/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15249277
>lol
There is absolutely no contradiction there.
>Convenient. So are Jews just natural-born leaders?
I will humor this. They do seem to have a higher GFP.
>Because if they're also just doing what comes natural, surely it would be silly to blame them?
Just let the murderers murder bro.
>Ah yes, aristocracy, the divine right of kings, feudal rule, another thing inscribed on our genes, I'm sure.
When I used the word aristocracy I meant a hierarchy of power. I was obviously not taking about any of this. More strawmans, semantics etc.
>Not really, you can see a black chap who's fourth generation German and turn to the white guy next to you to complain about foreigners, only to be told in Polish that he doesn't speak German.
You're just causing mental exhaustion on my part. I won't even bother to respond to this idiocy.
>This is blatant hypocrisy.
How? Or else explain where was my accusation of a conspiracy. I literally explicitly said I consider it to be mostly emergent and not conspiratorial behavior.
>You're using inaccurate, charged, and deliberately misleading language because you dislike it.
More semantics. That's all you do.

I am genuinely just tired now.
I will summarize. You originally claimed antisemitism was just some bizzare religious intolerance towards a super wonderful minority (yes I know you did not use the term super wonderful, try not to fixate on this). I then explained their massive disproportionate role in government, media, and in certain movements. Which is really remarkably large for such a small population.
You could not reject this, and then said "not all jews".
But the point was, antisemitism arises from non-religious or non-conspiracy-accusation causes. This is a fact (Or tell me more about the religious intolerance of Schopenhauer or Kant).