Oh boy, the Joo-haters just found my blog!
Apparently, sometime during the past 24 hours, a certain group of people have found this post and posted comments. Supposedly the link came from TheBirdman.org, but I didn't find it over there (not that I spent a huge time looking). Ah, what to do? Shall I approve the posts, edit them, or what? Well, I'll take on the substantive one, from appollonian:
This above-noted "Libertarian" is just another moralist-Pharisaist, most probably Jew, not worthy of any serious notation/response
But you're responding, aren't you? Do you always do things unworthy of das Herrenvolk? For the record, even though with my beard and curly hair I have passed for Jewish (particularly among Lubavitchers and anti-Semitic African-Americans), my ancestors for as far back as I am aware have been Gentile. I can't absolutely rule out being Jewish under a "one drop rule", but then, neither can you.
For again, obvious problem for original blog entry/post is all the brainless question-begging and presumption: WHAT IS MORAL?--and there is no basis, hence definition, but as for Immanuel Kant, "hey, we just feel like we want there to be 'morality,' so therefore we declare not only 'morality' to exist, but we think it's so cool be be 'moral' as we feel that 'space-kadet glow' as we pretend to 'moralism.'" It just makes me feel so "good" and "cool," u see, as I pretend to be "moral"--especially in everyone elses' faces--so these people imagine unto themselves. Moralists are just people with inferiority complex--moralism then makes them feel good, see.
OK. You don't believe that morality exists. Then I guess it's OK with you for me to use you for target practice. After all, it's just my desires against yours.
(2) "Rights" are properly matter of social contract and agreement--as so excellently and definitively laid down by Thomas Hobbes in "Leviathan." Jews then never had any "rights" in Germany (or anywhere), being mere recipients of German charity, the poor German volk too unwitting of Jew anti-humanity.If rights are contractual, they don't exist, except as privileges; they can be renegotiated at the drop of a trigger. And even if they are contractual, then Jews would have had rights in Israel, as they could contract for them there. Fortunately, you realize that you can't cut Jews out of human rights unless you first cut them out of humanity. That exposes your game.
So much for Jews, anti-human filth, scum, and the murderers of Christ, who affirm such Christ murder in their filthy book, Talmud.So why would they kill one of their own?
CONCLUSION: Thus we see the empty arguments of original poster falling like confetti through the air--as there's no substance whatsover, the argument consisting of nothing more than subjectivistic wishful thinking (as regarding "moralism")
Not at all. Basically, the only hit you scored on my argument is the claim that morality has no objective existence (a claim that 99.9% of humanity soundly rejects). Let's accept that argument for a moment, and rephrase my main point: Would you like it if thugs with guns forced you into a boxcar and took you to another home? Did Hitler have benign intent toward the Jews? If not, how relevant is the actual scale and success of the Endlosung to its moral evaluation?
Comments
Posted by: Heidi Cool
Posted on: May 31, 2007 01:55 PM
I tend to approve comments if they're remotely on topic--even if they're wrong--then respond to them as necessary. But then again I'm writing about Web development which is not so controversial. It's not as though I've got angry Internet Explorer users screaming that Firefox users are satan's spawn and such.
I think you are right to address the comments, though it can be risky. Quoting them displays the fallaciousness of their arguments and gives you a chance to respond. If a flame war develops later, you can always pull the plug at that time.
If nothing else I'm fascinated by the idea that someone managed to use Kant and 'space-kadet glow' in the same sentence. The categorical imperative just never seemed that new-agey to me. But then again I also didn't realize that "doom and gloom" Hobbes had the final word on human rights.
I think the problem in the end is that it becomes virtually impossible to have a logical argument with a person who is so stuck on anti-semiticism that he or she doesn't listen to other viewpoints. He/she referred to your "empty arguments" without providing any of his/her own foundations. It's almost as though you speak different languages.
You could avoid this by just deleting the comments, but I think there is value in letting your readers see what sort of thinking is going on the world and in response to your ideas.
FYI, A quick way to see who has linked to you in a blog is to go to http://www.technorati.com/blogs/blog.case.edu%2Fjeffrey.quick?reactions.