That's easy:
Hip, adj.: 1. a quality of popularity of, or characteristic of, a group of people oppressed or denied special privileges by white American males with traditional beliefs, or of a group of people which predominantly votes Democrat.
(Yes, I made that up)
As you note, compatibility is not a component of this definition. As intensely as American Jews and Muslims may dislike each other, they may also feel equally put-upon by western WASP culture, and therefore acquire the property of "hipness" via both voting Democrat. There's no intrinsic violation of reason here, because people are free to decide for themselves who their most threatening political enemy is. If American Muslims observe that American Jews often vote Democrat, it does not follow that the Muslims' circumstances will be improved by voting Republican, nor does any sort of logic require them to do so. Similarly, logic does not require a third-party observer (such as a spoiled, rich Democrat Brat college student) to "pick sides" in the Jew-Muslim dispute. It is understood those two groups are united in their oppression by and opposition to white American males with traditional values, and therefore, the Democrat Brat is permitted by reason to "support" both of them, irrespective of any other differences they may have. Extending the concept a bit further, LGBTQ people supporting Palestinians is indeed a rich concept, but perhaps not when you consider the LGBTQ person may actually consider the white American male with traditional values to be the greater enemy. After all, these LGBTQ people aren't volunteering to go live in Gaza. They're going to stay right here, where their biggest "first world problem" is making sure they don't get mis-gendered, dead-named, or improperly pronoun-ed (is that a word?).
Conservatives often fail to understand the concept of "hipness" because they don't grasp the powerful effect which can exist when two incompatible groups share a common enemy. The confusion arises at least in part because 1) identifying the "Common Enemy" is subjective, and 2) the "Common Enemy" concept is a one-way street: it "allows" to incompatible groups to be united in opposition to a common foe, but does not "require" it. For example, it is common for Republicans to assume that because Protestant Republicans and Catholic Latino Immigrants (supposedly) share a common enemy in Atheists, reason therefore dictates the Latinos should vote Republican. Experience simply does not bear this out. The Republican-voting Protestant considers the applicable Common Enemy to be "Atheists;" the Catholic Immigrant perceives the Common Enemy to be anyone who's not in favor of A) allowing the rest of their family to come here or B) voting them more free sxxt. Their perceived "enemy" isn't who the Republican Protestant thinks it "should" be.
No doubt. How do you say Samuel Whittemore in Hebrew? LOLTough old buzzard, wonder how many he got before he ran out of ammo.
Not enough.Tough old buzzard, wonder how many he got before he ran out of ammo.
This is partly the point that Trump was making when he went to Jerusalem and engineered the Abraham accords. None of the Arab states really give a crap about the Palestinians, and they really don’t see Israel as “The Problem.” Iran is “The Problem” in the region. Israel is a political and military ally. Not a well-liked ally, but a useful one.
Yeah, this thought has been on my mind. Back in the 70s, the entire Arab world was fighting for Palestine. Multiple large scale wars, oil embargos to punish the West, countless terrorist incidents and plane hijackings. Where is any of that now? Palestine seems to have lost their social credit.The Palestinians have long outlived their usefulness to the Arab states and become a dangerous nuisance to everyone. The Arab states always saw them as dangerous which is why they would not take them as refugees, only as guest workers who could be kicked out on a moment’s notice. They saw what happened in Jordan and in Lebanon. That’s why the Palestinians have to get backing from Iranian sponsored terrorist groups and clueless/leftish western states.
I don't get this mindset where someone would let themselves be subjugated like this .I WILL NOT COMPLY! They apparently are still ready to walk on the train cars.Stanford lecturer singles out Jewish students, makes them stand in a corner and brands them ‘colonizers’
A Stanford lecturer has been placed on leave after he reportedly branded Jewish students as "colonizers" and defended Hamas terrorists.www.bizpacreview.com
I always thought that Ameer Hassan Messina was the more talented of the duo anyway.I WILL NOT COMPLY! They apparently are still ready to walk on the train cars.Stanford lecturer singles out Jewish students, makes them stand in a corner and brands them ‘colonizers’
A Stanford lecturer has been placed on leave after he reportedly branded Jewish students as "colonizers" and defended Hamas terrorists.www.bizpacreview.com
BEWARE THE SEA PEOPLE!I had to stop when he claimed the USS Liberty attack was to lure us into war.