These
days of February 2010 have been the most important since I discovered the
subject of the Islamization of the West in September 2008 and that there was a
substantial body of literature on white nationalism a year later. Until
recently, Lawrence Auster’s writings had been a lighthouse to approach these
subjects. The fact that all of his great grandparents were Eastern European
Jews did not bother me the least bit.
But...
a single phrase that I recently discovered in a June 2009 Gates of Vienna (GoV)
exchange had the effect of a lightning bolt in the middle of the night. It made
me revaluate my values in a subject that I previously called “anti-Semitism.”
Take
note that GoV is a philo-Semitic
blogsite, with a big Star of David in its main page stating “We Support
Israel.” Below I quote a comment from the 2009 exchange at GoV. Avery Bullard said...
As I have often pointed out, socialism is by and large a
disease of the intellectuals, and Jews are over-represented among
intellectuals, due to a high native intelligence and a tradition of giving
their children as much education as possible. Jews were also over-represented
amongst musicians, physicists, and capitalist entrepreneurs.
But they
are never over-represented in organisations or movements that represent the
interests of the ethnic majority, only those that weaken that majority
[the lightning!]. That is why they’ve been expelled from so many very different
countries over so many centuries. Yet with the possible exception of Albert
Lindemann (Esau’s Tears) they never
want to know the reasons why they’ve been so disliked in order to prevent more
tragedies in the future. Instead they dismiss all anti-Semitism as
scapegoating. In other words: are Jews more responsible for communism, based on
their proportional representation amongst the intelligentsia, than any other
intellectuals? If they are over-represented in the intelligentsia then they had
disproportionate influence in the direction the intelligentsia took. Many
Russian intellectuals were Slavo-philes. Before Jews could access the most
important U.S. universities the old WASP intelligentsia in the U.S. was much
more traditionalist.
Bullard’s
comment in the words I italicized above was the lightning that changed my
worldview: from philo-Semitism to anti-Semitism in a single stroke! The
lightning struck my mind so hard that I must say something about the
Austeresque masthead I had chosen for my blog.
If
by March I don’t get a convincing rebuttal of the Bullard statement by my
visitors, with the accompanied relevant facts, I will add a hatnote in all of
my previous entries where the Jewish question is mentioned, something like: Postscript: I no longer believe in the
philo-Semitic opinions expressed herein…
(Minor changes & syntax corrected in 2017)
111 comments:
Interesting new development, Chechar.
I find the approach of neither attacking nor accepting Jews to be the best approach, but I am in the extreme minority in this view.
Attacking Jews makes the attackers sound like losers; accepting Jews seems like fawning or appeasement.
There really should be enough strength on the part of European peoples to simply assert themselves in the face of adversity, to construct a positive vision and go our own way. That's the key.
If I were tied to my bedposts I'd have trouble simply asserting myself to get up. If I recognized I was tied down not only would I have a better chance of figuring out how to get up, I'd also be less likely to be distracted from doing so when the person who did the tying calls me a "loser".
T,
Your analogy is flawed on multiple levels. And there are practical matters to consider.
The person doing the tying is not the most important one calling you a loser. Other Whites are.
The analogy is also flawed in that you're not just tied down, you've allowed yourself to be tied down.
At some point you have to accept responsibility and ask yourself what's the best way to get up. By finding your own solution? Or to bitch about the person who you let tie you down? While your natural allies scorn you for your endless complaining?
Hopefully one day people who care about the survival of Europeans will start paying attention to what works. It doesn't work to whine about Jews and it doesn't work to try to make friends with them.
Those are the facts.
The answer lies in another direction.
Virtually all gentile Westerners welcome Islam into the West because they believe it is the right thing to do. They believe it would be wrong to discriminate. They believe this not because the Jews tell them to or because of Jewish influence but because Westerners believe themselves that liberalism is identical to truth. If a critical majority of gentile Westerners decided tomorrow to de-Islamize the West the Jews would be powerless to stop it. There is no conspiracy.
I agree with you Andrew: there’s no conspiracy, as you will see in the next entries of this blog.
Takuan Seiyo has sent me a text which is reproduced faithfully below. Thanks Taksei for your comments!:
The Lightning-in-the-night may have been the bathroom light bulb.
by Takuan Seiyo
Some comments re: “But they are never over-represented in organizations or movements that represent the interests of the ethnic majority, only those that weaken that majority.”
1. Nor was Jesus among those who represented the interests of the ethnic majority. Jesus, the radical rabbi from Nazareth, challenged the ethno-theocracy of the Judaite polity and juxtaposed to it a universalist moral and theistic code free of the ethno-specific Jewish prescriptions, though preserving their important proscriptions. The basic Jewish trait is the desire to repair the world. From that desire sprung many good and many bad things over 3000 years (read Thomas Cahill’s “The Gift of the Jews.”). The problem is that since the mid-19th century, it’s mostly bad things.
2. The lack of knowledge of European history always compromises such statements as the one that “opened” your eyes. Jews are not “over-represented” because for 2000 years they could not even be presented, in any form. The ethnic majority in every European (and later Islamic) country where the Jews lived persecuted, reviled, murdered, robbed, raped and disdained them, for religious and secondarily economic/ cultural (e.g. literacy) envy reasons. It’s this that spawned the mistrust and sometimes hatred (as in Russia, Ukraine) of the Jews toward the ethnic majority, and that is the second reason why Jews tend to fall for universalist schemes (international socialism, multiculturalism etc.) rather than identify with the interests of the ethnic majority.
3. As a group, the Jews are a negative force with respect to the interests of maintaining the traditional foundations of Western society. But so are these groups: single women, Scandinavians, Negroes, Muslim or Latino immigrants, intellectuals, artists, people in the teaching professions, Socialists. It’s possible to recognize this without falling into either the anti- or the philo-semitic trap.
4. Furthermore, even if your interest is specifically in the harm that Jews do to the white ethnic majority, you have to reckon with facts that antisemites fraudulently omit. I have no problem with people who dislike Jews for political or any other reasons, but I have a problem with people who lie. Antisemites lie. So, in addition to the foregoing, before you decide whether to go from anti-anti to anti- I should like to recommend the following for your consideration:
(a) 10% -20% of the indigenous white ethnic majority in every Western country has Jewish genes. In Spain possibly the most. These 2000 years of living side-by-side has had some effects.
(b) Have the interests of the white ethnic majority been enhanced or harmed by the contributions of Moses, Isaiah, Jesus, Peter, Paul, Disraeli, Mendelssohn, Mahler, Kant, Wittgenstein, Einstein, von Neumann, Modigliani, Mandelbrot, von Mises, von Hayek (1/4 Jew), von Stroheim, Wilder, Rubinstein, Haifetz, the 170+ Jewish Nobel-prize winners (excluding Peace) and thousands of other major contributors in medicine (going back to medieval Spain and France), science and the arts. Not to speak of giants standing within specific cultures for a variety of reasons that are not widely known, and including major support of specific white ethno-societies, e.g. Adam Mickiewicz in Poland, Hayim Solomon or Commodore Uriah Phillips Levy in the United States, General Sir John Monash in Australia, and on and on.
To be “against” or “for” Jews is like being against or for Emmenthaler cheese. Jews are. Cheese is. Either is making both positive and negative contributions to the common weal.
If your particular diet calls for avoiding Jews or Emmenthaler, I am neutral on that, provided you know what’s good for you. But there is no need to lie, stigmatize or disseminate skewed information on either. And by aligning with antisemites, that’s what you would be doing.
24/2/2010
This is Geza. I'm surprised to find my comment in your JQ post and I'm a little shocked that you are acquiescing to the ideology of the anti-Semites. And no, I am not smearing them; anti-Semite is a perfectly acceptable term and if these Judeocritics weren't so PC themselves, they wouldn't shriek everytime someone described them as such. I am Jewish, for what it's worth, but I do take my kinsmen to task for taking up destructive political positions and I correct my fellow Jews when their outlook on the problem of Jewish activism is a little too rosy or based more on a wish than actual reality. I can imagine the exhilaration you must feel after reading some commentary on the Jewish role in the West's death spiral and Tanstaafl is right, you are being unbound from the philo-Semitic propaganda but you will be bound by another method in the future.
The anti-Semitic forum is one composed of unsavory characters, what we white non-Europeans call white trash, and furthermore, unless they become so extreme in their anti-Semitism that they are accused of being Jewish plants, you will be forced to accept them as brothers. The sophistication of the Judeocritic community is window dressing, the majority of their adherents are not intelligent and they are only tolerated because of their hatred for Jews; the smart anti-Semites basically babysit them. Of course, they will not admit this to you and I will probably get flamed for mentioning this but it is the truth.
You mention that there is no "conspiracy" and I take that to mean that this Jewish scheming is done in plain sight? Well, I hate to break it to you but the world is more nuanced than that. Jews do not control everything and they are not the ones who are giving the marching orders to the elites of the West. The Judeocritics may break some taboos and open your eyes to certain things were you blind to but they do not have all the answers to what ails the West, and they certainly don't have all the solutions. Their forums simply consist of playing six degrees of Shylock and pissing and moaning about the all-powerful Jews in general. But of course, if it makes you feel better by joining them, then by all means do so, just don't expect any results because they too are blinded by their biases just as much as the philo-Semites.
Russel, my point was that your desire for "European peoples to simply assert themselves" will more likely be fulfilled if we are informed about and account for the actions of those who are doing their best to thwart us. In my experience it is not fellow Whites who try to manipulate us with guilt-tripping and name calling so much as it is false friends and outright enemies nervous at the prospect of the very self-interested group with which they identify being confronted rather than ignored.
As for the psychological tricks, they might have more of an effect on me if I didn't realize the same things can be said about the "losers" who "whine" about muslims, , blacks, immigration, "liberalism", etc.
Takuan Seiyo,
2. The conflict of interests and animosity between Europeans and jews is only a subset of European history. Your account is one-sided, faulting Whites and portrating jews purely as victims. Historically jews have occasionally allied with non-Europeans, notably the muslim moors and turks, against Europeans.
3. Jews were emancipated first and proceeded to help twist classical liberal egalitarianism into anti-male, anti-White, anti-Christian, jew-, black-, single-mother-, and immigrant-friendly neo-liberalism. Note the differences between how Whites and jews are treated right now by Western governments, academia, and media.
White nationalism is pathologized, as is criticism of jewish nationalism. Why the double standard?
4. Please be more specific about these "anti-semitic" liars and lies that concern you. Do these "anti-semites" wield any financial or political power? Did they open our borders? Have they put non-Whites on a pedestal above Whites? Are they passing hate speech laws?
4a. Source? Your point seems to be that it's wrong for Whites to criticize or wish to separate from jews, even though living side by side for so long hasn't stopped jews from criticizing or wishing to separate from Whites.
4b. Jewish contributions do not cancel out the "since the mid-19th century, it’s mostly bad things" you conceded in 1. Why should Whites be moved by this kind of argument anyway? Would a long list of German national socialist contributions move jews? The very attempt is considered "anti-semitic". What justifies this asymmetry? When jewish nationalists founded israel was it because they didn't appreciate the contributions of all those non-jews they had lived amongst for so long?
Immigration is like cheese. Muslims are like cheese. "Liberalism" is like cheese. Your comment is like cheese. There is no need to circumscribe who can be criticized or how, unless you fear the criticism cannot be answered.
geza1, you can take your kinsmen to task and whine about the all-powerful "anti-semites" with them all you want. Knock yourself out.
My kinsmen and I will talk about what pleases us.
@Tanstaafl
I no more care for pathological Jew haters than I do for whitey-haters, feminazis etc. So you will forgive me for answering your post with a lesser time investment than it would merit had I more respect for the state of your mind and the quality of its store of knowledge.
To begin with, my account was one sided only to complement the one-sided account of the antisemites. I do not negate an "over-represented" Jewish complicity with the Moors or the Bolsheviks, nor the damage that resulted to the peoples among whom them lived. I only wish to point out that in both cases it was a result of terrific persecution suffered by the Jews at the hands of the regimes they helped to abolish.
You will find my elaboration on this point relative to Easter European history in my article commenting on Kevin MacDonald, the link to which is in one of the comments above. As to the treatment of the Jews by Spains’ Christian population prior to the Moor conquest, it was a very bad treatment indeed. You can find more in Wilfredo Tomas Cornellas y Suarez, The Longest War, 1995
So if you want to say that you don’t like Jews, you consider them your enemies etc., that’s fine with me. But when you adduce various historical data cherry picked to impute nefarious designs etc., and you design to omit all that belongs on the other scale, that is lying of the worst kind. I don’t like it and I don’t like people who do it.
As to all that being a subset of European history, it’s a redundant observation. I did not assert otherwise. This thread is about Jews in the West. As such, it is about that specific subset.
As to your third point, I don’t find much to object to. I don’t like the double standard and what spawned it, multicultural socialism. Likewise, I don’t care if you & Co. want to criticize and separate from Jews, as long as you don’t lie about Jews and demonize them, or lie about the Nazis and whitewash them. As to the lying about Jews, see pars. 2- 4 above.
When I state that for the past 150 years Jewish (social) contributions have been mostly a bad thing, that’s a value judgment based in my traditionalist European position. Most of the gentile population of Europe and about 1/3 of that in the U.S. would disagree with this judgment. Indeed the enthusiastic gentile socialists in the arch spanning from Greece to Spain to Rhode Island, to the extent they know who has most contributed to the development of their creed, would say that the very same Jewish contribution is a good thing.
For someone who is a white antisocialist ethnocentric there is plenty to criticize about Jews, and I have done so myself, e.g. In “F Street” at GoV. But between criticism and a monomanical obsession feeding on filtered history and redacted reality, there is a wide gap.
Everything may be criticized, provided you have knowledge and understanding of that which you criticize, and no pathological biases about the subject matter. If you are lactose-intolerant, please recuse yourself from writing about cheese. It’s the same whether your endeavor is to produce a cogent critique of Jews, automobiles or born-again Evangelists.
"geza1, you can take your kinsmen to task and whine about the all-powerful "anti-semites" with them all you want. Knock yourself out.
My kinsmen and I will talk about what pleases us."
1. I have already taken my kinsmen to task.
2. I don't whine about anti-Semites because no matter how annoying they are, they have no power in the West.
3. I'm not stopping you from discussing Jewish influence so don't get so pissy. I personally don't care what you and your kinsmen discuss. I am just pointing out that your movement lacks any solutions and the discussions become repetitive after a while. Chechar can find out for himself and he'll see what I'm talking about once he spends some time on Majority Rights, Antisemitica, or your blog.
Thanks for removing your latest post, Geza.
Guys: Please, please... I know this is an extremely thorny subject. It would be ideal if all of us would write in a more temperate tone.
I know what it feels being in Auschwitz-like conditions not only because in the past I was an avid reader of Daniel Goldhagen, and the testimonies of the Polish Yakoff Skurnik (a victim of Mengele), but because something horribler (no kidding!) happened to me: something that Swiss psychologist Alice Miller says the suffering of experiencing it is more soul-destroying than being in a Nazi concentration camp. (This is no other than the subject-matter of my previous three books that precede the one that is, albeit slowly, being published at GoV: but even the Gov’s published chapters may give you an idea of what it’s all about.)
Today I must go to the hospital for blood analysis and some liver stuff. This means a long queue in a poor public hospital with lots of brown Mexicans that will suck my morning time (believe me: you don’t want more Mex immigration into the States, whether the Gentiles and/or the Jews are to blame for it). However, if possible tonight I will post in another entry a rather long exchange between Auster and Tanstaafl that might clarify the issues that are being discussed in this thread.
Meanwhile: ease please...
If we don't start focusing on what works we're going to run out of time.
Takuan Seiyo,
First you write:
my account was one sided only to complement the one-sided account of the antisemites
then you write:
But when you adduce various historical data cherry picked to impute nefarious designs etc., and you design to omit all that belongs on the other scale, that is lying of the worst kind. I don’t like it and I don’t like people who do it.
Your moralizing would be more effective if you could adhere to your own standards.
I've read your long article demonizing MacDonald and "the anti-semites". It makes me wonder. Given the paucity of criticism of jews in academia, media, and government, what do you find so disturbing about the modest attempts to, as you say, complement that? For a fellow so morally outraged by imbalance you show a curiously strong motivation to join anti-White/pro-jew academia, media, and government in condemning and squelching what they already condemn and squelch quite effectively.
geza1,
I get it. I criticize people who do have power, and I do care about what they discuss. Whereas you know and write alot about powerless people discussing things you don't care about.
@Tanstaafl
It’s not possible to adhere to my own standards within a quick Internet post. In the context that Chechar created by putting together and emphasizing negative statements and attributions about Jews, I was merely redressing the balance.
It is possible, however, to achieve that standard of objectivity in a scholarly work of a lifetime, such as MacDonald’s. But he has cherry-picked to come out with conclusions that would be consistent with his pre-existing bias. That, to me, is not criticism of the Jewish ethny and its impact on the West, but antisemitic propaganda. Not that the other side doesn’t use it too. To me, Howard Zinn is the Jewish equivalent of MacDonald. In my opinion, of the two, Zinn was far more damaging to me, my people and my country – but that doesn’t change my opinion about antisemitic “scholarship.”
Curiously, the best, most informed and unbiased critique of Jews – including the black and the white -- is now being done in some of the countries that Jewish leftism damaged the most. American antisemites cite those damages while being ignorant, because of linguistic limitations, even of their extent. And they totally omit both the countervailing side and the reactive and/or ideology-based reasons for those damaging acctivities, cooking up instead ludicrous Elders–of-Zion theories instead.
Should you want to acquire more knowledge so that you could at least critique credibly, I recommend the just-issued “Rzeczywistość sowiecka 1939-1941 w świadectwach polskich Żydów” by prof. Krzysztof Jasiewicz, all based on primary sources. It deals with the relations between Polish Jews and the Russian occupiers of what is now Ukraine, and it does so truthfully including telling about Jews’ collaboration with these occupiers and the reasons thereof. There are dozens of good books like that, in addition to hundreds of worthless antisemitic crap, in Polish alone.
As to the American academia, I find it anti-white but not necessarily pro-Jew, unless you be a Holocaust denier and the revealing of Hitler’s and the Nazi-machine’s madness and monumental criminality offends you. If they do not criticize the damage that Jewish leftism and universalism does to white society, it’s because they share those premises from A to Z.
Finally, let me remind you that the first and biggest supporter of Saul Alinsky was the Catholic Diocese of Chicago. I am not against a cogent, objective criticism of Jews and their contributions to society, including in the negative sense. But if you do so in the manner of our “white-power” activists, Holocaust deniers and MacDonald-type intellectuals, you are merely ensuring defeat for your own professed cause and victory for the Jewish influenced and harmful world view.
As Fjordman has written – and he is a pure Norwegian BTW – the worst thing that has happened to white people, ever, was Hitler. Start from that and backtrack. Than you will be able to issue a critique of Jews that normal, educated people will want to listen to.
Takuan Seiyo,
Chechar's essay cites the overrepresentation of jews in movements that weaken the ethnic majority, ie. Whites, and you have done your best to lay the blame for this on "the anti-semites".
My purpose here is to help other Whites see that there is a conflict between White and jewish interests, and that we can and should put our own interests first. I'm motivated, as I think MacDonald is, to attack what I perceive is bad for Whites.
You come with the interests of jews foremost in mind, though you don't say so explicitly. You are unwilling to acknowledge that Whites have interests, apart from jews, and disapprove of us having any bias in favor of our own. You do not apply the same standards to jews. Your arguments here amount to a cherry-picked, biased account of their suffering at the hands of Whites, and your moralizing is based on the premise that anyone who doesn't put jewish interests before their own is a bad person ("pathological", "uninformed", "biased", "liar").
Can you admit your partisanship, or are you going to continue to pretend your concern is for balance and against bias?
"I get it. I criticize people who do have power, and I do care about what they discuss. Whereas you know and write alot about powerless people discussing things you don't care about."
I don't "write a lot" about "powerless people" aka anti-Semites. This thread is the first time I have dealt with the issue of anti-Semites. I criticized the movement for being ineffectual and you infer that I want you to stop talking about Jews? No, I have never said such a thing here nor anywhere else I have posted. I have had enough of you being "cute" with your comments and insuating the worst about people who disagree with you. Your debating tactics are thoroughly leftist.
@Tanstaafl
Further discussion between us would be a waste of time, as it was from the beginning. I engaged in it only for the benefit of the other readers. But to answer your question, the interest that’s foremost in my mind is the interest of truth. I also believe that in the current plagues afflicting the West, the truth is on the side of the white autochthons. Since you and your kind profess to be on the side of the white autochthons, but at the same time you subvert and falsify the truth, you cannot but harm your own cause, lead to murder and chaos, and ultimately lose, ignominously. Just as your über-idol did.
You and I shall remain in opposing and mutually disdaining camps of white ethnonationalists. The rest who care about the Fall of the West will have to choose sides. Goodbye.
Ugh. First of all, reading the road rage article on GoV made me revisit my childhood. That IS me. The first generation to escape, the one taught to not be brainwashed. I hope I will not fail in teaching my children the same, but looking at the people born after me... I learned a few things from my mother, one being that in order to succeed in life is that you must be twice as good and work twice as hard as the opposition because they might have connections and so on and so forth. The other thing is that I should never take things at face value and follow through on the logical narrative of the ideas put forth. Hopefully, if I have descendants, these ideas being passed through will be the tradition in my family. Also, the comments about taking the individualism mental framework to the extreme were good and yes, I've fallen in that trap before. Felicie is wrong and most Americans think like that sadly. I keep asking them what's the point in preserving European/American culture if I can't preserve my own ethnic group or race. Why would I care how my non-descendants will live and with what culture? Obviously, I won't and this is why recognizing who we are is paramount. I wrote before that capitalism, individual liberties, freedom are all ways to organize a nation(group with a perceived shared ancestry who from the same ethnic group by sharing a culture, art, language and so on). They're not universal concepts. If they are universal, than an African is as entitled to live in my country as I am and a terrorist is entitled to the same rights as I am. It's amusing to me that people think that not sticking up for your group is enlightened. This Orwellian crap is making me sick.
For example, related to groups. I'm a white woman. As a white woman, the odds of being raped by a black man are bigger than by a white man relative to population size. So I will be more careful when interacting with blacks. This doesn't mean that if a black man proved that he is trustworthy, despite my higher suspicions related to him, I won't be able to trust him. You judge individuals by individual actions and groups by the actions of the groups by the summation of the actions of the individuals within them. I also can blame the black community for all the interracial crime because they don't see it as bad - remember the reactions at the acquital of OJ? I don't see them worried about the interracial rapes or murders, while they cry over each time a cop beats up one of their own - see Rodney King. Obviously, if it fits the narrative, you won't hear much of them cry over Kenneth Gladney.
Now, getting back to the Jews. Reading that article should have made some bells ring. The Jews who moved there from Russia found the propaganda they got wrapped into ALREADY THERE. I do believe that Jewish people should take responsibility, just like anyone else for their history, but this doesn't change the fact that just like the white people who harbor these thoughts, they were subjected to a fairly big amount of indoctrination that I found in my university too. For example, my economics teacher was advocating some socialist claptrap and my classmates fell for it because they were relatively ignorant about economics, but since I went to school having already read some books, I refutted what he said and my classmates no longer really believed the stupidity that he was spewing and as we talked about the classes over lunch during breaks, the teacher became a mock object for us. So I believe that Jews, apart from being an ethnic group and seeing themselves as different so having no loyalty towards us for the most part, due to their higher IQ and more education, they are subjected to more of the indoctrination that we are subjected to too. This is supported by how things are - for example, if Europe falls to Islam, Israel will be destroyed. As ConSwede puts it, they're not really serving their best interests either.
I don't believe in white nationalism being anti-X. Our biggest problem is not to be against others, but to know who we are - this is what we lost. Now, not being philo-Jewish, doesn't mean being an anti-semite. Even though I have a little Jewish ancestry on my father side, I don't really care about the Jews or see myself as Jewish. I am a Zionist in the sense that I think Israel should exist and not only because each people deserve to have their homeland, but also because the Arabs have no claim to that land to begin with. Also, your point about Jews being over-represented in the liberal, West hating groups. I believe that's fairly normal due to the longer schooling effect, plus them not being emotionally involved as much in the creation of our societies. Hell, if you look at most whites, most of them support the left-liberal claptrap.
But yes, we need to stop listening to other groups about how we should run our lives and handle our business. It's like a stranger telling a family how to bring up their children. Also, I'm really fed up with the people who blame everything on the Jews. If the Jews could do this to us, I'm disgusted that I'm white and we deserve to disappear. It's as simple as that - and not because I see the Jews as inferior, but because they were a minority in our lands that we controlled.
At the end of the day, who is to blame? Sure, there are some more responsible than others, but again, truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. It's easy to blame the Frankfurt school, the Jews, but values can't be forced upon a people without their consent. From 1945 to 1963, in my country we had a resistance movement against the invading Red Army because they forced communism upon us. Men were willing to part from their families and fight for their nation. But that's because communism was a foreign invention. You see, the social revolution might have got their tools from the Frankfurt school, most of the inventors might have been Jewish, but at the end of the day we wanted it. We wanted the easy sex, the life of no problems with raising children and if we do have them just to throw them in the public education services. I mean, sure, the congruence of circumstances that allowed it to happen are unfortunate, but from then on, there was just the spread of the cancer. The seeds were planted before the 1960s or the second world war, it's just that then they were refined and we let them grow because we wanted to live with no responsibilities or duty and liberalism was the answer - no matter who you are or your decisions, your life will turn our more or less the same. This is what the liberal worldview desires. And we accepted it because it didn't hurt that much at first. We will renounce it when keeping our current mindset will hurt us emotionally more than giving up our core beliefs as a society. That moment is coming and I can't wait for it(I guess I'm on the same page as ConSwede with it) and it will come in the next couple of decades, I think. People will be forced to either by the dollar becoming worthless and the West broke, by the socialist pension and healthcare plans going bankrupt, by ethnic civil war... We will be forced to face the fact that our countries are bankrupt and invaded and we must act. But right now, it's easier to plan your retirement or vacation as a white person than do something about it.
Tanstaafl, the people who are the most hell bent to thwart our plans are our fellow white people. This is my life experience so far. It was shocking for me that I was debating multiculturalism on a forum and I was supported by two men(one African-American, one with an African father and European mother), while I got flamed as a racist by all sorts of white people from different countries(I didn't even bring up race, just culture). This was just one of my experiences related to this.
Also, the Jews didn't fight along the Muslims in Spain, that was a myth propagated by the Muslims in order to apply their divide et impera tactic. Sure, they used the Jewish(and they still were better off considering they were an intermediary class in between the Christians and Muslims so I doubt they minded as much) for their multilingual ability and other traits they had, but I wouldn't really call that betraying as it's betraying in the same sense as the French who served the Nazi soldiers in any way are traitors. I wouldn't really call that a golden age either, considering the massacres that happened. So yes, I guess Seiyo is right - ignorance of European history is a must to make these statements, I suppose. Also, the British cozied up the Porte for ages, so I guess all Romanians should desire the UK wiped off the map because of the British betraying us related to most of the interactions with the Porte and trading us to the Russians after they guaranteed our borders before WW2. I guess the British are pathetic traitors who shouldn't be trusted and they're anti-European because of their dealing with the Ottomans, right?
Also, classical liberalism was morphed into social liberalism, but it's not like people didn't desire it. If white people are this stupid, they don't deserve to be saved and I will not conceive the children of a group of idiots. Short term, it was more fun. Just like deficit spending is more fun and people would choose that over cutting entitlements or raising taxes. I'm not sure if you are European, but the EU constantly sides with the Arabs and funnels money to Hamas. I guess that's how Jewish nationalism is supported, right?
Takuan Seiyo, I agree with #1 in a way. It's similar to what ConSwede refers to as Christian ethics. We need to stop trying to fix the world and stick for our own - which is what we did until recently, when our world started to include other people in it too. Before the French world was France, the Swedish world, Sweden.
geza, Majority Rights has a couple of really good op-eds. But that's about it.
Anyway, since I got bored of this. We should criticize the Jews for their failures and not obsess over how to cozy up to them, just like we shouldn't obsess in hating them. In this sense, I'm neither philo, nor anti-Semite. Anyway, if my racial group is stupid enough to fall for everything the Jews do, I will have the offspring of a Jew, not a stupid retarded European(since that's how Tanstaafl sees Europeans, I suppose). And yes, when I start, I can't stop. :( lol
Takuan Seiyo,
I have just re-published the first entry on the series that discuss whether Auster’s First Law applies to the Jews or not. Usually I review a couple of times long entries before publishing them. But in this case I rushed to publish it as it is.
I believe that you and Larry Auster are the two most brilliant minds in the counter-jihad movement. I seriously do and would be honored if you could discuss the issues raised in the above linked entry. Surely if anti-Semites are so wrong it will be easy to rebut their arguments. (By the way, the linked entry contains various arguments by Auster himself).
Also, in that entry I explain what exactly do I mean with the “lightning” metaphor and the challenge I placed about the possibility of changing my masthead.
Respect,
Chechar.
Goodbye Seiyo. Since you are unwilling to plainly state that the interests of "the ethnic majority"/"white autochthons"/"white ethnonationalists" conflict with the interests of jews, and that you favor the latter, I can understand why you have nothing else to say.
Like Auster you really do a fantastic job of cricizing jews, then rationalizing their behavior and forgiving them, and ultimately directing blame at "the anti-semites".
Here, just before saying goodbye, you imply that if Whites put our own interests first, it will require us to "subvert and falsify the truth", and cannot but lead to "murder and chaos". Is this because you think we're incapable of running our own countries, without jews, or that we would suffer that notorious jewish tendency to inflict punishment on any country that tries? I'm eager for you to expand on this point. You can put it in your next essay focused on "the anti-semites".
geza1, if you would take issue with something I've actually written I could answer it. When you simply project your own guilty mind there's not much for me to say.
rebelliousvanilla, your life experience differs from mine. I gather you're in Europe so I'm not surprised.
I'm American of European stock, and I sympathize with Europeans. I know people are in prison in Europe for the thought crime of "Holocaust denial". Here we have
the israel lobby, with unofficial veto power over all major political candidates and appointees, and our treasonous government very thoughtfully funnels billions of our increasingly worthless dollars every year to the jewish nation.
I wrote a comment regarding the jewish golden age in muslim Spain and their collaboration with the ottomans in The First Law of Jewish Influence. If you have a problem with the jew-friendly perspectives on European history I cited feel free to take it up with the people who wrote them. Likewise the "jewish golden age". That's what jews call it.
@rebelliousvanilla
Re: “It's easy to blame the Frankfurt school, the Jews, but values can't be forced upon a people without their consent.”
I think it’s okay to blame the Frankfurt School, among others, but the overall point I am making is that you cannot treat the Frankfurt School in a vacuum. It’s a movement that arose as a counterpoint to Nazi ideology, and it reached its apotheosis after WW2 and in response to the Holocaust. No Nazis, no Frankfurt School. That’s what the Jew-haters refuse to consider.
Re: “the Jews didn't fight along the Muslims in Spain.”
The Spanish author’s book I cited relays that that Jews did open the gates in several Spanish cities to besieging Moors. The Polish author’s book I cited relays that Jews did collaborate in “over-represented” numbers with the ruthless Soviet conquerors of Eastern Poland in 1939 -1941. But this is the same story like with the Frankfurt School. The respective books also relay that the Jews had suffered such horrible persecutions in Spain under the Visigoths, and in the Ukraine under Ukrainian fascists and Polish religious fanatics, that in either case they were acting in the interest of simple survival.
I therefore don’t begrudge the crypto-nazis their collating and disseminating tales of Jewish treachery or malfeasance, as long as true. What I begrudge them is falsifying the genesis of such actions as well as omitting tales of Jewish sacrifice and beneficence, thereby working toward the repeat of the same white society’s errors in the future, with the same ultimate failure for the Western peoples.
Re: “Jews, apart from being an ethnic group and seeing themselves as different so having no loyalty towards us.”
You have to qualify such statements, for they exclude large percentages that do not fit the generalization. From among the names I mentioned previously, Hayim Solomon, a Polish Jew immigrant in America, gave up his wealth to help finance the American Revolution. He died penniless, but without him the Continental Army would have folded long before achieving victory. Uriah Phillips Levy was the first high ranking Jewish officer in the American Navy, and fought several duels on account of antisemitic insults. Later in life he bought Monticello, Thomas Jefferson’s home, and donated it to the nation. Right now, General Norman Schwartz is the Commander of the US Air Force. All such men don’t fit in the Jew-haters’ neat and simple picture, so they just clip the picture to exclude such Jews.
rebelliousvanilla,
thanks for posting. I get despairing at times when the demographics and signs across the board indicate inevitable decline for Whites and this is what the discussion boards degenerate into again and again.
I agree that the main problem is other Whites "the people who are the most hell bent to thwart our plans are our fellow white people". If only it were just Jews/Blacks/Asians, it would be so much easier.
It's just like the US Civil war, WWI and II, and on and on. Whites fighting Whites with the numerical superiority going to the White-hating Whites.
I also agree that if Whites can be so easily manipulated then so be it, then natural selection must take its course. I don't think all Whites are like that, but enough are to be a serious problem.
My hope is one day all this energy that goes into discussing the Jews (look at this f...ing thread again), thoroughly wasted energy, can go towards securing a future for Europeans and a fulfillment of European potential.
Tanstaafl, you really wonder that people call you biased? That's funny. You type a word that shouldn't be capitalized - white(or black for that matter) with a capital letter and a word that should withou a capital letter - Jew. As I said before, I could care the less about Jews. All these liberal idiots should all move to Israel and preach the crap they do there if they want to. But this doesn't mean you're not biased.
And Seiyo didn't say we need to falsify the truth in order to have a legitimate reason to put our interests first, that's a huge straw man. He said that the truth is on our side and by you falsifying it, you are undermining the cause. We really need no reason to falsify the truth - Europe is out homeland, we created it from scratch and we gave the Jews Israel to be their homeland. If they don't like it here, they can move to their place and I think others shouldn't have a say in the way we rule our countries and solve our intragroup problems. I don't need to distrot history and find the Jews the oppressors of my people in order to have a legitimate claim in saying what I said before. Obviously we are perfectly well fit for running our own countries.
And your government in the US is infiltrated by everyone. Goldman Sachs, the Israel lobby, CAIR, La Raza... I can go on. I don't see why you need to single out the Jews, considering everyone is taking their piece, except whites. But again, I think your government needs to be abolished. Just like the EU and I think most politicians should be executed for treason.
Takuan Seiyo, the Frankfurt school was founded before WW2 and Nazism(1922). Also, the Jewish betrayal in Spain is overstated, from what I read. I mean, it probably did happen, but I doubt the accuracy of the Spanish sources of that time because of the obvious reasons - everybody lied about it back then to make themselves look better, while the Muslims had an interest in making the Christians and Jews not like each other.
Also, I didn't say that Jews as individuals can't help us. But as a group and on average, they won't, at least in my opinion.
Russel, the 'problem' is that we were rich enough to afford this. We were 30% of the population and had 80% or whatever of the GDP in 1950. We just wanted to have no duties and just have fun and it was in our short term interest to do it. Now it's just a self-perpetuating disaster because liberalism thrives on it's own failure. The most crucial aspect is getting the white within marriage birth rate up again to silly numbers. This means we need to get tax cuts for parents(adjusted by inflation, each American should get a $10,000 tax deduction for each child, but they didn't adjust it for the CPI, which is understated anyway) and tax cuts for home schooling of the average cost of public education. This is a nice way of disbanding the stupid indoctrination system while getting us in a healthier position. Still, it won't be done. We just need a huge mentality shift and it will come eventually. I trust my own people's genetic inheritance and abilities to do it when push will come to shove. We will need a horrible event like a world war, civil war, bankruptcy to do it.
"It’s a movement that arose as a counterpoint to Nazi ideology, and it reached its apotheosis after WW2 and in response to the Holocaust. No Nazis, no Frankfurt School. That’s what the Jew-haters refuse to consider."
The Nazi ideology arose as counterpoint to Bolshevism which reached its apex of unearthly, unprecedented slaughter in 1932-33 as Jews Lazar Kaganovitch and Genrikh Yagoda, along with their predominantly Jewish NKVD thugs oversaw the engineered starvation and liquidation of ten millions Ukrainians nary a few hundred miles from Germany's eastern border. It was not uncommon for starving Ukrainian parents of young children, pushed beyond the point of human endurance and sanity, to kill and eat their own children. Stalin was planning to invade Western Europe. Had the German Wehrmacht not taken the initiative in stepping into the breach the gene-pools of Western Europe would have been decapitated in a kosher slaughter by Stalin's Jews. Those German men that laid down their lives so that all of Europe might live were truly the greatest heroes our race ever produced. You are not worthy to speak their names, much less besmirch them.
Btw, no Jews, no Bolshevism.
Takuan Seiyo said: 10% -20% of the indigenous white ethnic majority in every Western country has Jewish genes.
This statement is clearly untrue.
The indigenous white ethnic majority of Ireland does not have 10% - 20% Jewish genes. Whilst there was some Jewish immigration to Ireland, there has never been that much.
I also doubt that Sweden or Norway -- or Finland, for that matter, although I'm not sure about that country (doesn't seem as though many Jews ever settled in Finland) -- have such a high percentage of Jewish genes. There were never that many Jews in Norway, for instance -- and in modern times, it wasn't until the mid-1800s that Jews were allowed into that country!
rebelliousvanilla said: "You type a word that shouldn't be capitalized - white(or black for that matter) with a capital letter...."
White most certainly can be capitalized when referring to the people. Check the Oxford English dictionary.
I think it’s okay to blame the Frankfurt School, among others, but the overall point I am making is that you cannot treat the Frankfurt School in a vacuum. It’s a movement that arose as a counterpoint to Nazi ideology, and it reached its apotheosis after WW2 and in response to the Holocaust. No Nazis, no Frankfurt School. That’s what the Jew-haters refuse to consider.
The Institute for Social Research was of course founded in 1923.
Takuan Seiyo said: "...that is the second reason why Jews tend to fall for universalist schemes (international socialism, multiculturalism etc.) rather than identify with the interests of the ethnic majority...."
The main reason that Jews, as a group, never seem to identify with the interests of the ethnic majority in whichever nation we happen to be talking about is because they are not (biologically speaking) members of that ethnic majority.
This is not rocket science we're talking here. It's simple biology. And it's nothing unique to Jewish people.
In Northern Ireland, for instance, the two (broadly speaking) opposing groups -- Protestants and Catholics -- haven't gotten on for 400 years and neither side will ever identify with the interests of the other side because they are of differing ethnic backgrounds.
Same with Jews or any immigrant group moving into any society (unless it's Swedes immigrating to Minnesota or something like that) -- there will inevitably be conflicting, biological interests.
Re: History
@rebelliousvanilla
What is known as the Frankfurt School is generally acknowledged to have begun in 1930, even though it was within an institute that had been founded earlier.
@Eileen O’Connor
You are right on all counts. Difficult to go to go into the history of each country separately. Interesting in the context of the nazi contributions in this thread that Scandinavia, which has had the smallest “contamination” – as the nazis would have it— by Jews, is also the most dhimmi, castrated socialist multiculti part of Europe. Again, it’s a generalization. Finland less than the others, but Sweden and Norway are practically finished.
Another thing to consider here is that when you get into Jew-obsession you have left the shores of sanity and are bobbing on the waters of hallucinatory bile. And so there are people who say that the Jews are not the real Jews, but the Irish or English are. There are different versions of this, one having to do with the 10 tribes and the other with the exiles from Judea. There are now two nazi psychs posting on this thread, so this kind of stuff is probably to come, plus the tributes to the SS as the saviors of the White gene pool and so on.
"And it's nothing unique to Jewish people."
I have no doubt it must sooth one to think that, yet it is not so. Jews are quite literally evolved for parasitism. All their culture subverting machinations are to facilitate that end. The Jewish group strategy is one of subversion to dominate host societies, then to take the plunder and run once the heat gets too hot. There can be little doubt the most intelligent of them know precisely what they are doing, yet they do not care. As such, it makes no sense to simply tamp down on the more egregious actors, because more of the same will inevitably arise from the same gene-line. It is in the blood. The Jews must be dealt with collectively, that means stripping them of their ability to harm us, stripping them of their positions of influence and assets. That ultimately means expulsion from all White countries, as has happened every time before. This time however, it will be Final.
Rebelliousvanilla wrote:
“You type a word that shouldn't be capitalized - white(or black for that matter) with a capital letter and a word that should withou a capital letter - Jew.”
Now let us read this.
“Excerpt from Aviation, Geography, and Race
by Charles A. Lindbergh
featured in Reader's Digest, November, 1939, pp. 64-67
Aviation seems almost a gift from heaven to those Western nations who were already the leaders of their era, strengthening their leadership, their confidence, their dominance over other peoples. It is a tool specially shaped for Western hands, a scientific art which others only copy in a mediocre fashion, another barrier between the teeming millions of Asia and the Grecian inheritance of Europe - one of those priceless possessions which permit the White race to live at all in a pressing sea of Yellow, Black, and Brown.
Tanstaafl is in good company with other great American White men.
captainchaos said: "'And it's nothing unique to Jewish people.'
"I have no doubt it must sooth one to think that, yet it is not so."
What I meant by that statement was that the conflicting biological interests are nothing unique to Jewish people.
I wasn't referring to the tactics employed by Jews or other sub-groups/immigrant populations/invading populations in their dealings with the majority/indigenous populations.
"hallucinatory bile"
"nazi psych[o]s"
What a way you have with words, Takuan. But what is your venom - that I have little doubt you would wish to take to the level of the scatological - to a White man who would rather the world burn to ashes than see his people die? Nothing at all. What is the difference between Scandinavian liberals and Jews you ask? The difference between a Nordic who has been indoctrinated to the anti-human millenarian vomit (yes, I can play too) of the Jew versus a Middle Eastern derived people for whom no depth of depravity is beneath them. Got that?
"Right now, General Norman Schwartz is the Commander of the US Air Force."
We will accept nothing less than to be ruled over by none but our own blood. The officer corps is properly a bastion of unflinching honor and unflagging devotion to our blood.
P.S. The "Holocaust" is a risible and monstrous lie which serves Jewish interests in shaming my Germanic people, and all Europeans for that matter, unto death. Enough!
P.P.S. Kant was not a Jew, but a German.
I don’t believe that the Holocaust is a lie (nor Jared Taylor). This is getting flaming, people. I never intended this thread to become a troll place. Please cool down.
Takuan Seiyo said: 10% - 20% of the indigenous white ethnic majority in every Western country has Jewish genes.
I thought about this some more and I think you need to provide evidence for this assertion. Where are you getting those numbers from?
The only recent study that came to my mind that seems related to what you are saying is this one: The Genetic Legacy of Religious Diversity and Intolerance: Paternal Lineages of Christians, Jews, and Muslims in the Iberian Peninsula.
It was covered by Nicholas Wade in the NYT here. He wrote:
"Twenty percent of the population of the Iberian Peninsula has Sephardic Jewish ancestry and 11 percent have DNA reflecting Moorish ancestors, the geneticists have found."
Just to clarify, the researchers looked at the Y-chromosomes of 1140 males from the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands and found that 19.8% were likely of Sephardic Jewish origin.
That does not mean that 20% of the indigenous population of Spain/Portugal has Jewish genes. That means that 20% of the men surveyed from Spain/Portugal had genes of Jewish origin.
See the difference?
rebelliousvanilla,
I agree about getting the child birth rate up but I no longer care whether it's within marriage or not.
As for home schooling, of course this would be helpful as well.
But you're right that neither will happen, in part because the people who should be the vanguard and claim to be so concerned are blowing off endless energy about the Jews instead of working on a plan to insert some sanity before civil war or a financial meltdown.
All this is easily forseen and I'm more than a little irked by the fact that people of European descent can't pull it together before the very last minute.
I tend to agree a Crisis is what it will take but I remain disappointed with so many warnings that practical action was not taken sooner.
I think we're getting somewhere.
We have Seiyo's explanation why jews are never over-represented in organisations or movements that represent the interests of the ethnic majority, only those that weaken that majority.
The "jew-haters" make them do it.
Russel,
It is so good to see you here. Perhaps this is a worn-out topic for you, and I perfectly understand that you want to move on. But it is a complete novelty for me. All of my adult life I had been a staunch philo-Semitic. I got upset every time that my Catholic relatives made slurs on the Jews. I was ignorant of XX century history. Can you believe that I read tons of literature criticizing communism and only the last week I learnt that Jews were overrepresented among the Bolsheviks? Also, I knew zippo about their involvement in the US (1964?) immigration act, and that they had been strongly pushing for an immigration reform for decades.
This is a whole new universe for me...
Since so many have complained about Tan’s blog black-background, it makes sense having copied and pasted some of his stuff here, on a standard white background. Now there’s no excuse for those who complained about color. At any event, my copy-and-paste criticism in these threads is about how Jews have behaved in the country that welcomed them the most: America!
Tan,
I didn’t understand what you mean, that “We have Seiyo's explanation...” even though I posted his most recent email in the new thread.
Russel,
But you're right that neither will happen, in part because the people who should be the vanguard and claim to be so concerned are blowing off endless energy about the Jews instead of working on a plan
I'm going to assume you're aiming this at me, since I've been energetic here and actually expressed a concern for our people. I take it you're not talking about Seiyo, who even if he could be convinced to stop blowing off endless energy about "jew-haters" couldn't really be trusted to make a plan that benefits anyone but jews. But that's my opinion, I wouldn't want to put words in your mouth.
I hardly know you, so you'll have to excuse me for not organizing my life according to your desires.
I have three kids, one of which my wife and I homeschooled, at least for a little while. How about you?
@ Eileen O’Connor
Jewish Genes
I have read the same material you cite about Iberia. I’ve read three other articles; unfortunately it was years ago and I don’t recall how I came by them; I don’t even remember what languages I read them in. One was about the genetic make-up of the Italian population, making the case that in the genetic admixture of the predominantly dark-complexioned Italians, Jewish genes had the largest share. Indeed Jews have been living in Italy for some 2300 years, and intermarrying from the beginning. The second one made a similar case on a more limited basis for some central European countries like Hungary and Poland. The third article was specifically about the Western European aristocracy, and alleged 10% -20% (it had a percentage but I remember only the range it was in) Jewish blood among Europe’s blue-bloods. The plaint of Anglo blood purists about the centuries of Jewish “contamination” of the British aristos on the distaff side is long and well documented.
Then there are my personal experiences. I have known two typically Aryan-looking women who had no knowledge of anyone Jewish in their respective families going back centuries. Yet both had genetic diseases that are limited to Ashkenazi Jews. I spent a couple of months in Central Europe last year, where I discovered that antisemites, actually, were raising a big noise about the most famous historic figures in their ethnies having been Jews or part-Jews. I have a link to several hundreds such names in Polish history, including the national bard, Adam Mickiewicz, the national composer, Frederic Chopin, and many others, including contemporaries like Lech Walesa. In Prague, I was present at a learned discussion in which someone was making the point that the bluest of the Czech bluebloods, Prince Karel Schwartzenberg, was a Jew, and so on.
Then there is the other side, that Jon Entine has written about. Ashkenazi Jews have a large admixture of endogenous European genes, because they married local women. Think of the genetic history inscribed on the face of Issur Danielowitsch, aka Kirk Douglas.
Chechar,
If I'm wrong Seiyo can provide a direct answer himself.
I thought his answer was apparent in his first comment, but even after being challenged on it he reiterated the point more explicitly:
I think it’s okay to blame the Frankfurt School, among others, but the overall point I am making is that you cannot treat the Frankfurt School in a vacuum. It’s a movement that arose as a counterpoint to Nazi ideology, and it reached its apotheosis after WW2 and in response to the Holocaust. No Nazis, no Frankfurt School. That’s what the Jew-haters refuse to consider.
. . .
the Jews had suffered such horrible persecutions in Spain under the Visigoths, and in the Ukraine under Ukrainian fascists and Polish religious fanatics, that in either case they were acting in the interest of simple survival
. . .
I therefore don’t begrudge the crypto-nazis their collating and disseminating tales of Jewish treachery or malfeasance, as long as true. What I begrudge them is falsifying the genesis of such actions as well as omitting tales of Jewish sacrifice and beneficence, thereby working toward the repeat of the same white society’s errors in the future, with the same ultimate failure for the Western peoples.
Even where he acknowledges jewish malfeasance he ultimately attributes it to a reaction to "jew-hate". He begrudges the failure to do this, by talking only about the malfeasance, as more "jew-hate". Where does the "jew-hate" come from? But of course only a "jew-hater" would even think to ask!
This tautological nonsense isn't new. Auster used it in the argument about his First Law. It's a variation on the more common argument which denies there is any jewish malfeasance whatsoever.
Takuan Seiyo said: "I’ve read three other articles; unfortunately it was years ago and I don’t recall how I came by them; I don’t even remember what languages I read them in."
Thanks for your response, TS. I shall have to do some poking around about the Italian and central European examples you offer -- see if I can come up with the references or more current research. As for Jewish admixture in the European aristocracy, I can well believe it. But, since you can't offer sources for any of your examples, I will take your assertion with a grain of salt -- for now. ;-)
Out of curiosity, what was the genetic disorder that you said the two women with no known Jewish ancestry had?
Chechar,
I understand. It's true I am tired of reading the same old anti-Semitism on pro-White blogs, all to no effect.
I do think Jews are worth noting, but I don't think that's where the solution is.
Hopefully one day we can focus on what seems to work. In the meantime do what you need to do.
Takuan Seiyo said: "Ashkenazi Jews have a large admixture of endogenous European genes, because they married local women."
While there is, indeed, a good deal of admixture with native Europeans in the Ashkenazi gene pool, the most recent research actually suggests that 40% of the current Ashkenazi population is descended matrilineally from women from the Middle East.
In any case, I hope you don't think that admixture with indigenous Europeans makes Ashkenazi Jews indigenous Europeans. That makes them something new in Europe that didn't exist there before the Jewish diaspora out of Judea, spreading out throughout the Roman Empire and beyond.
Jewish genes from the Middle East + indigenous European genes = Ashkenazi Jews. In other words, a new population. And a rather inbred one at that, ergo the Tay-Sachs and other diseases endemic to the Ashkenazis.
It seems that all parties involved in this discussion agree with one aspect: "the organized Jewry" - as we call it - or a majority of the Jews individually tend to be hostile and harmful to the white and/or Christian majority of a country.
Now, the parties involved in this discussion disagree about the causes/reasons of this hostility/harm. For some, the main reason is the persecutions that the Jews suffered throughout the centuries. For others, the causes can be found in something intrinsic to Jewishness, intrinsic to the majority-minority relations or intrinsic to the liberal order which gives minorities a disproportionate power over the majority.
I don't know exactly what to think, I just have a few questions (I'm not interested in the genetic aspect of the problem, only in the moral one - even if 90% of Europeans have Jewish genes or somebody proves ad absurdum that the Jews are more Aryan than the Swedes, the questions still remain):
1) If it's true that the Jewish hostility was triggered by a long history of anti-Semitism in Europe, what are the reasons for the Jewish behavior in the US and Canada - two countries which offered them refuge and shelter from the persecutions?
2) What are the reasons for which so many American Jews vilify, mock and despise the American Evangelist Christians - Israel's best friends and supporters?
3) Do you think that the decision taken in the aftermath of the French Revolution (1792), to offer citizenship to the Jews for the first time in history - and for the first time in history a minority received an equal status to that of the ethnic majority - was good and positive for the white and/or Christian majorities everywhere?
Eileen O’Connor
I am not up on the valid definitions of race, genetic research etc. However, my basic position seems to be like yours, i.e. that the Jews, including Ashkenazi ones, are a different gene pool than autochthon European groups such as the Celts, or Central Asian imports such as the Magyars or Finns. And yes, an inbred one too.
Incidentally, Tay Sachs etc. came not only from the inbreeding. These things had also come from mass murder. By the 12th century mass slaughter had reduces the Jewish population of Europe from 4 -6 million 1000 years earlier to a couple hundred thousand [some details may be inaccurate, the general statement is true, have no time now to research and insert precise data and ref. If I recall, Jon Entine wrote about it]. The psychs in this thread will have things to say about this, but no, my intention is not to elicit a mass mea culpa from whitey.
The women were: one 100% English (immigrant to America) who had Gaucher’s syndrome; she actually researched her family history in an attempt to find a cure and found no Jews in it or anyone non-English. The other one was the normal American mixture: Anglo-Scots-Irish-German-French, again with no Jews as far as she knew, which was early 19th century. She had Tay-Sachs.
Armance,
1) There's a telling jewish saying, which goes along the lines, "philo-semites are just anti-semites who don't know it yet". Basically, in jewish minds we're all ticking time-bomb "jew-haters". It's a natural corollary to the common jewish narrative in which they are perpetual victims, persecuted for no reason whatsoever.
2) This springs from a cynical and once again telling view that zionist Christians aren't really friends so much as sneaky, self-interested people who need israel and jews to fulfill an end-days prophecy which won't be good for jews. More generally jews see Christians as historic oppressors, competitors, and an assimilative threat to their very existence as a distinct people.
3) No. No jewish emancipation, no communism, no Frankfurt School, no "Nazi ideology", no anti-White/pro-jew regime, no open borders, no genocidal levels of immigration.
In response to Chechar's next post Seiyo writes:
because without the Jews I see the West evolving as a possible Sparta; I cannot see it as an Athens
How would Sparta be worse than what we have now? But of course, because Sparta was inherently "racist" and therefore "anti-semitic"! What we have today is no Athens, unless Athens was as anti-Greek/pro-jew as the regime today is anti-White/pro-jew. Perhaps it was, very briefly, just before collapsing.
@Armance
cc: Chechar
“It seems that all parties involved in this discussion agree with one aspect: "the organized Jewry" - as we call it - or a majority of the Jews individually tend to be hostile and harmful to the white and/or Christian majority of a country.”
No, we certainly don’t agree on that point. Just to unravel the misconceptions and hodgepodge of misinformation in your sentence above would take 1000 words. To begin with, “Jewry” is not organized and you have to be nuts to believe that it’s hostile. There is such a thing as “Jewish organizations” – but they represent a minority not majority of Jews. And if you believe that Jews are harmful, you’d have to qualify in what ways and whether intentionally or as a byproduct of ideas that they believe in sincerely and, in their minds, benignly. Lastly, even when you have isolated those harmful ideas, behavior and such, you would have to explain why you are limiting the attribution of harm to Jews, but not to non-Jewish American liberals, at least ¾ of Western Europe ‘s population, and all mainstream Christian churches – all of which share precisely the same ideas, voting patterns and other behaviors.
There is some basic lack of knowledge in some participants in this forum, two are psych cases, but time flies. To paraphrase Russell, there is real work waiting. I will have to opt out of the discussion here.
Takuan Seiyo in a nutshell: circumspect in the extreme on criticism of jews, "jew-hate" not so much.
"To begin with, “Jewry” is not organized and you have to be nuts to believe that it’s hostile. There is such a thing as “Jewish organizations” – but they represent a minority not majority of Jews."
That's right, White man, believe Takuan, and not your lying eyes.
Member organizations of the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations (http://www.conferenceofpresidents.org/content.asp?id=55):
Ameinu
American Friends of Likud
American Gathering/Federation of Jewish Holocaust Survivors
America-Israel Friendship League
American Israel Public Affairs Committee
American Jewish Committee
American Jewish Congress
American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee
American Sephardi Federation
American Zionist Movement
Americans for Peace Now
AMIT
Anti-Defamation League
Association of Reform Zionists of America
B’nai B’rith International
Bnai Zion
Central Conference of American Rabbis
Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America
Development Corporation for Israel / State of Israel Bonds
Emunah of America
Friends of Israel Defense Forces
Hadassah, Women’s Zionist Organization of America
Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society
Hillel: The Foundation for Jewish Campus Life
Jewish Community Centers Association
Jewish Council for Public Affairs
The Jewish Federations of North America
Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs
Jewish Labor Committee
Jewish National Fund
Jewish Reconstructionist Federation
Jewish War Veterans of the USA
Jewish Women International
MERCAZ USA, Zionist Organization of the Conservative Movement
NA’AMAT USA
NCSJ: Advocates on behalf of Jews in Russia, Ukraine, the Baltic States & Eurasia
National Council of Jewish Women
National Council of Young Israel
ORT America
Rabbinical Assembly
Rabbinical Council of America
Religious Zionists of America
Union for Reform Judaism
Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America
United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism
WIZO
Women’s League for Conservative Judaism
Women of Reform Judaism
Workmen’s Circle
World ORT
World Zionist Executive, US
Zionist Organization of America
"And if you believe that Jews are harmful, you’d have to qualify in what ways and whether intentionally or as a byproduct of ideas that they believe in sincerely and, in their minds, benignly."
If a man is attempting to kill me with an ax I really don't give a damn if he is crazy or merely sociopathic. Besides, why is it that the "anti-Semites" need to be summarily shunned and crushed yet Jews that harm Whites need to be treated with sympathy and understanding? Certainly don't feel compelled to answer, as it is obvious.
"Lastly, even when you have isolated those harmful ideas, behavior and such, you would have to explain why you are limiting the attribution of harm to Jews, but not to non-Jewish American liberals,"
Easy, with liberals it is merely a matter of indoctrination, with Jews it is a collective enterprise of subversion which is bred to the bone in them. 'Liberal' Jews still look out for what is good for Jews, liberal Whites, not so much.
Congratulations on your discoveries and insights, Chechar. Now you may have more sleepless nights but it is a perfectly fair price to pay for the cruelest truth. It was much easier to live without The Knowledge, isn't it?
I remember only half a year ago I was amused by anti-jewish sentiments emanating from otherwise such advanced and reasonable thinkers. These days I myself amuse others ... Although my attitudes are irreparably and forever biased by the knowledge of the history of physical decimation of my people during first half of 20th century...
You are probably familiar with it, but just in case read a short chapter in Kemp's March of Titans about jews in "Russian" revolution
http://www.white-history.com/hwr61.htm
Absolutely Roman:
I wish I had taken the blue pill. Ignorance is bliss. There’s no question about that!
As a Polish, perhaps you might still say a couple of more things in this thread. I believe that, if Poland is still an oasis for the old Europe (I really love that country for that) with very few body-snatched pods, it’s precisely because of their staunch Catholicism and crude consciousness of, er... the “minorities” that snatch the naive whites of more tolerant nations.
Keep in touch!
C.
If we blame the Gentiles for the Jewis behavior, supposedly triggered by a long history of persecutions, we perpetuate the white guilt forever. The Jews act in a certain way because they were persecuted (even if in the US and Canada they were not). And the Black high crime rate and underachievement can by explained by a long history of slavery and segregation. And the Mestizo high crime rate can be explained by a long history of colonialism. And the Gypsy high crime rate in Eastern Europe is the consequence of a long history of racism and segregation. And, after all,the Muslims just react to the modernity imposed on them by the white man. Let's not forget the Crusades, too. And so on and so forth, ad nauseam.
No more pampered minorities. No more pampered people in general - white liberals, feminists, Christian churches and leftists included. They are all responsible for their actions. Persecutions of the past explain nothing.
@Armance
I agree with your final conclusion. Note that I find no justification for current Jewish liberalism in any historical causes. I am against it, I am against liberal Jews, and excuses don’t matter. On the other hand, when the Nazi types pull out tales about the Jewish NKVD, or German Jewish Communists, or desecrating the host in medieval France, then history is relevant because there they are on such false and psychotic paths that it’s not only an offense against historical truth but also undermines any possibility of being taken seriously with respect to a critique of contemporary Jews.
Above Seiyo writes:
To begin with, “Jewry” is not organized and you have to be nuts to believe that it’s hostile.
In Gates of Vienna: Critique of the Culture of Kevin MacDonald Seiyo writes (emphasis added):
Prof. MacDonald is correct in linking the rise of multiculturalism and massive non-white immigration to the activism of organized Jewry. Reading demographic dissolutionist Jewish statements like HIAS’s Progress by Pesach — and there is something in that category every week from ADL, AJC, HIAS and from crypto-Jewish organizations like ACLU and SLPC — is a revolting experience.
Moreover, MacDonald performs a valuable service here and elsewhere in exposing the long-standing pattern of Jewish activism on behalf of non-white immigration, and even more aggressive activism on behalf of resident and not necessarily deserving non-whites.
@Tanstaafl,
I thought you and I would not be talking any more, but when you quote me, we have to stand behind our offerings.
“Organized Jewry” properly means Jews who are members of Jewish organizations that have a political agenda. But that is a clear minority of Jewish organizations, and of Jews. Therefore “Organized Jewry” as a term indicating Jews, as your ideological pals employ it, is clearly misleading.
The major Jewish political organizations or quasi-Jewish orgs I cannot stand, and their supporters I cannot stand. I have written more about it here: http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2009/12/f-street.html. You will see there a link to a Jewish Orthodox website that specifically criticizes the same thing you (and I and others) criticize, and stating that orgs like HIAS are not representative of America's Jews.
At any rate, whether supporting liberal Jewish organizations or not, American Jews are far more liberal than most – but not all—segments of the American White population. For instance, if you care to learn about Scandinavian-skewed states like Washington, Oregon, Minnesota etc., or mainstream Protestant denominations, or urban Catholic dioceses, you will find out that they are just as liberal, with the same destructive effect, in similar proportions, as America’s Jews.
If you could be rational about it, and stopped blaming Jews for all the ills of society, and just included the large liberal segment of America’s Jewry among the foes you wish to defeat, you would find me and people like me – and they are many, trust me – among your allies. But your monomaniacal obsession with Jews, Holocaust denial, peddling of old unilaterally presented libels and other such Jew-obsessive things simply put your kind beyond the pale. So we’ll have to go on without you, and you’ll have to go on without us.
At any rate, whether supporting liberal Jewish organizations or not, American Jews are far more liberal than most – but not all—segments of the American White population. For instance, if you care to learn about Scandinavian-skewed states like Washington, Oregon, Minnesota etc., or mainstream Protestant denominations, or urban Catholic dioceses, you will find out that they are just as liberal, with the same destructive effect, in similar proportions, as America’s Jews.
This is also false. The groups you mention are not "just as liberal" and "in similar proportions" as Jews. Jews are far more leftist than all of these groups. Let's try using a metric you like, the share of the vote for Obama.
Jews: 78%
White Catholics: 47%
White Protestants - 34%
Non-evangelical white Protestants: 44% (evangelical white Protestants: 26%)
Whites in Minnesota: 53%
Whites in Oregon: 57%
Whites in Washington: 55%
@anon2
Your dogged nipping at my heels and requoting numbers that I already quoted is getting tiring. Also, check where I stated that Jews are by far the most liberal ethnic segment of the white population.
To try to gauge the Jewish factor specifically, you have to account for and discount both the urban/suburban factor and the higher education factor, as Jews are vastly over-represented in both. Both categories voted in much higher % for BHO irrespectively of the voters ethnicity.
Check the white voting percentages for BHO in Seattle-Tac, Portland, Eugene, Minneapolis. Everybody knows that outside of the big cities the population of those states is red. Unfortunately, it's the cities that call the political shots.
Similary, check the voting percentages for urban/suburban Christians rather than rural ones. As I have stated already, the Chicago diocese was the main initial sponsor and donor to Alinsky. The Catholic dioceses in the main cities are far more activist in the open borders movement than most Jews are, and Protestant orgs. bring many more Somalis and Bantus to the US than HIAS does. And the education factor I can’t even get into here and now.
Give me a break, go find a job as a fact checker at Der Stürmer, and leave me alone.
"Moreover, MacDonald performs a valuable service here and elsewhere in exposing the long-standing pattern of Jewish activism on behalf of non-white immigration, and even more aggressive activism on behalf of resident and not necessarily deserving non-whites."
---
In his book "The Culture of Critique", Kevin MacDonald devotes many pages to an analysis of "The Authoritarian Personality", which was written by Adorno. It was part of a series called "Studies in Prejudice," produced by the Frankfurt school, which included titles like "Anti-Semitism and Emotional Disorder."
In addition to ridiculing patriotism and racial identity, the book's purpose was to make every group affiliation sound as if it were a sign of mental disorder and defective "authoritarian personality." All group loyalties, not only to nation and race, but even close family ties are "prejudice."
It is precisely the kind of group loyalty, respect for tradition, and consciousness of differences central to Jewish identity(!) that was described as mental illness in gentiles. As Prof. MacDonald explains, the Frankfurt school never criticized or even described Jewish group identity – only that of gentiles: "behavior that is critical to Judaism as a successful group evolutionary strategy is conceptualized as pathological in gentiles."
As Christopher Lasch has written, the book leads to the conclusion that prejudice "could be eradicated only by subjecting the American people to what amounted to collective psychotherapy – by treating them as inmates of an insane asylum."
"Viewed at its most abstract level, a fundamental agenda is thus to influence the European-derived peoples of the United States to view concern about their own demographic and cultural eclipse as irrational and as an indication of psychopathology."
In the same vein, the French-Jewish "deconstructionist" Jacques Derrida wrote:
"The idea behind deconstruction is to deconstruct the workings of strong nation-states with powerful immigration policies, to deconstruct the rhetoric of nationalism, the politics of place, the metaphysics of native land and native tongue... The idea is to disarm the bombs... of identity that nation-states build to defend themselves against the stranger, against Jews and Arabs and immigrants..."
For these Jewish intellectuals, anti-Semitism was also a sign of mental illness; especially sexual repression caused hatred of Jews.
Needless to say, this project has been successful; anyone opposed to the displacement of whites is routinely treated as a mentally unhinged "hate-monger," and whenever whites defend their group interests they are described as psychologically inadequate. The irony has not escaped Kevin MacDonald: "The ideology that ethnocentrism was a form of psychopathology was promulgated by a group that over its long history had arguably been the most ethnocentric group among all the cultures of the world."
One observation which significantly bolsters the view of Organized Jewry is the widespread opinion that Jews have been behind VIRTUALLY EVERY MAJOR CATACLYSM OF THE LAST CENTURY.
Some of the cataclysms frequently named are:
* Panic of 1907 and other panics (to prepare the ground for the Federal Reserve)
* Defeat of Russia by Japan, 1905 (funded by Jacob Schiff)
* 1906 attempted Russian Revolution (Lenin was involved)
* Engineering of the election of Woodrow Wilson to get rid of Taft, who was blocking the Federal Reserve Act (1912)
* Federal Reserve (1913) - Paul Warburg & friends
* Bolshevik Revolution and subsequent regimes, especially Stalin, who was Jewish - 60 million killed (Robert Conquest)
* Getting America into WW1 (Balfour declaration)
* 1919 depression
* 1929 stock market crash (via contraction of credit)
* Great Depression (maintaining contraction of credit)
* Armenian Holocaust (by Judeo-Turks)
* Deliberate fostering of American racial strife - Policy of CPUSA, which was mostly Jewish, and took its orders from Moscow - continued thru the Civil Rights era, where most of the Freedom Riders were Jews
* Nazism - The rise of Hitler was a reaction to the abuses of the Versailles Treaty (written by Jews according to Benjamin Freedman) and to Jewish revolutionary activity in Germany in the wake of WW1 (Rosa Luxembourg, et al) - The Jews also financed Hitler (Warburgs etc), declared war on him (1933), and Hitler himself was 1/4 Jew
* American entry into WW2 (Jew Roosevelt was eager to enter, and made Pearl Harbor a sitting duck)
* Creation of the Soviet atomic bomb (see The Diaries of Major Jordan)
* Atomic and other spying - practically all were Jews, from the Rosenbergs downward - the problem continues, with Jonathan Pollard, Larry Franklin, the 'Pentagon memo' concerning Jews.
* Attack on the USS Liberty
* Assassination of JFK (see Michael Collins Piper's books)
* Nonwhite immigration (1965 immigration 'reform')
* Antiwhite discrimination (1964 'Civil Rights' act et seq)
* Hate crime laws (ADL)
* Anti-militia statutes (ADL)
* Feminism (Most major feminists are Jewish)
* US attack on Libya (Ostrovsky's By Way of Deception)
* Hiring of KGB and Stasi chiefs for Homeland Security (Jew Chertoff = 'Devil')
I would be relieved if these accusations were refuted once and for all!
@ "I would be relieved if these accusations were refuted once and for all!"
I know a refutation of one claim in the list, Vincent Bugliosi's mammoth study of the assassination of JFK.
@Anonymous
cc: Chechar
“I would be relieved if these accusations were refuted once and for all.”
Anonymous friend, I think you must be a Stasi agent with a contract from Abu Ahmad in Baluchistan, sent here to sabotage the productivity of the White race. It’s as though you built a list of 30 science-related items and then asked a group of people to refute them. The statements are of the sort:
1. Beelzebub is behind the planetary motions in the Chao cadence.
2. An invisible spaceship called Taariq is hovering in a planetary orbit, recording and manipulating the thoughts of all sentient beings.
3. Gravity is caused by defanged gluons chasing after sugar molecules.
etc.
That the host of this blog treats you seriously is a matter of considerable shock to me. You are right about Adorno and Derrida, but these are widely known things on which there is considerable consensus among right to center-left thinking people, even academics, Jewish and non-Jewish. There are mitigating circumstances for Adorno that I explained previously. Derrida was a specious nut, much beloved by the French and not different from their other commie (and non-Jewish) nutty intellectuals like Michel Foucault.
So what exactly were you trying to prove? Don’t tell me; it’s a rhetorical question and you are beyond help.
In fact, I didn’t take seriously a list that I not even read. A cursory glance hit the phrase “JFK Assassination” and I responded to it.
Anonymous,
Although this blog accepts Anonymous posts, I would highly recommend posters to register either in WordPress or Blogger before submitting any comment. Thank you.
"There are mitigating circumstances for Adorno that I explained previously."
The American Jewish Committee proudly proclaims its sponsorship of work done on The Authoritarian Personality, a work which you are free to read on that organization's website.
Here:
http://www.ajcarchives.org/main.php?GroupingId=6490
The flagship publication of the American Jewish Committee is Commentary, run by Podhoretz, a man we are lead to believe is 'conservative'.
Not even six degrees of separation then, Takuan, funny that as if we were to take your word for it - which is no doubt our duty as gullible goyim - none of this easily accessible information which directly contradicts your statements regarding the responsibility of organized Jewry, or even that there is such a thing as organized Jewry, could not possibly exist. But it does, and you implied it did not even though you knew that it did, because you are a liar. There is no lie you will not tell, no obfuscation you will not make, for the good of the Tribe - as will all Jews. You are a singular, living refutation of all that you claim.
"I would be relieved if these accusations were refuted once and for all!"
Don't forget we need to find out about:
1.) The Jewish hatched 'Doctors Plot' to murder 'Uncle Joe' Stalin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctors'_plot
2.) The real circumstances surrounding the murder of Rachel Corrie by Jewish-Zionist Oppressors.
The pity with some white nationalists is that with so many deranged conspiracy theories they undermine their arguments. And they block further reasonable discussions about the role of the Jews in Western liberalism/leftism. It's one thing to say that the ADL played a huge role in imposing hate crime laws and institutionalized PCism; it's a completely different story to say that Mossad was behind 9/11. It's the difference between horses and unicorns.
A friend of mine used to joke that if it's a group of people who might be suspected of being paid and manipulated by the Jews, these are the conspiracy-obssesed. Because you say something reasonable, like "Let's discuss the contribution of the Jews in the Bolshevik movement". And he/she says "Yes, the Jews were Bolsheviks. And they killed Kennedy, too!" Then any further arguments become useless, drowned in a sea of madness.
The Jewish behavior in relation to the white majority is not hidden, but easy to see, in broad daylight. I don't think it's benign. Somehow its destructive force is more passionate than the white liberals', because the white liberals manifest only self-hatred, the Jewish liberals manifest hatred and hostility towards others. Another malign aspect is that the Jews, being more intelligent than "the colored minorities", are emulated by the latter in organized whining and playing the card of white guilt. At intellectual level, Abe Foxman is the teacher of Al Sharpton.
TS said: "Incidentally, Tay Sachs etc. came not only from the inbreeding. These things had also come from mass murder."
Sure, of course. Causing a population bottleneck. Absolutely right.
BTW, fyi: neither Gaucher's disease nor Tay-Sachs is "limited to Ashkenazi Jews" -- they are just found in higher frequencies in the Ashkenazi population. Type III Gaucher's actually occurs most frequently in a sub-group of Swedes. And there is a version of Tay-Sachs that is common amongst French-Canadians that is genetically unrelated to the Ashkenazi version of the disease.
So, the Aryan-looking women you spoke of may not, in fact, have had any Jewish ancestors. (Difficult to say without sequencing their genomes, of course!)
"It is precisely the kind of group loyalty, respect for tradition, and consciousness of differences central to Jewish identity(!) that was described as mental illness in gentiles."
---
Should I be ashamed that I want my daughter to marry a Jew and only a Jew? Am I a Nazi for my pride and my conviction? Should I be condemned for wanting to keep that flame of Abraham alive?
On the contrary, I believe it is those who demand that we assimilate, who cannot bear that there be a people who dare stand out from the background, who dare to preserve their heritage and their mission despite every attempt to crush and beat them to the ground—they are the true bigots. They are the ones who are out to destroy the beauty G‑d made in His creation, to destroy the very essence of life.
We are proud to be Jews and we are proud to be proud. We don't wish to be anything else and we don't wish our grandchildren to be anything else. To us, there is nothing more magnificent than to be a Jew and nothing more disastrous than to lose one. Because every Jew is a precious flame, a burning bush that will not be consumed, an eternal torch that no one has the right to extinguish—not even that Jew himself
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/520294/jewish/Isnt-It-Racist-To-Believe-That-Jews-Are-Special.htm
Armance, good points.
The pity with some white nationalists is that with so many deranged conspiracy theories they undermine their arguments.
Exactly.
A friend of mine used to joke that if it's a group of people who might be suspected of being paid and manipulated by the Jews, these are the conspiracy-obssesed.
A very frequent thought of mine, especially lately.
I cannot believe it has escaped the attention of anyone how counterproductive these tactics are. Yet they are repeated again and again.
In this blog at the exact point that Chechar published an unassailable tribute to White tradition and White female beauty - boom! - in come the Jew-obsessed on the attack.
Coincidental timing or diabolically clever attack?
I've seen constructive dialog hijacked dozens of times on pro-White blogs and always in the same direction. As if done on purpose, knowing full well the response of the average reader.
Thanks for posting, Armance. I thought the same.
Bruce,
That's interesting text you posted. I'd like to see it re-written to substitute "White" for "Jew".
Then the question should be asked again whether it is racist. If you're told that it is then post the original and ask again.
Ha.
Takuan Seiyo: "Derrida was a specious nut, much beloved by the French and not different from their other commie (and non-Jewish) nutty intellectuals like Michel Foucault."
Derrida was beloved by the French in the same way that Israel is beloved by the USA. Jews had too much influence on French public intellectual institutions. Without Jewish support, Foucault, Sartre, and many others would not have become intellectual stars. Today, they no longer enjoy the prestige they had in the 1970s, but they have not been denounced as frauds either (I'm not saying that all of them were 100% phony). It's like Freud: most people will say he has become passé, not that he was a charlatan.
Today, it has become harder to take Jewish intellectuals seriously. They no longer enjoy so much prestige, but they still have a lock on the media and many institutions in France. A good example is the EHESS school, which is specialized in sociology. Another example is BHL (=Bernard-Henri Levy). Everyone pokes fun at him and says he is a fraud, but he still manages to be everywhere in the media.
Dear Chechar,
I have had a similar experience. I have changed from a committed judeophillic person to an anti-anti-anti-Semite. Some people would eliminate the first two “antis“. I do not care. This is how it happened.
First, reading the blog from a lucid ultra orthodox Jew, which I recommend to all you.
This will convince you that the Jewish orthodox interests are not Western interests. Still, they are compatible, even they will bring along the destruction of Christian sites in Israel. I can live without that. It will also convince you that there is nothing contemptible in Islam, that it is not in Judaism. Sexual mutilation (circumcision is a ritual and symbolic sexual mutilation), insane (for today’s hygienic standards) food taboos, repulsion of human images, etc. The difference is the universalistic and bellicose approach.
Second, the knowledge of the overrepresentation of Jews in revolution and in the subversion of Western (Christian) civilization, which I discovered in this blog. The list of revolutionary Jews is breathtaking.
Third, I discovered this traditional Catholic site and the magazine. I am reading the book, whose main thesis is that , after Jesus, Jews are only those Jews who rejected the Logos-Christ in favour of the revolutionary Barrabas. It explains things like the repulsion they feel for the Jews for Jesus; all Jews, including atheist ones, consider they are not Jews any more.
I am not against Israel, as far as they keep in check their enemies (which are also mine) it is fine for me. But when they play the victims of an absolute crime –the Shoa as the theological replacement of the Passion of Christ- or when they pretend that we should link our fate to theirs, I say: no way.
I have added the following note at the bottom of this article: “Update of February 27. The red-lettered phrase quoted above and how it changed my mind is better explained in my interpolated comments (‘Chechar’s note...’) within my latest entry.”
Also, my latest posts in that thread elucidates why Auster’s First Law is pivotal to understand the issues discussed here. I highly recommend the commenters of this thread to read the whole article by Tanstaafl re-published in this blog.
@Armance
cc: Chechar
“They block further reasonable discussions about the role of the Jews in Western liberalism/leftism.”
Again, I agree with your post. There is plenty of criticism that Jewish liberalism/leftism/radicalism merits, and it’s important to make it. And the nutjobs, including the five or so in this chain, make it impossible for such criticism to be heard. Furthermore, by falsifying history, they make it impossible for us to learn from history – including how to countervail against the Jewish influences we object to.
Fort instance, it’s true that Jacob Schiff, an American-Jewish banker, gave loans to the Japanese government that enabled Japan to defeat Russia in 1904. Schiff is honored as a hero in Japan. It’s also true that Jews made a vital contribution to the Russian revolution and climbed in disproportionate numbers to high posts in the Bolshevik movement. But what’s more important is WHY Schiff made that loan, and why Jews supported the Bolsheviks. He and they did so because all Jews hated Czarist Russia. They hated it because they were a grossly persecuted, maligned, abused and murdered group under the czars. It’s not in vain that the word pogrom is Russian. That’s why Schiff saw his contribution to the defeat of the czar’s army as a matter of honor, and why Jews saw the rise of the Bolsheviks as a literal life-saver.
Therefore, the damage that the nutjobs do to you, to me, to all who want to stem the tide of the ideas and policies that Jews have contributed so much to is not only that they say “The Jews were Bolsheviks. And they killed Kennedy, too!" The damage is just as great when they omit or falsify the true reasons WHY Jews (and Poles too) hated White Russia. In effect, the nutjobs are trying to recreate Czarist Russia by repeating the same horrible mistakes that led to the downfall of Czarist Russia.
I am very disappointed that Chechar keeps flogging the deeply flawed Tanstaafl stuff here, and really don’t feel that I want to contribute more on this blog. However, reasoned, rational critique of Jews can be made. Very few, if any, are doing it, but I tried, here:
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2009/12/f-street.html
Takuan Seiyo,
I disagree with you. Basically, your main point is that, yes, Jews are/were overrepresented in many anti-national, anti-majority movements, but the reason for their hostility is the persecutions which they suffered.
1) The Jewish Bolsheviks represent the consequence of Czarist Russia's anti-Semitism. Then the Jewish anti-national sentiments in the US and Canada are a consequence of what? It seems that if you are good to the Jews or bad to them, the result is pretty much the same.
2) You say that the Poles hated equally Czarist Russia, for historical reasons. But the Poles didn't support the Bolsheviks in retaliation, like the Jews. The Baltics and the Romanians also feared Czarist Russia for historical reasons, yet all of them refused to cooperate with the Bolsheviks. It takes more than a long history of persecutions to become a Bolshevik or to support such a regime. To be a Bolshevik, first of all you have to, well, enjoy the idea.
@Armance
You are ignoring what I have already stated and directed specifically to you: I find and accept no excuse for the leftism of North American Jews. As to the historical context, you lack the basic foundations for me to engage in a discussion with you. You will find that in one of my early posts I reference some excellent recent scholarship being done in Poland about that whole period, truthfully and with no sacred cows. That is my approach here, but you'd need to invest a couple of years of your life in study before you'd be able to be a good judge of that.
We don't want or need your poisonous "contribution" Seiyo. You don't share our interests, you've made that very clear. Go lecture somebody else already, your goodbyes are getting repetitive.
"As to the historical context, you lack the basic foundations for me to engage in a discussion with you."
What you call "historical context," which is really anything but, is to excuse the machinations of the organized Jewish community - as I have demonstrated above beyond any doubt was in play - is to excuse Jews by blaming the Nazis. Of course when the true historical context of Judeo-Bolshevism is brought to bear concerning National Socialism you resort to shrill ad hominem. That is because you are a lying Jew who cares naught for Whites but to the degree they serve Jewish interests. And if it comes to it at the last, and it will, you will align yourself explicitly with the anti-White genocidalists. Of course you will! Increasingly, as the backs of White men are forced against the wall, with nothing left to lose, they will embrace either explicit National Socialism or something close to it. When the Swastika (or whatever incidental symbol is used in its stead) goes up the flagpole that means we are truly done dicking around, that means game over, for you.
Here's a working link for the list of Jewish revolutionaries mentioned by AMDG.
http://tinyurl.com/ya6xkv9
TS said: "Fort instance, it’s true that Jacob Schiff, an American-Jewish banker, gave loans to the Japanese government that enabled Japan to defeat Russia in 1904. Schiff is honored as a hero in Japan. It’s also true that Jews made a vital contribution to the Russian revolution and climbed in disproportionate numbers to high posts in the Bolshevik movement. But what’s more important is WHY Schiff made that loan, and why Jews supported the Bolsheviks. He and they did so because all Jews hated Czarist Russia. They hated it because they were a grossly persecuted, maligned, abused and murdered group under the czars. It’s not in vain that the word pogrom is Russian. That’s why Schiff saw his contribution to the defeat of the czar’s army as a matter of honor, and why Jews saw the rise of the Bolsheviks as a literal life-saver."
But, TS, you only tell one side of the story here. Yes, Jews were hated and persecuted in Czarist Russia, but you fail to answer -- or even, I think, to ask -- why?
Commenters here can, and probably will, offer up a lot of answers to that question, mostly focusing on Jewish behavior I'm sure. Unfortunately, they will also be telling only one side of the story.
As I said previously, you will never understand any of the sometimes (too often) terrible relationship between European Jews and native Europeans unless you start looking at the situation from a biological point-of-view.
Jews in Russia were hated by Russians (and other ethnic groups in the Russian Empire) because they were not/are not Russian. (Yes, it is really that simple!)
If you (all of us here, in fact) would take the time to learn about and contemplate behavioral biology and its genetic underpinnings, all of this will cease to be a mystery.
You mentioned in the comments of the other post going at the moment that some of your ancestors -- your Slavic ancestors -- defended Europe against Islamic invaders. I hope you realize that what they were doing was simply defending what they saw as their territory and their access to the resources there from an invading group of foreigners.
Why should they have bothered? Why not just share their territory with the Muslims? Invite them in -- make peace.
Because NO group of people anywhere wants to share their territory and resources with an unrelated group of people. This, as I've said before, is fundamental biology. Sharing of resources amongst humans works somewhat in good times, but it definitely doesn't work when times are tough.
I cannot think of another mammal species that willingly shares its territory with competitors from its own species. (Perhaps there are exceptions, but I can't think of one at the moment. I will keep thinking on it, though!) There is definitely no primate species that shares its territory with unrelated, competing groups! Quite the contrary, territories are viciously defended from encroachment by neighboring, unrelated groups -- even though some of those groups usually include "cousins" and other somewhat related individuals.
(cont....)
(Oops. Sorry 'bout the double post!)
(cont....)
Now, you know already that Ashkenazi Jews are a distinct ethnic group in Europe, even though they have some aquired some indigenous European genes. Ashkenazis have been a "reproductively isolated population in Europe, despite living in many countries, with little inflow or outflow from migration, conversion, or intermarriage with other groups, including other Jews." Ashkenazis are much more closely related to other Jews and to Middle Easterners than they are to Europeans.
Of COURSE the natives are going to dislike and distrust them! They are not even (or barely even) Europeans, genetically speaking. It's difficult to get even more closely related people to get along like my favorite example of the different groups in Northern Ireland. Why would you expect it to go any better when the groups in question are even MORE distantly related??
This is why I say you (we all) need to learn a helluva lot of behavioral biology. Otherwise the discussions will just to continue to go 'round and 'round in an endless cycle of "you did this to us!" vs. "no, you did this to us first!" (Each side defending its own, genetic interests just like your Slavic ancestors vs. the Muslim invaders.)
All of those details, however interesting they may be, are merely proximate causes. The ultimate cause here is that what we have in this situation is a quite unrelated group of people moving into territories occupied by other peoples and then not assimilating (genetically). Jews are by no means the only people who have done this -- not by a long shot! -- but other aspects of their evolutionary history (e.g. those which resulted in the high average IQ of Ashkenzi Jews) have made the situation a unique one.
@Eileen
Race is important, but the higher the level of education, the less important it becomes -- within some boundaries. E.g. most of my friends are not from the white ethnies whose genes I carry, but Scots-Anglo-Irish whose genes I don't carry. On the other hand I don't have a single black or Muslim friend -- maybe that's too far in the gene pool...
You have made some good and valid points, and I hope we'll have a chance to discuss them further. But not in this forum that makes me puke.
The point that Eileen is trying to make was already explained in more humanistic terms by Tan in the other thread.
“To clearly see the Jewish problem (also called the Jewish Question) requires that you realize and accept that Whites and Jews are not the same group and their group interests do not entirely coincide. But this is yet another truism that is difficult to calmly discuss in the face of hysterical anti-anti-semitism and totalitarian PC. I do not say that Whites are the master race and Jews are subhuman. I do not say that I want to exterminate Jews. I do not secretly crave such things and I resent anyone who projects their own imagined hatreds into my head.”
It’s the third time I quote this paragraph in these two threads.
@Chechar,
The point that I have made already five times is that there is no such thing racially as "Jews" anymore than there is such a thing as "Mexicans." When Jews arrived in Europe they were a distinct and different group. But a few years have passed since then, and a lot of blood mixing has occured, not to speak of culture. There are 100%Jews and there are 6.25% Jews, and as elaborated before there are places where 20% of the non-Jews are Jews.I've spent some hundreds of words on that here, but it doesn't penetrate to people who are determined that it not penetrate. It's fine by me -- I just don't want to be here. I should find a different group. Goodbye, then.
TS said: The point that I have made already five times is that there is no such thing racially as "Jews" anymore than there is such a thing as "Mexican.
Race is not the issue here. (Please note that I never mentioned race because that is not what I'm talking about here.)
No, Jews are not a race, but they ARE a distinct genetic group. More specifically, Ashkenazi Jews are a distinct genetic group. And they are distinct from Europeans. And THAT is the material point (and the ultimate cause of all the problems).
TS said: "Race is important, but the higher the level of education, the less important it becomes -- within some boundaries....
Yes, possibly. That fits well with Rushton's "genetic similarity theory." Like people will seek out like people (i.e. with similar genes) even across populations. My own "significant other" is not Irish, for instance, but we are very alike in interests and inclinations.
I might also suggest that "race" (although I wasn't talking about race) or ethnicities might be slightly less important to you since you are a mix of ethnicities. I suspect that of myself, as well (I don't think I'm fully indigenous Irish, although I don't know for sure). You might be more open to dipping into other gene pools, so to speak. ;-)
E.g. most of my friends are not from the white ethnies whose genes I carry, but Scots-Anglo-Irish....
Well, then, we ought to ge on like a house on fire! :-)
Chechar said: "The point that Eileen is trying to make was already explained in more humanistic terms by Tan in the other thread."
Thanks for quoting it again, Chechar. I'm embarassed that I missed it the first two (or, rather, three!) times!
Whites and Jews are, indeed, not the same group and their group interests do not -- could not possibly! -- exactly coincide. Same holds true for any two (or more) distinct groups thrown together. At the very least, the situation will inevitably be difficult.
Eileen,
Neither you nor Captain Goebbels here adress my point, nor refute it, nor does my point negate yours. We are like ships passsing in the night ... and that's fine with me. No more time for the scum crawling all over this place. Maybe you and I will get to have an intelligent dialogue elsewhere, one day. Adieu.
I understand you missed it, Eileen: the other threaded article is long...
@ “Whites and Jews are, indeed, not the same group and their group interests do not—could not possibly!—exactly coincide. Same holds true for any two (or more) distinct groups thrown together. At the very least, the situation will inevitably be difficult.”
One of the points I tried to make in the Gates of Vienna blogsite is that Mexico was the first multicultural experiment by the Europeans. We have 500 years of experience in this stuff. Even though most Mexicans are mestizos, we naturally segregate ourselves from each other—without Apartheid, Mississippi segregational laws, or violence of any sort. It is the natural thing. North Americans should study genetic-group relations in Mexico more closely. I mean: half a millennia with this stuff is quite a lot of history!
As I told Taksei in these threads, there are three Mexicos in “Mexico”: the Indians, the mestizos and the Iberian whites. The thing is so obvious that I have never, ever seen a white male with a female Indian on the streets. Such an obvious custom is, curiously, absolute taboo to speak of it not only in the media, but among the Mexican intelligentsia or the TV soup operas.
I’ve learnt a lot about Homo sapiens from Animal Planet and the selfish gene. It explains so much if you understand the principle. Race (or more precisely genetic groups) is the ultimate taboo. Sooner or later Westerners will have to deal with it at a conscious level.
(BTW, the Mexican Jews have always segregated themselves from the Iberian whites.)
TS said: "Neither you nor Captain Goebbels here adress my point, nor refute it, nor does my point negate yours."
Hmmm. Sorry you've left the discussion here, TS -- but in case you do peek back in -- I'm afraid you've lost me here. Which point of yours was it that I didn't address or refute? I am genuinely confused here. I'll go back and read what you wrote again to see if I can work it out ... or maybe I'll have the chance to ask you somewhere else.
Chechar said: "Even though most Mexicans are mestizos, we naturally segregate ourselves from each other—without Apartheid, Mississippi segregational laws, or violence of any sort. It is the natural thing. North Americans should study genetic-group relations in Mexico more closely. I mean: half a millennia with this stuff is quite a lot of history!"
Yes, Mexico -- and other parts of Latin America like the Carribean and Brazil -- are great examples of how people self-segregate! I don't know enough about that area of the world to speak with any sort of authority, but I can give yet another example from a part of the world I do know about and that is Ireland.
After 400+ years since The Plantations in Northern Ireland, people still prefer to be with "their own". A likely question someone might ask you is "are you one of them, or one of us." Seriously! And then you have to try to figure out which one of "us" they are and if you're one of them or not....
It always seemed so nuts to me when I was younger, but I understand it now -- more than the people there do themselves. Inter-marriage between Protestants and Catholics has just started to happen in measurable, but still very small, numbers only in this generation. There's still a long way to go before there is "peace" in Northern Ireland! (Don't hold your breath.)
Chechar said: "As I told Taksei in these threads, there are three Mexicos in 'Mexico': the Indians, the mestizos and the Iberian whites."
What little I know about Mexicans I learned from living five years in L.A. There I got to know mostly Mestizos and Indians -- and then at some point I met some Mexican whites and I was so confused! (Not knowing much of anything about Mexico at the time.) YOU'RE Mexican?! :-p
I also (because of what I did there in L.A.) got to know a lot of other Hispanics/Latinos -- people from El Salvador, Guatemala, but also from Cuba and even Brazil. The Cubans (and, to a lesser extent, the Brazilians) used to crack me up: "There's no racism in Cuba!" ;-) I was still pretty lost in PC-land back then, but I was observant enough to see that the White-Cubans and the Afro-Cubans pretty much did not mix at all. No racism in Cuba my *ss! :-p (Actually, it was my sojurn in L.A. that woke me up to racial/ethnic/genetic differences between peoples. I experienced it all "first hand" for the first time in my life.)
Chechar said: I’ve learnt a lot about Homo sapiens from Animal Planet and the selfish gene.
Yeah, me too. All anyone really needs to do is watch a few episodes of Meerkat Manor -- and watch those adorable cute little creatures kill the pups of the neighboring troupe -- and it all becomes pretty clear what life is all about.
I hope Westerners wake up to the facts soon. Not much time left.... :-/
Seiyo's point:
Further discussion between us would be a waste of time, as it was from the beginning. ... You and I shall remain in opposing and mutually disdaining camps of white ethnonationalists. The rest who care about the Fall of the West will have to choose sides. Goodbye.
February 25, 2010 9:41:00 PM GMT+00:00
---
There is some basic lack of knowledge in some participants in this forum, two are psych cases, but time flies. To paraphrase Russell, there is real work waiting. I will have to opt out of the discussion here.
February 26, 2010 6:11:00 PM GMT+00:00
---
Listen, punk, ... I see you as my direct and mortal enemy, and I shall treat you as such. I’ll have nothing to do with Chechar as long as he has anything to do with you.
February 26, 2010 7:59:00 PM GMT+00:00
---
If you could be rational about it, and stopped blaming Jews for all the ills of society, and just included the large liberal segment of America’s Jewry among the foes you wish to defeat, you would find me and people like me – and they are many, trust me – among your allies. But your monomaniacal obsession with Jews, Holocaust denial, peddling of old unilaterally presented libels and other such Jew-obsessive things simply put your kind beyond the pale. So we’ll have to go on without you, and you’ll have to go on without us.
February 27, 2010 3:35:00 AM GMT+00:00
---
I am very disappointed that Chechar keeps flogging the deeply flawed Tanstaafl stuff here, and really don’t feel that I want to contribute more on this blog. ...
February 27, 2010 7:02:00 PM GMT+00:00
---
You have made some good and valid points, and I hope we'll have a chance to discuss them further. But not in this forum that makes me puke.
February 28, 2010 4:09:00 AM GMT+00:00
---
I've spent some hundreds of words on that here, but it doesn't penetrate to people who are determined that it not penetrate. It's fine by me -- I just don't want to be here. I should find a different group. Goodbye, then.
February 28, 2010 5:08:00 AM GMT+00:00
---
No more time for the scum crawling all over this place. Maybe you and I will get to have an intelligent dialogue elsewhere, one day. Adieu.
February 28, 2010 6:06:00 AM GMT+00:00
Apparently he keeps forgetting he's already made it.
"Captain Goebbels" Takuan Seiyo
----
“Should I be ashamed that I want my daughter to marry a German and only a German? Am I a Pharasee for my pride and my conviction? Should I be condemned for wanting to keep that flame of Germany alive?”
“On the contrary, I believe it is those who demand that we assimilate, who cannot bear that there be a people who dare stand out from the background, who dare to preserve their heritage and their mission despite every attempt to crush and beat them to the ground—they are the true bigots. They are the ones who are out to destroy the beauty God made in His creation, to destroy the very essence of life.”
“We are proud to be Germans and we are proud to be proud. We don’t wish to be anything else and we don’t wish our grandchildren to be anything else. To us, there is nothing more magnificent than to be a German and nothing more disastrous than to lose one. Because every German is a precious flame, a burning bush that will not be consumed, an eternal torch that no one has the right to extinguish—not even that German himself.”
@Takuan Seiyo
Lenni Brenner, "51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration With the Nazis."
Barricade Books (November 1, 2002)
The Nazi era is the most discussed period in history, yet most Jews and other Americans are unaware of the interaction between Zionism and Hitler and Mussolini. The reason is simple and stark: the Zionist record is dishonorable. This book brings to light, through the use of actual historic documents, the disservice that the Zionists did to Jews before and during the Holocaust. Some of these documents were published in English decades ago, but are only now seeing the light of day. Others are being translated into English for the first time. Included are documents from Propaganda Minister GOEBBELS' newspaper, Der Angriff, detailing an SS-man's visit to Palestine as the Zionists' guest. Readers will also learn about Adolf Eichmann's account of his personal dealings with the Hungarian Zionist Rezsö Kasztner, who was later assassinated in Israel as a Nazi collaborator who betrayed 400,000 Hungarian Jews. Also revealed is pro-Zionist propaganda put out by the Nazis, such as a medal for getting Jews to Palestine and a Nazi board game where the object is to move Jews to Palestine. The documents contained in this book were selected with due care so that a rounded picture of history emerges. The author concludes that Zionism betrayed the Jews; and the evidence that led him to that conclusion is contained in this book. This book shows that the consequences of Zionism demand exposure.
From Kevin MacDonald's Comments on Takuan Seiyo's Screed:
In saying that I should weight Jewish contributions more highly, Seiyo is making the same argument as Derbyshire. But as I said in my response to Derbyshire:
For Derbyshire, evaluating Jews is like a business ledger: There are positives and negatives, and for him, the positives vastly outweigh the negatives. However, providing a balance ledger of credits and debits is not a purpose of The Culture of Critique. My purpose is to document Jewish intellectual and political movements — movements led by Jews and motivated by perceptions that these movements would advance Jewish interests. …
Seiyo must understand that inevitably I must value the continued survival of my people and culture above any Jewish contributions to civilization. However, I do agree with him that “If the Jewish community won’t wake up to criticism from friendly parties, it will eventually face criticism from the growing number of unfriendly parties.”
Eileen,
Thanks for your comments. You see: this hotly controversial subject, and the emotions expressed in this thread, could easily chill down if people only started to look at it scientifically instead of the classic paradigms in the humanities. Race and genetic groups is a biological fact. Period. It follows that people pursue the interests of their own folk.
My subject of interest is child abuse and trauma. Before I was acquainted with the biological facts, especially with developmental psychology (John Bowlby), I had no firm ground to understand the whys of the trauma (and mental disorders) in abused children, now grown up adults. My worldview is so solid now...
Yes, race matters. And the whole debacle in today’s multicultural, anti-“racist”, cultural relativist and suicidal discourse has to do with not seeing the obvious. This is not reductionism. This is reality.
The same with Jews or with any other ethnic group. All of them pursue their own interests. Nothing wrong with that. Let me finish this post with an Auster quote:
“The Jewish problem—not the Jewish problem of the Jew haters, but the real Jewish problem—consists in the fact that Jews are a distinct people who because of their energy and talents tend to become dominant in culturally influential areas of society. This leads to the problem that a small minority group begins to become the definer of cultural standards for the majority. For the most part, this is not due to any Jewish racial agenda or conspiracy... rather it is just built into the fact of Jewish distinctiveness combined with Jewish talents. But even though the situation is not anyone’s fault, it is not a healthy situation. The way the problem can be resolved, as I’ve said many times, is by the majority recovering and maintaining its majority identity, functions, and authority, and thus requiring minorities to conform to the majority’s standards.”
You know, Auster is Jewish on both sides.
Chechar:
THX for the stirring thoughts and for providing a forum for this discussion.
It has been a pleasure to lurk and read. The idea of Whiteness has become much clearer. Same goes for providing a platform to Tak to out himself for what he is.
Tanstaafl: THX
Can you imagine asking the Chinese what they would think of exchanging their majority in China for the assurance of, say, a couple Nobel prizes over the next century -- to be won by non-Chinese residents in China? They wouldn't do it for ten-thousand f'ing Nobel or whatever other hollow prizes there are. Seiyo really needs to think that argument through again.
That should read "couple hundred."
"Lightning" update of January 10, 2011
Post a Comment