Christianity

[Alexis Jacobi]

Man, I am glad we are done with that topic.

Well, you mainly demonstrated how slimy you are.

Wait, slippery has a different connotation. Slippery as a seal, that sort of thing. To become slippery in a conversational set-up is a positive trait and a good strategy.

But slimy? As in "Morally repulsive, as in being dishonest or corrupt." No, that would be an unfair assertion on your part.

The real truth is that Flash behaved slimily from the very start. (This was on another thread). He tried to implicate me in moral villainy when I'd made a very clear & accurate statement. I expressly said that I did not deny the Shoah. I said that the general picture is accurate except for some fictional elements.

And he thought that he could morally corral me.

I suggest that you try to see things more clearly, accurately and overall fairly.

What bearing does this issue have on our social and cultural situation? A great deal! Because there are people who act like Flash, who distort and who slander without just cause.

It is very slimy behavior.

[FlashDangerpants]

If you give a solid answer then I won't have any further concerns.

Excellent! Now we are getting somewhere. Now let's define *solid answer* so there is no further misunderstanding.

I wrote: The Shoah narrative has some fictional elements which are still contested.

Now, I here provide an exa

mple of a fictional element and you agree to accept this as an example of what I am talking about and you agree to accept it as solid if it comes from a reliable source and to will take your concerns elsewhere...

I had in mind the assertion that the Nazis boiled Jews and made soap out of them.

“It’s a general conception that the Nazis manufactured soap,” says Michael Berenbaum, who was project manager for the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (USHMM) before it opened in 1993 and headed the museum’s research institute until 1997. “But those of us working in this area have not used it as an example [of Nazi atrocity] in the last 10 to 15 years. We don’t have any evidence that the Nazis actually manufactured soap with human bodies.”

By 1990, Yad Vashem, had unequivocally determined that the manufacture of soap was no more than a “mere rumor.” Holocaust scholar Yehuda Bauer told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency at that time, “The Nazis did enough horrible things during the Holocaust. We do not have to go on believing untrue stories.”

The myth was revisited in 2020. In response to a query from Haaretz, a spokesperson from Yad Vashem wrote that “Despite the persistence of these rumors … which began even during the Holocaust, there is no evidence that soap was mass produced from the bodies of Jews.”

Source: Jewish Virtual Library

soap?

This all started with me asking you about 3 conspiracy theories to try to find where you draw the line because you were defending Great Replacement Theory
Those were...

• that the Holocaust was invented (under jewish orders) to make the Nazis look bad and none of it really happened

• the flat Earthers who theorise that NASA is engaged in a conspiracy to pretend the world is round

• aliens built the Pyramids

You replied that one of them isn't a mere conspiracy theory but the other two are.

You think quibbling about soap is a "solid" answer? And do you still think it's not fair to call holocaust deniers conspiracy theorists because of some confusion over whether human fats were rendered into soluble cleaning products?

[henry quirk]

Man, I am glad we are done with that topic.

Well, you mainly demonstrated how slimy you are.

It's not surprising that Henry supports your childishness when it's not directed at him.

I haven't supported him. I have supported some notions he's articulated (but not all of 'em). I'd do the same with you if you ever said sumthin' supportable or defendable or just commonsensical.

[Alexis Jacobi]

You violated the agreement, Flash, so now I am going to put you on ignore for evermore.

You also misrepresented what I did say. Here it is.

The alien theory you can safely dismiss.

So too the flat-earth theory.

The Shoah narrative has some fictional elements which are still contested. But the general picture (the destruction of European Jewry) is a certainty.

The manipulation of historical narrative is simply put par for the course.

So each theory (your term) would need to be examined one by one. Our view of history has been tweaked and molded. But I assume you know this.

Adios HotPants. And best of luck in your endeavors.

[FlashDangerpants]

You violated the agreement, Flash, so now I am going to put you on ignore for evermore.

You also misrepresented what I did say. Here it is.

The alien theory you can safely dismiss.

So too the flat-earth theory.

The Shoah narrative has some fictional elements which are still contested. But the general picture (the destruction of European Jewry) is a certainty.

The manipulation of historical narrative is simply put par for the course.

So each theory (your term) would need to be examined one by one. Our view of history has been tweaked and molded. But I assume you know this.

Adios HotPants. And best of luck in your endeavors.

Ok, you were a lying nazi anyway.

And we do know that the thing you really dispute about the holocaust is that you think it was the right thing to do. Not some meangless shit about soap.

[Gary Childress]

The thing beyond "sound and fury" in his posts is Blood and Soil.

And this is definitely true, but not quite in the way he means it (associated with Nazism, etc.) It has become ideologically illegal, for a group of reasons, to speak about (be concerned about) 'blood' (one's physical matrix) and *soil* one's relationship to the place one lives, one's *right* to possess and control that place. But though these topics are ones that (in this case Flash) will work to suppress with condemnatory moral force (or his weak attempt at it) other people in this world, and in the larger community, and in the US, Australia, England and in Europe and many other places are thinking about. And with solid justification. But when they do so they immediately receive 'moral beating' just as Flash is attempting. It has led to 'cancellation', to getting de-banked, and a whole set of other actions with often very negative effects.

So I reverse the condemnatory assumption and I transvalue it: it is moral to think in such terms. It is moral to have those concerns. It is moral to talk about them. Present an argument that refutes this. (You can't and you won't).

However, it is just one concern within a group of valid concerns.

"Blood and soil" are certainly "valid concerns"--for pretty much everyone on the planet. Aside from that, I'm not sure what else can be said that wouldn't stir up a hornet's nest in one fashion or another (for pretty understandable reasons).

[Gary Childress]

You violated the agreement, Flash, so now I am going to put you on ignore for evermore.

You also misrepresented what I did say. Here it is.

The alien theory you can safely dismiss.

So too the flat-earth theory.

The Shoah narrative has some fictional elements which are still contested. But the general picture (the destruction of European Jewry) is a certainty.

The manipulation of historical narrative is simply put par for the course.

So each theory (your term) would need to be examined one by one. Our view of history has been tweaked and molded. But I assume you know this.

Adios HotPants. And best of luck in your endeavors.

Ok, you were a lying nazi anyway.

And we do know that the thing you really dispute about the holocaust is that you think it was the right thing to do. Not some meangless shit about soap.

With all due respect, he might have a legitimate point about the soap example, if that is indeed a hypothesis that has been floated concerning the holocaust and if it is indeed unfounded.

As with anything, there are often rumors and exaggerations that are used to demonize people to extremes that are not in fact true, just to stir up sensation or to get people to back particular agendas. I mean, it happens even where atrocities are concerned. Therefore we should perhaps approach such things with some reasonable degree of healthy skepticism. I mean, he does seem to say that the destruction of European Jewry is an indisputable fact. And when it comes down to it, that seems like some common ground that we can all agree on, including the notion that all those deaths were woefully wrong.

[Harbal]

Men are free wills. Each recognizes his natural rights as a matter of course but each must choose to recognize them in other men.

This is the point, henry. What you call rights are only rights when they are the subject of an agreement or pact between two or more people. Otherwise, they are merely personal principles.

I've yet to hear you defend the worth of a permission or privilege that has been granted to you by an authority when that authority can and will violate, amend, or take away that permission or privilege with impunity.

Why are you waiting for me to say something about this?

[FlashDangerpants]

You violated the agreement, Flash, so now I am going to put you on ignore for evermore.

You also misrepresented what I did say. Here it is.



Adios HotPants. And best of luck in your endeavors.

Ok, you were a lying nazi anyway.

And we do know that the thing you really dispute about the holocaust is that you think it was the right thing to do. Not some meangless shit about soap.

With all due respect, he might have a legitimate point about the soap example, if that is indeed a hypothesis that has been floated concerning the holocaust and if it is indeed unfounded.

As with anything, there are often rumors and exaggerations that are used to demonize people to extremes that are not in fact true, just to stir up sensation or to get people to back particular agendas. I mean, it happens even where atrocities are concerned. Therefore we should perhaps approach such things with some reasonable degree of healthy skepticism. I mean, he does seem to say that the destruction of European Jewry is an indisputable fact. And when it comes down to it, that seems like some common ground that we can all agree on, including the notion that all those deaths were woefully wrong.

His whole schtick is about the dissident status of suppressed "interpretations" of history, stuff you get into real trouble for believing, let alone merely saying. That soap thing with the Jewish Virtual Library as a source, is not that. It's not the thing he was unwilling to say, it was the distraction he hoped would fulfil that silly "one thing only" contract, and thus make me the bad guy for not laying off him.

I never originally expected him to have an actual problem with the holocaust. I was originally taking him to task for trying to refuse me permission to use the words "conspiracy theory" and I listed a few of the madder cospo theories to make a point, I had absolutely no idea he would turn out to be unable to accept that holocaust denial is another insane conspo theory along with the fake moon landings thing.

The soap story is not why he can't call it a conspiracy theory. He is lying. He was never concerned that it was illegal in Europe to say the nazis didn't make soap out of human fat. He never believed the owners of the site were under any obligation to remove that claim from their web site.

He does believe there is a conspiracy to replace white people with brown people. He does believe that society is soon to crumble. And he thinks that when that happens all thise extra brown people will be used to assert control over the white people unless you flock to his banner. And when that happens he doesn't think you will be squeamish about "final solutions" any more.

[Belinda]

I too suspect AQ is on a recruiting mission for some unpleasant political movement. I wish someone more politically aware than I would spell it out. I meant that that the effort to understand AJ exercises my brain. I believe there may be more than sound and fury in his posts, though what they signify escapes me. AJ's prose can not be helping him to recruit sympathisers.

For what it's worth I just accused him of believing the holocaust wast justified as an act of self defence against jews and he avoided denying that point.

Also appropos of nothing, when he directed me to a video of some guy casually explaining why there is a jewish plot to take over the world, the comments section was full of references to something called the Thule Society, so that's quite likely who he is recruiting for.

This is their logo...

Thanks Flash. I looked up the Thule Society on Wikipedia and it seemed to me to be a poorly -informed outcrop of Romanticism, inspired by a sort of paranoid attitude towards outsiders.

We can choose to go towards universal mankind or alternatively towards tribal mankind, but not both.

[FlashDangerpants]

I too suspect AQ is on a recruiting mission for some unpleasant political movement. I wish someone more politically aware than I would spell it out. I meant that that the effort to understand AJ exercises my brain. I believe there may be more than sound and fury in his posts, though what they signify escapes me. AJ's prose can not be helping him to recruit sympathisers.

For what it's worth I just accused him of believing the holocaust wast justified as an act of self defence against jews and he avoided denying that point.

Also appropos of nothing, when he directed me to a video of some guy casually explaining why there is a jewish plot to take over the world, the comments section was full of references to something called the Thule Society, so that's quite likely who he is recruiting for.

This is their logo...

Thanks Flash. I looked up the Thule Society on Wikipedia and it seemed to me to be a poorly -informed outcrop of Romanticism, inspired by a sort of paranoid attitude towards outsiders.

We can choose to go towards universal mankind or alternatively towards tribal mankind, but not both.

Full disclosure, the only reason I specified that exact group is because under one of his jews-rule-the-world interwibblies links, where all the nazies were writing about what a good idea it is to kill all the jews, the Thule Society was recruiting. So I figured that was probably his mob as he wold have got the link from somewhere after all.

He's never gonna confirm that for me though. The real action is in somebody'sd private mailbox where he is sharing tales of how mean all the marxists like that nasty hot pants are and hey, he happens to know a site where the marxists get weeded out instead of the race realists, would you like an invite?

[Gary Childress]

Ok, you were a lying nazi anyway.

And we do know that the thing you really dispute about the holocaust is that you think it was the right thing to do. Not some meangless shit about soap.

With all due respect, he might have a legitimate point about the soap example, if that is indeed a hypothesis that has been floated concerning the holocaust and if it is indeed unfounded.

As with anything, there are often rumors and exaggerations that are used to demonize people to extremes that are not in fact true, just to stir up sensation or to get people to back particular agendas. I mean, it happens even where atrocities are concerned. Therefore we should perhaps approach such things with some reasonable degree of healthy skepticism. I mean, he does seem to say that the destruction of European Jewry is an indisputable fact. And when it comes down to it, that seems like some common ground that we can all agree on, including the notion that all those deaths were woefully wrong.

His whole schtick is about the dissident status of suppressed "interpretations" of history, stuff you get into real trouble for believing, let alone merely saying. That soap thing with the Jewish Virtual Library as a source, is not that. It's not the thing he was unwilling to say, it was the distraction he hoped would fulfil that silly "one thing only" contract, and thus make me the bad guy for not laying off him.

I never originally expected him to have an actual problem with the holocaust. I was originally taking him to task for trying to refuse me permission to use the words "conspiracy theory" and I listed a few of the madder cospo theories to make a point, I had absolutely no idea he would turn out to be unable to accept that holocaust denial is another insane conspo theory along with the fake moon landings thing.

The soap story is not why he can't call it a conspiracy theory. He is lying. He was never concerned that it was illegal in Europe to say the nazis didn't make soap out of human fat. He never believed the owners of the site were under any obligation to remove that claim from their web site.

He does believe there is a conspiracy to replace white people with brown people. He does believe that society is soon to crumble. And he thinks that when that happens all thise extra brown people will be used to assert control over the white people unless you flock to his banner. And when that happens he doesn't think you will be squeamish about "final solutions" any more.

Well, at least he doesn't appear to me to be a holocaust denier himself. If he denies that the holocaust ever happened, then he would be a holocaust denier, however, since he admits that European Jewry was decimated, then it sounds like he is not denying it.

So far AJ's most overt flaw that I have noticed appears to be smugness over having read a lot of stuff that many of the rest of us are afraid to touch with a ten-foot pole (for what are probably understandable reasons). I suppose AJ could be the patron saint of lost souls here on Earth who have ventured a little too far down the rabbit hole with respect to studying Nazism (if he is putting his skills and learning to good use). Maybe his goal is to clean them up and eventually pull them back into mainstream humanity? I mean, I suppose if a person studies anything thoroughly enough they're likely to find errors or omissions made by mainstream scholarship.

In any case, I'd be interested in hearing AJ's response to my thoughts above.

[Alexis Jacobi]

In the political climate of today, and the intellectual and ideological climate, merely mentioning a non-standard idea gives license to certain factions to accuse you of being a Nazi. There are a range of terms they will use but it always resolves to that one. The Emblem of Ontological Malevolence.

I have critiques of the Republican Right of course, but presently these extreme tactics are a tool of the Progressive Left. They are powerful indeed to the degree that you, or one, is susceptible to their use.

Flash, Belinda, I think Lacewing (and numerous others), because of a general Progressive egalitarian ‘belief’ (which has a sort of religious note) are inclined to use ‘easy labels’ when they believe they have located one they can call an enemy. And enemies abound.

What interests me is less the topical political issues, but as a philosopher an examination of psychological, social and political coercion and how it works.

When Left-Progressives — god’s own true moral children in our world — find their Satan (and he rules the terrestrial realm and is working day and night in sheer malevolence), they give themselves Special Rights to violate ethics and morals to strike at their perceived enemy, their Satan.

Once they get hopped up in this there is no reasoning with them. It is an irrational state of mind. Any attempt to converse is like conversing with a religious fanatic. You are invalidated from the start and their suspicion rules them.

My ‘sin’ is largely that I am aware of these games. But also that I read extremely widely (in comparison to most here who read little if at all). To have ‘an open mind’ and to read primary sources is not understood to be a necessary or positive activity but one that ‘implicates’ you in the minds of people who are inclined to unreasonable positions and psychological hysteria.

I subjected myself to one local exemplar of unreason who latched on (according to him) because I am aware of the Great Replacement Theory and have studied its premises. They have their fair concerns. Whether it is true or not, and whether it is morally right or wrong to have protective attitudes, is actually beside the point for those who’ve made their decisions. They move immediately to a vilification position and work it with all the tools at their disposal.

[FlashDangerpants]

Well, at least he doesn't appear to me to be a holocaust denier himself. If he denies that the holocaust ever happened, then he would be a holocaust denier, however, since he admits that European Jewry was decimated, then it sounds like he is not denying it.

The thing he was unable to refer to as a conspiracy theory was whether the jews caused the holocaust.

The craziest holocaust deniers are the ones who say that it was all arranged by the jews themselves, using Hitler as a pawn. Others victim blame the jews as world controlling conspiracists who needed to be culled, they don't deny the holocaust as an event, they lament that it was left incomplete.

Your boy here has already made explicit that he he believes the kews are engaged in a n attempt to dominate the world. He's made explicit that he believes whites in America are and Europe are being replaced. If you cvan get him to deny that the world dominating jews are arranging that replacement, you would at least be dealing with the original thing I was taking him to task over in the summer.

But more likely he'll an excuse to not say so, and you will find one to not hold him to account.

[Harbal]

Full disclosure, the only reason I specified that exact group is because under one of his jews-rule-the-world interwibblies links, where all the nazies were writing about what a good idea it is to kill all the jews, the Thule Society was recruiting. So I figured that was probably his mob as he wold have got the link from somewhere after all.

He's never gonna confirm that for me though.

Why not just ask him the straightforward question: Do you support, or agree in whole or in part, with the views and aims of the Thule Society?