This is a P.S. to the discussion thread in "A lightning in the middle of the night!":
Now I realize that half Jews like Auster and Seiyo are virtuosos of “takiya” writ large. They deceive us gentiles by claiming they defend Western civilization when they prioritize Jewish interests.
I have just deleted a couple of my March 1, 2009 comments because I didn’t dare to mention Takuan Seiyo by name. Instead, in the threaded discussion below I used the term “a commenter”. Slightly edited, therefore, I am reposting what I wrote last year:
In the republished article by Tanstaafl I interpolated a comment of mine: “This is my challenge to the philo-Semites in my previous entry: that if I don’t get a convincing rebuttal of the Bullard statement I will have to remove the ‘non anti-Semitic’ clause before ‘white nationalism’ in the masthead of this blog. Conversely, if someone demonstrates that Jews are also over-represented in organizations or movements that represent the interests of the ethnic majority in the U.S., the masthead will remain. This is the whole point of these entries on the Jewish Question”.
“If someone demonstrates that...”, I wrote. I’ve read astute rationalizations in the threads explaining (justifying?) why they are not overrepresented. Seiyo wrote: “‘Jewry’ is not organized and you have to be nuts to believe that it’s hostile.”
Nuts? It’s true that protestant churches bring Negroes to The United States. But the trust of my point, implicit in my self-quotation above, has to do with proportions. Absolute numbers don’t convince. But rates matter. The obvious point is the percentage of liberal Jews among all Jews compared to the percentage of traitor whites among all whites. This is the crux. Yes: these days I struggled a lot around the Jewish Question. I now believe that the rates indicate that Tanstaafl’sinterpretation of Auster’s First Law is accurate. The following comment is illustrative. EileenOCnnr said:
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.So this is the long-awaited answer to my question that prompted these two threads: the Jews, as a group, do not identify with the interests of the ethnic majority in America for obvious ethnocentric reasons. Quod erat demonstrandum. This other exchange was illuminating. Armance said:
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?Tanstaafl responded: No way! 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. As to my former friend Seiyo, Kevin MacDonald put it this way:
Seiyo is part way there. He understands that Jews have been a critical force in promoting Western suicide and he says he deplores this result. But he can’t quite take the last step and acknowledge that the rise of Jews to elite status in the West is fundamentally about ethnic competition and displacement of previously dominant elites—typically motivated at the psychological level by fear and loathing of the people and culture of the West. I rather doubt anyone can persuade him. C’est la vie. That’s what ethnocentric self-deception is all about.C’est la vie! Since after the lightening stroke me I don’t see Islam as the main threat to the West, the masthead will be changed.
Bye bye Seiyo...