Comments by "Ralph Bernhard" (@ralphbernhard1757) on "The Israel Guys" channel.

@shanarchy614 One thing is for sure, whether monarchies or democracy, whether technocracies or plutocracies, whether military dictatorships or anarchy, whether an olighary or capitalism/corporatism, there will always be 10% who control 80% of the wealth... Entire systems based on divide and rule/conquer strategies, can be masked behind other terms or hidden by the use of euphemisms. When one states the term Apartheid, most people will say that it was a system of "blacks against whites". Superficially this is true but as mostly in history that is just half the story. Upon closer examination it was an intricate system of favoratism in a complex political system of divide and rule, set up by the hegemony. Whites historically had the domineering political, military and financial power and could therefore divide all others into systems called races and classes. Cape Town (administrative capital city) and Pretoria (legistative capital) created a hierarchy of favorites in a power structure; favoratism is an instrument to implement division. Once the hegemony has division it can implement a pecking order of access to its own power. The more favored a system is, the more power it is afforded. Race or class, rather than meritocracy, was employed as an instrument of power to effect a favorable outcome for those who historically had the power and dominion. The different races in Southern Africa could not play the same game back against the political hegemony, because the existing power structures overwhelming favored the white minority in a minority rule system as a result of the previous history of colonialism which went back a long time. Any intentions by the leaders of those who ended up deeply divided, to try and overcome the imbalance by creating the single enemy as being "white rule", was dispersed by the hegemon preventively: by creating a system of favorites, with ascending levels of privilege afforded by the hegemon according to race and status in a complex system of favoratism, as explained below. Meritocracy as can be explored further is also an instrument of power and privilege, and those who wield power can offer desirable positions in systems as "carrot" to strive for (strategy). And one can again zoom out or zoom into almost every level of society or international relations desired. At the core all divide and rule strategies are the same. It has little to do with race or colonialism
5
@msinbalony Most human brains are far too limited to grasp how they get sucked into the "divide and rule" setup of the world... Scroll up to find out more about how "divide and rule" works, if you are intellectually curious. In case you think with your limbic brain, then don't 😊
3
@molivson Antisemitism is basically the hijacking of the concept of "bigotry". bigotry /ˈbɪɡətri/ noun "obstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, opinion, or faction, in particular prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group." No single group or political entity should have a "right" to hijack a concept for themselves and the own ingroup only. Bigotry is a universal issue.
3
@ofrapeters3952 What parts exactly are "nonsense"? Be specific. If you cannot be specific, your criticism of my short essays is simply your own personal opinion. I can live with that.
3
@ofrapeters3952 Wars if conquest have been illegal according to international agreement, ever since 1928 (Kellog-Briand) No, Israel may not simply conquer Palestine by military force, "if it wants to." It can do so following principles such as "might makes right", but will then simply have to bow to the same "logic" it they no longer have the "might."
3
@RC-no3dr Israel uses Kibbutzim in the same expansionist way as the USA once used farms and forts, 200 years ago, using Manifest Destiny to create the "ingroup vs. outgroup" dynamics. When the farms/forts were attacked by the "animals" (outgroup), the own ingroup raised sympathy for the cause of more settler colonialism in the frontierlands, which then provided the justification for the next small step westwards, by the "superior ubermensch" (ingroup) into the homelands of the "untermenschen injuns". Notice the parallels, and history repeating?
2
@Bertrum123 Correction. The OP stated "selected facts", which suits the story he wishes to tell. Thank me later ☺️
2
@moonshinesa8234 Politicians know what really counts: those who have the wealth, which is why lobbying is so important. There is a revolving door between top political posts and top business positions. It who you know, not what you know that is important. All leaders play "divide and rule" games, to avoid the creation of unity in the base, the rest if the 90% of populations.
2
@moonshinesa8234 "Do you condemn Hamas?", is a loaded question. There is no need to answer loaded questions, since they limit the answers the questioner wants as pre-selected "logic". As stated above. Do you condemn Irgun, Lehi, Ben Gurion, and many other Jewish terrorists or terror organisations?" If not, why not? Or does everybody here avoid answering because they secretly admire terrorists, as long as others are victims of terrorism?
2
@ofrapeters3952 The life of a kibbutzim means little to their own leaders. "... We would send a tractor to plough some area ... in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn't shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot. And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that's how it was..." Moshe Dayan, reporting about the pre-1967 clashes with the Syrians, as quoted in The New York Times and Associated Press reports (May 1997, taken from previous sources back in the 1970s).
2
@ofrapeters3952 The life of a kibbutzim means little to their own leaders. "... We would send a tractor to plough some area ... in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn't shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot. And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that's how it was..." Moshe Dayan, reporting about the pre-1967 clashes with the Syrians, as quoted in The New York Times and Associated Press reports (May 1997, taken from previous sources back in the 1970s).
2
@shanarchy614 Thank you, same to you 👍
2
@ofrapeters3952 No, I've never lived on a Kibbutz, but I did consider the offer once while a naive 17-year old. There were pamphlets in our school, and the offer was basically that we paid for our transport to Israel, and once there it would be basically "work on the Kibbutz in exchange for all-paid cultural experience, incl. organized excursions, etc. all paid for by the Kibbutz". Something like that. Several of my school friends and I were quite excited about the opportunity, until I asked a Jewish pupil why he was not going. He said his father would never allow him to go, and then explained the "function" of the frontier Kibbutzim, using exactly the same "farms/forts/US strategy if expansion during the Indian Wars"-analogy as I wrote in the above essay. The function of these frontierland Kibbutzim, were as tools of expansion, and an accepted strategy of expansion. If these frontierland "farms/forts" (aka Kibbutz) were ever attacked, Israel would be "just shooting back," same as US imperialist expansion did for more than 200 years in North America... So here is the critical question. If this was already freely available "insider information", that attacks on "frontierland" Kibbutzim would be used as propaganda means ever since British Empire days (before 1948), and way back in 1984 when I personally found out, then why is nobody discussing this Israeli strategy of expansion today?
2
@JoaoSoares-rs6ec The creation of Israel was an imperialist action, during WW1. It was "granted" this right by empires. That makes it imperialism. It was not ever an act of mutual agreement, since the inhabitants who lived in Palestine (650,000 of mixed ethnicity, cultural and religious background) were never consulted. Are you an imperialist?
2
@ofrapeters3952 Are you an imperialist?
2
Unless their is verified evidence from multiple sources, incl. neutral sources like the UN or countries like Switzerland, etc., there is no need to believe anything.
2
GayasAIDS "The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do." -- Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
1
 @KathyPrendergast-cu5ci During the last elections in 2006, Hamas ran on a platform of peace.
1
@shanarchy614 Empires practiced "apartheid" whereever they turned up. Apart = seperate = divide. It's "divide and rule". It's ALWAYS divide and rule if governments defend wrongs against the wishes of most of its inhabitants. For the "dividers", the resulting division is always good. They can rule over the fear, the discord, the "finger pointers", and the "pointed at" alike. The "winners"? The "dividers": politicians, the "top 10% income earners, and so-called "freeriders" who prosper off societies without contributing much in return. It's how "divide and rule" works...
1
@gmw3083 Yes, creating mass-terror aids ethnic cleasing. The victims of these collective USA/EU/IDF operations all over the ME, are going to be refugees, soon coming to a city near you where your tax dollars will pay for their wellfare. That then contributes to mass-dissention within these countries these refugees turn up in, which can then be used by politicians here to foster hate, fear, mistrust..."dissention", in the form of masses of people pointing fingers in every conceivable direction which can then be exploited to set "ingroups" against "outgroups", which can then be further exploited... It's how "divide and rule" works at multiole tiers and in multiple locations. Who gains?
1
GayasAIDS Hamas, just like every single "terrorist" organisation EVER, at any point in history ever, in any geographical location ever, by any religion ever, are always an EFFECT of oppression. The USA/collective West is "classifying" the terrorists they created themselves with own PREVIOUS political actions, as terrorists... Terrorism/Freedom fighting (POV) is always an "effect" not a "cause." If you live in the west, then you (personally), or your parents, grandparents or previous generations have never ever ever fought anybody your own leaders have not personally set you up against. Try me on this one. Name me the war, incl. this current "War on Terror", and I'll inform you how your own government created it (aka "lay the foundation").
1
@julielenchner7257 He is not "right" about anything. He oozes "bias" out of every pore, making him a useful idiot for a cause. The cause is continued settler colonialism in the Levant, which is antisemetic in nature, using expendable pawns, a strategy as old as mankind. He is is eith knowingly, or unknowingly supporting imperialism. Zionism became a tool of the British Empire during WW1. After WW2, the hegemon causing problems in the Levant and the ME in general, became Washington DC. The Cold War and "oil" (interests), geopolitical/grand strategy strategic interests (like military bases, or the control of geographical chokepoints), was the reason for all of the US/collective West's meddling in the ME for more than 100 years... From a position of POWER, the USA/collective West uses the strategy of "divide and rule" over these minor powers in the ME, and the Levant. Jwes (whichever way categorized) are as much a victim, as they are benefactors.
1
@JoaoSoares-rs6ec Do you condemn the creation of Israel by its terrorist founding fathers, like Ben Gurion? A large percentage of the initial Israeli leaders stemmed from terror organizations like Irgun, Palmach, The Haganah, or Lehi or advocated for the violent and aggressive use of tools, like the Stern Gang... So. Do you condemn these historical Jewish terrorists? No other answer will be accepted.
1
@momsmushroomsjodyfoster5786 and @GayasAIDS Hamas, just like every single "terrorist" organisation EVER, at any point in history ever, in any geographical location ever, by any religion ever, are always an EFFECT of oppression. The USA/collective West is "classifying" the terrorists they created themselves with own PREVIOUS political actions, as terrorists... Terrorism/Freedom fighting (POV) is always an "effect" not a "cause." If you live in the west, then you (personally), or your parents, grandparents or previous generations have never ever ever fought anybody your own leaders have not personally set you up against. Try me on this one. Name me the war, incl. this current "War on Terror", and I'll inform you how your own government created it (aka "lay the foundation").
1
@soulfireonfire6423 The historical Apartheid South Africa did the same... See my above comments about "Apartheid" serving as a cloaking term, or "doublespeak" for "divide and rule"...
1
@ofrapeters3952 Look at their locations on a map.
1
@verawebbbe7122 There is sufficient condemnation of the IDF and "Mr Security", a total loser... The reason such criticism has no effect, is because losers and psychopaths alike surround themselves with bootlickers, who defend them. Did you know that up to 20% of all leaders in positions of power (even our so-called "democracies") exhibit psychopathic tendencies?
1
@shanarchy614 Unfortunately, the world is filled to the brim with bootlickers, of whom there are several in this comments thread. My favorite imperialist quote/standpoint of all times must be "if I don’t steal your home, someone else will steal it," made by a settler colonist to the helpless Palestinian owner of a house he was occupying. In fact this single statement reflects the essence of all historical imperialist greed during the era of European imperialism which peaked around 1900, because all the leaders of the imperialist powers and all their fanboys (and few fangirls too, I assume) thought that if they didn't rock up some place hundreds or thousands of miles away from their place of birth, to stick their banner down (or paper-plant-down the "rights" of their corporations "Smedley-Butler"-style), or "teach lessons" to some locals, that some or other different imperialist, waving a different banner, and chanting a different slogan, might just beat them to it. All such cases of imperialists accusing others of being imperialists, and the excuse then being that "if I don't do WRONG, then somebody else will do WRONG before I get there". The imperialist mindset is exposed BY the "imperialist" (or apologists), by way of what they consider the "norm". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque Obviously, they were ALL wrong. Small wonder Mark Twain preferred his dog, over such forms of humanity ("some" I assume, not to generalize, since there are good and bad people in all societies and cultures, and these are revealed by their actions, and what positions they defend). IMHO, at some point in a debate, every activist for a cause should just take a gun in their hands, and actually start shooting for what they so vociferously support with their words. Then, be honest, and actually admit they never would voluntarily die for the causes they "defend" with their words. Unfortunately, the world is filled to the brim with those who are very vocal in their support of a cause during the countdown, or when its only about words, but when it comes to the actual clash, there is an entire list of reasons why they or their kids shouldn't be in those "bloody trenches" themselves. Do you agree, Shannon? My top 5 of excuses for "Why SOMEBODY ELSE should go, fighting for what I believe in": - "I'm too old." (or variations of that) - "I'm just here for the argument, I don't actually know how to shoot." (or variations of that) - "I'm too rich, and have too much to lose." (or variations of that) - "I've got a family and a cat to support." (or variations of that) - "There is an interesting football match on tonight which I just can't miss, so mebbe tomorrow." (or variations of that) Yes, believe it or not, when it comes to seperating the straw from the chaff, such advocates for pushing an own agenda to point to actual conflict shine with their absence and can't even answer simple questions like: Would you at any point have actually fought and died for "poor little Israel which never did anything wrong."? None of these "mommy's basement dwellers" will ever risk their lives to put their money where their mouths are.
1
@ofrapeters3952 Russia's strategy is in alignment with the safety they must provide for the country. Not for anyone out of Russia to judge .. If you lived in Russia, you would understand ...
1
I suggest a search engine. I modern device, with which bs. like your OP can be instantaneously refuted... Try it sometime, and join the 21st century 👍👍👍
1
"If I don't steal your house, somebody else will" Zionist quote from the year 2121...
1