Oh, Ye, Of Little Jewish Faith! Kanye's West Goes South

WheresKanye HEADER

Posted: Dec 5, 2022   7:06:02 AM   |   Last updated: Dec 5, 2022   7:06:02 AM
by Pascal-Denis Lussier

Popularity Has its Limits; So Does Good Sense?

Advice: Thought I'd be smart and kill two birds with one stone, as they say — but not PETA folks; they don't say that — so I brought along my kitchen knives so I could sharpen them while waiting in line for my COVID jab... That did not end well. The lesson here: don't be smart!

Amateurpaganda

Much like what was witnessed during the tail end of Trump's term, the media are hitting all types of lows again, affirming their incompetence through a clear miscomprehension of their role as legit news outlets and responsible disseminators of info.

Once again, keeping citizens informed is important, but one's personal politics, winning an election, the number of likes and shares, and ad revenue, are some of the things that take precedence — depending on the day's Tweets — over the annoying "informing" aspect since, after all, even news is a business that must bend to the demands and whims of those who feed its revenue streams, making sure to present only those facts that serve up the narrative that's beneficial to those with dominion over news. In the free world, anyhow.
Western Propaganda - All sorts of pathetic

Since February, we've found out that Putin is dying of a different disease every other week, that he's more cancer than man, his prostate is so enlarged it's putting pressure on his cranium, his blood pressure is so elevated you may want to wear a raincoat if standing near him, all of that on top of the three strokes, the sudden MS combined with a rare neurological paralysis that's sure to set in any minute now. And, the poor guy, he's deep into pre-early offset alzheimer, too, and suffers from more acute dementia than... uh... Biden (really?).

You'd think the "Putin Problem" would require no more than a wee bit of patience to resolve itself seeing how every new pronouncement made by the West concerning Putin's health seems to indicate a half-life point, literally, yet, half of Putin's staff wants to coup him out while the other half is considering his assassination, the rest of the country feeling the same ambivalence, torn between ousting him with a forced retirement plan that lets Putin live out the few minutes more that his health will allow, or to just do away with him and, instead, use up those minutes tidying up the Kremlin for those kind & caring™ Western "consultants" due to appear within the hour after Putin's death, having promised all non-Putin Russians the Freedom & Democracy®™ that promises to free Russia with something called the "Восстановить лучший план," known as the "Build Back Better plan" in the West, which promises better times ahead ("It's not even implemented yet and look at all the damage it's already done," warns some GOP).

All of this is solid proof of the yearning for Western leadership that Russia has been longing for since the days of Kyivan Rus', right?

Rather, it betrays just how morally bankrupt certain Western institutions and their politics have become, propaganda now being a justified approach toward info sharing and a legitimate news format that's split into two genres depending on an outlet's political leaning; liberal-supporting lies are referred to as "activism" whilst conservative ones are called "far-right conspiracy theories". From a conservative perspective, these are called, respectively, "Commie lies" and "truth".

From my point of view, it's all shameless BS.

However, having noticed that much of the propaganda put out by the West merely mirrors any gains, loses, and victories claimed by Russia, or any outlet that's branded "pro-Russian" for simply refusing to partake in the destructive info war that's selling Westerners an entirely false view of the war and of Ukraine's actual status, ditto regarding Europe's health, then one is forced to wonder how bad a fall did Biden take and how soiled was he?

Past which line does one accept that one is a tool of the state? And any sane person would trust the US Establishment... why??? 

Speaking of irresponsible disseminators...

Eye Did Nazi That Won Co. Ming 

Ref.: Timcast IRL - EP. 665

Kanye West is where the sun sets

"You know, I don't like identirianism; I've never been a fan of people who've blamed everyone else for their problems. I remember during Occupy Wall Street you had people saying that it was the 1% that was the cause of their problems," said Tim Pool.

This was not long after Kanye West, or Ye, walked out on host Tim Pool who had him on as a guest on last Monday's edition — episode #665 — of his weeknight live show along with what appears to be West's new entourage, partially comprised of far-rightists, namely, far-out-misogynist Nick Fuentes and far-from-sensible provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos. I'd recently mentioned that Yiannopoulos seems to have returned in tamer form, but that appears to be just in terms of appearances, for a more menacing persona may lurk underneath based on his appearances with Kanye.

Such 'profound' irony and personal reveal in that comment by Pool. It pretty much puts to rest any arguments one may have had regarding Pool's true intentions at Occupy and his dedication to the cause, should anyone still possess a more Leftist view of Pool even if he hasn't supported true Leftists ideals... ever? No, no, saying, "I would have voted for Bernie" doesn't count for anything.

Nonetheless, Pool isn't a rightwinger since 'he claims to not be one and he was at Occupy...'

Sigh.

Yeah, we know. Pool isn't rightwing but the leftwing became too Woke and wild for him. This tells me the following: Pool buys into the propaganda he sells, betraying that he's somewhat gullible, and also filled with insecurities and an unreasoned anger, but, having been exposed to just the right amount of hardships and violence provided the necessary cause and the justifications to exploit his smarts for the quick-on-his-feet BSing skills that got him far — moneywise — and through which he over-compensates for said insecurities, but doing so without a care whether he steps on others, an aspect that's been corroborated by former colleagues.

Money solidified a shallow attitude and culture, and he constantly espouses anti-intellectualism and anti-education stances — because an idiocracy is the future, man — and he very rarely seeks to look beyond the surface layer of all he condemns, yet he seems to expect that others treat him as an intellectual... look, he's made millions.

I get the sense that he's not aiming to be disingenuous other than through the half-assed preparation and his "winging it" and "fence-sitter" approaches to news telling, which sees him go through an article from a select rightwing source, or some bit of narrative-relevant news seen through several headlines, his segments always entirely framed from a uni-directional and wholly-exaggerated rightwing perspective that omits a real, actual Leftist take on matters, injecting some rightwing creation of one instead, and usually to push more idiocy in the never ending and superbly asinine Culture War — majority votes and laws don't stop Republicans; they know better than the people what the people want and will never stop until they have it.

So, you hoards of homeless people can choke on your stewed-sock soup and regurgitated dumpster-salads for all they care; there are far bigger and far more pressing issues to take care of than over half a million bootstrap-pulling deficients and sundry losers who can't offer a payable use out of themselves that's of interest to the economy, such as abolishing gay marriages and making sure everyone says a proper "Grace" before every meal. Before snacks, too.

That's my view and rapid, remote psychoanalysis of Pool; it's worth what it's worth — I make no claims in regard to the beanie, but we all know it's because he's... 

I qualify him as a grifter for the reality he sells, willingly pushing a set agenda, and the manner by which he simultaneously tries to please all (hence the milquetoast fence-sitting reputation), for, really, money, not the truth, is what truly matters to him. He's consistent because he knows how important this aspect is if one wants to build a solid audience base, but Pool is one of the laziest pundits out there, putting no effort whatsoever on production value while, too often, he hasn't even bothered to read the articles he's discussing.

However, Pool is very much like Ben Shapiro, I feel; he has a goal, entrusted on him by wealthy people, and it's this that drives his conviction and seals what he firmly believes and preaches — no matter how easily invalidated these key aspects are, for dogma is now in play — and, therefore, when short on facts (or on any research time?), his BS becomes a necessary and justified part of the efforts to counter the "radical Lefts'" plans to destroy America's soul through Marxian semantic games that he and his merry band of rightwingers are battling against, doing so while complaining that the Crazy-Commie Left is ridiculous with its highly-typified view of a rightwing filled with extremists and white nationalists. Those Commies, I tells ya!

Kan Ye Identify

Back to Pool stating that he 'doesn't like identitarianism,' which some have pointed out to be an error as what Pool is surely referring to is more properly labeled as "identity politics." I also used the "identitarian" label twice in my previous post, and the same claim can be made about my usage, and to that I wanna say: "yes and no"; it now depends on context, in my opinion, as the overtly rightwing trend currently dominating in the US sees conservatism being shaped into a clear-cut version of the European Identitarian movement; the split that's occurring, or the 'GOP civil war', arises out of the shift that's the result of voters being disillusioned with both parties whilst world affairs are 'motivating' a more nationalistic, self-preservation focused outlook that's been responsible for the rise of rightwing elements worldwide.

To say that I had intended this sense of "identitarianism" would only be half honest, however, as one of the two times was meant to refer to the generalised "identity politics", which is where the Identitarianist issues are being battled, this in itself forcing identitarian traits on the progressive mindset.

That said, what people call MAGA, that, to me, is morphing into a well-defined and proper Identitarian movement; the main difference between the US and European version is that the US one incorporates "Capitalism" as a feature of its target identity.

Two events are responsible for the  movement's solidification into an American political ideology; these are:

  1. Deep dissatisfaction with the Dems, leading to many non-conservatives eyeing the Republicans;
  2. The GOP's willingness to exploit that dissatisfaction through steps that suggest that it is the "workers' peace party."

Adapting means forcing a more moderate political stance on the Republican party, which triggers an instant recoil in any real Conservative facing change, this happening while, simultaneously, a key core sees current events as an opportunity to force a more conservative agenda on the nation. So, some wanna go all-in on hardcore Right and some want the Right to be more hardcore, but not too heavy with the rightwing stuff? Am I getting that right? 

Tribalism being what it is and US tribalism being particularly nasty at times, splits are naturally happening across both parties, events forcing the divide that no one wants to clearly pronounce for the weakness this projects to the other tribe. Plus, voters react more positively to ambiguity than through explicit declarations of intent that alludes to Nazisms, some of these having been inspired by Americanisms that preceded those Nazisms... but I digress.

Traditionalism, a branch of Identitarianism, is defined as: "identifies ideologies/movements emphasizing the importance and value of tradition(s), often seen as being threatened or having been subverted by recent negative changes, such as by liberal changes."  (source: Identitarianism | Metapedia).  

If one examines the claims of such groups in Europe, primarily in France, and contrasts that with firm manifestations of this movement within the US, such as Identity Evropa, one readily sees nothing but parallels between their ideals and beliefs and what's become the predominant rightwing voice in the US, which includes all of the "cultural Marxism" nonsense that's driving the GOP's culture war narrative.  

Now, now, don't be so judgmental; the group states: "While the SPLC and the ADL may smear us as “White supremacists”, this is not the case. We are not supremacists because we do not believe that White people should rule over non-White people. Rather, we are ethno-pluralists: We believe that all ethnic and racial groups should have somewhere in the world to call home – a place wherein they can fully express themselves and enjoy self-determination."

In other words, they like all ethnic groups, as long as they stay in their own country and don't come to the US, which is white as it's always been white and should be whiter still. Here comes 'the great replacement'... oh, no!

"As Identitarians, we believe that identity matters, inequality is a fact of life, and ethnic diversity, as demonstrated by substantial historical and sociological evidence, is an impediment to societal harmony. Unfortunately, the fetishization of diversity has resulted in a paradigm wherein “less White people” – in academia, employment, and countries overall – is accepted as a moral imperative. We categorically reject this “progressive” morality and instead demand that we, people of European heritage, retain demographic supermajorities in our homelands."

.

Another reason why I suggested the term "eurodom" over "white supremacist", as it readily captures that sense, white supremacy being, thus, implied.

.

Back to Hitler

Ye making anti-Semitic remarks ("Ye" not to be confused with M.E. "you") and the indignation that it's generated highlights how well trained many Westerners seem to be, flipping the outrage switch to the "On" position with just the mention of anti-Semitism, it being present need not matter.

Yes, I'm sorry, but I know I'm not the only one who thinks so — even many Jews think it — and unlike most I don't fear discussing it: calling out anti-Semitism has become overly exploited and it's often used as a crutch and weapon, and it's just wrong and really annoying, especially when called up as a defensive justification for Israel's treatment of Palestinians.

Aside: You know what never goes through my head whenever I mention Soros? The fact that he's Jewish. You know what I probably wouldn't be aware of regarding Soros unless people made a big deal about it? The fact that he's Jewish. You know what Soros seems to care less about than those who call out anti-Semitism just for mentioning Soros' name? The fact that he's Jewish.

To be blunt: Thinking that the mention of Soros is an anti-Semitic dog whistle makes you pretty very extra fucking stupid in my book. Is that all it takes for you to turn a blind eye, you fucking moron?

OK. Now that I've let that out of my system: I see someone like Lance, of The Serfs, instantly react to any mention of Soros as if the equivalent of saying "all Jews are bad" and I just have to wonder if he pays a yearly membership fee to the pro-Israel cult he obviously must belong to? Honestly, most of the time he's calling out anti-Semitism — any racism, too, on occassion — I can't help but see a good little lap dog that's not too big on thinking for himself, or one that's too happy to crap on people he doesn't like to care about the details, but, yeah, please preach for peace while you extend that non-thinking part of you and apply it in regard to Ukraine so you can crap on all those who are veritably calling for peace. The stupidity I'm seeing from people who love to spend their days riding on some moral high horse is astounding; we're reaching new heights, indeed.  

During the week when I posted the first "Polly Ticking" entry, Lance had dedicated quite a bit of time to Marjorie Taylor-Greene, emphasising over and over that she was a crazy anti-Semitic who shouldn't be listened to regarding peace negotiations with Ukraine since, get this, she believes in Jewish space lasers... how insane is that? In one video, he spent over 10 minutes drawing attention to her state of mind — she's nuts — given that she belives in, you guessed it: Jewish space lasers.

Hey, numbnut: She never even said anything close to that; some guy wrote a smear piece out of a post she'd made on Facebook, and she’d said enough stupid things at that point that the Left just swallowed it up and still repeats it.

So, what does that make Lance? At the very least, a propagandist, that's for sure. And I've little respect for such folks. 

Yes, she’s a kook, but any time someone mentions Marjorie Taylor-Greene and references “Jewish space lasers,” it tells me they’re easy to fool providing it fits their tribal views, this providing just one more instance where 'Leftists' got played in the game they warn others about. The judgmental attitude Lance demonstrates as he partakes in the spread of a totally distorted accusation is absolutely no better than what he’s condemning MTG for (at that moment). It also tells me he’s actually quite ignorant of the technology in question, and that he did the total opposite of anything resembling journalism on this topic. Which is telling me quite a bit.

This may seem like the worst possible example given all the rest that’s since emerged out of that MTG creature, but it’s the opposite. How true to one’s word and ethics is someone? Call her what you will, but the instant a certain type of ethnic laser is mentioned, it tells me your word and ethics aren't worth much more than third-rate PR, and integrity is not your personal religion. I'm usually quiet about this, because it's MTG, but the lie still bugs me.    

I’d done a post breaking down its significance. What she actually posted was, it turns out, a very valid question that never once mentioned “Jews”, though it did mention a guy that worked at Rothschild to give validity to a stock thing, not a Jew thing. This highlights how the Left is quick to embrace hatred, and that it doesn't care about the truth as much as it lets on, these aspects making it easy to have the media not go where it ought to, and easier still to spin comments into public shaming moments, should the media see a need to do so.

The tech she refers to in her post is a new energy system that captures sunlight and beams it back to earth; it's a real technology and it was meant to be in testing the week the fires erupted (links available through related post), hence, questioning whether this system may have been responsible is something that would cross the mind of any normal person aware of these developments. However, the company claims that the tests were called off and PG&E assumed the blame for starting the fires the following week. There's the source of the "Jewish space laser," yet, there's nothing insane or "Jewish" there.

Mentioning a rich banker who happens to be Jewish or Soros or… this automatically qualifies as anti-Semitism but how come bringing up the Koch brothers has never been considered equally racist and vile anti-Americanism. There's a whole class of criminal acts that can't discussed without being branded anti-Semitic should one person involved be circumcised… nothing good to be gained from that kind of instant condemnation. Surveilling, judging, constantly, watching what one is saying, because, if it involves politics, then everything is a dog whistle or a subliminal Commie code, and everybody is slapping each other on the head because of what was said that no one really listened to even if they heard it.

And there's something very wrong with the concentrated yet far-reaching way that Soros is investing in social science matters and in social developments all over the world, but doing so in a very targeted manner through his Open Society spread of thousands of organizations, and always in tangent with neoliberal entities preparing to swoop down on their prey.       

The awesome person that is Palki Sharma had done a Gravitas Plus segment on the topic, which I discuss here (video also available). 

Kan Ye Nazi What's Wrong

The thing I find most troubling is the over-the-top reactions to shock comments that are, for the most part, benign other than their mention of Hitler. I haven't heard all he's said, so I wouldn't be surprised if there were some truly offensive statements made, but what's at the centre of attention and gets repeated strongly suggests — given the way it was initially stated — that something other than a vile adherence to, and encouragement of, Nazism is what's aimed at; in no way do I get the same sense of abhorrent hatred that's felt when similar claims are made by bone fide neo-Nazis and white nationalists.

Also, "Hitler" sits in a special class whereby just the mention of his name taints what one says in manner that robs people of their usual sense of logic, garnering reactionary condemnation should any hint of anything positive be perceived as being associated with Hitler or the Nazis. Every week is Hitler Week on the History channel but heaven forbid anyone should show fascination toward the man.

Lately, I've been hearing way more destructive, divisive, and hate-generating comments being made by politicians, these receiving some flak, but nearly all of it from fringe, intellectual circles or opposition members, but none receive the scorn given to West nor do those comments receive the attention they merit, their weight lost in the tribal fights that shift the focus. 

Personally, I've always found Hitler's evil to be overrated, and dangerously so. I'm not downplaying events and what they signify, I'm downplaying the level of responsibility people assign to Hitler. What happened could never be the result of one man, and there were far worse sickos under Hitler, these men being responsible for the details in Hitler's broad strokes; saying "Get rid of the Jews" carries evil, but eagerly detailing how to go about it in the most efficient manner possible, that's a whole other shade of evil.

Hitler has become a convenient emblem for a singular convergence of events leading to widespread despair and the savagery this enables; focusing on him in a manner that transfers all blame on one man whitewashes all that has contributed to the rise of Nazism and the processes that gave birth to a movement and power to a party. Because we blame one man, we are allowing it to happen, again, not realizing that we're currently helping to give form to all that preceded that terrible moment.

That said, what I do find the most troubling out of the over-the-top reactions against Kanye West are how those that express these have been condemning — and continue to do so — anyone pointing to Nazis in Ukraine despite all the very Nazi-esque Nazism Nazing about over there. Do you Nazi not see the signs? I'm not kidding when suggesting the idea that the rise of a Fourth Reich may be underway. And so, still, I really don't get why those "Nazis" are OK and the whole thing should be downplayed even more than it already is. Helloooo!

And please explain to me why the US and Ukraine have been the only two countries readily opposed to any bans on the glorification of Nazi symbols and ideology (now supported by 52 countries as of 2022; troubling, you say?)?

Sure, no disagreement from me that saying “Every human being has value that they brought to the table, especially Hitler” is just wrong. But if you deconstruct what's actually being put forward, it's only a morally reprehensible comment because of the "especially". 

Otherwise, saying that some human beings do not bring any value whatsoever to the table is the strongest argument for the death penalty there is, especially in regard to a whole class of mental disorders, which counters the ideals purported by those who react to Kanye's behaviour with calls to hyper-cancel his arse.

Really, one could argue that West is taking a "love all" Jesus view of things. Would Jesus call up his dad with coordinates for the people in need of smiting, or would he say something like, "Forgive them father, for they do not know what they are doing, for they are sinners who get their news from CNN"?  Surely, Jesus was a reform man.

Frankly, I find the balaclava he wore during his Infowars appearance to be more disturbing than his mention of Hitler.

Kanye West is the West

What I see is someone who's hurting, someone seeking a certain form of attention and testing the bounds of those around him, thus, testing their loyalty, his being warped by fame, his awareness impaired by a deep paranoia and his beliefs resting on a mania he expresses childlike... c'mon, people, the dude is clearly bipolar or suffering from some form of schizophrenia.

This isn't someone I'd consider a menace to society, though, more so these days, he's definitely not someone that ought to be in any role model position while prone to have certain types of outbursts. Having mentioned that Fourth Reich thingy, I think it's fair to say that no one should now be promoting Hitler through to, at least, 2026(?).

Reacting with such vehemence toward West for his behaviour; calling on fans to "cancel" him and no longer support his work and warning that asking for an autograph or selfie is endorsing a monster... sigh.

Of course, this comes from the so-called progressive end of the reactionary spectrum. The right, instead, tried to exploit the man in all sorts of ways. Are Yiannopoulos and Fuentes the most shameless opportunists of all? I suspect so, but I'm totally unaware of how that relationship transpired, nor do I care to waste time finding out, but I do have to wonder just how responsible they are for implanting "Hitler" and "Nazis" in West's recent ramblings? This suggests a shift away from the persecutory and oppressive anti-Semitism that appears to have been generated out of personal events.

Didn't the pair have access to West's social media accounts? If anyone cares for the man, then, get those two away from him, would be my advice.

And it's not like I haven't called attention to Nazis or didn't put any efforts, or thousands of words, into rectifying how ridiculously underplayed, it turns out, the "Nazi" situation is in Ukraine, as well as elsewhere. So you can rest assured that being a "Nazi sympathiser" doesn't affect my being a "Putin sympathiser", OK?

And the thought of me defending a hip hop pop rapper/singer for I'm a fan? Ha! You really don't know me, do you?

Silver lining: Until very recently, I would not have been able to identify Kanye West in a police line up even if half the people in there were white, Latino or Asian. Now, I, too, am cool. Just don't ask me to name one of his songs.

No, it's not that I don't enjoy music; it's that I love it too much to even pretend to care about certain forms. Also, I tend to lean toward stuff without a singer, per se, albeit vocals may be present or in a foreign language, this allowing my ears to treat vocals more as an instrument than speech.

No, it's not that I don't like speech, or I wouldn't have studied linguistics...

Source (citations and screen-capture): Even Alex Jones Seemed Uncomfortable W/Kanye's Hitler Praise | uproxx.com

.


Post your comment

Your feedback is greatly appreciated. However, please know that, due to spammers, all comments are moderated, and spam is simply flushed, your spamming/troll efforts being a total waste of time for you and no more than an annoyance for DMS&UY.

Comments

No one has commented on this page yet.

RSS feed for comments on this page | RSS feed for all comments

Your support goes a long way



.

Have content, research, or dev needs? Email to discuss. Flexible; competitive rates.


Corrections & Adds  

Dedicated Topics