iSteve commenter bjdubbs comments on the Ivy League presidents kerfuffle

Bingo, bjdubbs.

The Hamas attack (and Israel’s response) has caused some rather entertaining second-order effects in the Jewish diaspora.

It’s just a civil war between identity groups on the left. The Jews will win because they have the money and are motivated to use it. So Jews will get their DIE protected status. And Whites will continue to be the only unprotected, disfavored class. Another civil rights victory.

To paraphrase Lenin: “Freedom of speech for what? For whom?�

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/the-disintegration-of-the-aclu-james-kirchick

Tablet, the Jewish periodical had the former ACLU head, Ira Glasser there to ponder why the ACLU had gone from being pro-free speech in the abstract to becoming a blatantly partisan gatekeeper and sometimes promoter of censorship. Neither dare say it, perhaps neither really were able to accept it. But veteran noticers might have worked it out.

Glasser and his friends rarely encountered anybody who wasn’t Jewish, much less Black, within the 12-block neighborhood of East Flatbush that comprised the world of their childhood (New York City, he says in the film, was less the fabled “melting pot� of popular American sentiment than “a collection of insular segregated tribes�).

…

No American minority had reaped more from its faith in the country’s professed commitment to pluralism and tolerance than the Jews, a gift they repaid many times over by supporting the institutions—the universities, the Democratic Party, the ACLU—which upheld them. In the same way Lenny Bruce classified Ray Charles and fruit salad as Jewish (while claiming that “Evaporated milk is goyish even if the Jews invented it�), so the ACLU was seen as scrappy, authentic, and emblematic of an underdog quality. As Bruce might have put it: the ACLU, Jewish; the McCarthyite American Jewish League Against Communism, goyish.

…

Not that they ever pulled punches. Debating the constitutionality of flag burning on Firing Line, Buckley told Glasser something to the effect that the “average American� has a visceral reaction to the desecration of the Stars and Stripes

…

Were the ACLU today confronted with a lawsuit similar to National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie, Glasser doubts the group would take it. (Tellingly, in an essay collection celebrating its most important cases published on the occasion of the group’s 100th anniversary last year, the ACLU neglected to include that seminal litigation).

Maybe it wasn’t about free speech in the abstract like the old Quakers who had pioneered the original free speech activist groups. Maybe the much successful ones pioneered by Jews in the mid 20th century had a who/whom aspect to them.

At one point freedom of speech tended to help speech they liked more than speech they didn’t. Today, with their worldview ascendant in America’s institutions, suddenly it’s the reverse and they act like it.

“Magill and Gay are not his kind of people and he can’t call them on the phone and he wants them gone. That’s all there is to it.”

And this is the most apt, human nature, Occam’s Razor point of the entire point as to why Jewish donors behave the way that they do. Though they may be an older demographic, they don’t want the zeitgeist to leave them behind, trampled on by the DEI, Woke, CRT, etc. after all, who the hell do you think has funded these and other ideologies in order to bring down the traditional historical American nation? In other words, go after the bad people, but sure as hell not coming after ME and MINE.

“And that’s all I have to say about that”–Forrest Gump

Didn’t the Jews invent DIE? What’s happening in Gaza is very very sad but it is ironic how DIE is coming back on Jews like a bad case of acid reflux.

@SteveSailer FYI the latest bulletin on world war hair. This time a poor little seven year old cheerleader. https://www.dcnewsnow.com/news/local-news/maryland/anne-arundel-county/maryland-all-star-cheerleader-kicked-off-team-after-incident-involving-teams-hair-policy/

Arrant nonsense, except for the bit about the current presidents and their loyalties, and for that matter “about two to three years ago” the president of MIT was a less than completely … honest Jew.

None of these institutions believe in free speech. While I’m not that familiar with any of the three presidents in question, I defy anyone to provide solid evidence they believe in free speech. (((FIRE))) ranks Harvard the very last of the 248 institutions they track with an “Abysmal” “Speech Climate.”

MIT gets an “Average” which of course is not very good at all; as of the 1980s it was not great, and in this century it changed to no tolerance of conservatives at all, at best you could pretend to be a libertarian. I never got the impression in the 1980s Harvard was good for free speech, but based on some friends there it too wasn’t entirely hostile to conservative thought.

UPenn I know little modern about besides the scandal(s); in my circles it’s more famous for throwing away their world leadership in computers in 1946. But FIRE rates it right above Harvard at 247 with a “Very Poor” Speech Climate.

I’ll also note that while MIT Jews appear to have overstated the impediments to getting to classes from the occupation of Lobby 7, and per a photo I recently saw the whole path from it across Mass Ave into the western part of the campus, that does go beyond mere “speech,” however much protests and outright rioting was celebrated by our betters starting in the 1960s.

Applying my calculations of the Nakba against whites based on our meta-host’s collection of enrollment data and MIT Hillel, Jews on campus today simply don’t have the old herd of white (mostly male) students to blend into anymore. I would guess it’s much like the situation we’ve discussed with Asians getting murderized by negroes in cities no longer having crowds in COVID days and beyond due to work from home etc.

That said, I’ve noticed from the reports of incidents Jews in general are “instigators” of their physical bashing, all the reports I saw—they’ve tapered off for some reason, see below for one obvious reason—started with a Jew objecting to someone protesting or removing their hostage posters (at UCLA one masked negro was holding an unsheathed knife, and and correctly enough for a transition to combat…). MIT Jews were also counter-protesting in MIT Lobby 7 until per their questionable report everyone was ordered to disperse.

Perhaps one of the best US takes on the Zeitgeist and a reason to stop confronting pro-Hamas activists is that a Jew was murdered in California on November 6th by a professor named Loay Abdelfattah Alnaji. That’s most commonly a Saudi family name per a quick search, and he had the social media postings you’d expect.

OK, the belated November 16th Official charge it’s involuntary manslaughter because it started with a bullhorn strike to the face which resulted in a fatal fall for a sixty nine year old guy, but compare to Charlottesville for example.

Our ruling trash are not going all Leo Frank on this. Including the ADL which has no coverage of it at all!!!

We at Palantir have been committed to defending the principles that make democratic rule possible since our founding two decades ago.

Our software embodies our values and commitments. These include high performance, efficiency, transparency, fairness, and a rejection of narrow… pic.twitter.com/lTe4a5LufV

— Palantir (@PalantirTech) December 7, 2023

We at Palantir have been committed to defending the principles that make democratic rule possible since our founding two decades ago.

Our software embodies our values and commitments. These include high performance, efficiency, transparency, fairness, and a rejection of narrow thinking, including fear and skepticism of the other and outright bigotry.

We believe that these values must be backed up by actions on the battlefield, intellectual and otherwise, given the egregious levels of antisemitism in our society, especially at our most elite educational institutions. Some of these organizations seem structurally incapable of taking any steps to reform themselves.

Students on campuses are terrified and have been instructed by administrators to hide their Judaism.

We are launching an initiative for students who because of antisemitism fear for their safety on campus and need to seek refuge outside traditional establishments of higher education. They are welcome to join Palantir, and we are setting aside 180 positions for them immediately.

More details to follow shortly.

Demographic shift. Baby boomers are the most Jewish generation and their influence is finally on the wane.

Young Americans are much less Jewish and less white in general, so there are fewer Jews to support Israel and fewer white Christians susceptible to moral pressure from Jews. Non-white Christians feel no special guilt about Jews, but rather view them in the traditional Christian attitude as a stubborn, prideful people who reject salvation. Non-white non-Christians view them as either competition (at best) or tribal enemies.

Jewish financial clout may be able to maintain disproportionate influence for some time, but at a diminishing return on investment and high political cost.

I don’t think anyone in particular is to blame for this outcome. Instead, it’s the logical progression of the postwar American ideology of universal liberal democracy supported by prosperity gospel values. If the whole world should be like America, then the converse applies, and here we are. White Christians and Jews alike bought into this wholeheartedly. Only a few people with influence, such as Pat Buchanan, realized what it would lead to and spoke out against it, and they were almost universally denounced for doing so.

We are launching an initiative for students who because of antisemitism fear for their safety on campus and need to seek refuge outside traditional establishments of higher education. They are welcome to join Palantir, and we are setting aside 180 positions for them immediately.

Genius! This is how the NSA hires mathematicians: They get a heads-up about a talented masters program kid and hire him and teach him the advanced stuff in their own internal “college.�

Ask for the SAT and high school record, interview to detect any show-stopping weirdness, then hire and train internally. You get kids before they are brainwashed and the kids avoid debt. The kid also doesn’t get a “college degree,� but he has a great company on his resume that hired him after high school or in the middle of college, which means a lot if they kept him on for a few years at a good salary.

If a cohort is hired simultaneously it gives the kid a friend group to replace college friends. Companies should also think about helping their young hires meet potential spouses. Maybe that’s what HR could do after being stripped of DEI duties?

Commenter bjdubbs has summed things up pretty accurately.

Ackman is a Kushner, a midwit trust-fund asshole who floated from the Z-list to the grade inflation conveyor belt. Ackman perfected his Jewy yammering and usury skils on HBS cases. There is no reason to expect consistency or coherence, much less principle, from a guy who majored in Jewy whining about Ivy league preferment.

Maybe it wasn’t about free speech in the abstract like the old Quakers who had pioneered the original free speech activist groups. Maybe the much successful ones pioneered by Jews in the mid 20th century had a who/whom aspect to them.

The idea that a bunch of Red Diaper Babies whose parents were literal card-carrying Communists cared what an old dusty piece of parchment written by white plantation owners said about this or that would be risible if it wasn’t so depressing that so many people fell for it. They used “THE CONSTITUTION” because it was a spell that worked to bind you; that a Yiddishe Kopf would fall for his own tricks is just ridiculous. Communism was protected by the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights, and now Americanism is not protected by the same First Amendment of the Bill of Rights that still has all of the same words in it. You say “hey wait, that’s hypocritical and exactly backwards!” They say “we won.”

“Principle is what the weak fall back on when reason has failed.”

I’m not even quite sure what this means but I read it somewhere once and it sounds cool.

‘The Hamas attack (and Israel’s response) has caused some rather entertaining second-order effects in the Jewish diaspora.’

Indeed — but surely the entertainment could be purchased at a lower cost.

In other words, “no goyim need apply.”

“Magill and Gay are not his kind of people and he can’t call them on the phone and he wants them gone. That’s all there is to it.�

I want them gone too. They’re not my allies, and they hate my kind and want us dead. They’d gladly expel a white man with a 4.0 average for using the wrong pronouns. Didn’t Harvard admit that bipolar Hindu who just wrote Black Lives Matter! all over his application during a manic episode? Where’s the thumb on the scale for some prole Southern white kid with a good mind?

I assume Steve is being sarcastic because this isn’t the triumph of principle, it’s the triumph of people. Ackman is being a loyal tribesman and sticking up for the Jews, like blacks stick up for the blacks, latinos for the latinos, and Palestinians for the Palestinians. Whites are supposed to stick up for everybody but themselves and I’ve had quite enough of that shit. We welcome these people into our big ideological tent but when Israel and Gaza go to war the marketplace of ideas goes in the trash. We’re supposed to cough up for the cultural and territorial integrity of Ukraine but let millions of black and brown taxeaters in because Auschwitz or something.

These colleges have been openly calling for White genocide for decades. They all have whiteness studies departments and policies that explicitly discriminate against White people.

But a few people criticize Israel’s slaughter of Gaza and cuckservatives in Congress are up in arms. Just like that. A demographic that hates Republicans and republicunts will simp for them over their own constituency. And not one of them will bring up how Ivies have been calling for all sorts of hatred against White people.

Some jew I’m friends with on faceberg has been freaking out about this. They say it’s unacceptable to attack blacks, gays, trannies, or women, but only jews are allowed to be attacked. This isn’t just ignorance or stupidity, it’s malice. They accept that White people should be attacked, they are outraged that jews get even an ounce of criticism that Whites do every day. Fuck them, fuck their universities, fuck the GOP, and fuck Israel.

but surely the entertainment could be purchased at a lower cost

Not sure I follow…

I never knew Norman Lear converted to Catholicism:

https://pjmedia.com/gregbyrnes/2023/12/06/norman-lear-the-man-who-brought-us-archie-bunker-and-fred-sanford-dies-at-101-n4924526

The only way to explain his position in the most crude but consistent way possible is that as a Jew he wants Jews running the Ivy league for the benefit of Jews,

Nonsense. That’s the only explanation if you are an anti-Semite. There are plenty of other good explanations. Being for “free speech” is not the same as advocating for genocide.

First of all, these colleges are private institutions. They are not bound by Constitutional restrictions on infringement of free speech. Penn was not in any way obligated to give a platform for anti-Semites. Penn can have rules that advocating for genocide is grounds for discipline or expulsion.

2nd, there is a big difference between wanting your alma mater run “for the benefit of Jews” and NOT wanting your alma mater run in a way that endangers Jewish lives and is inimical or at best indifferent to Jewish interests. The former is a clear anti-Semitic trope and the latter is just common sense – if you bite the hand that feeds you, don’t expect any more handouts.

Maybe all those Palestinians and lefties will open their wallets and replace the future donations of Jewish donors with their own donations so Magill was on solid ground for alienating Penn’s existing donor base in favor of a new, sure thing, donor base, but somehow I doubt it. “Screw you Jews and Jew lovers, we don’t need your filthy money anymore. From now on Penn will be run for the benefit of the Resistance.” I think that she’s more like this:

Free speech looks different depending on what end of the power curve you’re on. “When I am the weaker, I ask you for my freedom, for that is your principle. When I am the stronger, I take away your freedom, for that is my principle.”

Somewhat related, I ran across this news item from a while back:

Jewish owner fights to destroy ‘gutter poet’ landmark
The hard-drinking, foul-mouthed writer Charles Bukowski once described himself as a guy who wouldn’t walk away from a brawl. Now it’s up to fans of the gutter poet to take up the fight to have his beaten-down bungalow turned into a civic monument over the objections of the property’s owners, who claim he was a Nazi sympathizer. Backers say the east Hollywood abode deserves recognition and the restoration that would go with it because it’s where Bukowski banged out stories and poems that transformed him from a working stiff with a literary streak into an internationally celebrated author. “The great books that really started him on his career – that all happened on De Longpre,” said Neeli Cherkovski, author of Bukowski: A Life and a friend of the writer. “It was where Charles Bukowski became the voice of Los Angeles.”
But the owners, who tried to sell the bungalow court as tear-down for $1.3 million, are poised to fight the proposal before a city commission Thursday based on allegations that Bukowski had Nazi leanings. Co-owner Victoria Gureyeva refused to discuss the issue on her lawyer’s advice, but previously said she would enlist local Jewish activists in her campaign against landmarking. “This man loved Hitler,” Gureyeva, who is Jewish, told the alternative newspaper LA Weekly. “This is my house, not Bukowski’s. I will never allow the city of Los Angeles to turn it into a monument for this man.”
The impulse to make Bukowski’s home a monument comes from a feeling that he was a more accurate chronicler of the city than other writers, said David Fine, author of Imagining Los Angeles: A City in Fiction. Raymond Chandler, Aldous Huxley, Nathaniel West and F. Scott Fitzgerald are far brighter literary lights, along with others who came here to toil as screenwriters. But they tended to portray an apocalyptic landscape of crime noir and empty celebrity. Bukowski grew up here and saw it from a less cynical, more authentic down-to-earth vantage.
“He’s writing about a city that people could recognize as a city of people – drifters and people that hang out at the library and on park benches,” Fine said. Bukowski, who moved into the bungalow in his 40s, lived in the adobe-colored one-story home on De Longpre Avenue from 1963 to 1972. The windows and doors are now boarded up, along with those of its neighboring bungalows, and a tall chain link fence keeps the curious out. A dirty camper van was parked outside on a recent night with its door open to the breeze and a shopping cart heaped with stuffed garbage bags beside it. A chorus of children could be heard crying in the apartment building next door.
The scene evoked images Bukowski described in the poem, “The Division”: “I live in an old house where nothing/screams victory/reads history/where nothing/plants flowers.”

https://www.jpost.com/jewish-world/jewish-news/jewish-owner-fight-to-destroy-gutter-poet-landmark

Political Jewry has always been very touchy about “antisemitism.” Seeing dark crimes in every drunken kid’s swastika wall tagging near a synagogue.

While most are still upholders of “most” free speech (Woke Jews not) when it comes to the Hamas terrorist incident retaliation by Israel, many Democrat Jews decide some speech must be squelched and punished.

The problem with left Dem Jewry is the contradiction they face. If you are a Woke Jew, then censorship of pro Palestinian statements or protests on campus or by students is just another brick in the censorship wall. They applaud attacks or shutting down conservative speakers on campus.

For the many non Woke but censorship tolerant Jews, it is uncomfortable.

Attacks on civilians and killing/kidnapping of Israelis is terrorism. Planned and well executed.

Most normal people oppose terrorism although the founding of the Israeli state involved anti British terrorism against the post WWII British military occupation by the Jewish Irgun faction. But these were mostly military targets, not civilians or kidnapping.

Ignoring the Hamas terror plot but decrying the Israeli Gaza collective punishment does rest on contradictory humanitarian grounds. But for many, this ignores the Gazan political choice of choosing Hamas as their formal government. Gaza = Hamas = terrorists.

Few pro Gazan protesters would lift a finger to publicly state opposition to the historical attacks on Axis civilian populations in Japan and Germany during WWII. The problem of Statism is that the entire state population is at risk for the deeds of their government, no matter how it is chosen.

This is a moral conundrum but has existed for as long as mankind. Attacking your neighbor puts your entire tribe at risk.

Anti free speech defenders of Israeli retaliation take their defense of Israel too far of course.

Speech at elite universities which does not condemn the Hamas terrorism is considered “hate speech” by formerly progressive sympathetic political Jewry. Instead of ignoring that, they rush to their ADL soapboxes and demand punishment/cancellation for anyone who does’t agree with them.

At its heart, is the fear that US government tax paid financial and military support of Israel might be at risk in some vague future way.

But Israel is a separate nation and the US should not be involved with their problems. Even so, it is not “Un American” to oppose wars that the US government is waging, directly or indirectly.

No one should be punished for disagreeing. Jewish censorship advocates want to pressure the government funded “university political complex” to shut down dissent.

Okay, withhold private donations. Make counter arguments in favor of Israel.

But censorship and cancellation, no.

And perhaps reconsider that support for the toxic and addled stew of Neo Marxist/neo fascist political theories which propel self proclaimed “progressive” politics.

“First they came for the conservatives, MAGA hatters and right wingers. Then they come for the Jews…”

It’s not so much a civil war as it is Jews putting the help in their place. The help thought that because Jews let them sit at the table and talked to them as friends that they were equals. They thought wrong. They’re the hired help and if they get uppity, they’ll quickly find themselves kicked out of the house, jobless and blackballed from being hired by anyone.

The whole full-court press by American Jews since Oct. 7 has been them flexing their muscles and letting everyone know very clearly who’s in charge.

Congress passing stupid resolutions shows that Jews control the politicians. The US sending endless weapons and carrier groups to Israel shows that Jews control the military. Jewish donors getting universities to say what they want or else you’re fired shows that Jews control higher ed. Finally, 24/7 stories of the always popular antisemitism shows that Jews control the media, not that anyone ever doubted that.

Oct. 7 hit a serious nerve with Jews. Israel is going full Bronze Age on the Palestinians. Back home, American Jews are showing everyone who’s in charge and what will happen to you if you’re stupid enough to push back.

If anyone ever doubted who runs the show, they don’t now.

Jews should enjoy the moment because as immensely powerful as they are, their power is waning. Don’t get me wrong, they’ll still be incredibly powerful for a long time to come, but they won’t be able to maintain this level of complete dominance.

Correct, it was never about principle. Could an Ivy League student – at any time – call for the forceable return of Blacks to Africa? That’s why we can’t have political discussions anymore. Remember when the ACLU defended the Nazis in Skokie? You could talk to many liberal/leftist/progressives back then because they were (usually) not absolutists and could be swayed by principle. At least they publicly acknowledged principles anyways.

That’s Vivek’s point. There’s no more dialogue, only a (for now) Cold War.

Hate speech is determined by whoever is in power. eg I’m in power, ergo BLM is an anti-White hate group and I can criminalize them. When hate speech is prohibited, you’re basically left with a war for power because power controls speech.

Let the Nazis march; let people advocate for the removal of Jews; and….let’s talk about those Black Africans…

Nobody cares what you and your tribe say anymore, Jack. Arguing with a Jew is utterly pointless.

There’s only one truth for Jews: Is it good for the Jews? I don’t understand why stupid goys don’t understand this. You and your people (correctly) don’t give two farts about goys. You’ll say whatever you need to say and will believe it as long as “it’s good for the Jews,” so why would someone argue with you.

Regardless, it’s interesting to watch Jews at the height of their power act so scared, swinging wildly at real and mostly imagined threats. You really are an odd bunch. As amazing as the tribe is at gaining power, it’s really terrible at being in power. Not surprisingly, con men don’t make great CEOs.

Well, enjoy the power, Jack, because it’s waning. Other scheming groups are entering the game. Whites are getting pretty fed up, though, admittedly, we’re a pathetic bunch so I don’t that we’ll cause any real problems. Younger (smart) Jews seem to be a bit thin on the ground these days, so maintaining that iron grip on the commanding heights will get much harder as the Boomers die off.

So spin your yarns about antisemitic “tropes” (seriously, what kind of tool uses that word). Who cares.

Palantir CEO Karp: We Stopped “The Rise Of The Far Right In Europe�
https://vdare.com/posts/palantir-ceo-karp-we-stopped-the-rise-of-the-far-right-in-europe

Auster also was aware…

https://www.thehebrewconservative.com/2022/02/06/lawrence-auster-jews-the-archetypal-multiculturalists/

2nd, there is a big difference between wanting your alma mater run “for the benefit of Jews� and NOT wanting your alma mater run in a way that endangers Jewish lives and is inimical or at best indifferent to Jewish interests.

The point is that Ackman and friends had the former (or so they thought) and now have the latter, by their own unwitting design. Ooops.

Maybe all those Palestinians and lefties will open their wallets and replace the future donations of Jewish donors with their own donations

Can Jewish money (bribes) save the Jews? Only if everyone is motivated only by shekels. Could be a yuuuuuge mistaken assumption.

I think the mistake in arguments like this one (referring to Steve’s post, not yours) is that they overestimate the human capacity for hypocrisy. In reality, most people will seek to rationalize and reinterpret their beliefs in accordance with coalitional politics. In fact, this is how most normie libs became woke in the first place.

Let’s say Ackman really is starting out here as an “Is it good for Jews?” chauvinist. But now he’s on team anti-woke, so over time he will adapt their beliefs with some degree of sincerity. That’s how humans operate.

and NOT wanting your alma mater run in a way that endangers Jewish lives

Oh fuck off with this neurotic hyperbole. Criticizing Israel does not endanger jewish lives at Harvard. Sorry you have to be treated like whitey once in a blue moon

Seeing dark crimes in every drunken kid’s swastika wall tagging near a synagogue.

The “drunken kid” in kid in question usually being a Jew perpetrating a fake hate crime. Same with negroes and nooses on college campuses. I always assume all so-called hate crimes are fake.

First of all, these colleges are private institutions. They are not bound by Constitutional restrictions on infringement of free speech. Penn was not in any way obligated to give a platform for anti-Semites. Penn can have rules that advocating for genocide is grounds for discipline or expulsion.

They’re not really “private institutions” in the way you use the term here, Jack – it’s a useful fiction that is employed whenever they get pressure from one side of the spectrum.

They’re heavily subsidized both directly and indirectly by the Federal government and the State governments in which they are situate. Their tax exempt status, which extends to the treatment not only of the receipt of donations and grants but of their endowment investment income is one enormous indirect subsidy. Obviously, Federal funding of student grants and student loans is another source of more direct subsidies. This favorable tax treatment is dependent upon pursuit of an exempt public purpose, in this case “education.” The Federal government of course has a lot of strings to pull in University governance, which is why there are ridiculous campus environments in reaction to the Federal government’s “guidance” on, for example, Title IX compliance. Of course, ideologically the Universities are in line with this interference so they lay down and don’t insist that they’re private institutions – only when the pressure comes from the opposing side of the ideological divide do they insist that they are “private” and that government pressure is some grave breach of the Constitution.

Another question which hasn’t been grappled with is whether a narrow band of institutions which arrogate to themselves the right to gatekeep and pick the ruling class is really “private” in the same way as a non-elite private institution is? If a secret society was uncovered which picks all of the Presidents and Vice Presidents and Supreme Court Justices, you wouldn’t really stand on the notion that this is a “private” members only affair in which the public has no legitimate interest.

But this free speech principle is hypocritical. Any professor at these universities stating a belief in fundamental racial or gender differences would be promptly fired by these presidents.

A few years ago college presidents were falling all over themselves to malign white men, in particular working class ones. Free speech indeed.

“ At one point freedom of speech tended to help speech they liked more than speech they didn’t. Today, with their worldview ascendant in America’s institutions, suddenly it’s the reverse and they act like it.�

Not the case. While then ACLU has flipped to oppose free speech, Jews generally have not. Think of the most prominent opponents, whether legal or practical, of left-wing censorship: Our own Unz, Amy Wax, the Volokh brothers, Glenn Greenwald, much of FIRE, most of the lawyers representing cancelled academics. Very disproportionately Jewish.

I don’t actually agree with either side, the censorship left nor the right-libertarians. I agree with Scalia: the First Amendment is to protect political speech, not the broad application it has now to smutty novels, violent addictive video games, etc.

Also relevant: the ACLU is currently led by a gay Puerto Rican and 7 of the top 17 staff members are Strong Black Women. Plus two more Asian females.

I’m not sure I get the headline here. (I could use a link to which of your posts the comment in question is under.) DIE hires Magill and Gay cannot possibly be principled. NOBODY on the left, Jewish or Gentile is principled, especially when it comes to free speech.

Those millions of lefties in the 1960’s, students, professors, gadflies-about-town, filling up the Washington Mall or Sproul Plaza in Berkerely “standing up” for free speech were only doing that for their selfish reason. Free speech and the technicalities of the law as prescribed by the fairly Constitution-abiding judicial system of the Conservative Establishment were nice breaks for lefties raising hell in the ’60s.

Once they BECAME the Establishment themselves they had no more use for such childish things. You can’t depend on ANY of those people you wrote about, except a very few like Amy Wax, to give a damn about anyone’s free speech if it’s against their side.

Who’s left that truly defends free speech? Ron Paul and I. Did I leave anyone out? Principles, whatchu’ talkin’ bout, Willis?

OT – Steve aren’t you interested in golf? This seems kind of significant.

https://www.golfmonthly.com/news/what-jon-rahms-liv-golf-move-means-for-the-game

Looks like the deal is worth somewhere between 300M and 600M simoleons. For perspective, Tiger’s lifetime winnings are $157M.

I wasn’t speaking in the broad terms you are expounding. I was very specifically addressing whether these colleges are legally obligated to uphold the 1st Amendment in the way that state universities, being direct arms of the state, are legally obligated to do and the clear answer in the case law is no.

Because private universities are not government entities, they are not required to uphold First Amendment protections in the same manner as public universities. In other words, private institutions may impose stricter limitations on free speech.

https://campusfreespeechguide.pen.org/the-law/the-basics/#:~:text=Because%20private%20universities%20are%20not,principles%20and%20support%20academic%20freedom.

Maybe the cases have been wrongly decided and the law should be different or you would make it different if you were the Emperor, but I’m telling you what the law actually is in this particular area.

Under 1st Amendment law, speech can be restricted only if it advocates for imminent lawless action. This is what the hamfisted Magill was trying to say when she said “it depends on the circumstances.” (Penn has supposedly voluntarily followed 1st amdt. standards up until now. )However, if Penn wants to have a rule that advocating for genocide is a breach of their disciplinary code, they can have one.

What’s wrong with the Gay woman? She sounds perfectly nice. Her husband’s name is Afendulis. I guess he’s not Jewish. Is that not allowed?

Lack moral clarity? The presidents stood up for free speech, which is exactly what they should be doing.

Sorry, no.

I’d buy this argument if they had established a rock-solid absolutist record on free speech, but they haven’t. Much of the material on a site like Unz.com would get you driven off campus by a howling mob at these places, and these school presidents would be right there cheering it on.

Since these schools have already demonstrated a pick-and-choose approach to free speech, a deep-pocketed donor like Ackman isn’t being out of line if he says, “okay, then you’re going to cater to me now” — because those are the rules they’ve established. Old-school liberals would have understood this and anticipated it, but they’re not calling the shots anymore.

Jack, you’re an attorney, you went to law school and learned in law school that once any institution takes federal money it’s no longer a private institution for constitutional purposes. Jews have forced Catholic hospitals founded and supported as Catholic hospitals to remove all those saint pictures etc because Catholic hospitals take federal state and county money. And once any entity, from teeny tiny hamlet sewer repair agency to colleges takes federal money it’s no longer a private institution

7 years of college and law school you know that. Better than most people.

Yeah, right.

Nobody’s raking UChicago Prez Alivisatos over the coals for allowing pro-Hamas protests on that campus – because UChicago has long maintained a principled position on favor of free speech and they stick to it.

But when your average Ivy League school goes from heavily policing neo-pronoun micro-aggressions against Trannies to Muh Free Speech when asked about genociding the Jews, you’d have to be breathtakingly stupid to stand up and cheer the pivot.

I’m morally certain that Bill Ackman and those who agree with him would be pleased as punch for Harvard et al. to sincerely adopt a strong free speech position in the wake of all this – under new management and untainted by the existing Woke Stalinism.

Gay’s a woman. Thought it was a man till I saw her first name. Jews put that thing into the Harvard presidency. Now they regret it boo boo.

Compare Harvard et al. to UChicago, which has a good, established record on free speech and therefore has the standing to say, yeah, these Hamas supporters are gross but they also get their 15 minutes in the public square like everyone else.

I wasn’t speaking in the broad terms you are expounding. I was very specifically addressing whether these colleges are legally obligated to uphold the 1st Amendment in the way that state universities, being direct arms of the state, are legally obligated to do and the clear answer in the case law is no.

Indeed, the first thing I though of, when reading bjdubbs’s comment, was that he was making a point about Constitutional law.

I don’t know about everyone. Clearly your usual vegan bike riding Lefty barista is not motivated only by shekels or she wouldn’t have been a sociology/puppetry major.

However, Harvard has been called a hedge fund with a university attached to it. What are the odds that the Board of an Ivy League university is more motivated by ideology than by $? The main job of a college president is to raise $. The LAST thing you are supposed to do is piss off the major donors. Magill and Gay have done for their businesses (oops, colleges) what Musk has done for Twitter. Except that Musk owns Twitter and doesn’t have to answer to any Board.

Musk, to his credit, has admitted that endorsing an anti-Semitic trope was, “One of the most foolish — if not the most foolish — thing I’ve done on the platform.â€�

Magill last night issued a hostage video in which she attempts to back away from her earlier statements but you can see that she won’t admit being wrong. Maybe she’ll manage to hold onto her job but I doubt it. The Wharton Board has already called for her resignation and while she answers to the Trustees of the University and not to Wharton, it’s hard to see how she can continue if she has lost the confidence of one of the major (and most lucrative) branches of Penn.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/upenn-president-liz-magill-called-resign-wharton-board-following-disastrous-testimony-antisemitism

Slight quibble. Only Protestant mostly ignorant southern bible thumper Christians ever allied with Jews. Eastern Orthodox and Catholics never did.

Not the case. While then ACLU has flipped to oppose free speech, Jews generally have not. Think of the most prominent opponents, whether legal or practical, of left-wing censorship: Our own Unz, Amy Wax, the Volokh brothers, Glenn Greenwald, much of FIRE, most of the lawyers representing cancelled academics. Very disproportionately Jewish.

BS. The fact a small number of Jews are on our side doesn’t mean that most Jews are. It’s like saying that because a few blacks are very conservatives, blacks as a group vote Republican.

I don’t actually agree with either side, the censorship left nor the right-libertarians. I agree with Scalia: the First Amendment is to protect political speech, not the broad application it has now to smutty novels, violent addictive video games, etc.

The Constitution won’t save anyone. The justices can redefine any word to suit their purposes. They can make “political speech” mean anything that they want. The Constitution isn’t magical. It simply represented the culture and values of a people, a people that quickly moving to be a persecuted minority.

Also relevant: the ACLU is currently led by a gay Puerto Rican and 7 of the top 17 staff members are Strong Black Women. Plus two more Asian females.

Seriously, how stupid do you think that we are. They are the help. They can be fired and replaced anytime Jews want. Stop lying!

I think the mistake in arguments like this one (referring to Steve’s post, not yours) is that they overestimate the human capacity for hypocrisy.

Just to be clear. Any minute now, you predict that Jews who are in favor of Israel existing as a Jewish state will come around to the White Nationalist position. You know, because they don’t have much capacity for hypocrisy. How many years until this happens?

Steve doesn’t seem to like anything that really challenges the system. He probably looks at LIV like he looks at white identity politics. Gauche and beneath him.

That said, Steve could probably rake it in as the LIV golf stats guy.

The Triumph of Principle? A headline from the 1700s? A book from ancient Greece?

Academia is in complete agreement that race doesn’t exist and White men are to blame for the world’s problems. No discussion allowed and hundreds of millions go directly towards entire departments that spend all day promoting this belief.

The contention is whether or not anyone in Academia can condemn the Jews.

Condemning White men is perfectly fine and in fact encouraged. Being unprincipled is the only way to survive in most departments.

A principled Academia is not possible. Entire fields of study like Sociology and Anthropology are built around blaming Whites. The colleges are just as religious as the Catholic private schools if not more so. How would you reform them? It’s like suggesting we need to reform the Catholic Church in regard to their beliefs on Mary but they can keep everything else.

OT — Incompetant central government bureaucrats in the capital embraced censorship because they were afraid of verbal criticism. Not in China, but in DC.
https://public.substack.com/p/pentagon-was-involved-in-domestic

A few years ago college presidents were falling all over themselves to malign white men,

…That’s right , do we have a dog in this fight?……when your enemy is destroying itself , don’t interfere……..thinking the Ivy League presidents are “principled” is ridiculous after the way they have treated straight white men and conservatives.

However, Harvard has been called a hedge fund with a university attached to it. What are the odds that the Board of an Ivy League university is more motivated by ideology than by $? The main job of a college president is to raise $.

They can lose megabucks on either end, depending on what they choose:

1) Absolute (legal) free speech on campus (including pro-“genocide� speech), losing some major donations, or

2) Have restrictive speech codes but possibly lose all government funding and maybe even non-profit status.

Ackman expressly says he views DIE as another Red Scare that history will view poorly and that he will help make it so.

Doesn’t Ackman get to decide what offends him and to whom he wants to give his billions? If you think he is being a neurotic Jew then feel free to step up to the plate and tell Sista Gay that you are going to replace his donations with your own so that Harvard will no longer have to dance to the whiny Jew’s tune. But I suspect that you can’t and won’t.

“Principle is what the weak fall back on when reason has failed.�

Corollary rule: “When a fellow says, ‘It ain’t the money but the principle of the thing,’ it’s the money.”

Let’s say Ackman really is starting out here as an “Is it good for Jews?� chauvinist. But now he’s on team anti-woke, so over time he will adapt their beliefs with some degree of sincerity. That’s how humans operate.

Ackman, a double Harvard grad and a big Harvard donor, is already there. In fact, Ackman is good news, not bad news. He went well beyond anti-anti-semitism and all the way into anti-anti-whitism. Examine his X feed.

Here’s a sample. https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/1731532031048245631

One senior member of the faculty shared that it is made abundantly clear that they cannot hire new faculty members unless they meet ODEIB requirements. That is, the candidate has to be a woman, person of color, or have LGBTQ+ status. Straight white males are “off the table.� Asians and those of South Asian (i.e., India) heritage are similarly disadvantaged in the process as they are deemed successful, overachieving minorities.

A number of the faculty bemoaned that in many cases they cannot hire the substantially more qualified person if he is a white or Asian straight male as the proposed candidate “has to be a woman or BIPOC person.� I was told that behind closed doors, it is common to hear: “I clearly don’t think this is the strongest candidate, but we can see where the train is headed. I therefore have no choice but to vote for the [lesser-qualified candidate.]�

It is made clear to the faculty that Harvard’s discriminatory approach to hiring should never be acknowledged or written about in an email….

On all of the above issues, I know you will not rely on my survey of the faculty. I therefore encourage you to commission a highly credible, third-party firm to do an anonymous survey of the Harvard faculty. I am confident it will confirm and reinforce all that I have outlined above.

Discrimination at Harvard Is Not Limited to Antisemitism

The problems at Harvard are clearly not just about Jews and Israel. It is abundantly clear that straight white males are discriminated against in recruitment and advancement at Harvard. That is also apparently true to a somewhat lesser extent for men who are Asians or of Indian origin. The ODEIB is an important culprit in this discrimination on campus as it sees the world in a framework of oppressors and the oppressed, where the oppressor class includes white males, Asians, Jews and other people perceived to be successful and powerful.

While Harvard claims that it is committed to free expression, in practice free expression appears to only happen “behind closed doors� or among faculty and students speaking anonymously.

Ackman publicly supports Musk and his free speech policies.
https://www.businessinsider.com/bill-ackman-elon-musk-grateful-bought-twitter-x-unfair-2023-12

Ackman is announcing a shift of alliance from the Coalition of Fringes to the Coalition of Merit (Jews, other whites, Asians, Indians, and other successful Americans)

This is likely a pivot point. (Just so we can save valuable type, know that all insinuations that I have gullibly fallen for a nefarious Jewish plot will be cheerfully ignored.)

That said, I’ve noticed from the reports of incidents Jews in general are “instigatorsâ€� of their physical bashing, (…)

I don’t see how this could be any different. I vaguely suppose most Jews in America are of the secular type, and most of the time do not wear identifying garment or paraphernalia. I expect that to be especially true in an University environment. So how could anyone harass them unless they actively identify themselves as Jews?
(Anyone feel free to correct me if I have said anything wrong. I’m not an expert on Jews, and don’t even live in the U.S.)

You don’t understand the law here. There is nothing in existing law that conditions government funding on having no speech code nor does this endanger their non-profit status. There are plenty of private colleges with all sorts of speech codes.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) ALREADY ranks Harvard #248/248 for their support of free speech on campus:

https://rankings.thefire.org/rank

even though they are 100% complaint with the law, so it’s hard to imagine what they could do that would make things worse.

#1 is already a 100% certainty. A sure thing.

#2 is pure speculation on your part. I’d say there’s a 1% chance that #2 will happen.

So to properly weigh the outcome you’d have to balance the loss from #1 x 100% vs. the loss from #2 x 1% (or choose whatever factor you think but it’s not 100% because that’s not the current law).

Lack moral clarity? The presidents stood up for free speech, which is exactly what they should be doing.

No, they didn’t. They stood up for free speech by brown affirmative-action students. Not for white people or American nationalists. You can bet the farm that if Ann Coulter or Jared Taylor or Nick Fuentes or Donald Trump wanted to speak, or some Christian anti-abortion group wanted to form on their campuses, they would do everything in their power to prevent it and they would explicitly condemn it, and they would allow all manner of harassment and protest and attacks to occur.

The rest of the analysis is spot-on — the Jews are butthurt because they no longer have complete control of these institutions, and because the brown affirmative-action people they let in to these colleges are not fellating the Zionists.

This twitter thread is interesting. It states the the policy at Penn literally says that hate speech is not punishable unless it “intentionally” provokes “a crowd” to “immediately carry out violent and unlawful action.”

not about the constitution or her views, but about the status of genocidal speech *under the Penn speech code*. This is the same question that the MIT and Harvard Presidents got. Now actually look at the code. Here's the FAQ on hate speech for Penn: pic.twitter.com/vZCFheSbcl

— Lee Kovarsky (@lee_kovarsky) December 6, 2023

OT: Glenn Loury looks into the George Floyd case:

Just so we can save valuable type, know that all insinuations that I have gullibly fallen for a nefarious Jewish plot will be cheerfully ignored.

Such D-bag (and very Jewish, btw) move.

Whenever anyone points out Jewish power, Jews always start with the “What are you, some weirdo conspiracy nut” move. It’s so tiresome.

If you think that Ackman and the rest of Jewish donors are doing anything other than trying to figure out what’s best for the Jews, you’re a gullible moron. Oh, but you’re so clever that you’ve already repudiated that by saying the equivalent of “I’m rubber, you’re glue; whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you.”

Well played, New Dealer. Well played.

If Ackman was such a colorblind CivNat, which is what you’re implying, where was he the past decade when whites were attacked daily in and out of class. He was nowhere because he was fine with it. And continue to be fine with it if he thought that he could force his golem to let Jews into the DEI club.

Btw, that’s likely what’s going to happen. Jews will force the Hate Whitey coalition to allow them in. After all, Jews are the ones who fund and organize the club so they can get whatever they want. Jews have completely bought into the Holocaust mythology. They’ll never join Team Whitey because they truly believe that we’ll send them to camps in Ohio the second Jews let their guard down.

I think this argument misses the point. Free speech IS the correct position. But these institutions didn’t protect it at all. People were run off campus for saying men shouldn’t participate in women’s sports. Now they are allowing calls for genocide on the grounds “we love us free speech.” Or to put it another way, if you can shut down Riley Gaines because you disagree with her, you can shut down the pro-genocide crowd if you disagree with them. You didn’t shut them down, do you agree with them. Or you are full of it. Or both.

“They’re heavily subsidized both directly and indirectly by the Federal government and the State governments in which they are situate. Their tax exempt status, which extends to the treatment not only of the receipt of donations and grants but of their endowment investment income is one enormous indirect subsidy. Obviously, Federal funding of student grants and student loans is another source of more direct subsidies.”

Yes! Remember the case of Bob Jones University back in the late 1980s? They were deemed NOT a private university because some of their students had federally guaranteed student loans. Because they offended elite sensibilities about miscegenation they elected to go REALLY private at great cost. So what Jack says here is an obvious smoke screen under current law.

A lot like the squid ink emitted by the usual suspects after it was proven that the giant social media oligopolists were colluding with the government to suppress speech. But they’re PRIVATE companies, we were told incessantly, by the same people who want the federal government to dictate what you are allowed to eat, whether you are allowed to drive a private automobile and if so, what kind, what kind of heater you can have, what kind of toilet you can have, what you can say, what you can think, to whom you can sell your house, where you can live, . . . .

Continuing my post on Ackman.

Anyone who wants to understand changes in expressed public opinion should look at Timur Kuran’s (fun) concepts of preference falsification. He predicted the East European political crashes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preference_falsification

Here’s a double treat, an X post by Philip Tetlock on Timur Kuran on the potential for collapse of wokeness in American universities.

Timur's pioneering work on preference falsification fits to a tee faculty & administrators too timid to challenge the identity politics orthodoxy of HR/DEI bureaucracies.
So is the regime about to crumble (remember Timur’s work on fall of Ceausescu)? Or can it just shrug off the… https://t.co/qwAPcsIiZW

— Philip E. Tetlock (@PTetlock) December 8, 2023

iSteve, I’d be pleased to see a more elaborated post by you on this topic.

“Principle is what the weak fall back on when reason has failed.�

Corollary rule: “When a fellow says, ‘It ain’t the money but the principle of the thing,’ it’s the money.�

Uh-huh.

So both of you guys would hire a contractor whose motto is “principles are meaningless”?

Modern society depends on men that are principled. The third world is corrupted from the belief that being unprincipled is fine if you are benefitting. It’s very hard to get anything done when no one trusts each other.

“Palantir CEO Karp: We Stopped ‘The Rise Of The Far Right In Europe’â€�

Given how loudly the fanboys cheered Putin’s claims about invading Ukraine to remove far-right elements in Kyiv, they might want to rethink their outrage at the likes of Karp.

Then again, maybe it’s just jealousy. After all, Karp claims he actually succeeded in his stated mission.

It’s pretty likely a lot of white educated people now have some Jewish ancestry because of intermarriage. So my guess is it won’t be that easy to separate whites out from Jews.

Modern society depends on men that are principled. The third world is corrupted from the belief that being unprincipled is fine if you are benefitting. It’s very hard to get anything done when no one trusts each other.

I think the aphorisms are intended to be descriptive, not prescriptive.

Also, I think they both are meant to describe people’s stated rationales for why hey are acting a certain way — i.e., that virtue signaling about one’s high-minded adherence to principle may be a smokescreen for a lack of logic, or having a financial interest.

So I would say they are more about being skeptical of after-the-fact rationalizations, rather than untrustworthy conduct in the first place.

The prole Southern white kid went to a sandbox 20 years with memaw and pepaw’s blessing to further Vladimir Jabotinsky’s dream.

Maybe it is just really really simple.

Maybe these college presidents are just plain afraid of the pro genocide Hamas folks. I mean actually afraid for their own lives. Women generally are not brave, and privileged women like these puppet female ‘college presidents’ are really not brave.

Israel is just another foreign country in my book, but the Hamas are profoundly vile. At least Israel has some smart people and makes some contributions to the world. Palestine? Probably every smart one has snuck out by now. If the Palestinians did eradicate the Jews and took over the piece of dirt, then what? It’s not magic dirt. They would still be the same wretched group of scum and villainy…

“Principle is what the weak fall back on when reason has failed.�

The corollary would be that the strong should not bother with either.

Reason also fails when it is used by the strong. Even if the reasoning is logical the recipient may not understand or value it.

If the strong does the opposite of the weak then the fall back to principle would not be used.

Which would then mean that principle itself is valueless.

Which would then mean that honest reason is valueless.

Thus the strong should use unprincipled reason when it suits them and not bother with a fall back.

I disagree but this is the philosophy of nihilism and it plagues the third world. But they don’t extract it this far as it is merely “Do whatever gets you the money”.

A principled man does merely fall back to his principles after reason has failed. His principles are part of his reasoning. Thus I disagree with the statement in any context. Being principled is not a common character of the weak in any priority. It is the weak that find it a foreign concept.

Corollary rule: “When a fellow says, ‘It ain’t the money but the principle of the thing,’ it’s the money.�

That’s insufficiently cynical. When the IRS goes after you, the amount is often trivial– to them. It’s the principle: you kneel. You pay.

Not to pick on the IRS, as many agencies and NGOs are much worse. But Dalrymple nailed it: it’s the principle. And that principle is your humiliation.

The PGA Tour is a mess and it is amazing the Jay Monahan has been able to keep his job this long into what has been an absolute disaster. The earnings for the top pro golfers were lagging behind other sports, even niche sports like Formula One racing. LIV’s format is strange and off putting to some golf fans, but this disruption needed to happen to reform pro golf.

I once tied up a company for half a day over 20 dollars.

It was very much about the principle. I really don’t care about 20 dollars.

I just wanted them to admit they were wrong.

And they did.

I just had to go through 3-4 Indian tech support guys that were reading scripts until they put me on with an American.

Anyone else find it odd that Steve uses a commenter to talk about this issue rather than, oh, I don’t know, talk about it himself. Is Steve trying to tell Jews something but doesn’t want to say it himself?

I’ve got some issues with Steve, but he usually loves to lecture Jews about how their anti-white program will hurt them at some point. Maybe Steve is worried that Jews are a bit riled up at the moment so he’s giving himself some deniability.

Anyway, it’s kind of weird.

Ya beat me to it.
They are the People of the Lie.

“The presidents stood up for free speech, which is exactly what they should be doing.”

I think the presidents were questioned on the much narrower issue of whether the speech was allowed by the schools’ codes of conduct. They should have been able to produce the text of the codes, and interpret from there, pretty easily. Then, of course, they would have to explain all the instances where the codes were abused in the past. But they chose to frame their responses in terms of constitutional free speech.

From a free speech in the university POV, I think, yes, discussions of why genocide may be necessary or prudent should not be prohibited, no matter who it offends; this assumes that the genocide of ANY group may be discussed with equal freedom. The universities have no problem bashing whites and Jews; they would never, ever, ever allow a discussion of genociding, e.g., blacks or Amerinds, and that is the very root of their hypocrisy.

Jeez, Jack, I thought that Jews buying influence with their lucre was an anti-Semitic trope? And really, you’re challenging an anonymous blog commenter to step up and put his billions where his mouth is? It’s heartening to see you doing the work of minister Farrakhan while simultaneously disproving the theory of Jewish genius.

Thanks. It would be interesting to hear Steve’s take. Here is an extended article from two years ago which brings in both Tetlock’s and Khan’s ideas.

https://manhattan.institute/article/the-politics-of-the-culture-wars-in-contemporary-america

First of all, these colleges are private institutions. They are not bound by Constitutional restrictions on infringement of free speech.

“Private institutions?” Holy cow!

Indeed. I think so too. But on a go-round with you a few years back you were telling me that they weren’t really private institutions and that their quotas on Jewish–back a 100 years ago–were somehow “unconstitutional” or something. And let’s face it, these institutions were way more “private” back then then there are now, with generous government grants, government student loans, etc.

I hope you will now admit that there was absolutely nothing wrong with these private, Protestant founded institutions, slapping a quota on Jews. Nothing wrong with it legally, morally, ethically–nothing wrong with it at all, as they were private institutions, free to serve their founding mission as they saw fit. And that Jewish whining about it is just that … self-serving Jewish whining.

 

Universities obviously can’t talk about Jews because Jews think as a group and fight back.

Whites could learn something.

Which would then mean that honest reason is valueless.

Thus the strong should use unprincipled reason when it suits them and not bother with a fall back.

Without honesty and principles there is no “reason.”

What you describe is cunning — perhaps sophistry at best.

Should American Whites identify as European mixed-race? What does a Half Norwegian, half Sicilian, individual with maybe one Jewish grandparent have in common with an Englishman?

Europe has largely seen itself as a successor state to the classical Greco-Roman world. The entire rhetorical trope of Whiteness is not to decontruct a race as is claimed but to deny a shared identity based on place of origin, the shared continent and culture of Europe with a Christian backdrop. Some wordsmiths could make the case it’s a prelude to genocide.

The really “Hard” science of Anthropology regards “the concept of a unified, distinguishable “White race” as a social construct with no scientific basis.” If only we got rid of our social constructs and became rootless cosmopolitans. So much easier for our betters.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_people

A alternative view on global politics today

Magnificent reception, the likes of which we have never seen before, the Arabs in the UAE and Saudi Arabia reserved for Vladimir Putin!
With cavalry, cannon fire, band, airplanes tearing the sky in an impressive line-up “forming” with colors the flag of Russia and Russian flags from one end to the other on the central streets through which the car carrying the Russian president passed.
The Arabs welcomed the new “Ruler” B. Putin, (or at least that’s how they see him). B. Putin’s handshake with M. Bin Salman is a “knife” in the US strategy in the Middle East.
There is no measure of comparison with the welcome to T.Biden or the recent welcome to the German president, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, who stood at the door of his plane for almost 30 minutes from the moment it landed. The reason was that there was no representative of the country to officially welcome him, as the German president had arrived a little earlier than expected.

https://archive.is/gIbCa

L-fucking-O-L. Remind me to hire you, you Shyster, if I ever need a rotten, stinking, lying lawyer.

Hey, how ’bout those ‘Merican bombs! They make a good explosion, don’t they, Shlomo?

The version I have heard is:

“When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles.�

Attributed to Frank Herbert

I haven’t yet seen anyone mention the late Noel Ignatiev, former Harvard professor, yet.

Did Ignatiev call for the categorical elimination of white people? Why yes, he did. Technically, that could be called advocacy for genocide.

There was no hue and cry for the removal of Noel, except from badwhites (who don’t matter, because they should be eliminated, I guess).

If anything says “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander” it’s Harvard’s coddling of Noel for all those years.

I don’t wish pain on the innocent Jewish kids for Noel’s genocidal rants (I don’t even count him as a Jew, but rather a spoiled, commie atheist), but I do wish pain on the institution of Harvard University for employing him in its teachers’ college to train racist cadres who will discriminate against white children.

So get get ’em, Bill!

Harvard’s been trashy for a long time anyway. Just see how it sold out and went Unitarian back in the early 19th century. Harvard discriminated against real Christians for a long time before it had quotas on Jews, and it never stopped.

Ackman is good news, not bad news. He went well beyond anti-anti-semitism and all the way into anti-anti-whitism.

So….so….if we support them on the anti-semitism thing, they’ll support us on the anti-white thing? There’s a concept.

Too bad you’ve peremptorily declined to discuss this fascinating ramification.

Modern society depends on men that are principled. The third world is corrupted from the belief that being unprincipled is fine if you are benefitting. It’s very hard to get anything done when no one trusts each other.

If only we could figure out what the implications might be of flooding our nations with third-world migrants. If only we could.

You say “hey wait, that’s hypocritical and exactly backwards!� They say “we won.�

Agreed! You said it earlier and better than I. Thanks, Alec.

The universities have no problem bashing whites and Jews

The universities do not bash jews, nor would they ever dare. This entire episode is about their daring to allow anyone on their campuses to criticize jews. Not the same thing, by any stretch.

Will someone please link me to the actual calls for genocide? I can’t find them.

Finally, some good news.

Very interesting but it now seems that Bosnian Serbs now have a higher fertility than the Bosniak Muslims. The Christians are outbreeding the Muslims in Bosnia. https://t.co/h0p31aAbXU

— Morrisan15 (@morris_que14) December 8, 2023

I’m proud of you, John, no sarc. That goes for both actions.

My big fight is over the refusal to take American cash by businesses. Chipotle at the airport told me they only took cards. They’d already made up the meal, but, no go. A guy behind me in line even offered to pay for it for me. “Nope, it’s not the money. It’s the principle of it. I’m thinking Revelations 13.” He understood completely, as I walked off…

… and got a muffin from a black girl whose little stand officially wouldn’t take cash, but then she took 3 bucks, EVEN. Yeah, I didn’t like the corruption at first, but the more I thought about it, “If this big company – that owns a lot of the businesses – wants to be that way, too bad about their missing muffin inventory, and let the girl make a few extra bucks.” I know …

As for the “customer care” folks on the phone, I’ve done the very same thing. I got an American on the 4th shot one time too. However, often I’m satisfied with Filipinas over •Indians. The former are at least pretty happy-sounding. I don’t know why I trust them more, but I do.

Also relevant: the ACLU is currently led by a gay Puerto Rican and 7 of the top 17 staff members are Strong Black Women. Plus two more Asian females.

Ben Kurtz wrote:

I’m morally certain that Bill Ackman and those who agree with him would be pleased as punch for Harvard et al. to sincerely adopt a strong free speech position in the wake of all this – under new management and untainted by the existing Woke Stalinism.

Probably not.

We are just not supposed to tell the truth about what the Zionists have done to the Palestinians.

Tell the truth, and you are smeared as an “anti-Semite.”

As I have said before, my dad was a strong supporter of Israel and a philo-Semite. But he nonetheless explained to me when I was a kid, way back in the ’60s, how this scam was played, specifically by the ADL.

We should get rid of the idiotic, fake term “anti-Semitic”: “Semitic” refers to a language family, which includes Arabic. And since most American Jews do not speak a Semitic language, antagonism towards American Jews is not “anti-Semitic.”

The idea that we need a special, scary sounding term for hatred of one group is just plain silly.

“Anti-Jewish,” “anti-Zionist,” and “anti-Israeli” are clearer and more precise terms. I am, for example, anti-Zionist, but I am not anti-Jewish.

And for that matter, we need separate terms for Jewish people and for Judaism. I am anti-Judaism (I am anti all religions, but especially those, like Judaism, that openly advocate genocide — see the genocidal passage in 1 Samuel 15, to which Bibi recently alluded), but I am not anti-Jews.

https://www.boston.com/news/local-news/2023/12/06/new-street-signs-massachusett-language-cambridge/

HammerJack wrote to gutta percha:

Will someone please link me to the actual calls for genocide? I can’t find them.

The scam is to claim that “From the river to the sea” is a call for genocide of the Israeli Jews.

In fact, going back at least to the 1960s, a number of Palestinians have called for a secular, democratic state in all of Palestine that treats Jews and Arabs equally — “from the river to the sea.”

The apologists for Zionist apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and mass murder know this, of course. Any guess as to where the Zionists learned this technique of the “Big Lie”?

I find interesting the GOP normies crowing about Harvard President C. Gay being mediocre are the same people who treated Condoleezza Rice like she was a 21st-century Alfred Toynbee back in the 00’s.

This is loosely related, rather than OT:

The woke mayor of Calgary is skipping the menorah lighting this year because the event is explicitly pro-Israel.

1/2 On the eve of a beloved Calgary tradition, the annual menorah lighting at City Hall, I have learned that the event has been repositioned to be political. This breaks my heart.

It is with great regret and sadness that I will not be attending. My statement is posted here. pic.twitter.com/ttx8E7LQII

— Jyoti Gondek (@JyotiGondek) December 7, 2023

It’s nice to see the pervasive anti-white bloodlust getting serious pushback, even though it needs to be masqueraded as ‘anti-anti-semitism’ to make it palatable to the swells. I’ll take what I can get.

“The Hamas attack (and Israel’s response) has caused some rather entertaining second-order effects in the Jewish diaspora.”
.
Right. “We have been such loyal members of the anti-white, anti-christian, anti-normal coalition of the fringes… why are we getting no support or sympathy when islamics knife our women in their private parts and behead our infants??”

Yeah, well, Jews have to decide then, are they Zionists or something else, something better.

That’s the thing about Israel and zionism in general: it sucks every Jew into this slaughter, no matter what we think about it. It’s doesn’t matter if you’re supportive, ambivalent, or hostile — it’s a totalitizing nationalist ideology that claims to act in your name. Actually it doesn’t just claim to act in your name, it demands it.

It might sound like I’m describing a cult or something. But actually zionism was actually pretty normal by 19th-early 20th century European standards. It’s just nationalism — Jewish nationalism. It came out of Europe and the Russian Empire and gained popularity as one solution to the Jewish Question that was being debated there at the time: Are Jews a religious group? A race? Should Jews assimilate and become part of the societies in which they live — to become Russian or German? Why does antisemitism exist?

Jewish nationalism offered an answer: Jews are a race. And because they believed that the only natural and healthy way to organize society is for every race to have its own state, the Jews also needed a state of their own, where they can live and flourish and control their fate — like the English, the French, the Italians, the Germans. Without this Jewish state, Jews in Europe and all over the world would be doomed. They’ll remain hated minorities and experience violence. Even worse: their race will continue to degrade spiritually and culturally, and will eventually disappear altogether.

In practice, the Jewish state is hastening the spiritual and cultural degradation of the Jews.

First of all, these colleges are private institutions. They are not bound by Constitutional restrictions on infringement of free speech.

Oh my God, I wish you had told us about this sooner counselor! This is great news. We would like to hire your services to set up a private university, private business, private neighborhood, and private country club where we can all live and which will exclude blacks, jews, palestinians, and others whose speech we frequently don’t like (we’ll send you the list). We will of course expect the usual public funding for these enterprises: public roads, tax exempt endowment, federal student loans, government contracts for our business, and carbon offsets for the putting greens.
This private institution concept could really catch on.

You don’t understand the law here. There is nothing in existing law

I’m talking about future law. “Free speech� is in play, more than ever.

I wrote:

1) Absolute (legal) free speech on campus (including pro-“genocide� speech), losing some major donations, or

You wrote:

#1 is already a 100% certainty. A sure thing.

Wrong—the first clause is not a sure thing, and that’s where the ‘news’ is—as you admitted earlier, there is no “Absolute (legal) free speech on campus� as I put it. That’s why Stefanik has the university presidents squirming, and that’s why there is now an expanded Congressional investigation—they cannot hide behind a principle of “free speech� if they’ve actually been suppressing it.

https://www.axios.com/2023/12/07/mit-harvard-penn-antisemitism-gop-probe-stefanik

You also wrote:

2) Have restrictive speech codes but possibly lose all government funding and maybe even non-profit status.

#2 is pure speculation on your part. I’d say there’s a 1% chance that #2 will happen.

The outcome for #2 could happen in the future for the reason I stated, or in the present for Title VI and executive order violations for not having strict speech codes perfectly tailored and perfectly administered. Which, if pushed to Stefanik’s logical conclusion (no allowed controversial speech) could theoretically cause the federal government to stop funding all higher education—or all education.

A California federal judge denied our motion for preliminary injunction today in our lawsuit challenging the state's under-21 gun bans, saying that they're a "temporary inconvenience" and they can "access firearms through family" instead. Read it here: https://t.co/6aOJl5Sapa

— Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) December 9, 2023

Update: The judge has denied California's motion to reconsider his ruling, which means it will remain in place: https://t.co/Gkvlvd3H00 https://t.co/Y0gqZgxMmz pic.twitter.com/MGXsyK7LW6

— Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) December 8, 2023

Make no mistakes: New York wrote a law that expressly banned carrying firearms in 91% of the State. Thanks to today's decision in our Christian v. Chiumento Lawsuit, that law is now unenforceable.

There's still work to be done, and we can't wait to hand @GovKathyHochul more Ls. pic.twitter.com/NoQV167tYU

— Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) December 8, 2023

"Requiring disclosure of handles is thus to demand that applicants effectively forfeit their right to pseudonymous speech on social media (where so much speech now takes place)." pic.twitter.com/daVMV4ccYo

— Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) December 8, 2023

"No matter how expansively we analogize, we do not see how a tradition of prohibiting illegal hunting on private lands supports prohibiting the lawful carriage of firearms for self-defense on private property open the public." pic.twitter.com/JJsW9YR5dT

— Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) December 8, 2023

Maybe these college presidents are just plain afraid of the pro genocide Hamas folks. I mean actually afraid for their own lives.

LOL. I doubt that. Why would they choose ambitious careers in institutions where “pro genocide Hamas folks� are thick on the ground?

Where on Earth did you get that cockeyed notion? Protestants weren’t even marrying Catholics until the 1960s. No, most white Americans do not have Jewish ancestry.

Sorry, that’s not the law. It’s not all or nothing. I already gave a link that explains that private universities (even the ones that accept Federal $ which is all of them) don’t have to abide by the 1st Amendment. Congress COULD make this a condition (they can attach any strings they want to Federal $) but they haven’t chosen to.

Maybe Steve is worried that Jews are a bit riled up at the moment so he’s giving himself some deniability.

Er, can’t Jews see that he posted/featured it, and still be just as riled?

This is very basic for lawyers but seems to be not apparent to Men of Unz. “Private” is not an all or nothing thing. For example for purposes of the voting statute, an “adult” can be someone who is over 18 years of age. For purposes of the statutory rape statute (in some states)an “adult” can be someone who is over 16 years of age. For purposes of the alcohol statute, an “adult” can be someone who is over 21 years of age.

Likewise an institution can be “private” with regard to the application of the 1st Amendment but “public” (as in “public accommodation”) when it come to the civil rights laws. Maybe this seems sort of Alice in Wonderland to you but this is how the law works – words such as “adult” or “private” do not have universal meanings. Each statute can define them any way they want and different from the next statute. This is not some kind of new woke construct like declaring men to be women. The law has always been thus.

The university presidents were right to defend free speech. But they also revealed themselves to be terribly hypocritical. They defended anti-jewish speech. But if presented with speech that’s anti-trans or anti-woke, their free speech virtues would go out the window. There’s a hierarchy. Anti-woke speech is disciplinary. But anti-jewish speech is just acceptable.

Charles Bukowski an anti-semite? A NAZI sympathizer? Hell, he wasn’t ever sober enough to develop ideas like that. IMHO.

Everything he said/wrote should be taken with a shot of rot gut whiskey.

But he had some good lines. Some of his best lines have been co-opted by folks who misinterpret Bukowski, but let’s leave it at that. Modern academics are pretty stupid.

Universities obviously can’t talk about Jews because Jews think as a group and fight back.

So why are you on a site founded and maintained by someone of Greenblatt’s tribe? Since they think uniformly, like drone bees in a swarm, or Cavendish bananas, their outward differences must all be a ruse.

Aren’t you suspicious that this site hasn’t been closed down yet? I suspect you and “Loyalty” and probably “Jenner” are part of the ruse.

You can’t have it both ways. They either think as a unit, or they don’t. My beagle has the same bark as every other beagle in the neighborhood, and she isn’t even purebred.

So you admit that Jews are whiny? Now we’re getting somewhere….

Waiting for the American Franco.

He probably looks at LIV like he looks at white identity politics. Gauche and beneath him

You are the only commenter here who has ever claimed to have made “white identity politics” work in real life. But you refuse to give us even the vaguest inkling of how, where, or when you accomplished this, or why it worked we it hasn’t for so many others. You cuss out Steve for not following your successful example, but how is he supposed to when you keep it under wraps? That is gauche and beneath all of us.

“But is has to be top secret! The Jews might find out!”

The Troll button isn’t enough. We need a If You Know So Much More Than Steve, Start Your Own @#$%%& Website!

“Private� is not an all or nothing thing.

Totally! When Harvard is elevating mediocre Jews, blacks, and homosexuals over competent goyish whites and East Asians, Harvard is exercising its prerogative as a private institution.

But millions upon millions of tax payer-funded dollars for its research, it’s we serve the public and the greater good!

This is emblematic of “higher education” today: https://abc7news.com/stanley-zhong-college-rejected-teen-full-time-job-google-admissions/13890332/

Stanley Zhong, 18, is a 2023 graduate of Gunn High School in Palo Alto.

Despite earning 3.97 unweighted and 4.42 weighted GPA, scoring 1590 out of 1600 on the SAT’s and founding his own e-signing startup RabbitSign in sophomore year, he was rejected by 16 out of the 18 colleges he applied to.

He was denied by: MIT, Carnegie Mellon, Stanford, UC Berkeley, UCLA, UCSD, UCSB, UC Davis, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, Cornell University, University of Illinois, University of Michigan, Georgia Tech, Caltech, University of Washington and University of Wisconsin.

His only acceptances: University of Texas and University of Maryland.

College admissions experts frequently tell applicants that schools with an under 5% acceptance rate like MIT and Stanford are reaches for almost everyone, but Zhong was even denied by Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, which has a middle 50% GPA of 4.13-4.25 for admitted engineering students.

But shortly after the wave of rejections, he was offered a full-time software engineering role by Google, one of the world’s top tech companies.

Zhong just started his Google job this week.

I’m talking about future law. “Free speech� is in play, more than ever.

Jack D doesn’t seem to understand that the future might not be the mere continuation of the past, let alone the present. He thinks that he and his fellow Jews will continued to be sacralized in this country no matter what and doesn’t seem to understand that even normies are starting to see that Jews are playing “plucky oppressed minorities” on TV all the while punching down the rest of us from the highest perches of our society.

Or maybe he does see it and is panicking a little – hence the especially desperate, shrill comments of late (since Oct. 7).

The presidents did not stand up for free speech. They’ve been suppressing conservatives for years. Bell Curve, anyone?

In other words, “no goyim need apply.�

No, this is just an opportunistic grab for some smart kids who happen to have become ripe for the picking due to current events. They have long hired really smart kids of all types. Thiel doesn’t even care if you don’t really want to work for Palantir, as long as he has your ear in whatever you do. His Thiel Fellowship program will pay you $100,000 on the condition that you drop out of college to work on your own project. He knows you’ll either be back to ask for alpha money if the project has potential, or ask for a job if it fizzles out.

Thiel is looking for the kid, Jew or not, who is whip smart, driven, and not risk averse, the kid who has no problem telling his Jew or Chinese (or white) parents that he’s dropping out of Harvard to work on an idea. Big companies are catching on to this hiring tactic: Did you read the recent story about the Chinese-American kid with a 1590 SAT and a sky-sigh GPA who was rejected by over a dozen colleges but then immediately hired by Google when they read the news stories about him?

“pro genocide Hamas folks.”

Hamas conducts a raid on Israel and takes hostages. Israel respond by shooting at anything that moves in that sector. (See destroyed cars). Israel then pummels Gaza with American munitions while
Israel politicians preach Gazan extermination. Who is “pro genocide” exactly? Is asking this question “antisemitism”?

Likewise an institution can be “private� with regard to the application of the 1st Amendment but “public� (as in “public accommodation�) when it come to the civil rights laws.

Counselor, read my reply to you here:

https://www.unz.com/isteve/the-triumph-of-principle/#comment-6304132

Title VI and the “December 11, 2019, executive order on combating antisemitism� are now colliding with institutional autonomy. This has obvious potential major consequences for the institutions in question—the First Amendment and Title VI, etc. are now in conflict, at least according to some prominent Jews like Stefanik and Ackman.

The law has always been thus.

Nah, the various cited civil rights laws are recent—within living memory. Remember Roe v. Wade ?

I suspect you and “Loyalty� and probably “Jenner� are part of the ruse.

What “ruse� are you “probably� accusing me of?

Harvard was totally free speech in the ’60s, I can testify to that, and not at all left wing…By the late ’70s, as the faculty became more and more leftist, that seemed on its way out…These people pollute everything they touch…

Jews think as a group and fight back.

And they literally make a federal case out of it when other groups try to do the same thing. They dehumanize non-Jews. That is the secret to their success. You seem to be arguing that whites have a morality problem. A Christianity problem. If so, that’s a legitimate argument. But a tough sell.

Sure maybe antisemitic Koreans will replace Jews as the major donors to Ivy Universities just as Jews replaced WASPS. But not this week.

Maybe these college presidents are just plain afraid of the pro genocide Hamas folks. I mean actually afraid for their own lives.

Screen name checks out.

“ even normies are starting to see that Jews are playing “plucky oppressed minorities� on TV all the while punching down the rest of us from the highest perches of our society.�

In your wet dreams.

Normal Americans love Jews.

Indeed, few things are more freakishly abnormal in America than antisemitism. The most famous antisemite is Kanye, an actual nutjob who dresses like this:

The most prominent right-wing anti-semite is Nick Fuentes, a seemingly gay Mexican who claims to be a virgin but livestreamed a lengthy date with a gay pornstar named “Catboi Kami.�

Gaza is not being ‘slaughtered’ except in the imagination of purveyors of now-you-see-it-now-you-don’t pacifism. You want war, you get war.

Your antisemitism blinds you. Jews were among the main advocates for the Supreme Court affirmative action case that is going to make this sort of discrimination illegal in the future. You don’t know who your real friends are. Hint: it’s not Claudine Gay.

[This is addressed to Twinkie.]

The scam is to claim that “From the river to the sea� is a call for genocide of the Israeli Jews.
==
No scam there. It is literally true.

Old Genocide Jack is invigorated by the blood of murdered Palestinian children. No point engaging with demons.

They used “THE CONSTITUTION� because it was a spell that worked to bind you

“They used ‘EVOLUTION’ because it was a spell that worked to bind you…”.

“They used ‘HUMAN BIODIVERSITY’ because it was a spell that worked to bind you…”

Many commenters here bitch about the repeal of ACLU-backed Roe. Even more would bitch, and louder, if even-more-ACLU-backed Epperson v Arkansas were overturned. But these are analogous cases. The ACLU hasn’t changed– at least not demographically.

Overturning Griswold probably wouldn’t affect these commenters personally, though.

Twinkie bears a multi-decade grudge against Jews because he blames them for his rejection from HYP and ignominious 2nd tier ivy degree.

What he doesn’t understand and is that for Jews, Asian women are like safety schools: the ideal hot thin feminine Jewess with a pleasant personality is… not exactly common. But the hundreds of millions of exotic pearls of the Orient are ours for the plunder.

You can’t possibly have been serious when you asserted “It’s okay to be White” as a successful slogan. Maybe a mildly successful troll, to smoke out the other side. Otherwise, it’s the opposite of inspiring. It sure ain’t “Rule Britannia”.

“ Palestinians have called for a secular, democratic state in all of Palestine that treats Jews and Arabs equally �

Like all those other secular democratic Arab states?

But the hundreds of millions of exotic pearls of the Orient

…are outnumbered by a billion or so men of their own stock. Are you playing Robin Hood in reverse?

We at Palantir have been committed to defending the principles that make democratic rule possible since our founding two decades ago.

Yeah, nothing says open and honest government more than a spy company founded with CIA money.

Interesting, I note that they don’t say “democratic government”; they say “democratic rule”.

Rule.

‘Not sure I follow…’

It’s been the greatest atrocity committed by a First-world state since the suppression of the Warsaw Uprising.

I agree it all has its amusing aspects, but…

Sure maybe antisemitic Koreans will replace Jews as the major donors to Ivy Universities just as Jews replaced WASPS.

1. Sad. I’m afraid that the accusation of “antisemitism” – like “racism!” invoked by blacks – is losing its power due to over-usage.

2. Yes, I am so anti-Semitic that I salivate at the prospect of that dirty Jew – Stephen Miller – becoming the AG under Trump.

3. You think money solves all problems. How typical.

4. Most Koreans in America have zero interest in being an alien overclass. Sure, they want to be upper middle class, but they mostly intermarry, go to church, and assimilate into the majority. That’s why there isn’t “anti-Koreanism” wherever they go. Your people might try that on for a size.

But not this week.

For a reputedly high IQ people, what remarkable lack of future time-orientation.

What you still don’t seem to realize is that, the more you double down hysterically on these various shticks – “But the Holocaust!,” the Victimest People EverTM, “fellow whites,” “fellow non-white immigrants,” do-as-I-say-or-no-donation-for-you, “you dirty anti-Semites!”, etc. – the worse the reaction is going to be.

Learn to read the room.

Yep, the fact that 10 Africans have an IQ above 130 proves that blacks don’t have an average IQ o 85.

Get some new material.

” Palestinians have called for a secular, democratic state in all of Palestine that treats Jews and Arabs equally â€�

Like all those other secular democratic Arab states?”

Well, at any rate none of them are explicitly racist Judeo-Nazi abominations dependent on the continued subversion of the United States for their very existence.

None of them are perfect — but it’s all relative.

A possible caption for that picture:

American National Security spokesman John Kirby: “Name me one nation that is doing more to alleviate the pain and suffering of people in Gaza than the United States. You won’t succeed, it just won’t work!”

This is Baghdad Bob and Sean Spicer level of self-delusion.

Kirby: "Name me one nation that is doing more to alleviate the pain and suffering of people in Gaza than the United States. You won't succeed, it just won't work!" pic.twitter.com/lHLOTG3UrU

— Trita Parsi (@tparsi) December 7, 2023

the ideal hot thin feminine Jewess with a pleasant personality is… not exactly common.

Are you saying that Jewish women are unpleasant, fat, un-feminine, and not-hot?

What kind of an anti-Semite, are you? Are you one of these self-loathing Jews? Or do you just hate your mom?

You know, I’ve been to Israel and Israeli (Jewish) girls are quite charming. Have you considered making Aliyah? Of course, then you’d have to expose yourself to harm while bombing tens of thousands of Palestinian women and children to their deaths. Might break a nail, you know. Tough choices, huh?

Art Deco wrote to me:

[Dave]The scam is to claim that “From the river to the sea� is a call for genocide of the Israeli Jews.

[AD] No scam there. It is literally true.

Why on earth do you claim that calling for a free and independent Palestine from the river to the sea requires the genocide of the Jews?

It surely does not: the Jews could peacefully leave.

Or they could choose to live as ordinary citizens in a free and independent Palestine that is no longer an ethno-religious apartheid state. No longer a “Jewish” state but just a state for all of its residents.

So, why do you lie?

Yeah, yeah, I know: it is who you are. You Zionists just cannot accept separation of religion and state.

The scam is to claim that “From the river to the sea� is a call for genocide of the Israeli Jews.

In fact, going back at least to the 1960s, a number of Palestinians have called for a secular, democratic state in all of Palestine that treats Jews and Arabs equally — “from the river to the sea.�

The apologists for Zionist apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and mass murder know this, of course. Any guess as to where the Zionists learned this technique of the “Big Lie�?

That’s very nice, but let’s talk reality here for a moment.

If the Palestinians ever came to power in all of Israel-Palestine, do you really think they will create “a secular, democratic state… that treats Jews and Arabs equally”? That’s even more unrealistic than your anarcho-syndicalist commune or whatever fantasy you have for the post-apocalyptic, post-America Sacramento (where, yes, you will have to fear my warlord army descending upon you and, yes, you’d better call the FBI and complain about this “threat” to your life in the strongest terms).

In reality, if the Palestinians were to wield even remotely that kind of power over the Israelis/Jews, there will likely be a huge bloodbath of revenge-taking. The best they could expect would be “democracy” South Africa-style. What sane person, Jew or non-Jew, would want that?

Ackman expressly says he views DIE as another Red Scare that history will view poorly and that he will help make it so.

The reason there was a “Red Scare” was because there were Reds. Of course a lot of those Reds were Ackman’s people (a lot of them), so naturally he wants to claim that it was all a lot of hooey. It wasn’t.

Pixo wrote to me:

[Dave] “ Palestinians have called for a secular, democratic state in all of Palestine that treats Jews and Arabs equally �

[Pixo] Like all those other secular democratic Arab states?

Lots of Arab states used to be secular before the US and its puppets drove the Mideast to Islamic radicalism.

As to democratic… well, when the totalitarians regime that now controls the US is overthrown and democracy is re-established, perhaps you will have standing to criticize other countries.

Until then… men in glass houses…

You know like the founding fathers intended. For ourselves and our posterity.

My little buddy Twinkie asked me:

If the Palestinians ever came to power in all of Israel-Palestine, do you really think they will create “a secular, democratic state… that treats Jews and Arabs equally�?

A better chance than the Zionists having such a state — they have made very clear that they intend to maintain their ethno-religious apartheid state… forever.

Frankly, the Zionists have so poisoned the well by their century-long policy of killing Palestinians and stealing their lands and homes, that reconciliation will indeed be hard.

My own recommendation is for the Zionists to just leave. But I doubt they will.

So, in the long run, they can either figure out somehow how to be good neighbors.

Or they can all end up dead.

It seems to me that striving for a just and lasting peace is better than ending up dead.

Twinkie also wrote:

That’s even more unrealistic than your anarcho-syndicalist commune or whatever fantasy you have for the post-apocalyptic, post-America Sacramento (where, yes, you will have to fear my warlord army descending upon you and, yes, you’d better call the FBI and complaint about this “threat� to your life).

You keep confusing me with someone else: I am not and never have been an “anarcho-syndicalist” nor have I ever indicated the slightest inclination to live in a commune (such as Israeli kibbutzim, which were founded as socialist communes — yechhh!).

As you know, my approach to warlords is a culinary one: truss up the would-be warlord, put him on a spit over a slow fire, and have a neighborhood barbecue.

A warlord wants us to serve him? We’ll be happy to serve him — as the main course for dinner.

Once enough people acquire a strong taste for barbecued warlord, I suspect that the supply of would-be warlords might just dry up.

As you know, throughout most of the existence of the human race, anarchism was the norm. And there was not much trouble with warlords.

Perhaps because they were eaten.

Nope, not anarcho-syndicalism. Let’s just call it culinary anarchism. Invite your would-be warlord for dinner. As the main course.

Twinkie also wrote:

In reality, if the Palestinians were to wield even remotely that kind of power over the Israelis/Jews, there will likely be a huge bloodbath of revenge-taking. The best they could expect would be “democracy� South Africa-style.

Payback is a bitch, isn’t it?

Maybe the Zionists should have thought of that before they stole someone else’s country, eh?

Thank you for the correction, Alden.

Jews put that thing into the Harvard presidency. Now they regret it boo boo.

Nobody could have seen that coming. Nobody!

Bravo!

“As you know, my approach to warlords is a culinary one: truss up the would-be warlord, put him on a spit over a slow fire, and have a neighborhood barbecue.”

This is silly. Warlords have armies. To beat them you will need an army and the army will need leaders. Warlords perhaps.

PD knows that there would be a bloodbath or at a minimum every single last Jew would be expelled but he thinks that the Jews deserve it for having stolen the country in the 1st place. He later said as much.

The stuff about a secular democratic state is just kayfabe for the rubes – you say whatever you have to say to achieve your goals and once you have achieved them then you say sorry, just kidding. Democracy is like a bus that you ride until your destination and then you get off. Abbas (who is about as good as it would get) is now in the 18th year of his 5 year elected term. Not only would there not be democracy for Jews, there wouldn’t even be democracy for Arabs. Arabs prefer Big Men, not democracy.

Twinkie wrote to Jack D:

That’s why there isn’t “anti-Koreanism� wherever they go. Your people might try that on for a size.

You do raise an interesting question, there.

Our family attended the Shanghai Olympics and, while in China, we hired several different tour guides.

One of them was a young Chinese guy who had previously been the guide for an American Jewish family. He went on and on about what unpleasant jerks these Jewish folks were and asked me if all Jews were that unpleasant: I did assure him that, no, there really are some nice Jews.

But this does raise the question of why it is, to quote Tom Lehrer, who is of course Jewish, that “everybody hates the Jews.”

You’d think that Jews might want to figure out the answer to that question…

“In reality, if the Palestinians were to wield even remotely that kind of power over the Israelis/Jews, there will likely be a huge bloodbath of revenge-taking. The best they could expect would be “democracyâ€� South Africa-style. What sane person, Jew or non-Jew, would want that?”

Plenty of people think the current South African government is an improvement on the previous regime. And would support a similar outcome in the Middle East. But this isn’t realistic.

bjdubbs said that Gay was not Ackman’s (the Jews’) kind of people and they want her gone. I don’t understand – if they want her gone, why did they put her in there in the 1st place? Or maybe they didn’t and it was other elements of the Coalition of the Fringes who did. As between Bill Ackman and Barrack Obama, who was more excited about the next president of Harvard being a black woman?

Male heterosexual Jews like Ackman, like male heterosexual whites in general, were increasingly seen as the wave of the past by institutions such as Harvard – future Harvard would be less male, less white, less Jewish (but not more Asian) – the typical Harvard student would look much like Claudine Gay herself. Bill Ackman didn’t get to be a billionaire by making self-defeating decisions like advocating for someone who hates him or is at best indifferent to him to be the president of Harvard.

Those who are saying that Jews are not the wave of the future in America are not wrong. The demographics dictate that. The handwriting is on the wall. The only problem is that they declared the future a little bit early. Timing is everything.

Jack D wrote to Twinkie:

PD knows that there would be a bloodbath or at a minimum every single last Jew would be expelled but he thinks that the Jews deserve it for having stolen the country in the 1st place. He later said as much.

You are of course lying, as you Zionists always do.

I did not say that.

I have said that when you commit certain crimes, like killing a bunch of people and stealing their homes, you should not be surprised if they respond in kind.

For the record: as I keep saying, I condemn the bloodbath by the terrorist group Hamas on October 7. I especially condemn the killing of innocent children by anyone, whether Jewish children or Palestinian children or anyone else.

Palestinians’ killing of Israeli military and Israeli government officials is, on the other hand, legal under the laws of war. However, as I keep saying again and again, I do not think they should do that — it is self-defeating.

What I have said repeatedly is that I think the Palestinians should take a leaf from the book of Gandhi and MLK and engage in non-violent resistance to demand equal rights throughout the territory controlled by the Zionist regime, “from the river to the sea.”

That is, in terms of the self-interest of the Palestianians themselves, I think they would be wise to eschew violence and to engage in a large-scale, coordinated, non-violent movement for eqqual rights.

From the river to the sea.

But you will keep lying about this.

Because that is who you are.

A lying, Zionist shyster.

Meanwhile, elsewhere on the planet:

My own recommendation is for the Zionists to just leave.

Are you going to leave Sacramento?

As you know, my approach to warlords is a culinary one: truss up the would-be warlord, put him on a spit over a slow fire, and have a neighborhood barbecue.

What is your fascination with cannibalism? The funny thing about warlords – they have these things called armies.

Payback is a bitch, isn’t it?

Maybe the Zionists should have thought of that before they stole someone else’s country, eh?

So you acknowledge that in your fever dreams, “the Zionists” will get what’s coming to them, eh? Yes, this is a totally palatable fate for the Israeli children in the minds of their parents – a “bitch” of a “payback.”

Meanwhile, on planet earth, land disputes between two groups of (armed) peoples don’t operate on coulda, woulda, shoulda. Yes, I think the Palestinians historically got a raw deal in many respects, but they weren’t the first and won’t be the last. Personally, I think a two-state solution of some sort would be the best (with a very well-armed, well-maintained border between them), but it is a thorny problem, because both sides have no-compromise demands (e.g. East Jerusalem) that are incompatible. So, it looks like we are at an impasse, with the Palestinians lacking the military force to drive the Israelis to the sea and the Israelis being restrained from being able to expel the Palestinians. Unfortunately, I think this situation will go on for a very long time.

Sigh. You Republicans just can’t help yourselves, can you. These “test cases” are going to be plentiful next year. And this is why it won’t matter how criminal, corrupt, or senile Biden is.

Well, this and the fact that you don’t have any good candidates. Mind you, I really wish you did.

https://www.unz.com/isteve/what-are-the-3-most-requested-songs-at-weddings/#comment-6302814

Plenty of people think the current South African government is an improvement on the previous regime.

But apparently not those currently living there, especially if they happen to be farmers (mostly, but not exclusively, white): https://www.news.com.au/world/africa/farmer-killings-farmers-tortured-and-killed-in-horrific-south-africa-raids/news-story/1aae3fe47328ada3b6a3d369675877df

I happen to have several expatriate South African friends. One of them is a female doctor. She finally decided to emigrate when she realized that she was the only female doctor who hadn’t been raped at her hospital in Joburg.

But this isn’t realistic.

That’s an understatement, to say the least.