Lokean Parables
The parables themselves can be found here:
Loki Ruins Everything (Voluspa, Rígsþula)
Let Baldr Be the Best (Baldrs Draumar)
What follows below is my general disclaimer about what they are and are not.
TVSTRANGERTHINGS

❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year

Origami Around

pixel skylines
Xuebing Du

if i look back, i am lost
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
RMH
KIROKAZE
Monterey Bay Aquarium
Three Goblin Art

oozey mess
trying on a metaphor
NASA
occasionally subtle

titsay
PUT YOUR BEARD IN MY MOUTH
AnasAbdin

#extradirty
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from South Africa

seen from United Kingdom

seen from Malaysia
seen from China

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
@langevandreren
Lokean Parables
The parables themselves can be found here:
Loki Ruins Everything (Voluspa, Rígsþula)
Let Baldr Be the Best (Baldrs Draumar)
What follows below is my general disclaimer about what they are and are not.

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
i am asking this in good faith
If the Bosnian Genocide is has been ruled a genocide and the death count was 33,071 people, how is what is happening in Gaza not a genocide when the number has been surpassed
Because genocide is not about the number of people being killed. Genocide is a specific legal term, and it has to have two components: 1) obviously people have to be murdered -- but this must be done systemically, as a policy (either written or unwritten) of the belligerent party. AND 2) there has to be genocidal intention to murder said people. Genocidal intention means that Party A (Israel) murders Party B (Palestinians) specifically because those people belong to Party B (Palestinians). There is no evidence that Israel has a genocidal intention. In fact, the October 7th massacre was actually a genocidal act on behalf of Hamas - Hamas committed the genocidal action and has been committing genocidal actions for over 20 years, because they specifically want to murder Jews for being Jewish. They also meet the first criteria because this is a systemic policy that is present in the Hamas Charter.
This is very important to distinguish because whilst genocide is a war crime, not all war crimes are genocide. Israel has committed war crimes, including murdering civilians, and even intentionally allowing civilians to be killed (such as bombing a house with a Hamas member in it and killing his family members). But this is not sufficient to rise to the criteria of genocide. We could make the argument that there is ethnic cleansing, because the vast majority of the people being evacuated are of a single ethnicity, Palestinian. However, again, ethnic cleansing alone is not sufficient to rise to the definition of genocide.
Crucially, the ICJ has not ruled that there is a genocide ongoing. They have ruled prima facie that 1) South Africa has the right to accuse Israel of genocide, and 2) that the ICJ itself is fit to hear and rule on the accusation. They have also ordered Hamas to release the civilian hostages, so if Hamas is saying they want to abide by the ICJ, they have already disregarded the ICJ ruling.
Genocide is not based on vibes. It's not based on bad feelings. It's not based on videos and images of dead kids, or destroyed rubble. Genocide is a specific legal term that can only be applied to the above scenario, and it cheapens our language when we levy it in circumstances where it does not apply. It especially cheapens our language when we engage in Holocaust inversion by claiming Israel is doing to Palestine what Germany did to the Jews, which is categorically false.
Beyond this, it belittles the groups that are involved in this conflict, particularly Hamas, to treat them like they are innocent civilians when they are in fact a very well-outfitted military brigade and the official armed forces of the Gazan government with over 40,000 fighters strong, who repeatedly and loudly say "death to Israel, we want to annihilate Israel, we will commit October 7th again and again until Israel is destroyed." They are being funded by the IRGC, they are being used as a proxy for Iran, and innocent Palestinian civilians are suffering as a result. Hamas has openly said that the "blood of martyrs fuels our resistance," they have openly said they hope Palestinian civilians die in droves while they steal aid and resell it at absurd mark-ups, while they flee to Egypt and Qatar so that they don't have to get their hands dirty. They recruit and brainwash young children to fight their "holy war" to murder as many Jews as possible.
And in terms of the death toll, you have to understand that this war is being fought in an urban environment where the belligerents are embedded purposely in the civilian population, in tunnels all throughout the civilian infrastructure. Violating the Geneva Conventions by using hospitals and schools as military bases, refusing to wear uniforms, and intentionally shooting their own people and blaming Israel.
These people even play tapes pretending to be hostages shouting in Hebrew "don't shoot," which is one of the reasons why a hostage was accidentally killed by the IDF, which is then turned around to show how evil the IDF is without understanding the context that these events happen in. In normal urban warfare the ratio of civilian to combatant death is around 9:1. In Gaza, the ratio is, according to Hamas's own numbers, 4:1. Literally twice as low as the average. So, yeah. War crimes are happening. Yes. Absolutely. Genocide is not happening, at least, it's not happening to the Palestinians.
Let's break down why this is just stupid amounts of wrong
Right off the bat we have a misrepresentation of the definition of genocide. @weemietime focuses on minor technicalities while ignoring piles and piles of evidence of policies and actions by Israel that literally constitute as genocidal practices (targeting civilians and systemic displacement just as some examples). You're cherry picking definitions while numerous human rights organizations, international bodies, and scholars smarter than you have provided proof that Israel is committing a genocide. Stop ignoring real world indicators
Intent can be inferred from actions, policies, and outcomes. So don't dismiss the systemic nature of Israeli war crimes. The intent is 100% there.
Deflection is sad. Stop bringing up Hamas as an attempt to absolve Israel of its war crimes. This false equivalency is a distraction from the core accusation. You tried. Also don't even get me started on the absolute bad faith argument that Hamas uses human shields when we've literally seen Israel do that. Also saying that absolves Israel of carrying out the LARGE MAJORITY of civilian deaths.
Holocaust Comparison Strawman. Drawing parallels in systemic oppression isnt equivalence. Not even a smart argument. We aren't dumb.
The civilian-to-combatant death ratio is misleadingly cited to minimize civilian harm while justifying indiscriminate targeting in densely populated areas.
Also there are literally ongoing investigations by many international bodies including the ICC. Way to be loud and wrong. You decided to be stupid with your whole chest.
G-d's bravest racefaker coming in clutch with "stop bringing up Hamas's actions in the war they started"
Oh look Khamenei’s laziest Turkish sleeper agent finally got their “harras actual jews” paycheck from Iran again
I wanted to add that, when a genocide is about to happen, the perpetrators generally won't shut up about their plans to commit genocide. (I'm thinking specifically of Rwanda and how the radio station referred to "Tutsi cockroaches" in the months leading up to it.) Gotta beat the drum until the mob is good and ready.
Another thing worth pointing out:
"The vast majority of people being evacuated are a single ethnicity, Palestinian."
Nobody else is allowed to live in Gaza. All Israelis left in 2006.
If a war occurs in a place where there's only a single ethnicity, then only a single ethnicity is going to fall victim to the war. The argument that Palestinians are being targeted falls apart when you realize they're the only ones there. This is like France starting a war with Belgium and people wailing that in France, only French people are dying. Yes, of course it's only the French who are dying, that's who lives in France! Of course it's only Palestinians, they're the only ones who live in Gaza!
What is happening in Gaza is a humanitarian crisis. It is not a genocide, and what's more, it is far from the worst humanitarian crisis going on in the world today. There are literally people in Rwanda begging for a fraction of the attention Gaza is getting. There are more people starving to death in Sudan than live in all of Gaza and over a million of them are children. China is committing three separate genocides right now!
I assure you, the whole world knows about Gaza. Try turning some attention to the Fur, the Rohingya, the Ukrainians, the Uyghurs, the Tibetans, the Sudanese, the Roma. Most of Europe is engaged in a form of genocide, but you don't hear about it because there are no Jews who can be blamed for it.
@weemietime I have nothing to add to this, except a minor quibble that strengthens your argument.
I appreciate your willingness to cite the 'Gazan ministry of health' (or whichever affiliated NGO) statistics for the military:civilian casualty ratio.
My understanding from sources in the US military is that they think it is probably somewhere between 1:1 and 2:1. And they agreed with the assessment that one would normally expect something closer to a 9:1 civ:combatant ratio under the circumstances. (Fighting Hamas in Gaza being a textbook 'worst case' scenario)
Also, those sources are...impressed at the lengths the IDF has gone to to minimize civilian casualties. Maybe less so later in the conflict (longer tangent there about alternatives that were closed off by the UN, etc), but especially during the initial invasion, there was a strong impression that the IDF's willingness to (for example) broadcast troop movements and airstrike targets ahead of time in order to provide time for civilians to evacuate.... it was not something any other military would have done under the circumstances.
Thoughts About Magic
I’ve been playing around with magic (as in the metaphysical kind, not stage magic) for the past while, and even though I’m not very good at it yet, I think I have a way of explaining how it works that’ll make sense within a Western paradigm of reality. I’m not sure if the model I have is accurate in any way, but I think it’s a start.
First, I need to address the way we depict magic in movies and TV, because these depictions threw me off the scent for what magic is for a long time. Magic isn’t a “stuff” people have inside of them that they wield, nor is it a “stuff” that exists in the universe that we can harness and command. It also isn’t something people are born with, nor is it something that only the “chose few” have. And most importantly, it isn’t some kind of power we force out of our hands or out of a wand through pure conviction or sheer force of will.
Instead, magic is an art. It’s like painting or woodworking or knitting, where it’s the act of manipulating a specific medium to achieve an intended outcome.
The medium magic uses is the imagination. Children know exactly what this is, whereas most (Western) adults have completely forgotten what it is, confusing it with “creativity” or “innovativeness” or “our powers of visualization” or even just “fantasizing” when it’s none of these things. The imagination is the field we do all of our thinking through, whether that thinking is based in visuals, language, feelings, or otherwise. Someone does magic by moving their mind through this field like they’d move their body through physical space.
This isn’t going to make sense unless you try it, so let me give an example using a therapy technique: Let’s say you’re stuck worrying about something. The way you can diminish this worry is to imagine or pantomime sticking the thing you’re worried about in a bottle and putting that bottle away somewhere (make sure you’re bottling the subject-matter worrying you, not the emotion you feel because of it). By doing this action, you move your mind through an arc of events that tells your body “the situation has changed, and here’s how,” which causes the body to adapt accordingly.
We don’t call these kinds of therapy techniques “magic” because magic is about manipulating the universe, not just ourselves. Psychology only goes so far with this because it follows a Western approach to cognition, which assumes our minds are housed in our brains and therefore can’t/don’t extend beyond them.
But the truth is that we actually have no idea where our minds live. We have no clue if they’re produced by our biology, or if our biology is just a filter for our minds in some way. Some cultures assume the mind lives outside the body the same way Western society assumes it lives inside of it, and base their concept of reality around that.
In my personal experience, magic will always be incomprehensible and mysterious UNLESS you understand your mind has no borders and expands into the universe all around you. Once you understand yourself this way, then it’s possible to experience a reality where magic is as real as any other art.
Whenever we look at magic being performed, we see rituals, chants, drumming, and the use of candles, crystals, and other ingredients. Logically and visually these activities make no sense. But that’s because they’re just facilitating the actual manipulation taking place on the plane of the imagination, which we can’t see with our eyes. It’s like watching someone code a program when we a) can’t see the display, and b) aren’t aware that the display even exists.
Magic is very hard to describe from the doer’s perspective. I need to get better at it before I attempt to explain.
Some Final Thoughts
In case it hasn’t become obvious already, magic isn’t capable of breaking the laws of physics. Like technology, it involves intelligently using the mechanics of the universe to achieve a result normally not found in nature. The only reason why magic looks miraculous is because we can’t understand how it works just by watching someone do it, nor can we replicate the results by simply imitating the motions that person made with their body. It’s like how we can watch Bob Ross paint, and even mimic what Bob Ross does, and still not understand how he Did That™.
I also want to talk about the role “belief” plays in magic. Believing in magic can make it easier for someone to accept it as part of reality, but it’s not what makes magic powerful. Powerful magic is like powerful art; it comes with time, practice, discipline, and the development of skills. I know this isn’t as enchanting or inspiring as the idea of magic (or, frankly, art) being some kind of inborn ability someone’s blessed with, but it does means anyone in the world can learn it.
One last thing: If at some point mainstream Western society does recognize this as an artform, we probably won’t call it “magic.” “Magic” has become synonymous with the fantasy genre, and anything we once called “magic”—such as chemistry (as alchemy) and mathematics—we now consider sciences. Chances are, what I’m describing will likely become part of psychology. It’s all just a rose by another name.
I know folks have been sharing this link on other posts, but &udm=14 works well:
You can add it as an extension to Firefox now: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/udm14/reviews/
Maureen Galindo is running as a Democrat to represent Texas' 35th Congressional District. Controversy-tarred congressional candidate Maureen
“She’ll turn Karnes ICE Detention Center into a prison for American Zionists and former ICE officers for human trafficking,” Galindo wrote in an Instagram post over the weekend, referring to herself in the third person. “It will also be a castration processing center for pedophiles, which will probably be most of the Zionists.”
On the one hand, depressing that she has non-0 support and literally any endorsements.
But also, based on funding sources (Lead Left), she is probably part of MAGA's 5th column.

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Amazing how the difference between having fancy culinary little treats and eating unhinged goblin bullshit is just having nice ingredients at hand. Like ooh look at me, I'm making myself porridge sweetened with brown sugar and raisins, with a dash of cinnamon and bit of vanilla in there, because I happened to have those around and was craving something sweet.
In different pantry circumstances, I'd be eating jam straight out of the jar with a spoon.
Question:
Smoked kippers, celery, red onion, mayonnaise, dill, caraway, black pepper.
Fancy culinary treat, or goblin bullshit? Asking for a friend.
i was wondering what type of relationship should be built with loki and what do i need and what he is willing to do, all that stuff. and when i asked directly i usually got not so clear answer. and today i asked again and i got cards that meant some kind of working relationships (like colleagues?)
and then i asked more questions and i figured out he wants me to do science and research to honor him... and he has enough witches he needs me as a scientist... and he answered "yes" when i asked if he wanted me to educate people about him...
what do i do now i am just a student...
It constantly blows me away how so many indigenous groups are like, "This animal/tree/mountain/etc is not only sacred to us but is also so important to us personally that we consider it part of our family and any harm that comes to it feels like our grandparent or sibling being hurt," and then people go out of their way to deliberately cause harm to those things. I know, I know, it's because of racism and colonization and selfishness but I always try to see the best in people and being reminded how little our cultures and communities are valued always really fucking hurts.
100% agree.
I also want to add (for the USAmericans) that Mt. Rushmore is very much an example of 'Oh, that place is sacred to you? Fuck you, we're gonna carve our leaders' faces in the stone there, so it'll be a monument to our vanity. Forever.'
When they're not celebrating the mass rapes and brutal murders that Hamas committed on October 7th, many Strasserites like to deny that the entire thing even happened. Or, if it did, it did so in such a wildly different manner as to be functionally a different event, with different perpetrators, victims, timetables, and - presumably - different accounts uploading the livestreams.
Considering just how ridiculously well documented October 7th was, I would genuinely, truly, be interested in a comparison between the evidence for the Simchat Torah pogrom vs, like, the existence of Alexander of Macedon. Or the entire Umayyad Caliphate. Or Lichtenstein. How does the evidence in favor of Lichtensten's existence match up here? If there is more evidence in favor of the existence of Lichtenstein, then by how much?
We know more about any singular 24 hour period during WWII than we know about the entire Roman empire. Using the standard of evidence that (at least according to these people) the Simchat Torah pogrom is insufficiently evidenced, can we prove that Karl Marx was a real person who ever actually existed, and not some kind of mythological figure without historical basis?
These aren't rhetorical questions; I do not know the answers.
So this is very specifically expressing a understandable frustration about the way certain people talk about October 7th specifically, and I don’t want to detract from that or derail, but I can’t help but feel viscerally reminded of this incredible piece of reporting on January 6th capitol insurrection from the New York Times:
A six-month Times investigation has synchronized and mapped out thousands of videos and police radio communications from the Jan. 6 Capitol
I remember watching it and feeling this weird chill down to my bones – not only because the events in question were horrifying, but because… well, I mean, it felt like a sea-change. I had never seen any event this well documented before. I remember thinking that probably no event ever had been. It was so clear – so unambiguous. You could see every part of it, from every angle. It was like I was there. It was like we were all there. No one could possibly deny something like this, I thought. The fraud will catch up eventually, I’m sure, and people will one day have to worry about governments faking even something like this, but for right now, for this window in time? This was undeniable. You couldn’t fake this, and no one could watch this and think that you could.
…And then people did anyway.
NYT put this out and people just… ignored it. Forgot about it. Called it “fake news”. It barely came up during Biden’s debate, and Trump’s incoherent fumbling around it was somehow less of a headline than “Biden is old”
I think that watching the way that, to most people, something like this meant nothing was the first time I really and truly understood the meaning of “post-truth”
Like. Yeah. There’s probably more evidence for the Simchat Torah pogrom than there is for the historical existence of Karl Marx. There’s probably more evidence of the January 6th insurrection than there is evidence of the Battle of Fort Sumter. What the fuck does that mean? What does that mean, for any of us? What does it mean to live in a world where things are more documented than ever before, and where AI generally still isn’t good enough to fake it without being caught, and even still, people just don’t care?!
I don’t know, but it scares the shit out of me
Without disagreeing with anything that's been said, I might add an explanation, or a rant, or both.
Most humans don't live in factual, empirical reality. Interacting with reality hurts fragile human brains, so most people choose not to try.
Instead, they live in make-believe bullshit story world that they build for themselves. I think of it as 'narrative reality' but there's probably a real term. My interpretation of the evidence is that most humans carry around a story about the world and everything gets fitted neatly into that story. If it doesn't fit, it either gets changed or ignored.
For Maga Natcons (aka 'Fascists'), a key part of that story is that 'real america' is being corrupted by liberal-queer-globalist-subversives. In that story, Jan 6 was about real americans fighting for freedom against oppression (1). Jesus is more real than the reality of Jan 6 to the average Maga Natcon because their story includes Maga Jesus as a major character but facts about Jan 6 are inconsistent with their fantasy world.
For Faux-Marxist Hamasniks, a key part of that story is that Israel is an illegitimate entity that drinks the blood of innocents (2) and that any measures are justified to destroy it. Maybe they would say 'dismantle,' but AFAIK they still mean 'kill all the Jews who live there' regardless of what term they use. They are going to ignore any and all evidence about what actually happened on Oct 7, because in their heads Palestinians are like cute innocent Ewoks fighting the Empire, and Ewoks obviously couldn't have raped and murdered civilians.
You can't change their minds with facts or rational arguments, because their worldview isn't beholden to facts or rational argument. My understanding is that the best course of action is to gradually work them around to a less shitty story of reality, like deprogramming a cult member. I don't think that's an easy or quick process though. More likely, you're looking at promulgating a more appealing story and hoping that it gains traction with humans who are still forming their narrative realities.
(1) I read their wretched social media posts and I still can't tell you what, exactly, it is they want to be free from. Having to use the singular 'they'? Getting healthcare that isn't controlled by their boss? Hearing people speak Spanish in public? Having to admit that the Confederacy was profoundly evil?
(2) Intentional blood libel reference. Not 'I am endorsing blood libel', but 'blood libel is an integral part of leftist Judenhasser ideology'.
Has anybody some recommendations on which Edda to buy?
I just can’t find one that looks somewhat good and is not written as if the stories of the gods are just what marvel portrays them as.
I would definitely go with the Poetic Edda over the Prose Edda, it's older and (slightly) less...filtered...through Christianity.
I usually rec Edward Pettit's version (lots of notes about translation choices, context, etc, etc).
You can buy it a lot of places, and also get it free. This is one place to read it.

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
So I’m reading Loki and Sygin: Lessons of chaos, laughter, and loyalty from the Norse gods by Lea Svendsen
And I found a passage that I really liked and want to share:
Many thanks!
I had seen that book and not bought it because...reasons (I am never sure how useful I will find other understandings of Loki).
That is very consistent with my read of the stories though. I will have to have a look at the rest of her book.
Anyway, Fenrir is great but too many people are villainizing him just because they were told to by the eddas and then straight up never did any further digging.
He's a deity you can go to who will understand your feelings of betrayal and deep rage and won't shame you for them or tell you to "just think positive and forgive". Who tf wouldn't want that?
Also, they tend to villainize him because he is justifiably angry at being betrayed and having his freedom stolen from him.
And if you're villainizing someone for that...
Well.....
So...I know I plug @Skaldish sometimes, but have you read:
Loki and his family play an important role in Norse Mythology. They also play important roles in our everyday lives.
I think you might like it.
I was thinking about controversial it is, even in pagan settings, to worship tricksters like Loki and Sutekh, and I think that I described it pretty well with
"Tricksters are inherently transgressive figures who literally embody what it's like to live in a socially unacceptable or taboo way, which is why members of marginalized communities flock to them while more privileged people find them distasteful. They are the personifications of chaos and social unrest, which includes how much strife surrounds people who are deemed socially unacceptable; they are literally the gods of minorities and people who suffer under bigoted unjust systems.
When tricksters do something bad in a myth, marginalized groups see a complex rebellious figure with their own motives while privileged people see a bad person doing bad things. And when tricksters are punished, privileged people just see a bad guy getting their comeuppence while marginalized groups see the harsh realities of living as a socially unacceptable person.
It's no wonder then that queer people, the mentally ill and other minorities have flocked to Loki's side, since he embodies the realities of their lives, even when others can't understand it."
I couldn't have said it better.
you should actually question people if they tell you that they're part of a long, ancient, unbroken tradition of a practice that has most likely died out or evolved into something new. you should especially question this if their teachings insert new age practices and terminology. you should question this even more if they insist that they can initiate you into this ancient lineage, just pay them xyz amount of money.
of course, there are traditions that have persevered despite christianization and colonialism. but you shouldn't trust everybody on the internet who appeals to the idea that old = better as a way to assert their authority.
so, you guys know about those people that say that loki is the satan of norse paganism?
thats half-true. but not in the way you think. walk with me
we think this statement is wrong because we have been taught that satan= evil, so this statement must mean that loki=evil, right?
makes sense, and thats what people usually mean by that.
BUT the reason i think this statement is actually true is because satan doesn't have anything to do with whatever the fuck the church has been teaching about them.
think of satanists. the real satanists, not the one the church warned you about that kill goats and shit. (that pretty much do not exist, by the way.)
satanists do NOT worship satan. satanists take satan as a symbol for things such as progress, change, non conformity, queerness, kindess, ecc. satanists believe the body is to be respected, therefore consent is essential. while christianity (ahem, the church, not christianity) teaches you that anything that happens is "satan's fault!!!" war? the devil!!!! illness? the devil!!! poverty? the devil!!! satanists believe that if something bad happens, its only because of the choices one has taken. its about taking accountability.
rings a bell????
that's right, loki! patron of change, chaos, and outcasts.
what does woshipping loki involve? being kind to anyone to everyone, especially those who are left behind, and learning to accept and embrace change.
and what does loki do the most? they will help you, yes, but most of all, they will teach you lessons, one of these being about taking accountability (speaking from personal experience, plus ive read lots about others having that same experience.)
in conclusion, i do believe that loki could somehow be ""compared"" to satan, the REAL satan, because of how alike what they "preach" (sorry if im not making sense, english isnt my first language so sometimes i cant think of a proper word to use for a certain context, lol.)
okay, i promise im done with the yap of the day,. i had this really weird train of thought during class today, and i wanted to throw this out here to see what others thought!!!
ok bai !!
An interesting thing, that you may not know, but which meshes with your view on this: (and my apologies if this is all old news to you)
The original Satan, as depicted in the Torah, is not a divine evil adversary. Satan is more like a role. Like, the Satan is the angel in charge of...well...being the devil's advocate in a lot of ways. The ultimate role of the Satan is more to test people, and to cause them to grow by overcoming challenges. It serves Loki energy, as the youths say.
'The Devil' as a Christian construct is a really interesting look behind the curtain at how the Christian mythos came to be. Although Christian myth claims that it comes from (and is the truer version) of Judaism, that's not really true in the way that Christians tell it.
Christianity is actually a crazy mishmash of Jewish texts and some fringe heresies that have been kludged together with a bunch of other traditions from that region (1). IIRC, 'the Devil' as a divine enemy and a scourge of humanity comes from one of the dualist mythos (Zoroastrian or Manichean probably)(2). Although a lot of the dualist stories didn't make it directly into the Bible, it could be argued that the Christian view of reality is closer to those than it is to Judaism. One of those ways is that Christianity has trouble accepting the possibility of morally nuanced figures.
tl;dr
Yes. The Satan is a role in Jewish stories that is not dissimilar to the role that Loki plays in old Scandinavian ones. You are not wrong. So say thousands of years of religious scholarship.
(1) It's like if someone got kicked out of their synagogue for being a crackpot, and then tried to make a personal cult religion based on half remembered bits of Torah, second-hand retellings of ancient Greek myths, and parts of Persian mystery cults that they thought sounded cool. Then it gets grafted onto the cultic infrastructure of the Roman state religions and goes through a bunch more retconning so it can be used as a tool to enforce conformity and obedience in a dying empire. Crazy stuff. But...don't tell Christians that. It tends to piss them off.
(2) The book of Enoch is kind of a cool artifact here. It reads like a weird blend of the story of Prometheus and Persian dualist cosmology, but then gets spliced into the Christian old testament to explain the flood.

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
People love to say things like “Hiding Anne Frank was illegal, turning her in would have been legal” without like fully grasping the modern implications properly. You have tons of folks like “if WW2 happened today id have __” that do not realize what is happening around them.
We have this idolized AND sanitized version of what happened then, and so we do not recognize it when it happens now.
Resistance fighters assassinated nazis and blew up weapons and infrastructure and destroyed records and forged paperwork and raised secret funds and smuggled people in vehicles and yes, hid them in their homes.
“Well it’s sad he got sent to an ICE camp but he faked his permit :/“
Whoever helped him fake his paperwork did what fighters in ww2 did. People who cut through chain link fences do what fighters in ww2 did, people who blow whistles chasing after ice cars do what fighters in ww2 did, people who destroy arms factories and cop city cranes do what fighters in ww2 did, people unmask agents do what fighters in ww2 did.
People are doing it now! They’ve been doing it now! You keep saying “oh if this happened here__” it HAS! It IS!
What are you doing about it?
Uncontroversial take:
People who say 'turning over Jews was the law' as a reason to do it, or 'they shouldn't have been washing dishes in the country illegally' as a legitimation for the current regime's racial terror are the same people who would have gone into the Milgram experiment and administered lethal electrical shocks to an innocent person just because some guy in a lab coat told them to.
Controversial take:
Such people are sentient in theory, but not in practice. Plan accordingly.
but Jews weren't washing dishes in a country illegally. we were living in our own countries legally where we had been living for hundreds of years, paying taxes and contributing to society.
you see, simply being Jewish is not a crime unless you're living under a genocidal government. Entering a country illegally IS a crime, universally. There has never been a point anywhere in the world anywhere in history where breaking and entering and committing theft is not a crime.
you get how that's different from just ...being Jewish, right?
it's similar to how your neighbor living in his own home minding his own business is not a crime, but your neighbor coming into your home by force and living in it without your consent is a crime. it doesn't matter if all your neighbor is doing is your dishes (though he is inevitably going to be sitting on your couch and watching your Netflix and eating your food) - it's still a crime.
I very much doubt you're the type of person who cares how Jews feel, so perhaps imagine how Roma or LGBTQ or mixed race folks feel when you downplay the actual systematic genocide of their families to someone being arrested for a literal crime and put on a plane back home.
that said you've already made it clear you consider all of the minorities who might take issue with this to be "sentient in theory but not in practice," so I doubt I'll get anywhere asking you to have compassion and I think about what you're saying. nevertheless I would still very much appreciate it if you stopped appropraiting Jewish and Holocaust comparisons in the future. They're not yours to use and especially not for this purpose. Thanks!
Hey...I think maybe you're mistaking my position with other positions. (1)
I am not claiming that, for example, Ashkenazim in central Europe in the 20th century were there illegally. And, while I can see in retrospect how a person could infer such an equivalency from my phrasing, that was not my intent. I used those two examples because those were the two examples in the the post I was reblogging. See also footnote (2).
The connection I am attempting to draw is this:
People who justify terror campaigns (2) based on the 'non-humanity' of classes of people or people engaging in basically non-threatening actions, or actions for which violence is a grossly disproportionate response (3) tend to have a consistent ideology that worships authority and the exercise of power, and tend to be perfectly happy to inflict wanton violence because someone in power tells them they can. That worship of power, that joy in inflicting suffering because someone in charge says its ok, that makes a person less than sentient. Even if they claim to share my beliefs or politics, or personal preferences. Even then.
Footnotes
(1) Yeah, there's a lot of Anti-Semitism out there right now. And a lot of it goes through social media. And that is shitty. No argument from me on those points, and I think that would probably be apparent if you read down through my blog.
(2) Also granted the Holocaust was an exceptionally horrifying case of such a terror campaign. As noted above, my examples were chosen because those were the examples I was replying to. And Anti-Semitic violence is definitely on the rise and a pressing issue these days. I am very concerned at how mainstream it has become to take the attitude that 'They were Jews so they had it coming.' So in that context also, I though it made sense to name Anti-Semitism as a specific example of human shittiness.
Now, while MAGA supporters are not Nazis by definition(some are, some aren't), they are pretty definitionally fascists, of which Nazi is perhaps the best known subtype. So I also thought it made sense to note the connection in the ideology of the people perpetrating the violence even if the scale of violence, justification, and victims are different.
(3) This one, I'm not going to agree with you on. I am not willing to grant that immigration status ('illegal' or otherwise) justifies the mass detention, torture, and extradition of said immigrants. Or the wholesale destruction of liberal norms in the US in service of what amount to state sponsored racial terror. Or the violence being used to quell dissent around this issue. If you think that the guy washing dishes at a local restaurant, or roofing your house, or doing your neighbor's yardwork, or picking your food is equivalent to a burglar...the analogy you are using is superficial and misses the truth of the thing in order to make a point that is morally bankrupt. Maybe read more Latin American history, and the history and economics of immigration in the US?
regardless of what you meant you should never appropriate Jewish pain the way you did. it doesn't really matter that the person you replied to did it, you should not have also done it.
Enforcing the law is not a terror campaign. this is a terror campaign:
it's awful that you seem to feel that these people's families and the people concerned about these murder victims are somehow less than human for wanting justice and safety.
The murder rate has dropped 20% since deportations began, so it seems in fact a terror campaign is ending:
A 21% drop would push homicide rate to a new historic low, new CCJ analysis finds
The guy washing dishes and roofing the house and doing my neighbor's yard work or picking my food is equivalent to a burglar because he came here illegally and stole those jobs from Americans. Americans absolutely will take the jobs if the wages aren't undercut by illegal workers. I get that you feel bad for them but that doesn't mean they aren't committing theft. You have not offered it an explanation of why it is not theft only that you feel it like it isn't.
No matter what America has or has not done in other countries that doesn't give them the right to come here and steal from us, just like I don't have the right to go over to China or Russia and steal from them because they fuck with American politics all the time.
Yep. We're...not going to agree on that one.
And I'm going to feel pretty comfortable saying that, if I am understanding your position correctly (that undocumented workers are committing theft, ergo, US Americans are morally correct in using lethal force against them) I am on solid ground naming that as a despicable position.(1)
(1) In no particular order:
Yes, it *does* matter what the US has done in other countries. If we as a country wreck, say, Guatemala by supporting right-wing death squads that exterminate indigenous communities who stay in Guatemala, and support US companies that employ undocumented Guatemalan workers, it is the height of hypocrisy and viciousness to turn on those workers because white nationalism is trendy right now.
It is also, point of both legal and moral fact, not *theft* if someone is working a job that you think, hypothetically, an 'American' might want. If I get a job that someone else might have wanted (or even actually did want) that isn't theft, they did not have a moral or legal right to that job. Maybe look up some legal codes or read more political philosophy. Maybe Hannah Arendt or John Rawls? Hell, even Hayek would be better than whatever it is you're reading now.
I note the usual canard about the victims of immigrant crime and a photo (not a link to a source, but a photo), and...it makes you look innumerate.
Here's an example of using evidence to support an argument
tl;dr version: Your views are detached from objective reality. Undocumented immigrants commit crimes (including violent ones) at a significantly lower rate than native born US citizens. If this is really the point you want to base your position on, I'm happy to provide additional references (next week, I take the weekends off).
You're simply incorrect. theft is bad no matter who does it. even if you agree with it it's still theft.
just like you stole the dignity from Jews in your previous post, you also advocate to steal jobs homes and lives from Americans. that's all this comes down to. you feel certain citizens deserve to be stolen from because of conflicts in other countries decades ago. people like you are simply immoral and cannot be reasoned with.
oh and by the way you should look into exactly how they collect immigrant crime numbers before you start quoting them. for the most part immigration status is not noted when people are arrested so we really have no way of knowing how much crime is committed by immigrants. but we do have murder mysterously reducing by 20% in the year that we sent them home.
anyway you're really attached to this notion that certain aggrieved populations have the right to steal and that's nonsense. and you know it's nonsense which is why you and the authors you mentioned have to twist yourselves into knots to justify it. you are not a white Savior and a legal immigrants are not your special little blorbos. that might be hard for you to take - libs really hate the thought of their vastly underpaid slave class being taken from them so they tend to try to portray them as little lost puppies who can't possibly manage without them. fucking nuts really. they're ADULTS you weirdo. they're making a conscious choice to break the laws of another country in order to commit theft on its citizens.
it's been nice talking to you but please stop justifying appropriating Jewish pain and justifying theft and murder on your neighbors - all of which you are doing on a racial basis. you should really address your inherent bigotry towards just about everyone before you talk about ... pretty much anything.
and just to close out, just so you're absolutely clear: theft is wrong, no matter who is doing it, or why. you wouldn't let these people come to your house and live in it and take the food out of your mouth and kick your mom out of her hospital bed, so you probably shouldn't advise that for others just because you don't like their nationality or the color of their skin or what their government did without their consent decades ago. or perhaps you dislike their class because the people being stolen from by illegal immigrants tend to be lower income minorities.
ok bye grow up and do better
You keep using 'theft' and 'stealing', but I do not think those words mean what you think those words mean. You also may want to look up the strawman fallacy. You keep trying to argue with me about things I have not said, which is very tedious.
Nevertheless, in the spirit of getting something productive out of this discussion, I propose a compromise:
I will think twice next time before I use the Holocaust as an example of the evil that comes from blind obedience to power, if in return, you will ask your Rabbi the following ethical question(1):
"Suppose that within a country there is a particular demographically group class of people. This group is, on average more law abiding than most, and does a lot of the work that other groups don't want to do.
Under what circumstances it is just for a person to participate in a propaganda campaign of collective guilt that portrays the entire group as criminals, assert that the entire group is undeserving of human rights, and support a state program to detain the entire demographic group in prison camps with the goal of deporting them or killing them."
(1) No, not to harass them. Because your moral compass is defective, theirs is likely to be better, and it might be helpful for you to listen to their reasoning.
Hope that helps.
People love to say things like “Hiding Anne Frank was illegal, turning her in would have been legal” without like fully grasping the modern implications properly. You have tons of folks like “if WW2 happened today id have __” that do not realize what is happening around them.
We have this idolized AND sanitized version of what happened then, and so we do not recognize it when it happens now.
Resistance fighters assassinated nazis and blew up weapons and infrastructure and destroyed records and forged paperwork and raised secret funds and smuggled people in vehicles and yes, hid them in their homes.
“Well it’s sad he got sent to an ICE camp but he faked his permit :/“
Whoever helped him fake his paperwork did what fighters in ww2 did. People who cut through chain link fences do what fighters in ww2 did, people who blow whistles chasing after ice cars do what fighters in ww2 did, people who destroy arms factories and cop city cranes do what fighters in ww2 did, people unmask agents do what fighters in ww2 did.
People are doing it now! They’ve been doing it now! You keep saying “oh if this happened here__” it HAS! It IS!
What are you doing about it?
Uncontroversial take:
People who say 'turning over Jews was the law' as a reason to do it, or 'they shouldn't have been washing dishes in the country illegally' as a legitimation for the current regime's racial terror are the same people who would have gone into the Milgram experiment and administered lethal electrical shocks to an innocent person just because some guy in a lab coat told them to.
Controversial take:
Such people are sentient in theory, but not in practice. Plan accordingly.
but Jews weren't washing dishes in a country illegally. we were living in our own countries legally where we had been living for hundreds of years, paying taxes and contributing to society.
you see, simply being Jewish is not a crime unless you're living under a genocidal government. Entering a country illegally IS a crime, universally. There has never been a point anywhere in the world anywhere in history where breaking and entering and committing theft is not a crime.
you get how that's different from just ...being Jewish, right?
it's similar to how your neighbor living in his own home minding his own business is not a crime, but your neighbor coming into your home by force and living in it without your consent is a crime. it doesn't matter if all your neighbor is doing is your dishes (though he is inevitably going to be sitting on your couch and watching your Netflix and eating your food) - it's still a crime.
I very much doubt you're the type of person who cares how Jews feel, so perhaps imagine how Roma or LGBTQ or mixed race folks feel when you downplay the actual systematic genocide of their families to someone being arrested for a literal crime and put on a plane back home.
that said you've already made it clear you consider all of the minorities who might take issue with this to be "sentient in theory but not in practice," so I doubt I'll get anywhere asking you to have compassion and I think about what you're saying. nevertheless I would still very much appreciate it if you stopped appropraiting Jewish and Holocaust comparisons in the future. They're not yours to use and especially not for this purpose. Thanks!
Hey...I think maybe you're mistaking my position with other positions. (1)
I am not claiming that, for example, Ashkenazim in central Europe in the 20th century were there illegally. And, while I can see in retrospect how a person could infer such an equivalency from my phrasing, that was not my intent. I used those two examples because those were the two examples in the the post I was reblogging. See also footnote (2).
The connection I am attempting to draw is this:
People who justify terror campaigns (2) based on the 'non-humanity' of classes of people or people engaging in basically non-threatening actions, or actions for which violence is a grossly disproportionate response (3) tend to have a consistent ideology that worships authority and the exercise of power, and tend to be perfectly happy to inflict wanton violence because someone in power tells them they can. That worship of power, that joy in inflicting suffering because someone in charge says its ok, that makes a person less than sentient. Even if they claim to share my beliefs or politics, or personal preferences. Even then.
Footnotes
(1) Yeah, there's a lot of Anti-Semitism out there right now. And a lot of it goes through social media. And that is shitty. No argument from me on those points, and I think that would probably be apparent if you read down through my blog.
(2) Also granted the Holocaust was an exceptionally horrifying case of such a terror campaign. As noted above, my examples were chosen because those were the examples I was replying to. And Anti-Semitic violence is definitely on the rise and a pressing issue these days. I am very concerned at how mainstream it has become to take the attitude that 'They were Jews so they had it coming.' So in that context also, I though it made sense to name Anti-Semitism as a specific example of human shittiness.
Now, while MAGA supporters are not Nazis by definition(some are, some aren't), they are pretty definitionally fascists, of which Nazi is perhaps the best known subtype. So I also thought it made sense to note the connection in the ideology of the people perpetrating the violence even if the scale of violence, justification, and victims are different.
(3) This one, I'm not going to agree with you on. I am not willing to grant that immigration status ('illegal' or otherwise) justifies the mass detention, torture, and extradition of said immigrants. Or the wholesale destruction of liberal norms in the US in service of what amount to state sponsored racial terror. Or the violence being used to quell dissent around this issue. If you think that the guy washing dishes at a local restaurant, or roofing your house, or doing your neighbor's yardwork, or picking your food is equivalent to a burglar...the analogy you are using is superficial and misses the truth of the thing in order to make a point that is morally bankrupt. Maybe read more Latin American history, and the history and economics of immigration in the US?
regardless of what you meant you should never appropriate Jewish pain the way you did. it doesn't really matter that the person you replied to did it, you should not have also done it.
Enforcing the law is not a terror campaign. this is a terror campaign:
it's awful that you seem to feel that these people's families and the people concerned about these murder victims are somehow less than human for wanting justice and safety.
The murder rate has dropped 20% since deportations began, so it seems in fact a terror campaign is ending:
A 21% drop would push homicide rate to a new historic low, new CCJ analysis finds
The guy washing dishes and roofing the house and doing my neighbor's yard work or picking my food is equivalent to a burglar because he came here illegally and stole those jobs from Americans. Americans absolutely will take the jobs if the wages aren't undercut by illegal workers. I get that you feel bad for them but that doesn't mean they aren't committing theft. You have not offered it an explanation of why it is not theft only that you feel it like it isn't.
No matter what America has or has not done in other countries that doesn't give them the right to come here and steal from us, just like I don't have the right to go over to China or Russia and steal from them because they fuck with American politics all the time.
Yep. We're...not going to agree on that one.
And I'm going to feel pretty comfortable saying that, if I am understanding your position correctly (that undocumented workers are committing theft, ergo, US Americans are morally correct in using lethal force against them) I am on solid ground naming that as a despicable position.(1)
(1) In no particular order:
Yes, it *does* matter what the US has done in other countries. If we as a country wreck, say, Guatemala by supporting right-wing death squads that exterminate indigenous communities who stay in Guatemala, and support US companies that employ undocumented Guatemalan workers, it is the height of hypocrisy and viciousness to turn on those workers because white nationalism is trendy right now.
It is also, point of both legal and moral fact, not *theft* if someone is working a job that you think, hypothetically, an 'American' might want. If I get a job that someone else might have wanted (or even actually did want) that isn't theft, they did not have a moral or legal right to that job. Maybe look up some legal codes or read more political philosophy. Maybe Hannah Arendt or John Rawls? Hell, even Hayek would be better than whatever it is you're reading now.
I note the usual canard about the victims of immigrant crime and a photo (not a link to a source, but a photo), and...it makes you look innumerate.
Here's an example of using evidence to support an argument
tl;dr version: Your views are detached from objective reality. Undocumented immigrants commit crimes (including violent ones) at a significantly lower rate than native born US citizens. If this is really the point you want to base your position on, I'm happy to provide additional references (next week, I take the weekends off).