Personally, I blame BB.
Don’t say that since Palestinians are Semites, Jews/Israelis are anti-Semitic, too. You do not get to redefine the oppressions of others, nor do you get to police how they refer to that oppression. This also often ties into #8. Don’t do it. Anti-Semitism has exclusively meant anti-Jewish bigotry for a good century plus now. Coin your own word for anti-Palestinian oppression, or just call it what it is: racism mixed with Islamophobia.
There's a number of problems with this nonsensei, such as for instance that the last time gypsies decided they've fucked up that ethnonym tooii and are ready to move on to a new one they picked Roma. Because why the fuck not, right, it's been a great people sometime in antiquity, why shouldn't some contemporary parasites try to extract a little value out of the words they didn't make.iii Who the hell cares that Romanians have been called that for centuries by the oppressive surrounding world and millennia by them themselves, who cares that they speak the closest thing to vulgar latin extant today, who cares about anything ? The gypsies can now call themselves "Roma" and everyone all over Europe gets to manifest their stratified ignorance on the topic. Like you know, the fucking Italian state, the closest approximation to a stereotypical gypsy ever enacted in Europe.
So there you have it, dear jooz : you're not special. Some random gypos are going to come along, call themselves "semites" and that's that. Don't you fucking love
socialism stupidity and the direct results thereof ? Get used to it, you're Semites just like the Palestinians, the Romanians are Roma-something-or-the-other just like the Gypsies and on it goes. The day you're going to have something nice for yourself some schmuck somewhere is going to try his best to take it, whole or part, and you have no solutioniv : even if he only gets the tiniest fraction he's still +EV.
But anyway, this is small potatoes. The real problem with the ignorant, self-unaware nonsense this particular idiot is peddling, mostly for the consumption of a resonant chamber lined with exactly identical, undistinguishable idiots, is the fit-reducing proposition that failure is valuable and success is not.
To explain myself : if what's in question is desirable, such as a good job, or doing a good job, or whatever it may be, then YES those who got it are entitled to an opinion, and those who don't are entitled to shut up and sit down. However! if what's in question is not desirable, such as rape, or genocide, or whatever it may be, then those who got it are contrariwise entitled to a large bowl of stfu and sit down, whereas those who didn't get it are entitled to an opinion.
So, with examples : the successful CEO of a successful company IS entitled to opinions about companies, CEOing and so on. The failful 30 yo neckbeard/armpithairette social media derp IS NOT entitled to opinions about companies, CEOing and so on. Contrariwise, the person who didn't get any venereal diseases IS entitled to opinions about hygiene, dermatology and so on perhaps all the way to "life in general". Meanwhile the syphilitic crackhead with the clap IS NOT entitled to opinions about much if anything at all : certainly not keeping clean, and in all probability not "life in general" either.
Consequently and furthermore : the ideas of rich people about how to make money and what's it all for are proper and should be heard. The "ideas" of poor people about how to make money and what money's for are not only unworthy of being heard or for that matter uttered - but they're not even ideas in the first place. Contrariwise, the ideas of women that didn't get raped are valuable on the topic of rape. The ideas of women that did get raped are not nearly as valuable, much in the way and much for the reason we don't care what roadkill thinks about avoiding car traffic. This is also why just about anyone is welcome to comment on genocide with the exception of the jews, the tutsis and a long list of unknown historical failures. (They're welcome to keep talking about "the holocaust", tho, much in the manner anyone's welcome to create his own words in his own house for private use with his own wives and girlfriends. Just don't expect me to give a shit.)
So yes, you do get to both define and police other people's oppression. Ideally, you actually create it in the first place, and quite deliberately. This being the chief point of intelligent life, in the general as well as in all particulars : to create structures of oppression and enforce them upon the environment.
Not that I mind genocide-prone people turning things on their head, and crowding the loser of a race for "impressions" to write home about, while ignoring the winner. I couldn't care less, really. It should be pretty obvious by now however what's the end result of such "selfless", let's call it, behaviour. But no matter : if its not fucking obvious after the first pass, well... ovens are cheap and arbeit macht frei. You can have round two any time and round three just as soon as you're ready after that. There's an infinity of genocide, rape, failure, depression and general destruction waiting in the future for any entity that refuses to accept the world and prefers instead to "replace" it with phantasmagorical creations of the [very stupidv] mind.———
- Other than the stuff already discussed in the logs, inanity such as
Don’t use crucifixion imagery. Another huge, driving motivation behind anti-Semitism historically has been the belief that the Jews, rather than the Romans, crucified Jesus. As in #1, this belief still persists. There are plenty of other ways to depict suffering that don’t call back to ancient libels.
Because yeah, let's drop the largest meme in the history of human thought just because fiddy people lost in some desert somewhere "feel oppressed". How about no, how about shut the fuck up and sit down ?
The best way to not get oppressed is to not go out of your way trying to piss off groups that are more powerful than you. This is also the only way to not get oppressed.
What you're doing, anon jewboy, is exactly contrary to that, it's the way to get oppressed. Which is fine with me, but bear in mind that a) you will get what you're asking for, and when you bitch and whine about that too I'll just point out that you were asking for it ; and b) that there's a historical term for this specific fitness-reducing behaviour. It's called jewish impudence. Now why do you think that may be ? Three tries, and if you say "oppression" you lose. [↩]
- Ever wondered why this particular people has to go through about a dozen or so names each millenium ? And if you're about to say something about oppression shut the fuck up and sit down. [↩]
- The problem of "words-as-externalities" which various nefarious agents are mining freely for their privatized gain is discussed all over Trilema - recently in Why progress is a self limiting disease, originally in N-am putea sa avem si noi back in 2009, it's a topic.
Consider that someone "finding" some coal doesn't get to simply take it, leaving a dark ugly hole in the landscape. Yet somehow someone "finding" some cool word DOES get to take it, leaving a dark ugly hole in the language. So why isn't marketing illegal yet then ? It's definitely worse than rape, because while plenty of women genuinely grow from the experience (and for some women it's definitely the only avenue left for any growth whatsoever), no word has ever benefited from the association with some eager leech.
If the extractive industry can pay upwards of 90% of its income in taxes, why shouldn't anyone making it their business to suck the life from words pay at least 99%, if not 105% ? Seems like a great idea to me. [↩]
- If you're about to protest that yes there is a solution, how about you either fucking understand the value and the importance and the positive social effects of oppression ? Also known as education ?
Or if not that, how about you shut the fuck up and sit the fuck down ? [↩]
- Yes, I'm aware the lot that should shut up and sit down doesn't agree it's stupid, nor does it see why I should say it's stupid and so on and so forth.
There's a name for this situation, where one's inability in a field translates into an inability to evaluate the ability of agents in that field. [↩]