Facebook statement on allowing advertisers to target "Jew haters"


Either that or die a horrible, fiery death in the End Times.

But hey, the evangelicals “love Israel” so they must be friends of the Jews (or so think some extremely foolish and short-sighted right-wing and fundie Jews).


I think a lot of them are expected to burn in Hell instead, because “Biblical inerrancy” and the psychedelic fever dream that is the book of Revelation.


No-one said intersectionalism was a privilege of the progressive, left-leaning groups.

In fact, the big success of the neo-fascists these days, wherever I look, is that they happen to fill the Venn diagram spot where all the unhappy, burdened, tired, poor and hungry, the huddled masses, the wretched refuse political shore, the intellectually homeless and the inherently brainless gravitate to.

That spot used to be occupied by the utopia of the Marxists, communists, socialists, of liberals and progressives. Which was maybe a lie, maybe an illusion. Now, it is occupied by a void, an abyss.

And from that abyss rises a giant Facebook-like, with a bundle of sticks in it’s fist.

Sorry. I’m in one of these moods. This weekend saw the polls for our home-bred Schnullernazis of the so-called AfD predict a third place in next weekend’s election. Which would definitely mean fascists, maybe even literal Nazis to be represented in our parliament: the AfD doesn’t even have enough “normal” right-wing libertarian personnel to ensure this would not happen if they really reach the third place.

Oh fuck this shit, Facebook. I blame you.


The fact that the bad guys are empirically better at building voting coalitions among the disenfranchised might have something to do with purity tests.

I’ve noticed that the racist right happily accepts Jews and gays into their anti-Semitic and homophobic “big tent” but the progressive left drives people away for wearing “all lives matter” t-shirts. These are not hypothetical examples; they are real events.

Good intentions won’t compensate for bad strategy, unfortunately.


(Oh dear, rabbit hole, here I come. There’s a path off topic my feet tread so easily…)

To be fair, (intellectual) honesty is important of you want to change the world. But I know what you are talking about from my own experience.

The German term would be Selbstzerfleischung, and the behaviour has been described as typical for the “left” (whatever your criteria for this bin-homogenous group might be) since the 1970s. However, I am inclined to think this is a stereotype. Also from own experience, I know that a small but vocal minority is pushing for purity of thought and thus often alienating a broader audience. Often, they have a point. But they are communicating in a way which is hard to stomach For example, I read attacks on Laurie Penny which were really scathing, bitter and of-putting - but if you chipped away the style, worth thinking about.
Very vocal on twitter, don’t know about Facebook - but the echo chambers are so loud you wouldn’t want to enter a discourse. But then, they do not make up the majority, they don’t decide who is “allowed” on a demonstration - just like extreme Nazis don’t make up the bulk of any Trump rally. They set a certain tone, true. And, FFS, they often have a point. Also, they are under constant attack from the right. They even are a major taking point of the right-wingers, which leads to de-railing of any discussion, at any time.

So, who am I to blame them for their attempt of intellectual purity, for concurrency, and their unnerved reaction when questioned?


… but only once you have calculated the return on investment and are positive it’s not high enough to warrant interception and deletion.

closed #34

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.