After stealing the money, the Jews stole cyprus's 400 million Euro's worth gold.

[antimattercrusader]

All these replies that I am seeing.

'shut up you idiot'

'Admin ban this guy'

'get outta here racist'

'close this disgusting thread'

Smack of the same human weakness of mind that leads to witch hunts, pogroms, and dare I say, ethnic cleansing. That is, the tendency to think in herds and for individuals to align themselves with whatever the status quo may be. 60 years ago, it was 'Jews are bad'. These days, it is 'thou shalt not say anything even slightly critical in reference to any ethnic minority group, and especially not the Jews'......whatever, I wouldn't be happy with either state of affairs.

'The Jews' aren't stealing Cyprus' gold. But it just so happens that individuals of Jewish origin are greatly over represented amongst those who are running the current corrupt global financial system, responsible for systematically wrecking economies and plundering wealth. All the biggest banks, are largely owned and controlled by moguls of Jewish origin. I know that most of you are fkn idiots who are incapable of even recognising what independent thought is, but that much has got to be allowed to be said. And the full range of reasons why this might be the case has to be allowed to be considered.

I hate to say it, but this guy is at least partially right with regards to people's responses. I don't agree with him, but want to read a better argument than "Ban this guy." Of all places, we should value freedom of speech. This guy has just as much right as myself or anyone else to make a post. Just like we have the right to call bullshit in our opinions and/or argue specific facts. None of us have the right to have him banned. Come on, here at Bitcointalk.. we're better than that LOL

[1715190353]

1715190353

[1715190353]

1715190353

[1715190353]

1715190353

[BTC Books]

I hate to say it, but this guy is at least partially right with regards to people's responses. I don't agree with him, but want to read a better argument than "Ban this guy." Of all places, we should value freedom of speech. This guy has just as much right as myself or anyone else to make a post. Just like we have the right to call bullshit in our opinions and/or argue specific facts. None of us have the right to have him banned. Come on, here at Bitcointalk.. we're better than that LOL

Let me be a bit more clear.

I did not in any way suggest that this asshat should be banned.  Nor would I support doing so.

My use of the Ignore button is not to suggest banning, but is rather something I do - just for me - with the absolute certainty that bigots and racists and homophobes and all their ilk are incapable of rational thought.  So why would I choose to pollute the conversation with any thoughts of theirs?

Do you find that acceptable?

[MatTheCat]

Let me be a bit more clear.

I did not in any way suggest that this asshat should be banned.  Nor would I support doing so.

My use of the Ignore button is not to suggest banning, but is rather something I do - just for me - with the absolute certainty that bigots and racists and homophobes and all their ilk are incapable of rational thought.  So why would I choose to pollute the conversation with any thoughts of theirs?

Do you find that acceptable?

Q. If it is just a personal thing why then do you feel the need to share the fact that you are placing him on ignore with everyone else?

A. Cos it isn't a personal thing. You are joining in the ostracising, aligning yourself with the perceived popular response, and letting the world know that you are shunning the dirty pariah. Just as a good 1930's German would let the world know that they were shunning the Jewish grocery store and just as a good 1950's white American would let the world know that niggers weren't welcome in his place of business.

[dree12]

But it just so happens that individuals of Jewish origin are greatly over represented amongst those who are running the current corrupt global financial system, responsible for systematically wrecking economies and plundering wealth. All the biggest banks, are largely owned and controlled by moguls of Jewish origin. I know that most of you are fkn idiots who are incapable of even recognising what independent thought is, but that much has got to be allowed to be said. And the full range of reasons why this might be the case has to be allowed to be considered.

It just so happens that individuals with last names beginning with "O" are overrepresented in the US executive branch. Does this mean we blame the people with last names beginning with "O"?

Bigotry is the result of innumeracy and logical illiteracy, not "independent thought". If it's anyone we should be pointing fingers at, it's the ones that do the oppressing and blame everything upon everyone else. Ostracizing the Nazi, the anti-Semitic, the bigot, the homophobe, etc. is not "aligning oneself with the perceived popular response". It is an individual statement that generalizations will not be tolerated. It is an action in the hopes of avoiding the errors we have made in the past. It is forcing others to take responsibility for their own actions, not blaming them on scapegoats.

[darkmule]

Well, I know I'll be putting a copy of Mein Kampf on my bookshelf now next to Satoshi's white paper.

Idiot.

[alexh]

I can't wait for the EU to go down, though living there.

[MatTheCat]

This line of rational:

It just so happens that individuals with last names beginning with "O" are overrepresented in the US executive branch. Does this mean we blame the people with last names beginning with "O"?

Reminds me off the Homer Simpson "Extended Warranty! How I can I possibly lose!" Sketch. In that I see how it might make sense...........to a donkey who was prepared to be talked out of his hind legs.

Bigotry is the result of innumeracy and logical illiteracy, not "independent thought". If it's anyone we should be pointing fingers at, it's the ones that do the oppressing and blame everything upon everyone else. Ostracizing the Nazi, the anti-Semitic, the bigot, the homophobe, etc. is not "aligning oneself with the perceived popular response". It is an individual statement that generalizations will not be tolerated. It is an action in the hopes of avoiding the errors we have made in the past. It is forcing others to take responsibility for their own actions, not blaming them on scapegoats.

I am not stating that the OP was an independent thinker, for whatever reasons he may find emotionally appealing he is aligning himself with an already badly beaten down fringe group think opinion. He already started off on the ground with blood pissing out his mouth, there was no need for anyone at all to rush in and start booting into him even more, but that is what the rodent social instinct of most of the respondents has lead them to do. Not because they are good and righteous, but because their subconcious need to be part of the perceived accepted majority compelled them to do so in order that they appear good and righteous.

You are welcome to stick to whatever backward world view you wish, but the world is always changing and just as your grandaddy's views on the world may seem grotesque and anachronistic by today's standards, your own particular brand of limited thinking will be seen by your successors in the same light. See, the inception of political correctness really came about in the 60's and 70's, in response to the frankly ugly and limiting mainstream social prejudices of the time. Back then, it would have been someone like me who would be stating that black people are no different to whites, whereas people like you would have been going on 'Keep our Schools White' marches. By the time political correctness came into the mainstream, we were into the mid 1990's. That would be when minds like yours would come to accept and espouse PC values, whereas more radical thinkers, would already be starting to reject the limitations imposed on debate and thought, by the new status quo. Whilst the mainstream is still very much entrenched in a public ideology of 'equality', at the forefront of psychological and scientific research, the evidence is piling up which suggests that actually, nature has an overwhelming effect on an individuals mind  and thus, who our forebearers were and lives that they lead, influence the hard wired form that our minds are born with. Ultimately, this implies individual and racial inequality. Don't like the fact that people of African extraction dominate boxing or the 100 meter sprint? Deal with it. Don't like the fact that students of oriental ethnicity tend to score much higher in mathematical disciplines? Deal with it. Don't like the fact that people of Jewish ethnicity are overwhelmingly represented in the top 20% of affluency bracket in Western nations? Deal with it, because these are all irrefutable facts that are fundamentally determined by genetic inheritance.

This is something that hopefully in due course, will come to be widely recognised without anyone feeling the need to go and wipe out the high maths scoring Chinese students. In the meantime, people like me, have to put up with herd members like you trying to ostracise me and deny me my right to free opinion and speech.

Deal with it.

[Lethn]

Don't call for bans, that's how the rest of the world deals with stuff they don't like, just ignore them or mock them

[MatTheCat]

This line of rational:

It just so happens that individuals with last names beginning with "O" are overrepresented in the US executive branch. Does this mean we blame the people with last names beginning with "O"?

Reminds me off the Homer Simpson "Extended Warranty! How I can I possibly lose!" Sketch. In that I see how it might make sense...........to a donkey who was prepared to be talked out of his hind legs.

Bigotry is the result of innumeracy and logical illiteracy, not "independent thought". If it's anyone we should be pointing fingers at, it's the ones that do the oppressing and blame everything upon everyone else. Ostracizing the Nazi, the anti-Semitic, the bigot, the homophobe, etc. is not "aligning oneself with the perceived popular response". It is an individual statement that generalizations will not be tolerated. It is an action in the hopes of avoiding the errors we have made in the past. It is forcing others to take responsibility for their own actions, not blaming them on scapegoats.

I am not stating that the OP was an independent thinker, for whatever reasons he may find emotionally appealing he is aligning himself with an already badly beaten down fringe group think opinion. He already started off on the ground with blood pissing out his mouth, there was no need for anyone at all to rush in and start booting into him even more, but that is what the rodent social instinct of most of the respondents has lead them to do. Not because they are good and righteous, but because their subconcious need to be part of the perceived accepted majority compelled them to do so in order that they appear good and righteous.

You are welcome to stick to whatever backward world view you wish, but the world is always changing and just as your grandaddy's views on the world may seem grotesque and anachronistic by today's standards, your own particular brand of limited thinking will be seen by your successors in the same light. See, the inception of political correctness really came about in the 60's and 70's, in response to the frankly ugly and limiting mainstream social prejudices of the time. Back then, it would have been someone like me who would be stating that black people are no different to whites, whereas people like you would have been going on 'Keep our Schools White' marches. By the time political correctness came into the mainstream, we were into the mid 1990's. That would be when minds like yours would come to accept and espouse PC values, whereas more radical thinkers, would already be starting to reject the limitations imposed on debate and thought, by the new status quo. Whilst the mainstream is still very much entrenched in a public ideology of 'equality', at the forefront of psychological and scientific research, the evidence is piling up which suggests that actually, nature has an overwhelming effect on an individuals mind  and thus, who our forebearers were and lives that they lead, influence the hard wired form that our minds are born with. Ultimately, this implies individual and racial inequality. Don't like the fact that people of African extraction dominate boxing or the 100 meter sprint? Deal with it. Don't like the fact that students of oriental ethnicity tend to score much higher in mathematical disciplines? Deal with it. Don't like the fact that people of Jewish ethnicity are overwhelmingly represented in the top 20% of affluency bracket in Western nations? Deal with it, because these are all irrefutable facts that are fundamentally determined by genetic inheritance.

This is something that hopefully in due course, will come to be widely recognised without anyone feeling the need to go and wipe out the high maths scoring Chinese students. In the meantime, people like me, have to put up with herd members like you trying to ostracise me and deny me my right to free opinion and speech.

[dilatedPixel]

Dear MatTheCat,

There are obviously differences between races...they are small, and differences within each race massively outweigh differences between races. The reason what you write sounds like illogical claptrap is because you extrapolate the actions of a few to a whole race. The banking elite make up .000000000001% of the Jewish people, and you are trying to extrapolate as if you have a significant sample. Why not just focus on the bankers themselves as individuals, and as their own group. The majority of the banking elite is non-Jewish...so a more objective (and less rife with confounding variables) view would be to treat them as a distinct group.

So.... most serial killers are white =\= white people have some sort of genetic subconscious-ancestral-serialkiller-crazyness problem?  You are massively oversimplifying...again you try to use a small sample of outliers to readjust the whole bell curve of a population. Instead of looking at the race of white people to study serial killers, wouldn't it be more effective to study the tiny group of serial killers?   

Also... I think it eluded you that dree12 was pointing out that: correlation =\= causation.... it's a fallacy...he was using an absurd example to show you that your point is absurd.

 The motivations and actions of individuals are complex...least among them is their race, chief among them is greed. Although race is often used as a pretext to give action to violent greed.

BTW, you should definitely invest in a "Jump to Conclusion Mat"


 

[MatTheCat]

Dear MatTheCat,

There are obviously differences between races...they are small, and differences within each race massively outweigh differences between races. The reason what you write sounds like illogical claptrap is because you extrapolate the actions of a few to a whole race. The banking elite make up .000000000001% of the Jewish people, and you are trying to extrapolate as if you have a significant sample. Why not just focus on the bankers themselves as individuals, and as their own group. The majority of the banking elite is non-Jewish...so a more objective (and less rife with confounding variables) view would be to treat them as a distinct group.

So.... most serial killers are white =\= white people have some sort of genetic subconscious-ancestral-serialkiller-crazyness problem?  You are massively oversimplifying...again you try to use a small sample of outliers to readjust the whole bell curve of a population. Instead of looking at the race of white people to study serial killers, wouldn't it be more effective to study the tiny group of serial killers?   

Also correlation =\= causation.... it's a fallacy

 The motivations and actions of individuals are complex...least among them is their race, chief among them is greed. Although race is often used as a pretext to give action to violent greed.

BTW, you should definitely invest in a "Jump to Conclusion Mat"
 

No.

You are the one is jumping to conclusions and who is oversimplifying. I put my case forward in a post on the first page of this thread. This is not something that can easily be dealt with through rational reductionist thinking that relies on breaking problems down into quantifiable easily understood parts, and crucially, tends to ignore any areas where this cant be done.

Of course, If I happened to be brutally abused when I was kid, and were to have grown up to be a serial killer, it could be rationally argued that I have far more in common with a Japanese serial killer, than we both do with the rest of the population or gene pool from which we spawn. This however, is a bullshit argument which is missing the point completely.

Either you get it or you dont. If you dont, then I cant help you.

[bcpokey]

MatTheCat is a perfect example of an answer to your question antimattercrusader.

You start with a flawed premise, and respond to it with sound arguments, which are then systematically nit-picked at and baited for continued "discussion" as though the original point was somehow valid.

It both wastes time, and partially validates invalid thinking as though it were something to be read by the less informed, or undecided.

Not one of his statements is worth refutation, so why waste the time and breath to do so? I don't necessarily thinking banning the OP is necessary, as simply letting the thread die of lack of attention would be fine, but I certainly don't think that any response greater than the emotionally satisfying ones like "You're a retard." are warranted either.

[dilatedPixel]

No.

You are the one is jumping to conclusions and who is oversimplifying. I put my case forward in a post on the first page of this thread. This is not something that can easily be dealt with through rational reductionist thinking that relies on breaking problems down into quantifiable easily understood parts, and crucially, tends to ignore any areas where this cant be done.

Of course, If I happened to be brutally abused when I was kid, and were to have grown up to be a serial killer, it could be rationally argued that I have far more in common with a Japanese serial killer, than we both do with the rest of the population or gene pool from which we spawn. This however, is a bullshit argument which is missing the point completely.

Either you get it or you dont. If you dont, then I cant help you.

You ignored the part about how idiotic it is to extrapolate from a tiny tiny miniscule NON RANDOM SAMPLE to a whole population....your whole argument JUST CAME UNDONE!

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM

you just lost

[gradient vector]

It is so sad, that religious attacks have to be involved. Religion should never be the first thing that comes to mind when attacking the elitist in the banking world.  

+1