Language is powerful weapon, can we start using it?

Jew = practicing judaism and its variants
Semites = race of middle eastern origin
Israeli = citizen of israel
Zionist = israeli nationalist

My english is bad and im using translator to type this but i would like to see Zig Forums comments
(repost from halfchan with 0 anwsers)

Attached: Pola.jpg (1200x1080, 202.27K)

Other urls found in this thread:

Those are all literal definitions from the dictionary you autist. Terrible post in any language.

These are technical terms
The memetic quality of language operates itself in such a way that some terms become colloquial and incorporated into a subjective and cultural discourse which deviate from their root meaning, so, today, "Jew" on imageboards most likely refers to "someone I don't like", the ethnicity of the individual becomes incidental, although, the pathological diagram of the Jewish Conspiracy is important in structuring political activities for many people.

To express more clearly, I remember I was on /b/ and someone referred to energy drinks as the "liquid jew", so the ethnic component is absent, or at least subliminally conspiratorial. The collapse of etymology as a symbolic science is not necessarily a bad thing, but the grammar nazis are annoying as fuck also.

Attached: smart.png (600x599, 234.18K)

He try to explain you, he have a concrét word to explain (((how))) they are.

Maybe we can reach to the kalastic side

*no concret

I don't have anything to say about your post. No clue what you're getting at here matey.

this is the problem

If you simply say bankers or elites anyone with a brain will understand what you're getting at without antisemitism involved. Don't say jew.

Most people understand what the technical definitions of these words are, your implication with the post is that we don't know what Jew literally means - I was saying that it has entered a plural realm of colloquial use, also.

I've been saying "I zionist in Israel is a patriot. A zoinist anywhere else is a traitor." for a while now and it's been well received. It's truth is impossible to argue with.

Attached: 7rno.jpg (540x522, 40.37K)

we need to change it, they got their own country now

we need to change what?

kikes = the most efficient fire fuel

1. A person of Semitic origin.
Since Shem was a son of Noah and Noah never existed, there is no legal definition or recognition of 'semite' in the US.

Most "Semites" are not jews.
Most jews are not "Semites".
Don't let the jews trick you, Anons.

Soy = What OP consumes while making these slide threads.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (1280x720, 1.71M)

people who dont practice judaism are not jews

the naming scheme

you'd be surprised.

i vote "OP"

jews are all colors
fuck us definitions

I have tried posting through a machine translator to non-ringrish boards, and it is difficult to be precise. There is an implication of attempting to contain vernacular in your post. If so, why? If the vernacular is given coordinates, and expanded, rather than subdued with bureaucratic politesse, the points of popular affective identification with the full heat of ideological concern are not shuttered by micro-censorships into fatuous constructs of error.

Attached: Schleichers-Language-Tree.jpg (918x1024, 270K)

they all bleed red

but i think you are wrong

wait, is op trying to redpill us on the black hebrew israelites?
fucking based

hi 4chinz

you going to cry, white boi?


you iz khazier, i's knows it. shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii[click to expand]

where are you frome?

Learn how words work.

hmmm, you're the same low-iq tor user from the other thread.

Yes they are.
Afro-asiatic mixed-race inbred small-brained foreskinophiles are jews even if they pretend they aren't.

Yes. In fact, I know you are wrong: schoolmarming is always wrong. This board is for Vietnamese weaving enthusiasts and containment. How can you be correct and at the same time issue a gangster computer god world-wide secret containment policy?

Attached: 1526331158928.jpg (338x450, 40.82K)

not shilling or redirecting the post, but does anyone think that the online behavior, meaning, primary site preference and activities could off branch into separate languages in a couple hundred years if we have that long to dick around on the internet?

Attached: language.png (1004x602, 719.93K)

Internet language is never isolated from personal social interaction, so no.

No. Words have one meaning or they have no meaning, and everybody knows who wants the meaning of words to be transient of ephemeral: jews.

your pic related is my point
we need appropriate naming scheme

there are no separate languages
all language is just symbolic communication
anything is within the logic of it's own linguistics, it's just that we cling to these alphabetical incantations of acoustic expression. Did you know that the early Greeks attempted to combine written and spoken language with astrology?

Language has always been pictorial. Look at your keyboard, these are pictures of sounds. Language is a form of symbolism which creates the phenomenon of accurate psychic communication.


Attached: pepe.png (300x250, 104.07K)

Yes. The simple word 'WE' implies more than any non-native Zig Forums-speaker could ever comprehend without being directly informed. Only on the Internet, and in this one sekrit club, has a word become an icon that communicates an entire story. Other cultures and languages are informing this new language, too :^) XDDDDDDDD

Roughly translates to:
Or do you think each of those words you used had a single agreed upon meaning ?

What the other user said, with the provision that if it did, it would somehow involve glyphic micro-images of porn: or the total annihilation of judea. There is a different manner of fluency on the tubes, and styles within styles of that, compared to day to day interaction. Not sure what could make these two zones positively compound each other, with the exception of a broad fascist liberation of the occident into a consummately sovereign symphony of Europid cultures.

Attached: 1526510859417.jpg (550x847, 81.97K)

Everything you listed, from zionist to israeli to semites, are all jews. So what's your point? My bad, of course you don't have a point. You're just shitposting in pol cause nobody gives a fuck about what you write in your blog.

give me a country name and i will give uou an example

Bosnia and Uruguay.

I'm not claiming complete subjectivity of language, I am showing that language is a technology of organising a symbolic imagination for the psyche to understand the world it exists in. This nature of language opens up the door for new structures of meaning. Like, how we accept the idea of Darth Vader, but this figure exists solely in fiction - language is malleable and is constantly improving itself to accommodate for it's environment.

The simple proof that language is not absolute is that all English translations of foreign works are not perfect, and vice versa - language thus becomes an estimation of a gathered formation of symbols, within the perspective culture it's analysing, and this does not even have to have ethnic implications. Someone who does not understand imageboard culture,would need to adjust their worldview to properly integrate and so on.

Even, look at the word "nut", which means to ejaculate, now. You gotta keep up with the changes, old man.

Attached: checkmate.png (427x576, 359.04K)

the romans called apples, apricots, and pomegranates apples. Therefore, my nuts exist solely on an airplane. lil tyke, champion, tiger.

Attached: Chess.jpg (310x163, 7.67K)

bosnian citizen of middleistern origin (or not) zionist = working against bosnian intrest

Well, in basic structuralist view, we have come to a point in modern times that we separate objects from one another in a materialist ontology - basically, different objects imply different forms and unique symbolisation, within larger structures of understanding. So, if we look at a category like fruit: we see that the term "fruit" applies to apples, apricots and so on, but these things also exist in themselves, and have unique words.

You are correct in that words refer to specific things, but in the colloquial (informal) realm, words become a lot more relativistic.

Attached: my turn.jpg (1600x1068, 93.83K)

pfft, i never disagreed with you, I was just kidding.

Attached: 1471848098413.gif (500x390, 1.92M)


I don't want to nitpick, because I admire the flux of your complaint. If you tightened up your judgement of what constitutes an "idea" you could smoothly move into an authoritative position where anti-gentiles outside of our language tree (families) could be justly excluded from both our languages and the full form of our ideas. An example of an idea might be "flying buttresses", "gothic ideal", "cell theory" or "set theory". After this definition of idea, almost all anti-white cultures of rent seeking, parasitism, criminality and degeneracy become recognizable as unjust burdens. Time travelers of a form that have coerced and exploited our altruistic disposition and destructively highjacked our civilizations, genomes, languages, ideas and economies. Also, if Europid languages are too fuzzy for absolutes, there are always mathematical rationales to prove samesaid.

Attached: 1526518382349.png (370x359, 253.18K)

comfy post / 10

Yes yes very interesting, please continue

No jew. The etymology of words are the only meaning.
Literal as in literature.
I am 13 and sponsored.

It's called "classification" you nigger. Stop using words you don't wholly comprehend. Words that have etymological origins in prehistory.

Absolute shit thread OP, consider suicide.

Attached: DCB0-454D-BVCN-DMAF.jpg (2006x2006, 820.14K)

i just want to see them post fren

shut the fuck up you stupid kike, fuck off

Attached: jews are a race.jpg (603x432 130.84 KB, 67.28K)

Attached: img827720.jpg (667x397, 55.37K)

Attached: tshnR1wu.jpg (606x559 22.26 KB, 691.22K)

These are all correct. But isn't it how so few Zionists actually live in countries that AREN'T Isreal? Kinda gets the noggin joggin…

Made a huge typo there, fuck. And the delete button ain't worth shit.

These are all correct. But isn't it how so many Zionists actually live in countries that AREN'T Isreal? Kinda gets the noggin joggin…

The consensus of the ethnos defines the character of a language of laws: civil, canon, mathematical, economic. If the continuity of the ethnos is adulterated with other group interests, pathological mutability or universalist translations, then the system and consensus fall into a spiral of deterioration. This pozzforce of civilizational failure is difficult to perceive, let alone take on as a popular cause while those that profit by or maliciously propagate it, can appear to be an illusion unrelated to the mass delusion that conceals the inertia of its cultural violence. So, for instance, giving our technology, scientific and mathematical knowledge away to Dravidapoos invokes an immense productivity burden on all strata of our ethnos. Similarly so of our agricultural bestiary: no one but us has taken the time to domesticate animals. All of the sovereignty of all of the productive and creative relation to ourselves and nature has been shitted up with destructive and forced alien participation. All of that which is of the provenance of the Occident ought to be clawed back in a calculated reactionary program. This would create cultural interactions where we legit get to know and admire each other, while continuing to create. Business, mutable currencies and all of the Orientalist slave trade cult need to be expurgated right down to the level of genetics. Overthrow media ownership. We muss go space. Do eugenic. Sack the kikenbanks. If we measure enemy loss in the billions (gigadeath) then there are five groups which will have to be culled in this measure (((and one permanently liberated))); Dravidapoos, Atzatlan, Chankoro, Mozlins and r-select kafir bleghs. We could compensate the spirit of nature by restoring much of this biomass to the terrestrial and oceanic food chains – perhaps even using the feeding opportunity to domesticate larger ocean fishes.

Attached: 1523992530056.jpg (600x739, 193.15K)

Very informative, I will consider it in the future.

Sorry, user but
Only a single inbred mixed-race Afro-asiatic family. Most are converts from the Caucasus and the rest are from Africa or Asia. And dna spreads are next to meaningless because they misplace "mixed" people when they should be seen for each of their parent's genetic lineages and not how they map in context to others'.

this thread is sliding the good one with effort post

1. A landrace is a domesticated, locally adapted, traditional variety of a species of animal or plant that has developed over time, through adaptation to its natural and cultural environment of agriculture and pastoralism, and due to isolation from other populations of the species.

Thus, being an ethno-religious group that spans and parasites off of various racial groups, jews cannot be a distinct race.

i never knew that Zig Forums is so compromised

Language is pre-determined

Attached: cosmo.jpg (1748x1200, 788.99K)

Kind remark.

Attached: 1524166148975.png (1024x821, 218.61K)

Attached: hello faggot police.jpg (625x455, 93.14K)


Attached: 1427285712818.png (758x1024, 749.34K)

You’re right!!!

I hope more people will understand this before this thread disappear

Energy drinks are Jewery.

I don't. The image used by OP comes from a set of "bruise porn" images in a standard image search. The passive-aggressive tone policing used to level a micro-censorship demand is based on this effeminate affectation to semantic victimhood, to bruising. It's a shit tier mugs game. Why not just go ahead and kys OP.

Attached: 1525102980201.png (658x550, 22.92K)

i missed you fren
please don't hurt yourself

Read Nigga READ

Attached: WhiteManRead.png (1076x8033, 14.45M)

Read dude.

Attached: Read01.png (1077x8053, 14.46M)

what are you trying to say

all these books, yet still clueless

Why don't I ever get that kindness?

This one is a little complicated. I would consider a zionist to be, more accurately, a jewish nationalist. That is, they support the existence of an explicitly and ethnically jewish state. Of course, in practice that state is israel, and could be nothing else, but there is a difference between an israeli who happens to be a nationalist concerning his state, and a zionist, who is a nationalist concerning his state specifically because it is a jewish state.

You could, for example, unlikely as it may be, be an arab muslim who is a citizen of israel and still be an israeli nationalist. But a zionist is a jewish nationalist.

no. that would be israeli semite muslim zionist

Literally wrong. Unless their support is for an explicitly jewish state, they are not zionist.

my point is changing this way of thinking
atheist israeli are also zionists
some american christians are zionists

Semite =/= Hebrew =/= Israel =/= Judea =/= Jew =/= Judean =/= Judahite

Noah had three sons; Japheth (Indo-Europeans), Shem (Semites) and Ham (Hamites). Japheth would spawn the white peoples who would inhabit lands from Western Europe to India, Shem would spawn the white peoples who would live in Mesopotamia, and Ham would spawn the white peoples who would live in North Africa. Semites are those descending from Shem, including Babylon.

Abraham would leave Ur in modern day Iraq, Babylon. Abraham founded a new nation, his people were called the Hebrews. Thus a Hebrew is a Semite, but a Semite need not be a Hebrew.
Israel is the name that Jacob (son of Isaac, son of Abraham) received from God in an event that foreshadows Baptism. He wrestles with God, being forced to confront all of his past evils, and leaves the event physically changed and spiritually reborn; with the new name Israel.
Israel then becomes an overall term to include all of the tribes of Israel. Jacob/Israel had 12 sons, Joseph would have two sons Ephraim and Manasseh who received Jacob/Israel's blessing (as he had received Isaac's blessing, and Isaac had received Abraham's). Judah was the fourth son, and is the one who came up with the idea to sell Joseph - the favoured son - into slavery for some shekels. So an Israelite is a Hebrew, but a Hebrew need not be an Israelite.

When the Hebrews controlled the Holy Land the land it was originally split between each of the tribes. Broadly speaking you had 10 in the North in what was called Israel, and you had the Judahites and Benjaminites (and later Levites) in Judea. Israel is conquered by the Assyrians, a divinely ordained destruction sent from God due to their sins including child sacrifice. Judea also partook in these practices but were given another chance, Jesus, after which they too would be destroyed. No matter how you slice it; geographically Judea was not the country Israel, though Judah is one of the tribes of Israel.
People born in Judea were called Judeans, whether they were a Judahite or not. A Judahite being a member of the tribe of Judah. We know that Paul of Tarsus was of the tribe of Benjamin, yet he is still also called a Judean because of living in Judea, though he was not a Judahite. Jesus was both a Judahite and a Judean, but neither of these are synonymous with Jew.

The term Jew did not exist until later on, with the religion of Judaism actually being younger than Christianity. At the time of Jesus and in the New Testament we learn of a sect of the Hebrews called the Pharisees. The Pharisees uniquely followed the Oral Torah, which is today codified as the Talmud, which instructed them do all manner of strange things (including lying to non-Hebrews, manipulating them, enslaving them and stealing from them). Jesus condemned these as the traditions of men, and condemned the Pharisees as hypocrites, a brood of vipers, and the children of the devil. The other Hebrew sects required the Levites, that is the Priest class, to perform their rituals in the Temple; without the Temple they cannot perform their rituals, and essentially the faith is dead. The Pharisee's Oral Torah allowed for them to not worship at the Temple. Thus when the Temple is destroyed in 70AD by the Romans, as prophesied by Jesus; there is a crisis in the Hebrew world. They have two options; either become a Christian with Jesus as the Temple, or else become a Pharisee with the Oral Torah which states they do not need a Temple. This is the event that births Judaism, a Jew is an adherent of Judaism, and Judaism is essentially Pharisaism. So one can be a Judean and a Judahite without being a Jew; Jesus being the prime example, as Jesus clearly detested Pharisaism and considered it of the devil.

Attached: 1393228411136.jpg (1134x1001, 226.36K)

Actually that's wrong. All of those equate to each other.

Attached: KJV_Deuteronomy_12-20.jpg (400x309, 67.91K)



dude have you seen the civcucks on youtube an twitter? they use that language to cover for (((them))) and their followers actually buy it "not all! just the zionists! just the bankers!" it's fucking weak

Antisemites are wimpy whiners.

please keep your comedic judean fanfiction to >>>/x/

Semites are not a race, its ethnicity.


Y-chromosomal links between Semitic-speaking peoples of the Middle East like Arabs, Jews, Mandaeans, Samaritans, and Assyrians/Syriacs have shown links, despite differences contributed from other groups

this is why you lose

Says the juden

the firewall.