— mick lascelles (@LascellesMik) April 17, 2018
According to Wikipedia: Kurdaitcha (or kurdaitcha man) is a ritual “executioner” in Australian Aboriginal culture (specifically the term comes from the Arrernte people) who points the dildo of truth at the bad man.
Among traditional Indigenous Australians there is no such thing as a belief in natural death. All deaths are considered to be the result of evil spirits or spells, usually influenced by an enemy. Often, a dying person will whisper the name of the person they think caused their death. If the identity of the guilty person is not known, a “magic man” will watch for a sign, such as an animal burrow leading from the grave showing the direction of the home of the guilty party. This may take years but the identity is always eventually discovered. The elders of the mob that the deceased belonged to then hold a meeting to decide a suitable punishment. A Kurdaitcha may or may not be arranged to avenge them. The practice of Kurdaitcha had died out completely in Southern Australia by the 20th century although it was still carried out infrequently in the North. The practice, in regard to bone pointing by itself, does continue into modern times albeit very rarely.
I am an ashkenazi jew from New York. I became interested in making sense of anti semitism around the age of my bar mitzvah in 2001. I discovered Stormfront and watched David Cole’s documentary. I grew up in a family that would definitely be classified as ZOG lol. Members of my family make massive donations to AIPAC and the ADL I found a lot of truth in the widespread criticisms of jewish culture and did not buy the narrative of it all just being a baseless, paranoid conspiracy. Those views have stuck with me and its just now I am reconciling my ancestry with who I view myself to be. I first heard you on Jim Goad’s podcast and have been watching many of your streams. I really applaud you for what you are doing. I was elated when Cofnas took down Macdonald and your coverage of it was a true joy. I had certainly bought into the idea that the reason no one in academia touched the subject was due to a highly inconvenient truth.
I just wanted to thank you for your frank and honest discussions in the pursuit of truth. It is a wonderfully refreshing perspective. I have always had far right inclinations and discovering other jews who are open to those ideas has been a real game changer for me.
Its been really amusing to watch it collapse by trying to make it an IRL movement. I kind of knew that would happen. It’ll be interesting to see how those ideas seep into the mainstream collective consciousness. Seeing Coulter retweet Enoch was a mindfuck. I think most of those guys’ take on anti semitism is reductive. History is extraordinarily complex with groups always vying for power and influence. It is very telling that there are far right movements in south east asia and mongolia dealing with the CQ(Chinese Question).
* Cofnas writes: “I proposed the “default hypothesis” to explain Jewish overrepresentation.”
Now, I reiterate: I don’t actually disagree with Cofnes conclusions. Unlike him, there was never a point where I thought MacD’s argument held up (I didn’t come upon it when I was a mere lad, though, so I don’t hold his earlier embrace of it against Cofnes).
But, given that doovid and his embrace of multiculturalism is a rising voice of your channel, I suggest a counterpoise of Cofnes proposing a *certain* “default hypothesis” with this bit of wisdom from someone who also has a bit of the proper background in him (so he cannot properly be accused of special pleading):
“When the sovereign is the story, I claim, the sovereign is he who selects the null hypothesis. What is a null hypothesis? Have you ever seen the phrase “no evidence that”? For instance, there is no evidence that voter fraud has a significant impact on American elections.”
That is, for people on the left (doovid is on the left, is he not?) the default hypothesis (null hypothesis) for lack of Black achievement is discrimination. The success of people of European descent in America is a sign of their privilege, which has to be taken from them (by, say, multicultural programs of “inclusion” and diversity and “checking [their] privilege” as the sayings go). Who selects the null hypothesis is who rules us. And one has to defeat it before you can even have an argument, as Manik found out. Thus another quote from the same source:
“Since the sovereign also sets the bar for how much evidence it takes to convince you otherwise, he can order you to believe in pretty much anything short of outright arithmetic violations. All he has to do is set the null hypothesis to his desired outcome, then set the burden of proof impossibly high.”
All we have to do is surrender our own civilizations up to multiculturalism if we want to disprove multiculturalism; if we want to disprove “diversity is our strength” we just have to give up our own civilization. Until then it is the default hypothesis (but the achievement of a certain ethno-religious sub-set is pure merit, no privilege or knapsacks involved). These quotes are from here and well worth reading in light of Doovid continually banging on the subject of multiculturalism as a fait accompli – whether someone can argue that it is good for his particular people and good for minorities introduced into america as a consequence of it and thus as a consequence good for the future coalition of the ascendant and thus by definition good for *that* America, the America that Hillary Clinton said years back is the one she is a patriot towards, the future America, is a quite different thing from whether it is good for the Americans who populated this country, the legacy Americans who are to be disempowered and displaced prior to being disposessed and then – well the various Studies departments, i.e. Whitness Studies, openly say exactly what they have in store for *my* people, and it is not kind. Thus the pertinence of questions about what is known about the holodomor, say.