South Africa: difficulty getting good information

[Atla]

Mike, what's your opinion on Viking cuisine?

[accelafine]

What about 'home styling'? I was going to buy it but it's 'out of print'

[Skepdick]

...

So the imperialist social justice [EDITED] has managed to colonize another thread for his own philosophical gain...

[Alexis Jacobi]

Is this forum just another social media space for reflexive bickering and personal jabs? Or is it supposed to be a place for honest, intellectually serious debate?

You carry on like an “AI agent” — an AI entity established and directed to argue and influence people to accept certain conclusive points of view which, in your case, you construct on the bedrock of physics facts. I have wondered if “you” are a small group of persons experimenting with the construction, the tweaking, and the perfection of an AI entity designed to achieve specific outcomes. Even if my suspicion is not accurate, the fact that you come across like an AI bot leads one to speculate about the potential of such entities. Their day will come.

Your entire “argument” is a machine-argument. And though I admit it is possible if one really held such adamant views to debate them honestly, why I wonder do I have this nagging feeling that “you” are not honest?

However, what is more interesting and provocative is your political and social outlook. It is similar enough to the general Woke-Progressive program that what is intriguing is the employment of physics and ‘hard determinism’ arguments in an attempt to ground it in the very bedrock of manifest reality.

And here your acute progressivism is very similar to that of nearly every person who inhabits this space. Flash, Gary, likely Will, and many others come to mind. Generally speaking, ultra-liberals who have absorbed these outlooks. They have become “reflexes”.

Yet here is an interesting fact: at present these paradigms are being significantly challenged by a sort of popular revolt. There is an ongoing attack on the certainties established in the American-led Postwar Era. This began at least a decade ago (since I have been paying attention). The most notorious exponent of this reflexive, internalized construct is our own M. Flash. Any idea that does not conform to this Postwar Liberal Paradigm is equated with Nazism.

Curiously then, what “you” BigMike present here is an extreme expression of this hyper-liberalism that attempts to ground itself through absolutist declarations based in physics laws. You take political ideology to a whole other level! The implications? That Man requires reprogramming just like the types of programs constructed for computers. The anthropological software needs to be revised.

How unsurprising that on a thread where South Africa is discussed, and where every tenet of “woke ideology” of this modern, revisionist sort came to be expressed, but is now teetering on the very edges of collapse and disaster (?) — how interesting it is that your machine-opinions insert themselves to bolster the established views.

[FlashDangerpants]

our own M. Flash. Any idea that does not conform to this Postwar Liberal Paradigm is equated with Nazism.

As a point of order, I would remind you that I call you and Wizzy and that pistolero guy nazis because of your deep antisemitism and white nationalism, and you will find no other people here that I have called nazis because I only use it about actual nazis. Which is what you are.

[Alexis Jacobi]

our own M. Flash. Any idea that does not conform to this Postwar Liberal Paradigm is equated with Nazism.

As a point of order, I would remind you that I call you and Wizzy and that pistolero guy nazis because of your deep antisemitism and white nationalism, and you will find no other people here that I have called nazis because I only use it about actual nazis. Which is what you are.

Yes, I am aware that you have explained yourself in that way. Still it would be (in my opinion) dishonest to pretend that your use if the term Nazi so loosely is not the same in kind as how it is used culture-wide and on forums and discussion boards like this one.

All ideas that contradict or challenge the postwar consensus and its various tenets is indeed equated with Nazism and fascism. You are part of that same reflexiveness of casting aspersions, whether deserved or not.

Now, since you bring such a substantial charge against me — “I only use it about actual nazis. Which is what you are” — would you be so kind as to quote from what I have written that expresses a Nazi ideology? Can you back up the claim? Or — as I expect — does it better serve your purposes to insinuate the claim rather than to demonstrate it?

Can you link to quotes or better simply quote here where I have expressed Nazi ideology? You can clear it up right away.

In my view, this mental reflexiveness of a weird Left-Progressive sort is in the process of being challenged on many different fronts. And since this thread is supposedly (!) dedicated to examination of current events in South Africa and since Apartheid is directly equated with extreme racism and of course Nazism, your explanation are apropos and welcome.

[FlashDangerpants]

Now, since you bring such a substantial charge against me — “I only use it about actual nazis. Which is what you are” — would you be so kind as to quote from what I have written that expresses a Nazi ideology? Can you back up the claim? Or — as I expect — does it better serve your purposes to insinuate the claim rather than to demonstrate it?

Just go back to that time you refused to describe the conspiracy theory that Jews caused the holocaust as untrue. When you had the opportunity to deal with the questions honestly you tried to wear me out by demanding an in depth bibliography of all the books I had read. You blew your opportunity. There's no relitigating, you are a nazi.

[Alexis Jacobi]

I would remind you that I call you and Wizzy and that pistolero guy nazis because of your deep antisemitism and white nationalism

I do understand how “guilt by association” works, Flash. But I must clarify for the sake of precision: there are positions that are critical of aspects of Judaism — for example Talmudic Judaism’s extreme racism and extreme supremacism — that are in no sense connected with bona fide Nazi totalitarianism. Judaism can certainly be critiqued as the ur-form of supremacism. This can be carried out both fairly and also tinged with darker sentiments (Judenhass).

And similarly there are white nationalism postures that have no connection with National Socialist ideals.

Still, there is such a thing as European-preference or exclusionary political and ideological platforms, and the fact is that in Europe they are coming out of the closet, as it were, in every European country. These movements are exemplary of oppositional positions to the much of the Postwar liberal construct. But neither are they necessarily Nazi-like or Nazi advocating.

Except in your mind where indeed they are the same.

My point? That all of this is “up for discussion” when it is fairly put out on the table. My view is that it should all be discussed, not repressed. (Thus my attitude of toleration).

[Alexis Jacobi]

Just go back to that time you refused to describe the conspiracy theory that Jews caused the holocaust as untrue. When you had the opportunity to deal with the questions honestly you tried to wear me out by demanding an in depth bibliography of all the books I had read. You blew your opportunity. There's no relitigating, you are a nazi.

Would you be so kind as to post the quotes that so concerned you and condemned me? You are merely asserting that I have the opinions you ascribe to me, but that in no sense are they my opinions.

It is called calumny, M. Flash.

[FlashDangerpants]

Just go back to that time you refused to describe the conspiracy theory that Jews caused the holocaust as untrue. When you had the opportunity to deal with the questions honestly you tried to wear me out by demanding an in depth bibliography of all the books I had read. You blew your opportunity. There's no relitigating, you are a nazi.

Would you be so kind as to post the quotes that so concerned you and condemned me? You are merely asserting that I have the opinions you ascribe to me, but that in no sense are they my opinions.

It is called calumny, M. Flash.

There's no relitigating.

[Alexis Jacobi]

There's no relitigating, you are a nazi.

It is a thoroughly false assertion. But do you know what? It does not matter if it is true or false: the claim is all that matters! And that is an important point: it is becoming less and less credible to fling terms around without substantiated validation. That strategy has been punctured, even if you cannot face up to it.

That is in my view the most import point here. In this context, then, South African history and the real facts of the matter there are being reexamined.

[Alexis Jacobi]

There's no relitigating.

There was never any litigation to start with, you nut! Except in your overheated mind.

And “overheated minds” is the topic.

In this sense you and BigMike have qualities and tendencies very much in common!

[FlashDangerpants]

I would remind you that I call you and Wizzy and that pistolero guy nazis because of your deep antisemitism and white nationalism

I do understand how “guilt by association” works, Flash. But I must clarify for the sake of precision: there are positions that are critical of aspects of Judaism — for example Talmudic Judaism’s extreme racism and extreme supremacism — that are in no sense connected with bona fide Nazi totalitarianism. Judaism can certainly be critiqued as the ur-form of supremacism. This can be carried out both fairly and also tinged with darker sentiments (Judenhass).

And similarly there are white nationalism postures that have no connection with National Socialist ideals.

Still, there is such a thing as European-preference or exclusionary political and ideological platforms, and the fact is that in Europe they are coming out of the closet, as it were, in every European country. These movements are exemplary of oppositional positions to the much of the Postwar liberal construct. But neither are they necessarily Nazi-like or Nazi advocating.

Except in your mind where indeed they are the same.

My point? That all of this is “up for discussion” when it is fairly put out on the table. My view is that it should all be discussed, not repressed. (Thus my attitude of toleration).

I am sure you have an extremely keen eye for distinctions between all the various types of nazi there may be. I don't need that talent thank you. All the different types of nazi, including whichever is your precise brand, all are just a bunch of nazis to me.

[Alexis Jacobi]

From The Return of the Strong Gods by R.R. Reno:

It may be counterintuitive to describe the post-war consensus as one of openness and weakening. Political correctness is closed, hard, and punitive. But we need to distinguish the sociological reality of the dominant consensus — which is by definition bent on domination — from its content. Yes, the postwar consensus polices opinion, sometimes with an iron fist. But it does so to enforce what it imagines is best, on the whole, for society: dissolution, disintegration, and de-consolidation — in a word, openness. We're told we need more diversity, more flexibility, more innovation, more creativity, and more “difference.” To speak otherwise is to risk putting oneself at odds with dominant opinion, which is always a dangerous place to stand. So yes, political correctness is in a certain sense “strong,” but its punitive power is deployed to impose openness and weakening.

[Alexis Jacobi]

…all are just a bunch of nazis to me.

Excellent! That is exactly what I hoped to make clear. Any idea that challenges or opposes the set of tenets anchored in you, is the same as Nazism.

It is not just “you” but the entire consensus of the Postwar (to speak broadly).

It took you just a few posts to get honest. And I thank you!