I've been searching for articles talking about browning, and it's about as I suspected.
Heres a great article that outlines the Jewish means of deception and how they tackle unfavorable facts
https://www.unz.com/article/lying-about-judeo-bolshevism/
>We’re again in very familiar territory: when you feel you can’t avoid a fact (“Jews were invariably disproportionately represented”), and you can’t downplay it, then explain it by way of prejudice (“they were not welcome”). The problem with snapshots of history like this, as I’ve explained many times before, is what I’ve come to term a “cropped timeline explanation” — something that is extremely common in all Jewish and philosemitic historiography concerning anti-Semitism.
>When faced with an uncomfortable and unavoidable fact involving Jewish behavior (Leftism, usury, financial crime, pornography, etc.) one starts with assumptions of anti-Jewish prejudice and works from there. Jews are on the Left? It must be because they were excluded from the Right. Problems begin to arise when the question is asked why Jews were excluded or viewed as socially or culturally oppositional in the first place. Here, “irrational prejudice” is the last resort, but beyond it, when faced with further interrogation of that idea and the even deeper historical context, nothing is there. One is confronted with blank stares, rhetorical dead ends, and a factual wasteland.
Heres a great article that outlines the Jewish means of deception and how they tackle unfavorable facts
https://www.unz.com/article/lying-about-judeo-bolshevism/
>We’re again in very familiar territory: when you feel you can’t avoid a fact (“Jews were invariably disproportionately represented”), and you can’t downplay it, then explain it by way of prejudice (“they were not welcome”). The problem with snapshots of history like this, as I’ve explained many times before, is what I’ve come to term a “cropped timeline explanation” — something that is extremely common in all Jewish and philosemitic historiography concerning anti-Semitism.
>When faced with an uncomfortable and unavoidable fact involving Jewish behavior (Leftism, usury, financial crime, pornography, etc.) one starts with assumptions of anti-Jewish prejudice and works from there. Jews are on the Left? It must be because they were excluded from the Right. Problems begin to arise when the question is asked why Jews were excluded or viewed as socially or culturally oppositional in the first place. Here, “irrational prejudice” is the last resort, but beyond it, when faced with further interrogation of that idea and the even deeper historical context, nothing is there. One is confronted with blank stares, rhetorical dead ends, and a factual wasteland.
Don't think *for* him. Make him think for himself. Guide him towards the truth with questions and ponderies. Socrates set the method.
Second most important advice:
Virtual experience is WAY MORE PERSUASIVE than ideas. Paint a picture. Make him "imagine you're a cop called to a disturbance, and a knife-wielding negress charges at you." It's not just imagination, it's virtually being there. TV is also a virtual experience, which is why it works for normalization so well.
For most people, virtual experience affects their biases just as much as real experience. Even if they're not idiots. Come on, you enjoyed imagining "a big, beautiful wall", didn't you?