This terrible anti-Semitism, that is, the perfect conflict with the eyes of the strict
A debate on anti-Semitism took place on Krzysztof Łukszy's channel rather late – if this can be called a debate, then it happened between Mr. editor Radosław Patlewicz and Eli a Polish hebrew who, though not a hebrew of origin, decided to become a Servant of Satan (Is Satan wearing a yarmulka? Interesting question).
Should a philosomite be active in specified a debate at all? After all, for phylosemity, anti-Semitism is everything it disagrees with. Well, of any facts Eli told the fact – for example, as a consequence of persecution, the Palestinians crowded in the last Israeli-free areas so tightly that erstwhile the Israelites started shooting at them, it was predicted that any stray ball might hit someone, say, a two-year-old.
But this was not the core of the debate, but – in addition to the deliberate insult of Radosław Patlewicz – we discussed the definition of anti-Semitism in the debate. And here's the problem, due to the fact that once, what definition can 1 anticipate from phylosomity, and twice, is it hate, or is it violence, crooked eyes, slander? Rational or irrational, the words intertwined and converged, and I wondered why no 1 would consider the anticipation that this was just any view. A very circumstantial view, with a strict expression and consequences, which is simply a mirror reflection of philosemitism; and no of us have any uncertainty about what Philosemism is: the belief of the superiority of the Jews over the goys and the right to manage the goy's money.
Imagine that the planet view is perfectly divisible. Not by the economical and moral sphere, specified a division may function in popular thinking, but it does not say anything about the fullness of the case. due to the fact that while the economy is (most often) the opposition of socialism-capitalism (I hatred this word, but on another occasion), “citizenship” is divided into many aspects. Gays – Do you tolerate or smoke at the stake? A throne alliance with an altar or a chapter? Do you love trances or are you afraid of them? It doesn't make sense. Why should individual place his “citation” on 1 of the mythical sides? The answers to questions may vary and do not gotta influence real thinking.
John Timothy Woronin a.k.a. “Rhabbi Eliachu” – a patostrimer posing as an orthodox hebrew on the InternetSo the division that I propose is the following: the worldview is divided into simple views. Each view is simply a tristate, i.e. its set of values is {-1, 0, 1}. The values that take the view are positions: anti, neutral and philo. Let us now consider what these positions actually mean: the only thing that is of real importance is the goods, material and intangible that defend privacy (the right of property, freedom and well-being free of harm), and so the position says whether the characteristics of a social/ethnic/national group are applicable to the movement of these goods – whether something belongs to individual for that reason – and, secondly, whether this trait or features entitles them to privileges (filo), or whether they may be ordered to rob them (anti).
Now things are getting much simpler. The answer to the first question – positive-negative – defines the “page”: left-right. Whether it is simply a left philo or an anti is of secondary importance, due to the fact that the most crucial thing is that never right-wing and always left-wing is to say that for any reason you can take something from individual and give it to individual else. What does that mean? That anti-Semitism is specified a value of the view of Jews that due to Jewry itself individual should be expropriated/ deprived of freedom/what another harm.
Even if we put the harm to it, it doesn't change anything. Anti-Semitism is simply a position (and a popular view) left-wing and should so be attributed Lutheran, another Protestants, russian and PRL communists and their colleagues in the 3rd Reich (“ “ “ “ “ “ “ “ “ , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,.
John Timothy Woronin a.k.a. “Rhabbi Eliachu” – a patostrimer posing as an orthodox hebrew on the InternetI hope that specified a case will aid us all in the fight against all those who, dressed in the appearance of eloquence, effort to convince us that possibly there is something about the things that the Polish right hates Jews. Let us be clear: abnormal (neutral, means) attitude towards Jews, goys, blacks, whites, poor, rich, trances, cis, women, men, gays, straights and priests have left-wingers. We're normal. Let's reconstruct normality.
Krzysztof Drużyński
We besides recommend: British banks close accounts to clients they disagree with. “Orwell reality”
