I keep getting the same argument here, that the Jews are responsible for the creation of feminism. However, the evidence we have does not suggest that. The term originated in France, and suffragette movement (the first wave), at least as far as I know, was not created by Jews. At most the Jews have facilitated the spread of feminism through Big Tech.
The creation of a word is not necessarily tied to the creation of an ideology surrounding the word. An easy example is communism. Karl Marx didn't invent the word, but yeah, you know the rest.
Can you link any studies that suggest Jewish involvement?
What, you mean peer-reviewed and published academic studies? Surely, you're not this naive.
You have to look at the known facts. Gloria Steinem (Jewess) is the leader of the feminist movement. Feminism itself has very strong Marxist (a Jew himself) socialist influences. I don't know how much more "involved" you can get than that. I incorrectly stated earlier that she was funded by the CIA, but this is false. She was funded by the Rockefellers - an Illuminati family.
We can't say anything with a 100% certainty,
False. You and I will both die. That is 100% certain.
but to derive the posterior you need the likelihood and the prior.
True.
What do we know about the Illuminati Jews (idk if you're referring to Zionists here or not)? And what evidence do we have to make any claims of that magnitude (I'm not referring to your claims, just in general)?
We know of them and that they exist. The Rostchchilds (formerly named Bauer - Ashkenazi Jewish name - changed historically) being the most famous example. There was, strangely enough, a book published about them (Bloodlines of the Illuminati), but most of the sources that were available online from 20+ years ago, some of which I remember reading, have either been deleted or is actively being censored (prominent investigators on the topic have already been censored from the mainstream media platforms, like YouTube). In another 20 years there won't be, if any, trace left in both publicly available sources and in the public consciousness. It will be a footnote in late 20th century, early 21st century history, and probably a university undergraduate course called "alternative media history" or some such.
Curiously (and hilariously), the FBI archives some of these sources.
vault.fbi.gov
I think most of the anti-Semitic rhetoric is based on unfounded conspiracy theories (e.g. the Jews are importing "low IQ Africans" to dumb Europeans down). To me it's preposterous that whites use the Jews as a scapegoat for all of their problems.
Anti-Semitism as a concept is being weaponized against critics of Israel, and also against critics of anything Jewish of any kind, as a means of shutting down any rational inquiry. The kind of Neo-Naziesque anti-Semitism involving synagogue burning and targeting Jews for violence is more rare than Islamic terrorism. Speaking of which, Arabs are Semites also, but nobody calls it anti-Semetic to racially profile Arabs, for example. So I would take claims of "anti-Semitism" with a grain of salt, and would be careful not to lump racism with criticism (this term does that with ease, arguably by design, but most certainly with intent), since it's a very common tactic to delegitimize honest criticism. It's now "anti-Semetic" even to question the historical veracity of the details surrounding the claims of the holocaust, like the gas chambers and the six million figure. The questioning of no other topic in history (and in the subject of history itself) draws as much visceral ire as this. Perhaps Galileic heliocentricism as a criticism (and challenging) of the Roman Catholic cosmology is arguably another example of this.
Having said that, it is important to identify legitimate racism, if at least for the sake of accuracy and rationality. We can ignore and look past the petty bullshit to get at the core anyway.
I wouldn't say that the claims are unfounded, but it might be exaggerated in a histrionic sense. Being aware of the globalist new world agenda, of the Jewish corporate dominance in media and politics, and of the Talmudic scriptures that declare all non-Jews to be used as cattle as the Jew sees fit, among many other things that - in a way - act as a prerequisite for moving the discussion forward (or having it in the first place), it's not a huge stretch of the imagination to understand where the conspiracy in your example comes from.
A people who have strong ethno-nationalist identities with equally strong cultures are much, much more difficult to subjugate, subvert, and dominate, than an ethnically diluted and culturally vapid group who are ignorant of their own immigrant culture and heritage. Your tribe and community becomes the host state (now foster), to which loyalties would be sworn to (as new citizens), taxes would be paid to (as contributions), and whose culture you would generationally be assimilated into (as your children learn their language proficiently and become culturally and nationally indoctrinated in the school system). This is what has been happening everywhere around the world, mainly with countries from the Middle East. Their countries are corrupted by puppet dictators, attacked and have their resources stolen under bogus pretenses, and the people are forced to escape and seek refuge. Their children forget, or are apathetic to, their own language, culture, and religion, and adopt these things from their foster country.
The best way to conquer and destroy (weaken nationally, culturally, financially, and spiritually) a people is not by brute force, but through cultural assimilation. Once weakened, any group of people (both domestic and imported) are far more malleable and amenable to your desired changes (gradually, of course; attitudes and beliefs don't change overnight). Race-mixing contributes precisely to this process in a virtually prescriptive manner in a way that purely ideological dominance (e.g., cultural Marxism and far-left extremism) is insufficient, if not inefficient. If I ever wrote a "how-to" manual on world domination, race-mixing would be a major chapter.
I do however, agree with you main conclusion that the Jews as a whole (including the super religious ones) are not responsible for inceldom. And if they've contributed to it, it's only as a byproduct.
My stance on this is still probabilistic (it was my second and third words), though it's low enough that for the sake of discussion we can reasonably say that they aren't responsible.