My point was to give a rationale that could be said to SJWs for why their disbelief in PG actually goes directly against everything they say they stand for - as you say, SJW types think the world is run by rich old white men, so that's why it's there in the rationale - to convince people of things you need to have some kind of an inroad using one of their already firmly held beliefs and leading them to the logical conclusion that holding that belief (i.e. rich old white men rule the world and it's terrible) necessarily means accepting either a) victims/witnesses claiming abuse by elite pedo rings are credible, have no reason to lie, whereas the elites have every reason to lie and we already know they are terrible warmongering capitalists anyway or b) the elites are telling the truth, these ordinary people are lying for whatever reason, implying that you hold the word of privileged and powerful members of society (in SJW eyes rich white men) in higher esteem and as more credible than those of anyone else.

Do you see the reasoning? It's a persuasive argument to use to get certain people to think differently about their assumptions and question whether disbelieving PG actually fits into the moral framework and world view they've constructed for themselves.

Personally I have no idea what nationalities or races are the wealthiest and I don't really care either because it doesn't actually matter. The wealthiest and most powerful Jews, Arabs, Chinese, Mexicans, Americans, whatever... they are all together in a category that has way more significance than whichever ethnic/religious/national/cultural category they also fit into. And all ordinary Jewish, Arabic, Chinese, Mexican, American etc citizens are all together in a separate category. Those two categories are all that matter. Bill Gates, Carlos Slim, the Bushes, the Clintons, Putin, Soros, Jack Ma, the royals of Saudi Arabia, the European royals etc all have far more in common with one another than they do with us, and you and I have far more in common with your average person living in the US, Mexico, Russia, Europe, China, the Middle East, Africa etc than we do with any of the world's wealthiest and most powerful, no matter what our respective ethnic backgrounds. This is a fact that people need to start realising, because the divisions sown among ordinary citizens only serve to weaken us as a whole and make it easier for the sociopaths at the top to have their wicked way with us.

Edit: Oh and no I'm not Jewish, and conflating Anglos with Talmudism? To be honest I don't even really know what Talmudism is! So that wasn't intentional if you read it that way. I'm also British - about as boringly genetically English as you can get, with a little bit of Celtic in me.

I find it really ironic that in thinking they are an evolutionary step ahead and behaving as though they are superior and treating other humans as nothing more than meat and trash, they're actually the manifestation of a perhaps inevitable evolutionary dead end for homo sapiens sapiens.

Humans are physically weak, soft pathetic creatures, and we've been SO successful as a species because of our brains - our ability to imagine, plan, and create from the surrounding environment the means by which we can adapt to survive, in pretty much most conditions on Earth (and even in space) at this point. And our brains developed and evolved that way because we are incredibly social. Basically, the reason we can reason, and plan, and imagine, and think to the future etc, is because we can empathise with others and put ourselves in the shoes of others, which in turn means we can communicate with others and form tight knit groups for protection and for sharing labor and ideas.

Sociopaths are an anomaly, in that they do not have empathy. A lone sociopath in a group way back when could be useful, because they take risks, can command loyalty, and be effective for dealing with competing tribes and other threats ruthlessly. But in a global society of humans, the last thing you want is a large number of sociopaths in charge - their extreme risk taking behaviour (even when it risks their own safety - their narcissism simply does not allow them to conceive of failure) then involves taking risks on behalf of very large groups of people, with the ability to harm many thousands or millions (e.g. casino banking and financial crash, initiating foolish and ill-thought out wars etc) and what's worse is, when in positions of power, they can manoeuvre the details so that the risk to them personally is minimal -e.g. invading Iraq essentially for personal profit - yes more than a million have died since as a result, but to them that is literally of no consequence other than in the ways it might affect their performance in an election or ability to secure support for future military operations etc. Nuclear war is nothing to these people as long as they're outside the fallout zone and their personal profits and comfort are not damaged. Protecting the environment is of little consequence, because their ability to forward plan is very limited and narrow - they can't envisage a big picture or knock-on effects beyond their own sphere of influence, and therefore miss out on potential effects at a distance that can unfurl and come back round, spelling disaster for everyone on the planet.

And if they managed to cull a great deal of the human population, after a generation or two, through the trauma and abuse, the neglect, the violence etc, almost all new humans born would grow up to be severely dysfunctional and lacking in the ability to empathise, even within small family or friendship groups. It would be impossible to mobilise and organise to help save people from external threats such as natural disasters, disease, famine etc, because everyone would only be concerned with protecting their individual personal welfare - risks are only taken and kindnesses are only given if the reward is personally beneficial to the sociopath. So epidemics would become pandemics and by the time individuals realised it was close enough to put them at risk and worth taking action, it'd be too late. The species would falter and then fail fairly rapidly. If you think about, the only thing that keeps these powerful sociopaths loyal to one another at the moment is the collective moral conscience and empathy of the rest of the population, and the punishments that would be meted out.

So yeah, they are an evolutionary dead end, there being a whole and necessary feature of human experience that they are simply biologically incapable of knowing or understanding. I think that's why people talk about love being the answer and all that cheesy cliche sounding stuff. It's not loving your friends/family/romantic partner, it's having the cognitive and affective ability to feel and care for other people you have never even met and know nothing about.

Well said, both of you.

Oh boy...

K sorry nana, I'll leave you alone about that. I thought you were with "them" when you responded how you did with the Luke Kuhn story. The narrative you were giving was literally the story that DisruptJ20 put out to counter Veritas, because they knew ahead of time the Veritas story was dropping.. and they had 1 reporter in a different situation appear as though he was faking it when he wasn't. Luke WAS performing on camera. He had a group of people listening to him and he's a total narcissist.