Malice is Self-Condemnation & Self-Honour

"It was an invitation to be beaten by making everyone else’s life a constant low-level misery, mainly because she could not stand not to be the centre of attention."
https://www.xenopolitix.com/post/355-difficulty-at-the-beginning-v

Note the self-condemnation.

1. I can't stand to be away from attention.
2. I will do something unpleasant.

Why [2]? She has already ruled out doing something pleasant to gain attention. In turn: why? Because she thinks it won't work. She thinks she's incapable of being pleasant. She believes she is fundamentally worthless.

And she should know best, shouldn't she? Why don't we take her at her word on this? 

P.S. "Jews dominate in the media and academia they “talk from the kitchen” at a vast scale; eventually the host snaps, like a provoked husband, and administers a beating."

Never tolerate bad behaviour. You will only get more allergic with time. Maybe check 2-3 instances to make sure it's not a momentary thing you'll get used to. If it's genuine bad behaviour, deal with it immediately, when you're still calm and can avoid being a brat about it. 

Only turn to violence if they refuse to stop. Then: don't stop at beatings. Exile and execution need to be on the table. Principle: disobedience is usually accidental, and usually the actual act is not a big deal. (E.g. Gyews are convincing because you're weak. That's your sin, not theirs. That's why the violence; pogromers know they shouldn't have to resort to pogroms, and really hate being reminded.) By contrast, insubordination is an immediate firing offence; if they refuse to clean up their act, that's insubordination, regardless of how petty the act is. If they're so incompetent they can't clean up their act, they're a bad hire. You screwed up. Also, the result is identical to insubordination. Insubordination is isomorphic to incompetence; they lack the competence of deciding to follow instructions (and are now being fired for being bad at their job).

Having execution on the table calms things. You don't need to get upset, because the problem will be solved. It's merely a question of how expensive the solution will be. Are they going to see the light when asked? Or are you gonna fuckin' kill them and never have to think about it again? 

Under Fascism unfriend them on Facebook and block them on Twitter. Again, with this on the table, there's no need to get upset. Turns out the relationship wasn't profitable, so you cut your losses. It's not a moral thing, it's a pragmatic thing. If someone slags you off for doing this, block them too. Don't angst about it.

If you live with them and moving out is inconvenient, then that's like the bad hire: you screwed up. Tolerate it for now, but moving just became your priority #1. Make sure living on the street is on the table. "If you keep doing this, I'ma go be homeless rather than put up with it." Revenge is Sour: if you can kill, then you typically don't need to. However, if you need to, then just do it. No angst. Just fix it. 

P.P.S. "A third party, an Englishman, say, watching a German will say, “Now, now what is this brutal behaviour? These people are practically powerless. We must put a stop to this beastliness—it’s like beating a woman!”"

To be precise, only peasants, who have no agency, let things get so bad they snap and administer physical punishment. Childish, not animalistic. (Maybe also animalistic.) Likewise if you have to use spanking to control your children, it's because you're weak. You have no authority and refuse to turn to someone who does. Have to resort to terrorism.

"Finally, I cut the cord on the radio in such a way that it looked like it had frayed; it became intermittent and my relative got bored with the game. No need for a beating or a pogrom; of course, the way we discreetly cut the cord before was to not allow the Jews to enter certain elite universities, but it is too late now."

Works, but slightly dishonourable. Certainly, she herself wasn't honourable and doesn't deserve honourable treatment. However you can see, given the specific example, that without honour you would have to repeat these games. Going to have to metaphorically cut a whole bunch of metaphorical cords. If this is really the best solution, then moving just became your #1 priority. Try honour. If that doesn't work, then put kill on the table and use dishonour until kill can be achieved. 

Wrinkle: sometimes honour is too risky. If being honourable would scupper your later attempts to use dishonour, and they don't deserve honour, don't try it. Go straight to kill. 

P.P.P.S. Did you notice terrorism is basically spanking et al? They learn in childhood that terrorism is acceptable and effective, so they try it as an adult. Terrorism is common in the modern world because comically incompetent parenting is common. Americans teach their kids that terrorism is acceptable and effective all the time, then complain when terrorism is used on their country.