Political violence has been used throughout history to send messages and influence public opinion and policy. Throughout the 1960’s up until the 1990’s, leftists groups consistently used bombings, shootings, and scare tactics to promote their goals. In the United States, the Weather Underground is probably the most notable terrorist group in the history of the United States. Yet, the group is held esteem by many intellectuals, academics and media figures, who feel the violence committed by the group was justified given the context of the times. Leftist groups such as the Weather Underground were promoting viewpoints that would eventually become accepted into the mainstream, such as opposition to the Vietnam War and the dissolution of white homogeneity in the United States. As a result, groups such as the Weather Underground can give us a unique perspective on the prism through which the media and the Left in the Western World perceive violence.
In 1970, Weather Underground members Terry Robbins, Theodore Gold and Diana Oughton, were all killed when a bomb they were making in a Greenwich brownstone detonated, leveling the brownstone. The goal was to attack an army ROTC dance for non-commissioned officers in Fort Dix, New Jersey, in retaliation for the U.S.’s war in Vietnam. The fact that it was a dance likely would have resulted in the death of many female civilians. In 1981, a number of Weather Underground members and the Black Liberation Army shot and killed two police officers and a guard while trying to rob a Brinks armored truck. Many more incident could be listed, but the point is that these leftist groups were very violent.
In Europe, the left-wing violence during the Cold War was infinitely more vicious than America’s, resulting in scores of deaths across the European continent. The Red Army Faction (Germany), Revolutionary Cells (Germany), Action Directe (France), The Red Army Brigades (Italy), etc. were all responsible for hundreds of deaths. Kidnappings, bombings, and executions were standard practice for these groups.
However, these groups are generally not considered with the same revulsion as right-wing terrorism, despite their substantially higher kill rate. Since the period of New Left terrorism, documentaries such as The Weather Underground (2002), contain a very supportive undercurrent in their coverage of Weather Underground members (the Weather Underground, created by two Jews, was nominated for an Academy Award). Many other books, articles, and movies have glamorized these groups.
William Ayers (co-founder of the Weather Underground) and his wife Bernardine Dohrn (a leader of the Weather Underground), not only did not do any real time for their actions, but are now considered a part of the liberal elite in Chicago. It has been noted before, but Ayers and Obama are at the very least acquaintances, both living in the same affluent neighborhood of Hyde Park in Chicago at one time, a fact used by Republicans to attack Obama during his political campaign for president. In all likelihood, Ayers actually benefitted from his foray into terrorism, even writing a book about his experience. It is safe to say that Ayers, Dohrn, and others in the group are considered a part of the Revolutionary Canon of the 60‘s and 70‘s, where violence was not only necessary, but romantic.
One of the notable aspects of the Weather Underground, that perhaps endears it to the political and academic establishment, was its tacit hatred of Whites. The members indicated they were ready to go to war against Whites in support of Blacks and other indigenous people. Ironically enough, even while fighting for the ethnic rights of these groups, these New Leftists were calling for an end to all racism and “perceived” differences between people. Regardless, violent leftists felt the White monoculture had to go one way or another. For the Left, attacking Whites through violence was a justified option. ”We’re against everything that’s ‘good and decent’ in honky America,” Weather Underground member John Jacobs said in his most commonly quoted statement. “We will burn and loot and destroy. We are the incubation of your mother’s nightmare” (in J. Varon, Bringing the War Home, p. 160). Jacobs came from a prominent Jewish leftist family, and remained a fugitive until his death in 1997.
David Gilbert, another prominent Jewish member of the Weather Underground, summarized his involvement in the organization as follows:
In response to the murderous government assault on the Black Liberation Movement and the unending, massive bombing of Vietnam, the Weather Underground formed in the early 1970′s. I spent 10 years in underground resistance. On October 20, 1981, I was captured when a unit of the Black Liberation Army and allied white revolutionaries attempted to take funds from a Brinks truck, with the unfortunate result of a shoot-out in which a guard and two policemen were killed. (In Dan Berger, Outlaws of America, p. 44)
Gilbert was sentenced to 75 years in prison.
In the film, The Weather Underground, Naomi Jaffe, who came from a Jewish family, said
We felt that doing nothing in a period of repressive violence is itself a form of violence. That’s really the part that I think is the hardest for people to understand. If you sit in your house, live your white life and go to your white job, and allow the country that you live in to murder people and to commit genocide, and you sit there and you don’t do anything about it, that’s violence.
In fact, former members of the Weather Underground are routinely invited to give talks about their actions on campuses, museums, activist gatherings, etc. (Once Anders Breivik is released from prison, if ever, I wouldn’t count on him getting invited to any lectures at leading universities). One of the most influential members of the Weather Underground, Mark Rudd, who is also Jewish, spoke at the New Mexico Jewish Historical Society about his role in the Weather Underground and the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) in 2005, a precursor to the Weather Underground, choosing to focus on the heavy Jewish involvement in the group.
I first spoke publicly about the question in 1988 at the twentieth anniversary celebration of the Columbia strike. In a rambling 45 minute monologue I touched on a lot of subjects, but the only one people seemed to respond to was my recognition of our Jewish backgrounds as relevant to our opposition to the war and racism. … Unfortunately, I haven’t pursued the subject until now, but I do believe that the revolt of Jewish youth in the New Left of the sixties and seventies deserves to be studied and honored as an important chapter in the history of American Jews.
In the same speech, Rudd mentions the disproportionate role of Jews in SDS:
I got to Columbia University as a freshman, age 18, in September, 1965, a few months after the United States attacked Vietnam with main force troops. There I found a small but vibrant anti-war movement. In my first semester I was recruited by David Gilbert, a senior who had written a pamphlet on imperialism for national SDS, Students for a Democratic Society. David was one of the founders of the Columbia SDS chapter, along with John Fuerst, the chapter Chairman. Both were Jewish, of course, as were my mentors and friends, Michael Josefowicz, Harvey Blume, Michael Neumann, and John Jacobs. Ted Kaptchuk and Ted Gold were Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Columbia SDS the year before I was elected Chairman, along with my Vice-Chairman, Nick Freudenberg. All of us were Jewish. It’s hard to remember the names of non-Jewish Columbia SDS’ers; it was as much a Jewish fraternity as Sammie. There were probably a greater proportion of gentile women than guys in SDS, and of course I got to know them.”
Rudd goes farther than most in celebrating the role of Jewish involvement in SDS. In this rather obscure speech to a rather obscure Jewish organization in New Mexico, Rudd basically reveals the overarching mindset of the revolutionary tactics employed by Jews and their non-Jewish cohorts. It seems that all the latent and often well-concealed anger towards the “goy” and White culture bursts forth in Rudd’s analysis of Jewish involvement in the SDS and later, the terrorist group, the Weather Underground. Not only that, but despite Rudd and other Jews being members of what the U.S. government deemed a terrorist organization, the disproportionate involvement of Jewish members is a matter of pride in the Jewish community, especially as the SDS and the Weather Underground were both seen as a part of successful attack on Whites and White culture. Rudd excoriates everything perceived to be White and non-Jewish:
What outraged me and my comrades so much about Columbia, along with its hypocrisy, was the air of genteel civility. Or should I say gentile? Despite the presence of so many Jews in the faculty and among the students—geographical distribution in the admissions process had not been effective at filtering us out, our SAT’s and class-rank being so high—the place was dripping with goyishness.
The main reason for pointing to these viewpoints shared amongst members of the Weather Underground, is that the Weather Underground’s use of violence has been excused and embraced as proper and fitting in the Western ethos, and much of this is influenced by a uniform hostility towards White culture. Right-wing groups, especially those that are explicitly sympathetic to Whites and White culture, are uniformly attacked, and viewed as psychologically deranged. In academia and in the media right-wing extremists are universally characterized as insane, pathologically evil, and operating without remorse. That’s all well and good, but the media takes a different tack when violence is committed by groups opposed to Whites.
That is not to say that the entire history of the New Left can be categorized as one of racial harmony among Jews and other minorities versus Whites. In Outlaws of America: The Weather Underground and the Politics of Solidarity, Dan Berger illustrates some of the conflicts that arose between Jews and other groups:
World events would also split the antiwar and civil rights movements. On June 5, 1967, Israel launched a pre-emptive attack on Syria and Egypt while being attacked by Jordan. The Six-Day War brought under Israeli control the Golan Heights, the West Ban, the Gaza Strip, and the Sinai Peninsula…To many activists, Israel’s occupation seemed to be an act of open and racist hostility against its Arab neighbors. (An analysis seemingly confirmed a decade later by Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Dayan, who admitted that Syria posed no threat and that the idea was to “grab a piece of land and keep it, until the enemy gets tired and gives it to us.”)
From the beginning of the 1967 war, there was fear that taking a position critical of Israel would be seen as anti-Semitic. This fear was especially pronounced in the United States, where Jews across the political spectrum supported the Six-Day War and subsequent occupation and were pushing the United States to do more to aid Israel.
Both SNCC and SDS were criticized for taking positions in solidarity with the Arab countries and critical of Israel’s war effort. Greater hostility however was directed at SNCC, already in white America’s disfavor because of the group’s Black Power position. While SNCC’s position was at times simplistic—e.g. equating the Gaza Strip occupation with a Nazi death camp—the main problem was that it was a Black organization criticizing Israel. Jewish liberals denounced SNCC’s “betrayal” and donations to SNCC dropped dramatically as talk of “Black anti-Semitism” increased” (p. 56).
During the 60′s, 70′s, and 80′s, Jews still felt somewhat marginalized in society, especially in the presence of so many “goys” still running the country. It was therefore necessary to use violence to deal with Whites, often in cooperation with other minorities and token non-Jews (mostly non-Jewish women if Rudd is to be believed). There were even plans to have Black sovereign states formed by Black separatist groups— seen as a legitimate course of action on the New Left. According to Berger, a Black group called New Afrika attempted to establish a sovereign Black nation in Mississippi in 1968 (p. 68). This was not the only group that was explicitly organizing around ethnic lines. There also were the Black Panthers, the Black Liberation Army, the Brown Berets, the Young Lords Party, and El Comité, amongst many others. The Weather Underground not only supported the ideology of these ethnic groups, but was allied with both the Black Panthers and the Black Liberation Army.
It is unclear how much effect violence had on policy and political discourse, but one thing is clear: Since the days of the New Left, the U.S. has embraced multiculturalism and White homogeneity has been broken. The type of left-wing violence of the 60’s and 70’s in America is no longer seen, partly because those on the fringe promoting multiculturalism have now become the elite, and their dogmas have been incorporated into the status quo: once you become a part of the establishment you ostensibly have no reason to attack the establishment. Ayers, Rudd, Dohrn, are all emblematic of this trend, going from terrorist leaders to well-respected academics, and in the case of Rudd, to hero of the Jewish people.
End of Part 1. Go to Part 2.
John Schretenthaler is a freelancer writer. His website is www.cultureofpoverty.com.
Facing the Future as a Minority
Thus far, there’s no substance here for comment. We must bide time to see how this chronicle is intended to relate to the concerns of Occidental Observer. Meanwhile, the detached, seemingly indulgent attitude of reporting is, on first acquaintance, less than reassuring.
From the first paragraph on one observes that the underlying assumption – that the “media,” have an identity apart from the Left – is flawed. The media, as known in the States, are the Left. Therefore, embrace of violence by the media is no measure of anything but depravity and the unity of Judaism in anarchy. What else is new?
This naive salmagundi of dubious intent and sentiment overlooks the contrarian aggressiveness of Jews everywheretoward everything non-tribal. Jew sabotage of the host country is a cliché of history. It is the Talmud of their method. Only specifics vary with time and place. Had these despicable youth not manufactured a cause in the Vietnamese War or Black “Oppression,” they would – unquestionably – have found other excuses. Meanwhile, this salacious parade of illicit and unacceptable behavior – both on the part of insurgents and media – only further indicts the heathen within our gates.
Mark Rudd, who was indeed based in New Mexico at the time, went more public with his discussion of Jewish involvement in the New Left. At the 2008 American Studies Association annual meeting held that year in Albuquerque, he made essentially the same admission about Jewish involvement. He need not have felt any more insecure there than at a Jewish Historical Society meeting, however, for he was surrounded by the same people.
Meanwhile, those in American Studies still prosecute the war against “Whites” while nowhere noting how many “Whites” with power are in fact Jews.
“In the United States, the Weather Underground is probably the most notable terrorist group in the history of the United States.”
The CIA is more notable.
It seems that all the latent and often well-concealed anger towards the “goy” and White culture bursts forth in Rudd’s analysis of Jewish involvement…
Was it “anger” or was it hatred?
During the 60′s, 70′s, and 80′s, Jews still felt somewhat marginalized in society,
The implication being that Jews no longer feel marginalized. It’s the 2010s, however, and Jews still feel marginalized in society.
‘”There were probably a greater proportion of gentile women than guys in SDS, and of course I got to know them.”’ Did this disgust anyone else, or just me? Also, violence against Whites is still going on or increasing. Most of the violence is racist, but I’m sure some of it is political and the numbers will go up. Nope, it’s not a “wonderful, enriching” experience losing one’s country. Whites need to become very ethnocentric and nepotistic and take charge of the media and institutions used against us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0KuyyKtQpo
@Henry:
This actually really really pissed me off, but I’m not surprised. No doubt his foray into terrorism was all ego driven, a chance to stick it to the “goy” and try to screw some “goyettes” in the process.
I’m pretty sure the Jews could commit virtually any amount of violence they want at this point, and completely get away with it.
@Anon2:
Jews do not feel marginalized anymore. They’re well aware of the position of power they’re in, and it’s ever growing. The problem is, they still have a revenge fantasy going, and it’s intrinsic to their nature. They won’t stop until whites are completely destroyed.
Their power derives from money more than demographics. Although, I take the census figures with a grain of salt, and I wouldn’t be surprised if there were a few million more Jews than the “books” indicate. That’s the problem with living in such a massive country, it’s easy to “juke” the stats since it’s far too big a country for anyone to notice the difference.
Whites do not have the subversive card to play, or the violence card to play. We are still the majority for the time being, and still seen as the “bad guys.”
I wouldn’t be surprised if long after we are reduced to the minority, whether we still be manipulated into thinking that we still hold a majority, just to keep us in check. I mean, the demographic tipping point is coming, and they don’t want whites to get upset, so they’ll do everything they can to keep the status quo.
Oh, but I’m quite sure of the gentiles who witnessed this unfold, some of which had power, all knew many a “good” Jews.
This is a very useful overview of how Jews use ideology and moral indignation to mobilize the Sheeple and intimidate the opposition. Jews are nothing if not confident, aggressive, unified and psychologically intense.
Incredibly, most of the Left (and virtually all of the mainstream pundits and media institutions) completely ignored the disconnect between the counterculture’s stated antipathy towards racism and imperialism and its tacit acceptance of Zionism and Jewish chauvinism. Basically, the Left never made so much as a peep over Palestine. This was no accident.
Jewish radicals of every political persuasion (including the ‘centrist’ ones) have been steering the American supertanker towards the rocks since the Russian revolution. Henry Ford realized this nearly a century ago. And since the 60s, Jewish activists, anarchists and agitators been rapidly gaining even more traction in NY, Washington and LA. Their tireless efforts got America into WWI, WWII and every Mideast flareup and war for the past 50 years. Is it any wonder why Jews are so universally reviled?
These parasitic organisms are programmed to invade and weaken their host country.
Unlike our ‘Golden Rule’, their most resonating value can be summed up as follows: “But is it good for the Jews?”
@JJ:
That exactly was the complaint of the Nazi leadership when they started to take action against the Jews: everybody knows a “good” Jew.
The Red Army Brigade and Faction were outed years ago as CIA fronts.
There is no doubt, however that the Jews were and are hostile toward anything that is ‘good and decent’, whether in “honky America” or anywhere else.
In order to be anti something, that something has to exist. Ashkenazi Jews know they are not semitic, therefore the easiest way to disarm them is by asking if they are semites, or in the alternative answer that you have nothing against the Palestinians or Lebanese.
@Tralee Ronan: I find myself appreciating both your comment, Tralee, and John Schretenthaler’s excellent essay.
I think you are being a tad unkind in your first paragraph. IMHO, Mr. Schretenthaler has presented the salient events of the 1960, 70s, and 80s, cogently and methodically, despite the usual word-count constraints of a single presentation here at TOO. So, I think the civilized and brotherly thing to do is to applaud him, and show our appreciation for a well-composed treatise. I am personally very much looking forward to John Schretenthaler’s “Political Violence, Part-2″.
Meanwhile, I would say the 3rd paragraph of your comment Tralee, is superb and worthy of quotation.
Related to this subject, you can now download the short musical MP3 “They’re Always Saying (They Were Holocausted)” at http://www.WhiteID.com. The MP3 is a quick download, and it’s free. Send it to your friends or pro-White radio announcers.
Excellent article which shows in unmistaking terms that Jews see themselves as “at war ” with every society they live in.As in all ethnic conflicts there is also a sexual dimension to this phenomenon that is often overlooked.A somewhat cryptic remark of Rudd about the SDS indicates that : “…All of us were Jewish…There were probably a greater proportion of gentile women than guys in the SDS,and of course I got to know them…”.Here “to know” is of course meant in the Biblical (sexual) sense like: Adam “knew” Eve. This is what always happens in such cases.In simple socio-biological terms: a foreign group infiltrates the territory of another group,defeats its men and then takes its women.On a more primitive level you see this with Blacks.Having a White woman is seen by them as a “trophy”.You see this also with coloured men who now immigrate in great numbers into White countries.Signs that they have “made it” are: a well paying job,a car and…a White woman.Jews are no different in this respect.
AS someone who participated in some measure, at least in the 60s, in The Movement, as it was grotesquely known by its advocates, the violence prone crazies were perceived as such by 90% of peaceniks in the streets.
If one did a bean-count of the number of demonstrations, etc in the 60s and into the 70s (Laos invasion), I suspect that less than one-tenth of one percent of activists and peaceniks ever got violent except for throwing rocks or whatever.
I don’t know where this article is going, but if is going to suggest violence “worked” in this historical period, I would say that that is nonsense.
What did “work” in the 60s was perhaps a few million folks in the streets.
On the other hand, nigra violence worked insofar as it got Programs and Cool-it payoffs to the useless, which we are still saddled with.
White folks wearied of body counts, bloody scenes on television, 58,000 dead americans as well as slaughter of civilians that went at least to two million. In short, violence worked (in Vietnam) to end the war, and anti-violence worked in the streets of the US to end the war.”
The Ayers and Hoffmans and Bobby Seals got the airtime because if it threatens to bleed, it gets the lead in the media. The actual violence from white revolutionaries was almost zero compared to the years of peaceful demonstrations, etc. Black violence was fairly widespread, over 250 riots in our cities, and I don;t know how many dead, but probably
a few hundred.’
It is always a matter of “despite of” or “because of”. The success of the anti-war movement (Vietnam) was because the war could not be won politically, it was militarily something of a fiasco, and probably a majority of Americans simply refused any more war.
Our situation is so different I would not know where to start, but violence is totally inappropriate for the time being. I see that Norway’s Labor Party is reported in the news today as surging in the polls.
@Joe Webb:
The actual violence from white revolutionaries was almost zero compared to the years of peaceful demonstrations, etc.
True.
It is always a matter of “despite of” or “because of”.
Those are words of wisdom, Joe.
The Weather Underground didn’t do the movement against the Vietnam War any favors.
Our situation is so different I would not know where to start, but violence is totally inappropriate for the time being. I see that Norway’s Labor Party is reported in the news today as surging in the polls.
A good, accurate and relevant point.
Norway’s Labour Party saw it’s support balloon by 11 points since June, while the Progress Party lost 3 points.
http://news.yahoo.com/outpouring-sympathy-norways-labour-massacre-205715260.html
That’s a 14 point swing in relative popularity between the two parties.
Come on – William Ayers and Obama just acquaintances ? Wasn’t Ayers co author of O’Bama’s books and tutor to Howdy Doodey ?
This may relate to a discussion started on another TOO thread, but I note that the recent change of race on the part of Spiderman, by Marvel Comics of New York, is the work of a member of an ethnic group on which the esteemed Professor Macdonald has much to say in Culture of Critique (1998):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14394181
Obviously this might be a pure coincidence, but it did have me thinking.
Anon2 said: “The implication being that Jews no longer feel marginalized. It’s the 2010s, however, and Jews still feel marginalized in society. ”
I would submit that until jews have succeeded in exterminating every White male from the face of the Earth, they will continue to feel ‘marginalized’. The intensity of their hatred and depth of their fear and loathing for White males, I sincerely believe, consumes their every thought and every deed.
Which basically means: White men cannot share the same geographic living space with any jew; they are and always will be an existential threat to our race and our gender. Why do you think they are so obsessed with promoting miscegenation between white females and black males? To reduce the number of white babies born, certainly. But, most especially – to reduce the number of White male babies being born.
Oh, and if our White females were really on our side – they’d react by having as many white male babies as possible, just to spite the jews who seek our genocide.
Face facts, White man. It’s them or us. There isn’t going to be any ‘compromise’ with this foe. I’m talking to Jared Taylor, and are you listening?
Greg said: “The problem is, they still have a revenge fantasy going, and it’s intrinsic to their nature. They won’t stop until whites are completely destroyed.”
MacDonald has touched on this aspect to their devilishly evil character. I agree. I wonder quite often if these creatures can even be considered ‘human’, by the standards and definition of that term when used by White Europeans. They literally burn inside with a raging, boiling, simmering, vitriolic and red-hot hatred for White Europeans and I am 100 percent convinced that they fully intend to physically destroy our race by whatever means possible.
Meanwhile, panty wearing Whites like Hunter Wallace and his followers keep advising whites to ‘maintain’ the proper decorum and under absolutely zero circumstances should whites ever consider that it might take brutal, determined and ruthless force to get these vile monsters off our backs and out of our nations.
Tell me, friends. If we are too chicken and too ‘civilized’ to even consider that we might need to physically fight back against an enemy who fully intends to murder us the way their kinsfolk slaughtered over 65 million Whites in Russia when they ran the USSR – do we even deserve to survive?
How many readers here are aware of that ‘Super Congress’ abomination that was deviously tacked on to that debt ceiling legislation and that those 12 committee spots are going to very likely be infested with anti-white, Second Amendment hating jews – who will be able to use that Super Congress to target the Second Amendment? We all know that as long as we white men have our weapons, they cannot resume where their kinsmen left off in the USSR and continue with their slaughter of our race – and our enemy knows this as well.
Can anyone else here spell it out better or in a different way so that it sinks into the heads of White men of what we are facing?
In academia and in the media right-wing extremists are universally characterized as insane, pathologically evil, and operating without remorse. That’s all well and good, but the media takes a different tack when violence is committed by groups opposed to Whites.
Of course they are characterized as insane, pathologically evil, and operating without remorse. They are, after all, “right-wing extremists.” What do you expect? It’s a virtual tautology.
People should perhaps be initially skeptical of any writer who parrots mainstream media slogans like “right-wing extremist.” A few of the explanations for a writer’s use of such terminology are not flattering: such a writer may be deliberately advancing a mainstream media agenda or may be too naive/lacking in perception to be aware that, in embracing the politically charged terminology, he is advancing a mainstream media agenda.
[WIfe of Mark Rudd (SDS), probate judge Merri Rudd]
Merri Rudd, Author of Life Planning in New Mexico
(Photo by Kim Jew)
Merri Rudd is currently the Probate Judge for Bernalillo County, New Mexico and owns Abogada Press. Rudd received her undergraduate degree from Vanderbilt University and has been an attorney since 1986 when she graduated from UNM’s School of Law. After clerking for the Honorable William W. Bivins on the New Mexico Court of Appeals, Rudd focused her practice on elder law, addressing the needs of Albuquerque’s senior citizens. She worked at the Senior Citizens Law Office (SCLO), which provides selected free legal services to Bernalillo County seniors over 60.
Rudd spent three years compiling and editing the New Mexico Senior Citizens Handbook, published by the State Bar of New Mexico in 1989. In September 1989 she received the state bar’s Outstanding Contribution award for her work on the Handbook. In 1990 the state bar published the Elder Law Manual, a training manual for attorneys who work with senior citizens. Rudd co-authored the Elder Law Manual with Ellen Leitzer and Patricia McEnearney Stelzner, attorneys and co-directors of SCLO.
In 1993 Rudd, along with attorney Tom Smidt, drafted and advocated the successful passage of a law that ensures an individual’s right to choose cremation.
Rudd closed her private law practice in 1997, but contributes to the elder law field in an academic capacity. Ms. Rudd taught wills, trusts and probate to TVI paralegal students and has served as an adjunct professor at the UNM Law School. In 2000 Rudd and Patrica Elliott, a retired CPA, presented a 5-part series on estate planning created by KNME-TV, the local PBS station for New Mexico. The series aired statewide.
Rudd writes a bi-weekly column for the Albuquerque Journal’s Business Outlook. She also writes a legal column for Prime Time newspaper, which received the State Bar’s 1998 Silver Gavel Award and the 1999 North American Mature Publishers Association’s Best Entry in Editorial Category award. In 1998 Merri also received a YWCA Women on the Move Award for her many years of community service to the legal profession and is included in the national edition of Who’s Who Among America’s Teachers.
In her spare time Rudd enjoys raising native wildflowers, hiking, swimming, cross country skiing, baking, contra dance calling and ushering for UNM’s Popejoy Hall.
——————————————————————————–
@Anon2:
I’m not sure what he meant by right-wing extremism, because the general idea of right-wing is hard to define, but I would assume the extremism refers to violent acts.
However, but his point was not that it’s wrong to define them as insane, evil, etc, but that media does not recognize that left-wing groups are evil, disturbed, insane as well. It was a critique on the media and academics, is my thinking.
@Greg:
Why is one group of people who commit violent acts labeled “right-wing extremists” while another is described, by both the author and yourself, as “left-wing groups” or “groups opposed to whites”?
Do you think there is a difference in connotation between the two?
@Greg:
“The general idea of right-wing is hard to define” … because the terms “right & left wing” are ridiculous abstractions that will always lack cohesive definitions. The fact that we stubbornly labour with them helps (I suspect) to explain why it is so often difficult to make progress with reasoned debate.
I of course do concede that to dispose with them kind of presents us with problems when attempting to explain facets of our political landscapes to each other. Mmmm.
Personally, I prefer to substitute the words immature and dependent for ‘left’ wing … and the words mature and independent for ‘right’ wing.
Trying to fit Jews (particularly Ashkenazi Jews) into this left/right paradigm is impossible, simply because you are literally dealing with group insanity here; something utterly abnormal and destructive. The house of the Serpent if you prefer.
If more people could accept and utilize these simpler associations, then they would finally stop confusing the hell out of others whenever they attempt to assign the (ultimately) meaningless terms “left & right” to Jewish motives and behaviour.
Face it. Jewish behaviour has no wings, just an a*se covered with dirty feathers.