A Review of “Why the Germans? Why the Jews?” — Part 3

Brenton Sanderson

Part 1
Part 2

Götz Aly’s selective application of his “pathological envy” thesis

While asserting that German hostility toward Jews has its origins in a pathological “envy,” as a fervent leftist Aly would never extend this line of reasoning to account for the hostility of American Blacks or other non-White groups toward Whites. Aly can safely posit that “intellectually inferior” Germans who “lacked confidence in their identity” had an envy-driven hatred for “intellectually superior” and upwardly mobile Jews, yet never assert that intellectually inferior Blacks have an envy-driven hatred for intellectually superior and upwardly mobile Whites. Instead he would doubtless affirm the bogus narrative that Black hostility to Whites is a legitimate response to an insidious White “racism” that has impeded their social and economic advancement. This, of course, is despite that fact that this supposedly ubiquitous and malign force has somehow failed to hinder the social and economic advancement of East Asians in Western societies.

A National Socialist poster: “Bolshevism is Jewry”

A National Socialist poster: “Bolshevism is Jewry”


Nor would Aly extrapolate his pathological envy thesis of intergroup hostility to explain the vastly disproportionate Jewish participation in the Bolshevik Revolution and the other oppressive communist regimes of Eastern Europe. This despite that fact that, in response to legal restrictions in Tsarist Russia that limited their economic and educational opportunities, millions of Jews gravitated to Zionism and Communism. That envy and resentment were key factors behind the overwhelming Jewish attraction to radical left was obvious to Norman Cantor who noted:

The Bolshevik Revolution and some of its aftermath represented, from one perspective, Jewish revenge. During the heyday of the Cold War, American Jewish publicists spent a lot of time denying that—as 1930s anti-Semites claimed—Jews played a disproportionately important role in Soviet and world Communism. The truth is until the early 1950s Jews did play such a role, and there is nothing to be ashamed of. In time Jews will learn to take pride in the record of the Jewish Communists in the Soviet Union and elsewhere. It was a species of striking back.[i]

Advertisement - Time to SUBSCRIBE now!

Indeed a huge weakness of Why the Germans? Why the Jews? is the total neglect of the Jewish-Communist symbiosis and how this contributed (independently of envy at Jewish social advancement) to rising support for the NSDAP and other “anti-Semitic” political parties in Germany. It is common knowledge that when, after the chaos of World War I, revolutions erupted all over Europe, Jews were everywhere at the helm. One of Hitler’s most oft-repeated themes in the 1920s was the deadly threat that a “bloody Bolshevization” posed to Germany. In 1928 Hitler wrote:

The goal is the destruction of the inherently anti-Semitic Russia as well as the destruction of the German Reich, whose administration and army still provide resistance to the Jews. A further goal is the overthrow of those dynasties that have not yet been made subordinate to a Jewish-dependent and led democracy.

This goal in the Jewish struggle has at least to some degree been completely achieved. Tsarism and Kaiserism in Germany have been eliminated. With the help of the Bolshevik Revolution, the Russian upper class and also the national intelligentsia were — with inhuman torture and barbarity — murdered and completely eradicated. The victims of this Jewish fight for dominance in Russia totaled twenty-eight to thirty million dead among the Russian people. Fifteen times as many as the Great War cost Germany. After the successful Revolution he [further] tore away all the ties of orderliness, morality, custom, and so on, abolished marriage as a higher institution, and proclaimed in its place universal licentiousness with the goal that through this disorderly bastardy, to breed a generally inferior human mush which itself is incapable of leadership and ultimately will no longer be able to do without the Jews as its only intellectual element.[ii]

Another National Socialist source noted that: “Only those who have experienced that period of Jewish terror and slaughter, the murder of hostages, plundering and acts of arson [in the Munich communist uprisings of 1918–1919], are able to realize why Munich became the birthplace of National Socialism, whence the movement spread to other parts of Germany, and finally put an end to Jewish domination.”

Despite the centrality of the threat of “Jewish-Bolshevism” as part of the National Socialist platform, Aly completely ignores the whole topic because it simply doesn’t fit into his “pathological envy” theory of German “anti-Semitism.” In a work of some 304 pages purporting to analyze the origins Hitler’s popularity, the word “communism” rates a mere three mentions.

No mention of Jewish ethnic networking

In addition to his lack of consideration of how the very real fear of communism contributed to support for the National Socialists, another key weakness of Why the Germans? Why the Jews? is the lack of any discussion of the role of Jewish ethnic networking in the rapid social and economic advancement of Jews at the time. Jewish historian Jerry Muller acknowledged in his book Capitalism and the Jews the importance of Jewish ethnic networking contributing to Jewish upward social mobility, observing that “the obligation to look after fellow Jews was deeply embedded in Jewish law and culture, and it existed not just in theory but in practice.”[iii] A recurrent theme in Germany throughout the nineteenth century was how, if unchecked by the state, Jewish ethnic networking invariably led to their monopolization of entire industries and professions, and how this harmed German interests.

In 1819, for instance, the German writer Hartwig von Hundt-Radowsky noted that the anti-Jewish “Hep Hep” riots that year in southern Germany were precipitated by “the rights granted to Israelites in many states” which led “to the poverty and malnourishment that prevails in many regions since the Jews choke off all the trade and industry of the Christian populace.” He noted that the success that Jews recorded “in all profitable businesses ever since several states, guided by a misunderstood humanism, accorded them the freedom to choose their own trades, which is also a license to plunge Christians into misery.”[iv]

Around the same time the German academic Jakob Friedrich Fries likewise warned of the dangers that Jewish ethnic networking and nepotism presented for the native population, pointing out that “the Christian merchant, who stands alone, has no hope of competing.” Citing the example of Jews in the city of Frankfurt, who had been released from the ghetto in 1796 and had risen rapidly up in society, he warned: “Allow them to continue for a mere forty years or more, and the sons of the best Christian houses will have to hire on as their manservants.”[v]

The economist Friedrich List argued in 1820 that the state had the right and duty to protect the native German majority from Jewish economic domination and exploitation.[vi] Legal restrictions on Jews were lifted in the Grand Duchy of Posen in 1833, a region with a significant Jewish population. Soon thereafter a citizens’ committee on Jewish affairs noted that following the easing of restrictions it had not taken long for Jews “to take over high roads and market squares and dominate commerce and industry.” If they were given full citizenship rights, the committee argued, “almost all the towns and villages in the Grand Duchy would come under the exclusive administration of Jews.”[vii]

In the Kingdom of Saxony the general populace pressured the royal family to maintain anti-Jewish restrictions on certain types of economic activity. Dresden allowed “at most” four Jewish merchants, lest commercial streets “swarm with Jewish salesmen and trade fall into Jewish hands” Local civic leaders warned that any easing of restrictions would result in “Jews inundating the entire country so that soon farmers wouldn’t be able to sell a single calf without Jewish involvement.”[viii]

Kevin MacDonald notes in A People That Shall Dwell Alone that from “the standpoint of the group, it was always more important to maximize the resource flow from the gentile community to the Jewish community, rather than to allow individual Jews to maximize their interests at the expense of the Jewish community.”[ix] He makes the point that the propensity of Jews to engage in “tribal economics” involving high levels of within-group economic cooperation and patronage confers on these groups “an extraordinarily powerful competitive advantage against individual strategies.”[x]  The power of this strategy was evident by 1914 when Jews earned five times the income of the average German.[xi]

In 1916, the German economist Gustav von Schmoller argued in favor of only admitting small numbers of Jews to the higher ranks of the military or civil service. Otherwise, he feared, “they would swiftly develop into an intolerant dictator of the state and its administration. … How many cases have proved the truth of the prophecy that once you admit the first Jewish full professor, you’ll have five of them or more in ten years’ time.”[xii] In the same year, a delegate to the Bavarian parliament, Ottmar Rutz, noting this tendency and how it had resulted in the Jewish domination of the faculties of Bavarian universities, pointed out that “every Jewish professor and every Jewish civil servant keeps down a descendant of the German people. This sort of exclusion is what’s really at stake. It’s not a matter of insulting or attacking one or another descendant of the Jewish people. This has nothing to do with all of that, and nor do my petitions. This is solely about productively promoting the descendants of the German people and protecting them from exclusion.”[xiii]

Jewish overrepresentation among the learned professions was then, and is now, of such a magnitude that it cannot be accounted for solely on the basis of higher IQ and cultural differences alone — but was and is massively a product of Jewish nepotism. The role of Jewish ethnic networking in the vast overrepresentation of Jews at elite universities in the United States has been revealed by recent studies which have proved that Jews are represented at the Ivy League far beyond what would be predicted by IQ, whereas Whites of European descent are correspondingly underrepresented. For any given level of high IQ, non-Jews far outnumber Jews in America. For example, there are around 7 times as many non-Jews as Jews with an IQ greater than 130 (an IQ typical of successful professionals), and 4.5 times as many with IQ greater than 145. Obviously, there are not seven times as many non-Jews as Jews among elites in the elite sectors of the U.S. — quite the opposite. Would the situation, given the strength of Jewish ethnocentrism, have been any different in Germany in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries?

Virtually no mention of Jewish cultural subversion as a cause of “anti-Semitism”

As well as completely ignoring the crucially important phenomenon of Jewish ethnic networking, Aly fails to acknowledge the link between disproportionate wealth and disproportionate political, legislative, media and cultural influence, and how this influence was wielded by Jewish elites to reengineer German society in their own interests. Ethnic competition doesn’t only exist in the economic realm but in the cultural and political realms. Resentment fuelled by wealth disparities is only a part (albeit a highly significant part) of a multifaceted picture.

Kevin MacDonald has often noted that it wouldn’t matter if Jews were an economic elite if they were not hostile to the traditional people and culture of the West. The unfortunate reality is that they are hostile, and this hostility has existed for millennia. In Separation and Its Discontents he notes that the heightened level of resource competition between Germans and Jews, especially after 1870, “resulted in very large Jewish overrepresentation in all the markers of economic and professional success as well as the production of culture, the latter viewed as a highly deleterious influence.”[xiv] In his German Genius, Peter Watson observes that after 1880, and especially after the Dreyfus trial in France in 1893, “the Jews were increasingly identified as Europe’s leading ‘degenerates.’”[xv]

A National Socialist source from 1938 points out how “the disintegration and decay of German intellectual life under Jewish supremacy was most apparent and assumed their crudest aspects in the sphere of light entertainment art.” When, in the unstable political aftermath of Germany’s defeat in 1918, at a time when all barriers of law and order had broken down, “a veritable storm of Jewish immoral literature, obscene films and plays then broke over Germany.” The Berlin Revue proprietors who “were Jews without a single exception” offered the public “veritable orgies of sexuality and licentiousness. All realities of life were regarded from the one and only aspect of erotic desire and its satisfaction.” Berlin quickly assumed the mantle of “the most immoral town in the world.” The increasing spread of indecency and immorality forced the government in 1926 to “take constitutional steps for the suppression of filthy or otherwise low-grade literature.”

Revue poster from the Weimar Republic

Revue poster from the Weimar Republic

The themes of Jewish moral, cultural and political subversion permeate the speeches and writings of Hitler and other leading National Socialist figuress. In Mein Kampf Hitler argued that the Jewish influence on German cultural life largely consisted in “dragging the people to the level of his own low mentality.” Likewise he recalls how he once asked himself whether “there was any shady undertaking, any form of foulness, especially in cultural life, in which at least one Jew did not participate?” and later discovered that “On putting the probing knife carefully to that kind of abscess, one immediately discovered, like a maggot in a putrescent body, a little Jew who was often blinded by the sudden light.”[xvi]

In a brief departure from his “envy” theory, Aly himself acknowledges the prevalence of the belief that Jews, through the insidious political and cultural influence they exerted, were destroying mainstream German culture, and that this belief, which spread through all social strata “became a mass phenomenon and paved the way for the racial anti-Semitism at the core of the National Socialist worldview.”[xvii] According to this worldview, “At the close of the emancipation era in Germany, the Jews enjoyed a practical monopoly of all the professions exerting intellectual and political influence. This enabled them to stamp their entirely alien features on the whole public life of the country.”

One of the ways that racial and ethnic groups do battle for position is through controlling the thought and ideas that go into the minds of their competitors. That explains the invariable push by Jews to exercise domination and control over the media and entertainment industries. They realize that media influence is an incredibly important aspect of ethnic competition in the modern world: filling the heads of your ethnic competitors with things that are not true or which are inimical to family life or other adaptive behavior among non-Jews but which help your group to thrive. Those non-Jews who are aware of what is going on naturally resent this waging of ethnic warfare through controlling the public flow of information — and the Germans were no exception.

The German media in the years before 1933 was almost entirely in Jewish hands. The largest circulation newspapers, the Berliner Morgenpost, the Vossische Zeitung, and the Berliner Tageblatt, were owned by the Jewish Ullmann and Mosse companies, and were overwhelmingly staffed by Jewish editors and journalists. The Marxist press, most prominently including newspapers like Vorwärts, Rote Fahne, and Freiheit was likewise under Jewish control. The Jewish essayist Moritz Goldstein observed in 1912 that: “Nobody actually questions the powers the Jews exercise in the press. Criticism, in particular, at least as far as the larger towns and their influential newspapers are concerned, seems to be becoming a Jewish monopoly.”

Even Germans opposed to Hitler, like the Hamburg philosopher and women’s rights activist Margarethe Adam, acknowledged the reality of Jewish media control. In a 1929 discussion on the Jewish Question that she conducted with the Jewish historian and sociologist Eva Reichmann-Jungmann, she noted that “The Jew in his very nature is perceived by the Aryan as a different type of human being.” The hostility of many Europeans towards Jews was, she argued, an almost reflexive response to the “teeth gnashing disdain that Jews felt for Christians.” As evidence for her claim, Adam cited the mighty Jewish press, which was “rife with insults and scorn hurled at the great personages of the German past.” She explained that “this press is what causes people to speak repeatedly of ‘Jewish solidarity’ in the worse sense.”[xviii]

Misrepresenting Heinrich von Treitschke

To buttress his “envy” theory of German “anti-Semitism,” Aly cites the 1879 publication of renowned German historian Heinrich von Treitschke’s article “Our Prospects” in the prestigious journal Preussische Jahrbücher. This article was, Aly claims, addressed by the famous historian “to the sons of the rapidly declining artisan and merchant class,” a group that were “fearful for their future.” In his article, Treitschke raised the idea that “in recent times a dangerous spirit of arrogance has been awakened in Jewish circles,” and he demanded that Jews show more “tolerance and humility,” noting that: “The instincts of the masses have recognized in Jews a pressing danger, a deeply troubling source of damage to our new German life.” The most knowledgeable Germans, he proclaimed, were calling out with one voice: “The Jews are our misfortune.”[xix] According to Aly,

Treitschke’s “Our Prospects” polemic characterized Jewish immigrants to Germany from Eastern Europe as “an invasion of young ambitious trouser salesmen” who aimed to see their “children and grandchildren dominate Germany’s financial markets and newspapers.” The nationalist historian pilloried the “scornfulness of the busy hordes of third-rate Semitic talents” and their “obdurate contempt” for Christian Germans, noting how “tightly this swarm kept to itself.” The holder of four professorships in his lifetime, Treitschke worked himself into a veritable frenzy over “the new Jewish nature,” whose tendencies and attributes included “vulgar contempt,” “addition to scorn,” facile cleverness and agility,” “insistent presumption,” and “offensive self-overestimation.” All of these qualities, Treitschke claimed, worked to the detriment of the Christian majority, with its “humble piety” and “old-fashioned, good-humored love of work.” If Jews continued to insist on their separate identity and refused to be integrated into the German (which to Treitschke, meant Protestant) culture of the nation, the historian threatened that “the only answer would be for them to emigrate and found a Jewish state somewhere abroad.”[xx]

Aly takes Treitschke’s article out of its historical and intellectual context, and claims that the hostility toward Jews in Treitschke’s article, which Aly views as completely baseless, was “symptomatic of Germany as a whole,” and was grounded in pathological envy. However, the actual context of Treitschke’s famous article was explicated in Albert Lindemann’s book Esau’s Tears: Modern Anti-Semitism and the Rise of the Jews. Lindemann, noting how this context is “often neglected or ignored in accounts of the period,” observes that the real catalyst for Treitschke adding his voice to complaints about Jews in Germany was the nature of the work of the leading Jewish historian Heinrich Graetz and its enthusiastic reception among German Jews. Lindemann notes:

Although his History of the Jews is still lauded by twentieth-century Jewish historians as one of the great nineteenth-century histories of the Jews, there is little question that the sense of Jewish superiority expressed in it, especially in the eleventh volume, which had first appeared in 1868, was at times narrow and excessive. Indeed compared with it, Treitschke’s history of the Germans may be described as generous in spirit, especially in its treatment of the relationships of Jews and non-Jews, their relative merits and defects.[xxi]

Lindemann points outs that Graetz harbored a “deep contempt for the ancient Greeks and a special derision for Christians in the Middle Ages.” Presaging Freud and the Frankfurt School, Graetz considered contemporary European civilization to be “morally and physically sick.” Lindemann observes that “Graetz had written much that was stunningly offensive to German sensibilities of the time” and that it was hardly surprising that Treitschke responded with “such fury.” Celebrating deceit and guile as highly effective forms of ethnic warfare, Graetz had written that the Jewish writers Boerne and Heine had “renounced Judaism, but only like combatants who, putting on the uniform of the enemy, can all the more easily strike and annihilate him.” Moreover, in his private correspondence, Graetz “expressed his destructive contempt for German values and Christianity more forthrightly.” In a letter to Moses Hess, written in 1868, for instance, he wrote that “we must above all work to shatter Christianity.”

Jewish historian Heinrich Graetz

Jewish historian Heinrich Graetz

On becoming aware of such views, Treitschke angrily observed that “the man shakes with glee every time he can say something downright nasty against the Germans.”[xxii] It was reading Graetz and noting how his brand of history was so highly esteemed by Jews that prompted Treitschke to echo the reactions of many Germans to having their people, culture and religion derided by members of an alien race living in their midst, noting that:

What deadly hatred of the purest and most powerful exponents of German character, from Luther to Goethe and Fichte! And what hollow, offensive self-glorification! Here it is proved with continuous satirical invective that the nation of Kant was really educated to humanity by Jews only, that the language of Lessing and Goethe became sensitive to beauty, spirit and wit only through [the Jews] Boerne and Heine! … And this stubborn contempt for the German goyim is not at all the attitude of a single fanatic.[xxiii]

Graetz found his counterpart in the Weimar Republic in the figure of the Jewish intellectual and journalist Kurt Tucholsky who, using a variety of pseudonyms, “scoffed at the ideals of the German nation: he flung his biting sarcasm and venomous mockery at every religious and national sentiment.”   By deliberately excluding the historical and intellectual context of Treitschke’s famous article, Aly perpetuates the false narrative that German hostility towards Jews had absolutely nothing whatever to do with Jewish behavior. This deliberate distortion enables Aly to blithely dismiss Treitschke as an “intellectual agitator” and producer of “anti-Jewish polemics.”

The author also gives the German composer Richard Wagner this kind of shabby treatment, dismissing him as “a paradigmatic example of the way that resentment provoked hatred for Jews among German intellectuals and artists.” As I have previously noted, there is a great deal of validity in the opinions Wagner expressed with regard to the Jewish Question. Aly is unwilling, however to subject Wagner’s writing to any detailed and fair-minded analysis, simply arguing that “none of Wagner’s assorted justifications could disguise the personal economic interest that clearly lay behind his animosity.”[xxiv] According to Aly, anti-Jewish statements are never rational, but always the product of a warped mind, while Jewish critiques of Europeans always have a thoroughly rational basis.


Aly concludes his book by claiming that “Today’s generations of Germans owe a lot to their ancestors’ desires to get ahead in the world. Precisely for that reason, there is no way for them to divorce anti-Semitism from their family histories.” Reinforcing the toxic culture of the Holocaust that is today leading Germany to destruction, he argues that today’s Germans have a moral obligation to come to terms with and atone for “the murderous anti-Semitism of their forefathers.”[xxv]

Despite its many shortcomings (in truth because of them) Why the Germans? Why the Jews? has been lauded by establishment critics. Christopher Browning, writing for the New York Review of Books, described Aly’s book as: “A remarkably fresh look at an old problem. …  Aly is one of the most innovative and resourceful scholars working in the field of Holocaust studies. Time and again he has demonstrated an uncanny ability to find hitherto untapped sources, frame insightful questions, and articulate clear if often challenging and controversial arguments.”

The majority of Jewish critics have been similarly admiring. Dagmar Herzog, writing for the New York Times, maintained that “the lavish evidence Aly heaps on — from both self-revealing anti-Semites and acutely prescient Jewish writers — is incredible in its own right and makes for gripping reading.” The Jewish Daily Forward called the book “Consistently absorbing. … A penetrating and provocative study [that] offers shrewd insight into the German mindset over the last two centuries.” Misha Brumlik, writing for the German publication Die Zeit, labelled Aly’s work “Brilliant, passionate, provocative” and according to Michael Blumenthal, once Jimmy Carter’s Treasury secretary and now director of Berlin’s Jewish Museum, claimed that Aly’s “analysis of a profound social malady has made the incomprehensible comprehensible.”[xxvi]

However, for some, Aly’s pathological envy thesis — despite his assiduous efforts to locate the sources of this envy exclusively in the pathologies and malformations of the German mind — is unsatisfactory because it fails to fully capture the truly “evil” nature of the “anti-Semitism” that once pervaded German society. Writing for Commentary magazine the Jewish writer Daniel Johnson dismissed Aly’s underlying message as “a more scholarly version of Hannah Arendt’s ‘banality of evil’ thesis.” According to Johnson, “What made the evil of the Shoah ‘radical’ is that it had no social or economic rationale. Because it had no motive or purpose beyond its own insane internal logic, its cruelty also had no limits, no proportionality, no humanity. It was literally inhuman.” He claims that “envy is too mild a motivation” to account for “truly evil” depths of German Jew-hatred. In his view, “There is something darker, more pathological, more ‘incomprehensible’ going on here.”

While Why the Germans? Why the Jews? flirts with the truth, it is marred by the distortions and omissions I have identified in this review. Competition for access to resources broadly construed to include competition over the construction of culture is undoubtedly a prime cause of intergroup hostility — and it was an important contributing factor in German hostility toward Jews in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. To be charitable, making “envy” the sole causal factor for post-Enlightenment German “anti-Semitism,” is overly simplistic. The sources of German hostility to Jews during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were manifold: Jewish economic competition (exacerbated by Jewish ethnic networking and nepotism), disproportionate Jewish involvement in revolutionary political movements, and Jewish moral and cultural subversion and domination. Ethnic competition takes many forms, and the assertion by Jews of their ethnic interests (economically, politically and culturally) inevitably leads to hostility from those whose interests are compromised. The Germans of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were no exception. Given the ubiquity of “anti-Semitism” throughout history, it should be obvious to everyone that Jews themselves are the carriers and transmitters of “anti-Semitism.”


[i] Norman Cantor, The Jewish Experience: An Illustrated History of Jewish Culture & Society (New York; Castle Press, 1996), 364.

[ii] Adolf Hitler, Hitler’s Second Book: The Unpublished Sequel to Mein Kampf (Enigma Books, 2003), 236-37.

[iii] Jerry Muller, Capitalism and the Jews (NJ: Princeton University Press, 2010), 91.

[iv] Götz Aly, Why the Germans? Why the Jews?: Envy, Race Hatred, and the Prehistory of the Holocaust (New York: Metropolitan Books, 2014), 34.

[v] Ibid., 55.

[vi] Ibid., 34.

[vii] Ibid., 36.

[viii] Ibid., 38.

[ix] Kevin MacDonald, A People That Shall Dwell Alone: Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy with Diaspora People (Lincoln, NE: iUniverse, 2002), 247.

[x] Ibid., 217.

[xi] Götz Aly, Why the Germans?, 31.

[xii] Götz Aly, Why the Germans?, 132.

[xiii] Ibid., 137-38.

[xiv] Kevin MacDonald, Separation and Its Discontents: Toward An Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism (1st Books Library, 2004), 170.

[xv] Watson, The German Genius: Europe’s Third Renaissance, the Second Scientific Revolution and the Twentieth Century (London: Simon & Schuster, 2010), 434.

[xvi] Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf ( London, Imperial Collegiate Publishing, 2010), 281; 58.

[xvii] Aly, Why the Germans?, 4.

[xviii] Ibid., 161-62.

[xix] Ibid., 74.

[xx] Ibid., 77.

[xxi] Albert Lindemann, Esau’s Tears: Modern Anti-Semitism and the Rise of the Jews (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 139-40.

[xxii] Ibid., 141.

[xxiii] Ibid., 140.

[xxiv] Ibid., 39.

[xxv] Aly, Why the Germans?, 232.

[xxvi] Ibid., Back cover.

  • Print
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • RSS
  • Add to favorites
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • Technorati

51 Comments to "A Review of “Why the Germans? Why the Jews?” — Part 3"

  1. Veritas's Gravatar Veritas
    January 25, 2016 - 4:16 pm | Permalink

    Some of the biggest, most incorrigible, evil enemies of Germany and the historic German nation is… THE GERMANS THEMSELVES … as we see from this putrid verräter Aly (although he is not really a true Deutscher, or Arischer, but ist ein Türkischer – betraying the land who took his family in generations ago).

    The Crime of Our Age (1949) by Dr. L.A. Fritsch, Ph. D | Justice for Germans


    “I have had the bitter experience that the greatest haters of the Germans are the disloyal Germans themselves as was the disloyal disciple of the Lord, Judas. Many are so intimidated through the hate-propaganda that they will attribute the very worst to their own people because of their fear of losing their bit of bread and their comfort… I side a thousand times rather with that true patriot, that great German-American, Carl Schurz, the right hand of the martyred President Lincoln when he said: “I love Germany as a child loves his mother, and I love America as a man loves his wife.” This should be the attitude of every German-American. He who does not love his mother violates the Command of God and is not worthy to be honored by his own children.”

    (I would also disagree about Schurz and Linclon and the horrific war they waged against the South)




    *Schurz’s other sentiments about loyalty were spot-on, however.

    Verrat an einem stamm ist eine sehr verderbliche, unglücklich nordische merkmal — treason to one’s tribe is a very pernicious, unfortunate Nordic trait.

    • Veritas's Gravatar Veritas
      January 25, 2016 - 6:15 pm | Permalink

      Here is another shining example of eines Deutsch verräter, an untermenschen of the first order, who shamelessly lied and bore false witness against his own nation and people, helping to solidify the *Big Lie* among the court “historians” of the West on the “uniqueness” of German “war guilt” — the direct consequence being the needless shame, and unwarranted guilt, generations of Germans had to bear because of the groveling, opportunistic, self-serving böse taten (evil deeds) of these traitors:

      Who Started World War I? – LewRockwell.com

      The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914, By Christopher Clark, HarperCollins, New York 2013, 697pp.

      The question of the causes of the outbreak of the First World War—known for many years during and afterwards as the Great War—is probably the most hotly contested in the whole history of historical writing.

      At the Paris Peace Conference, the victors compelled the vanquished to accede to the Versailles Treaty. Article 231 of that treaty laid sole responsibility for the war’s outbreak on Germany and its allies, thus supposedly settling the issue once and for all.

      The happy Entente fantasy was brutally challenged when the triumphant Bolsheviks, with evident Schadenfreude, began publishing the Tsarist archives revealing the secret machinations of the imperialist “capitalist” powers leading to 1914. This action led the other major nations to publish selective parts of their own archives in self-defense, and the game was afoot.

      Though there were holdouts, after a few years a general consensus emerged that all of the powers shared responsibility, in varying proportions according to the various historians.

      In the 1960s, this consensus was temporarily broken by Fritz Fischer and his school, who reaffirmed the Versailles judgment. But that attempt collapsed when critics pointed out that Fischer and his fellow Germans focused only on German and Austrian policies, largely omitting parallel policies among the Entente powers.




      Fritz Fischer, 91; German Historian Blamed Germany for First War


      Outside his country, Dr. Fischer became Germany’s best-known living historian. The book that had caused such commotion was published in the United States as ”Germany’s Aims in the First World War” (Norton, 1967). Its title was a neutralized version of the German original ”The Grasp for World Power,” which gave a clearer idea of the author’s judgment.

      It challenged the traditional view that Germany, like the other great powers, stumbled into the war, and that there were those on all sides who tried to avert it or halt it before it grew into the catastrophe it became. Some modern British historians have also taken the middle view that there was enough blame to go around and that Britain had its share.



      *Verrotte in der hölle, herr Fritz

  2. buckle's Gravatar buckle
    January 25, 2016 - 1:18 pm | Permalink

    I speak some German and belong to a German meetup in my adopted city. I attended a meeting in a bar recently and was struck by the politeness, modesty and charm of the German women present. To think that more German women were raped in one year of Allied occupation than in the last fifty years by the Turkish immigrant community is a measure of the hopelessness of the present situation. Logically, the German nation is ripe for conversion to Islam.

  3. Veritas's Gravatar Veritas
    January 24, 2016 - 7:30 pm | Permalink

    BOTTOM LINE – Jews *envy* the Germans.

    All and everything else that is said, whether from them, or their lackey stooges, IS PURE PROJECTION.

    As I maintained on another blog thread on this site before regarding Jewish intermarriage rates (you know, how they so insist! to be against it yet intermix with supposed despised “gentiles” – as long as their White European, at substantially high rates), this is all part of a REVERSE PSYCHOLOGICAL TRICK the Ashkenazi use to browbeat and shame Germans, and other Aryan Europeans, into feelings of racial self-doubt, and to work against their national, tribal and cultural self-interests, whilst encouraging them to serve the Jews and Jewish power if they wish to “be somebody” or have a “greeeeaaaat career” – cuz you know, nuthin can be accomplished in life without the Jews’ .. or their kosher approval.

    Amazing how this insidiously evil propaganda works – and you can thank in great measure the traitorous philosemites, on the “Left” or the “Right”, for *gas-lighting* our Folk into such horrible levels of self-doubt and despair, and turning over the keys of our kingdom to them – such as with the utterly despicable haus-goy Aly.


  4. January 24, 2016 - 3:46 am | Permalink

    British Soldier’s WWII Song (sing these words to tune of famous hymn: “Onward Christian Soldiers”):

    ♫ Onward conscript army, you have naught to fear; ♫

    ♫ Isaac Hore-Belisha, will lead you from the rear. ♫

    ♫ Clad by Monty Burton, fed on Lyon’s pies; ♫

    ♫ fight for Yiddish conquest, while the Briton dies. ♫

    CHORUS ♪-♬ Onward conscript army, marching on to war | fight and die for Jewry, as we did before. ♪-♬

    ♫ You must die for Poland, pay your debt of thanks; ♫

    ♫ to your benefactors: International banks! ♫

    ♫ To place again the Germans, beneath the Jewish star; ♫

    ♫ onwards to the slaughter: Goy cattle that you are. ♫

    CHORUS ♪-♬ Poor? Perscuted Jewry, will finance war again | Forward to the slaughter, for the Hebrews’ gain. ♪-♬

    ♫ Driven to the shambles, like a flock of sheep; ♫

    ♫ by lying propaganda, by their plans laid deep. ♫

    ♫ So for Isreal Moses Sieff, you must fight and die; ♫

    ♫ that Marks & Spencer’s neon signs, may still light up our sky. ♫

    CHORUS ♪-♬ Forward, on to Poland, ten million men shall fall | that Judah’s reign of terror, may hold us all in thrall. ♪-♬

    CREDITS: “FruitVegFitness” (YouTube Comment)

  5. January 23, 2016 - 11:48 pm | Permalink

    Are Germans so amnesiac?

    If Germany had gotten off Scot-free in WWII, I can understand the guilt.

    But Germans paid a horrible price.

    10 million dead.

    Entire cities incinerated.

    2-3 million women raped in the most horrible manner.

    9 million expelled from former parts of Germany, 1 million dying in the process.

    Huge loss of territory.

    A nation divided. East under communist rule.
    West under US occupation, even to this day.

    Destruction of arts and treasures.

    Darkened reputation around the world.

    Huge reparations to Jews and other groups.

    And then think of all the great things Germany has done for the world by offering generous loans, technical expertise, economic advice, etc. since the end of WWII.

    Also, German contributions to humanity over the many centuries have been incalculable.

    But for some reason, none of that matters.
    It’s like Groundhog Day all over again, and Germans are 100% guilty and must atone over and over all over again.

    • January 24, 2016 - 11:22 pm | Permalink

      Excellent and truthful summary, Andrea. Thankfully, this video helps show that not all Germans have succumbed. There are young shoots of self-realization already thrusting for the light. Check it out. English sub-titles.

  6. gubbler chechenova's Gravatar gubbler chechenova
    January 23, 2016 - 8:12 am | Permalink

    I think we need to stop using outdated terms like ‘left’ and ‘right’. After all, our side will prefer pro-white socialists over anti-white capitalists. Indeed, we would even prefer pro-white communism to anti-white libertarianism.

    Instead of ‘left’ and ‘right’, we should think in terms of vertical and horizontal. Verticality is about hierarchy, roots, and locality. After all, a pole has to be stuck or ‘rooted’ in the ground. Also, a vertical pole has high areas, middle areas, and low areas. Verticality cannot not about equality. Also, verticality is fixed in territory like a pole is stuck in one place.

    People need verticality. They need roots. They need a specific place in the world. For example, Germany is over HERE, and Turkey is over THERE. Also, people need to understand that there will always be classes and different social outcomes among individuals. Some people will be more intelligent and rise higher. Some people will be more talented. Some people will run into bad luck.

    Strict ‘rightness’ is about verticality.

    Horizontality is about equality, movement, and universality. It tries to spread evenly all over the place. It is about spreading wealth, power, and laws.

    If verticality is like solid material, horizontality is like liquid. You need solid material to build stuff upward. You need liquid stuff to flow outward. Land tends toward verticality. Oceans tend toward horizonality. Land has hills and mountains and valleys and canyons. But all the ocean of the world is flat in surface. There are no such things as watery hills or mountains. Seas can produce waves, but they all flatten out eventually.

    Strict ‘leftness’ is about horizontality. Horizontality tries to level everyone and everything. It animates against barriers and hierarchy. Communism tried to create a society where people were like a sea of humanity without the ups and downs of classes. And some leftists want all people around the world to be equal or have equal access to wealth. Though horizontality can be forced and coercive, as under communism, it is also a natural force. Look at the animal world, and all creatures ‘steal’ from others. If a squirrel has ‘too many’ nuts, other squirrels try to take them. Also, if you allow cats and dogs to do as they please, they will run and roam all over the place. To keep them in one place, you need to put them on a leash or build artificial barriers to hem them in. The fact that humanity, since it first emerged in Africa, exist in all five continents means that there is something in us that is nomadic. Of course, we don’t have a single nature. We are made up of conflicting but also complementary natures. We see this in animals too. Dogs like to run around freely, but they also mark territory with urine. They have a keen sense of “which turf is mine, which turf isn’t mine”. And even as cats love to go outdoors, they also eventually want to return and sleep and eat in the safety of home.

    Because the left is horizontal in its leveling agenda, it supports open borders. If one nation has more people than another, then the excess population should flow into the other nation. It’s like once a cup is filled, the water will flow over and move all over the place.

    In some ways, capitalism is also ‘leftist’ in a sense because capitalists aren’t content to hold and contain their wealth within the borders of their own nations. They want their investments to flow outward all over the world and set up enterprises all over in the name of lifting all boats. Of course, unlike communism, capitalism freely admits to creating winners and losers as its ever-expanding investments flow in all directions around the world.

    Communism was about spreading the wealth around by taking from the rich and giving it to the masses.
    Capitalism is about spreading the wealth around by investing capital all over the world. For that reason, capitalists also value open borders. They want their investments to flow outward so that profits will flow inward.

    Capitalism is a hybrid creature, and it partially explains why Jews have been so good at it. There is, after all, the hybridity of rootedness and rootlessness in the identity of Jewishness.
    Capitalism is verticalist(or rightist-like) in creating hierarchies and classes. But it is horizontalist(or leftist-like) in its drive to spread capital all over the world and establish production and distribution systems all over the world. It breaks down national barriers.

    Now, there is value to both verticality and horizonality.

    We need verticality.

    Without roots and grounding in locality, there is no permanence and stability for a people. People need a homeland and identity. A people and nation need to be established in a specific place, much like a pole stuck in the ground. Also, vertical hierarchy will always be a fact of life because no two people are equal in everything. Though most people tend to fall somewhere in the middle, there will be elites and there will the underclass. And people need to find work according to their ability.

    We also need horizontality.

    We need movement and change. Without it, we would all end up in a rigid class system in which the upper caste hogs all the wealth, privilege, and power, while rest of the population feeds on the bottom. Who wants to live in caste system where, if one is born into a lower caste, he must remain at the bottom despite his talent to prove himself and rise up in the world? In such a world, those born high will remain high no matter how dumb and worthless they are, and people born low must remain low from cradle to grave.
    So, a person with 150 IQ who is born low must remain low while a person with 90 IQ who is born high will get to control the power. Despite some of the neo-monarchist crap we hear in some corners of ‘alt right’-verse, no sane modern person wants to live under a king. Besides, who gets to be king? Who gets to decide? And must we all bow down this king’s son, even if the son is a retard? Suppose we were born poor but filled with talent and intelligence. Must we suppress our abilities in order to serve the insipid spoiled mediocrities who were born high?

    And the concept of rights makes more sense than the concept of privileges. Rights apply to all within a community and protects freedom & property in accordance to the law. In contrast, the concept of privileges says some people, on the basis of some arbitrary and bogus grounds, are deserving of special advantages while the rest must do without them for no good reason. And privilege is not something that is earned. If you work at success and make a lot of money, that isn’t privilege. What you have is wealth created by work and ingenuity. Because it was earned, it is not privilege.
    But if you’re a dumb lazy fool favored by the state or powers-that-be simply because you were born high, then you are surrounded by privileges. I wouldn’t want such privileges. I wouldn’t want a government that says, “gubbler should have more privilege and advantages than everyone else simply because gubbler was born ‘special’.” It would mean that my vaunted status in life is bogus and has been bestowed on me by an unfair system. And I wouldn’t want anyone else to have such privilege over me and the people. The system and the law should be impartial in its interpretation and execution of justice.
    If someone does me wrong, he should be judged according to the same set of laws that apply to anyone else. If I steal from him, I should go to jail. if he steals from me, he should go to jail. The system shouldn’t allow me to steal from others on the basis of some special privilege. Nor should the system say someone else should steal from me because he is privileged and favored by the state. During the Aristocratic Age, a small class of people has such privilege over the masses, and it is no wonder that Enlightenment values were appealing to so many people. The people didn’t think it was fair for the upper-classes to do as they pleased and get away with it with the blessing of the state. And the American Republic was founded on principles that a man had no right to abuse his power simply because he was born high.

    So, there is a need for a system of laws that ensure basic rights under the rule of law for everyone in a given social order.

    Now, why did humanity have troubles with verticality and horizonality?

    Because both have their limits, beyond which the practice begins to break apart or undermine itself.
    Every idea has a useful limit. When it goes past that limit, counter-forces come into play to restore the equilibrium between verticality and horizontality. But I would still emphasize verticailty over horizontality because things begin with verticality. There must be a strong and healthy verticality before a strong and healthy horizontality becomes viable.
    Consider a tree. It grows both upward and sideways. The trunk grows higher & higher, and the branches shoot higher & higher. But the branches also grow sideways and spread out. This is true of the roots as well. Roots dig vertically into the ground but also grow sideways into the surrounding soil.
    It would be silly for a tree to grow ONLY upwards. It needs to branch out sideways too.
    BUT, there is a limit to its horizontal growth. There is limit, beyond which the horizontal branch will break and fall(or threaten the balance of the entire tree). So, even horizontality must be an extension of verticality. This is true of water as well. In order for water to spread sideways, it must first vertically fill up the space it occupies.
    Also, verticals can be mutually reinforced through horizontals. Suppose there are four vertical poles. Suppose horizontal panels are nailed from pole to pole to connect them together. If this is done well, then the horizontal links will help to mutually support the poles.
    Indeed, the European project following WWII worked so well because each vertical European nation was horizontally connected to other nations through mutual trust and shared laws. If this system is beginning to break down, it’s because extraneous horizontal panels and bridges have been added in ways that undermine than serve the unity of the poles. Nations like Greece are wobbly poles with poor grounding in the soil. So, when such nations are connected to the more stable ones, they exert negative force on the edifice than help support it. It’s like adding a midget to a basketball team will not make it better. Sometimes, more is less and less is more. If more is always more, every dish will be improved by more salt and Mona Lisa will be better with more paint.
    Worse, EU under its PC regimen has decided to nail onto the poles the horizontal weight of the Third World. With so many Muslims and Africans arriving in Europe, the whole system is coming under great strain. The EU project, if it is to work, must be about solid European nations mutually supporting one another. Solid vertical poles connecting via horizontal panels can be mutually supportive.
    But when the panels are extended far into the third world, the sheer weight of the unsupported panels exert strain on the entire EU edifice. If there are two vertical poles, and if they are connected together by a horizontal wooden panel, then horizontality serves verticality. But if we add an extra panel to one of the poles, and if this extra panel isn’t nailed to another solidly grounded vertical pole but just hangs freely for someone to swing from like a gorilla, it will be a case of horizonality undermining veriticality.
    This is why functional internationalism depends on functional nationalisms. And this system should exclude dysfunctional political systems that don’t play by the rules and just dump their peoples and problems on other nations and peoples.

    So, there is a limit to everything. We need to settle on the meaningful intersection between verticality and horizontality.

    Verticality must not go beyond nationalism and meritocracy. The vertical phenom of nationalism must remain within national borders. Hitler ran into trouble because his vertical German-ism extended into non-German lands. The German pole must remain on German soil. It mustn’t be used as a club to strike at other poles.

    Also, even though we need to accept class differences, we also need to reject something like aristocracy and monarchy that says privilege should be made permanent by blood. According to aristocratism, even idiots born to privilege should be favored by the system over much deserving people. It means that even smart and skilled people born without privilege must remain without it.
    Though Alt Right has attacked National Review and GOP for being ‘too liberal’, the bigger problem may be that Conservatism Inc has a monarchical attitude toward most white Americans. It thinks in terms of dynasty and privilege. Since Jeb Bush was born into the Bush royalty, we are supposed to get down on our knees like humble serfs. Just because rich kings like Sheldon Adelson and Koch Brothers can buy up all the cuck politicians, we are supposed to be meek and sing praises to Jews and Israel forever.
    Well, it’s a great thing that populists with pitchforks said NO and threw their lot in with Donald Trump instead. What is happening in the American Right is more like the French Revolution than the Restoration. Conservatism Inc has anointed certain individuals as the Royalty of the movement. And the rest of us are supposed to shut our minds and just obey these neo-aristocrats without complaint.
    This is really a form of neo-monarchism. I mean why did George W. Bush become president? Because he was part of Bush dynasty. And why did Jeb Bush begin his campaign with a $100 million war chest? Because he too is part of the dynasty that is now connected with super-rich globalist Jews. To the extent that the Alt Right took up pitchforks and said HELL NO to this kind of privilege, it does have ‘leftist’ and horizontalist tendencies, which need to be valued for what they are.
    Furthermore, suppose by some fortune, the Alt Right were to gain power in the US. Should we then meekly bow down before the great Alt Right leader and follow him blindly like the Germans followed Hitler? Well, how did that turn out?

    Just as there is a limit to verticalism, there is one to horizontalism. The concept of Rule of Law that applies to every citizen within the nation is good and crucial. Also, each person needs to be protected by the law and be guaranteed BASIC rights of justice. Otherwise, the powerful and privileged could just him like dirt with impunity. And justice will be denied to him since the system is on the side of privilege and power. Who would want to live in such an order? Of course, things would be nice if one could be part of the privileged class in such an order, but what person of true honor and self-respect would want to ‘win’ on the basis of favoritism?
    A student with any self-respect would rather pass or fail based on his talent and input.
    How would it be to receive a ‘C’ even when you did A-level work? Or be given an A even when you only did C-level work?

    The Left was on the right side of history when it pushed for equality of basic rights and equality of recognition based on meritocracy.
    It began to go wrong when it turned radical and pushed for forced equality against freedom and merit. And it went decadent and crazy when, having achieved all its basic goals in the West, it came up with ever sillier causes in order to remain ‘relevant’. We can see this among blacks too. When blacks struggled for basic civil rights and equality under the law, they were on solid ground. But today, they are making fools of themselves with the mendacious BLM movement and idiotic controversies about black actors not being nominated for the Oscars.

    There needs to be a limit to both verticality and horizontality. If anything, the two need each other. Horizontality in law works best within a vertically constructed nation.
    But, when a nation tries to spread its power, ideas, and values horizontally into other nations, things get confused, troublesome, and messy. Ideally, each nation should ensure rule of law and basic rights to all its citizens. But it is up to each nation to decide on how to go about achieving this ideal.
    There is also the danger that when the elites of a nation become immersed in the larger world, they no longer care about their own people. Look at Sweden, Germany, France, and UK. All those nations have lots of native whites faced with all sorts of serious problems. But the elites only care about serving Jewish elites and masses of darkies in the Third World.

    So, while horizontality has great value, it should apply only within the borders of a nation. It’s like water in an aquarium should be for that aquarium, not for all the aquariums in the world. Let the water flow freely but within that aquarium. It has no business overflowing or splashing into other aquariums. Let the principle of basic rights and rule of law apply to the people of that nation. And that nation needs to remind itself that it is not its duty to take care of other nations or intervene in their affairs.

    The intersection of verticality and horizonality is what we should be about. That was the promise of fascism before Mussolini got crazy with egotism and Hitler got crazy with German-supremacism.

    Verticality needs to intersect with horizonality. Verticality should NOT behave like horizontality. Imperialism was unstable because it was verticality behaving like horizonality. It was about the power of one nation spreading all over and gaining dominance over other peoples and nations.

    But then, it is also problematic for horizontality to take on the semblance of verticality. This happened with communism as a new privileged class gained total power in the name of ensuring justice for all.

    Verticality must act like verticality,and horizonality must act like horizontality. It’s like there is a need for solid material and there is a need for liquid materials. Solid materials should act like solid materials, and liquid materials need to act like liquid materials.

    A working intersection of verticality and horizonality would be as follows: On the basis of verticality, there would be the need to preserve national boundaries and ensure that the nation is defined by a certain racial & cultural makeup and imbued with a certain historical narrative and sacred myths. It would also accept the fact that there will the elites, the middle classes, and the lower classes.

    Once such verticality has been established and secured, the factor of horizontality would ensure that each person of the nation is guaranteed with the basic rights of liberty, conscience, and property. The water(liquid) of horizontality would be contained within the tall glass(solid) of verticality.

    The problem with globalist ‘open borders’ radicals is that they believe in the water but not in the glass.
    The problem of extreme rightists is they believe in the glass but not in the water. For them, the glass should be filled with solid glass and contain no water. That way, everything is frozen. Bottom of the glass is always on the bottom, top of the glass is always on top.

    But a much better system is a glass that contains water. That way, there is stability and security provided by the solid form of the glass, but there is also free movement that allows top to fall to bottom and the bottom to rise to the top. Indeed, consider how nice it would be if the Bushes were to fall to the bottom. Do we want the likes of George W. Bush, Jeb Bush, George P. Bush, the Bush daughters, and etc to on top of the glass permanently? Of course not.
    We want such mediocrities to fall to the bottom, and we want fresh blood-and-talent to rise to the top.

    What is dangerous about globalism is it perverts both the rules of verticality and horizontality. This is because the globalist elites are no longer bound to their land and people. Traditional aristocrats were bound to the land they inherited and the peasants who worked for them. And national elites relied on their own country and people for power. British bourgeoisie relied on the British middle class and working class. The French bourgeoisie relied on the French middle class and working class. There used to be national capitalism in America, and America’s business elites were bound to American workers.

    The elites were part of the vertical pole. They were the top of the pole, but they were still part of the pole, and, as such, connected to the rest of the pole. They couldn’t defy gravity and solidity.

    But the globalist elites can defy political and economic gravity of nationalism. They’ve created a system whereby they no longer need to be bound to any single nation. They live in their own realm not unlike the sky island in the MIyazaki movie LAPUTA: CASTLE IN THE SKY. They live in a world not unlike the sky city in GUUM, aka BATTLE ANGEL. They are like the elites in ELYSIUM. Their power and privilege float all around the world above all nations and all humanity. Given their free-flowing movement, one might say the elites are horizontalist and ‘leftist’. But if horizontalism is like liquid and moves on the ground, globalism is like gas and moves along the top. So, it reaches high and moves ABOVE the horizontal movement of the liquid masses. Mexicans moving en masse to America is like a demographic horizontalism. So is the massive movement of Muslim and African hordes into Europe. These are ‘free’ movements of mobs with little or nothing. In contrast, the globalist elites glide high above everyone and own & control most of the wealth. They float above the liquid masses of the Third World and above the boundaries of vertical national entities. if anything, they drop bombs on the national walls from their sky castles. George Soros is typical among these globalist elites. Indeed, the ONLY walls they tolerate are the ones around Israel. Globalist elites don’t fear the Third World masses since they live in a world of their own that defies gravity. Even if German streets were to fill up with criminal African and Muslim mobs, the globalist elites don’t have to worry about getting hurt since they have multiple residences in the richest and safest places all over the world. Even if all of Germany were to be lost and even if the German masses were to suffer on the street level, the globalist German elites working in cahoots with the likes of Soros could use their wealth and connections to live in some fancy part of the world in the Middle East, Latin America, Asia, etc. They have a sky-and-money mentality, not a blood-and-soil mentality.

    Because globalists defy both verticalism(which is rooted to a specific territory and can rise only so high) and horizontalism(which is about the leveling movement of the masses), they constitute a new mode of power: levitality. Their power levitates over everything and everyone. They hover over us like satellites and have control over the entire globe.

    A national elite is at the top of the vertical pole. Their high status depends on the rest of the pole. They enjoy more power, wealth, and privilege, but they are mindful of the fact that their position would not be possible without the rest of the pole.

    In contrast, the globalist elites float above all national poles. They are fixed to no nation. They use global finance, communications, spying, and intelligence to mess with the entire world. They can destroy all of the Middle East and then pressure Europe to take in millions of ‘refugees’. Thus, Muslim and African liquid masses horizontally crash through the weakened vertical walls of Europe.

    But the levitational globalist elites remain glibly and smugly above both realities as it floats around freely in its anti-gravity sky castles.

    LAPUTA warned us of the danger of rootless globalism.

  7. Fenria's Gravatar Fenria
    January 22, 2016 - 7:01 pm | Permalink

    The reason why the common folk never seem to see the work of the jews is for the exact reasons mentioned in this article. They have managed to couch their actions in the respectable realms of intelligentsia and higher education, in the very hand of markets themselves, and in the intricate cogs and wheels of financial engines. From these lofty positions, they practice their age old art of ethnic networking and social gatekeeping, letting in those that please them, and keeping out those who don’t.

    The common man is looking for the crazy drunk about to smash him with a pipe and steal his wallet. He has no idea that the kindly faced professor or earnest government official is doing more damage to him and his nation than any pipe wielding idiot ever could. The jew has made an artform out of not being seen, and predictably, only those with eyes to see can outwit him.

    • FKA Max's Gravatar FKA Max
      January 23, 2016 - 10:09 am | Permalink

      Very well put, Fenria.

      Psychopathy in the workplace is a serious issue as, although psychopaths typically represent only a small percentage of the staff, they are most common at higher levels of corporate organizations and their actions often cause a ripple effect throughout an organization, setting the tone for an entire corporate culture.

      It is interesting, that psychopathology is much more common among white collar professions, especially some professions, which are popular with Jews. I wonder, if there is a connection there?:

      According to Dutton, the ten careers that have the highest proportion of psychopaths are:[11]

      Media (TV/radio)
      Police officer
      Civil servant


      • T. J.'s Gravatar T. J.
        January 23, 2016 - 11:50 am | Permalink

        “We succeed by not naming ourselves”

        I don’t see any scientists, engineers, inventors, or mathematicians on that list.

        Wealth producers are at war with everyone else.

        Common thread of non-producers [liberals]- low visio-spatial skills.

        Accurate conception of reality assumes a normal brain- a balanced brain. A brain with good verbal AND spatial skills.

        A chain is as strong as its weakest link. High verbal talent does not offset weak visio-spatial. IQ scores should be based on the score of the weakest link- guess what would happen to jews and the ladies? Those with brain imbalance should barred from voting or holding office.

        Windows Experience Index uses such a scoring system. [7.9 is max]

        Processor 7.3
        RAM memory 7.7
        Graphics 6.6
        Gaming graphics 6.6
        Hard disk [ssd] 7.9

        Score: 6.6- Determined by lowest sub-score

      • FKA Max's Gravatar FKA Max
        January 23, 2016 - 1:52 pm | Permalink

        This is the highly politically incorrect one Million Dollar question: Is psychopathy more prevalent in Jews? Also: Is this form of psychopathology/personality disorder hereditary, and if so, is therefore perpetuated within the Jewish community through intermarriage among Jews? Have Jews intentionally interbred with each other to maintain a certain level of psychopathy within their population/community, because it serves their group evolutionary strategy/survival?
        Is this anti-social and mental disorder the true and real reason why Jews have been persecuted and expelled from country after country throughout the centuries? Is this the reason why Jews are more successful spread out across the globe, rather than being together in one place (e.g. Israel, ghettos, etc.)? Is their nomadic life-style an evolutionary strategy to avoid direct conflicts of interest with fellow Jewish psychopaths, but still maintain group cohesion, and does this explain why Jews promote and seem to benefit from and thrive in a globalized/open-borders world and environments?:

        A third is that psychopathy represents a frequency-dependent, socially parasitic strategy. This may work as long as there are few other psychopaths in the community since more psychopaths means increasing the risk of encountering another psychopath as well as non-psychopaths likely adapting more countermeasures against cheaters.[emphasis added][1][78][100]


        • FKA Max's Gravatar FKA Max
          January 24, 2016 - 11:27 am | Permalink

          This is just anecdotal evidence, but Jewish horror movie director Eli Roth had some brain scans done, and his brain activity is that of a ”part-time” psychopath. The uploader of this video came to the same conclusion as I did, namely, that psychopathy is more prevalent in Jews, because of centuries of inbreeding:
          Eli Roth is a psychopath
          Video Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=En10bS_JW6Y

          Published on Mar 24, 2012

          Eli Roth, the disgusting rat-faced freak who directed the Hostel and Hostel: Part II movies, creating the horror sub-genre called “torture porn” or “gorno” to express his sexual fantasies, turns out to be a psychopath. Who would have thought?

          Eli Roth also played an ugly-looking Jew in Inglorious Basterds, and describes the film as Jewish or kosher porn. He also stated:

          “It’s almost a deep sexual satisfaction of wanting to beat Nazis to death, an orgasmic feeling”.

          Many Jews are psychopaths or partial psychopaths, the cause of which is centuries of inbreeding. This inbreeding is also the cause of several genetic diseases among the Jews, such as Tay-Sachs, Gaucher’s disease, Niemann-Pick and many others.

          I already briefly touched upon this above, but I think, it is very interesting to note, that psychopathy is a frequency-dependent, socially parasitic evolutionary strategy:

          Frequency-dependent selection is the term given to an evolutionary process where the fitness of a phenotype depends on its frequency relative to other phenotypes in a given population.

          In positive frequency-dependent selection, the fitness of a phenotype increases as it becomes more common.

          In negative frequency-dependent selection, the fitness of a phenotype decreases as it becomes more common. This is an example of balancing selection.


          Psychopathy is a negative-dependent selection type of evolutionary strategy, and since it is/I think it is more prevalent in Jews, it also makes Jews as a group less fit/effective when their numbers grow too much, because their psychopathic behavior becomes too obvious to their non-psychopathic hosts/host nations, and results in resistance and countermeasures to their parasitism, i.e. 1930s Germany, etc.

          Important to note also, is that psychopaths exist in every race on planet Earth. But I believe, that Jews for various cultural reasons, have artificially (either intentionally or unintentionally) increased the number of psychopathic individuals within their own ranks i.e. interbreeding among Jews, epigentically activating the psychopath gene through religious practices and teachings, etc. Jewish religious texts are notoriously violent, supremacist, etc. Maybe reading these violent texts activates these otherwise dormant psychopath genes in Jews more often. Also childhood circumcision, and the trauma resulting from it, maybe a factor in activating the psychopath gene in Jewish individuals, that carry it, more frequently:

          Epigenetics is the study, in the field of genetics, of cellular and physiological phenotypic trait variations that are caused by external or environmental factors that switch genes on and off and affect how cells read genes instead of being caused by changes in the DNA sequence.[1][2]


          Also important to keep in mind with Jews, is their relative higher IQ, and their probably lower levels of testosterone in general, compared to colored people especially, which means, that Jewish psychopathy does not necessarily express itself in physical and serial-killer type of violence. But the Jewish/Israeli treatment of Palestinians is probably a counter-argument to this. As I stated above, maybe this more violent tendency only comes out in Israel, because it is a majority Jewish country, and so the percentage of psychopaths in positions of power is higher and influences public policy and collective sentiments more. But then again, Israeli Jews have on average lower IQs than their cousins, who interbred more frequently with Whites. Psychopathy researcher Kevin Dutton put it this way, and I agree with his assessment, that higher IQ psychopaths ”kill” in a different way than lower IQ psychopaths do, with their killing grounds today, primarily being Wall Street, the City of London, etc. (emphasis added):

          When psychologists talk about psychopaths, what we’re referring to are people who have a distinct set of personality characteristics, which include things like ruthlessness, fearlessness, mental toughness, charm, persuasiveness and a lack of conscience and empathy. Imagine that you tick the box for all of those characteristics. You also happen to be violent and stupid. It’s not going to be long before you smack a bottle over someone’s head in a bar and get locked up for a long time in prison. But if you tick the box for all of those characteristics, and you happen to be intelligent and not naturally violent, then it’s a different story altogether. Then you’re more likely to make a killing in the market rather than anywhere else.


        • Sgt. Pepper's Gravatar Sgt. Pepper
          January 30, 2016 - 3:07 am | Permalink

          This is the highly politically incorrect one Million Dollar question: Is psychopathy more prevalent in Jews?

          I think the extreme ethnocentrism of Jews— MacDonald calls it “hyper-ethnocentrism”— is like a kind of psychopathy. It is hereditary, a result of their selective breeding. It is not quite the same thing as the ‘generalized’ psychopathy that psychologists talk about, but it is similar, at least on the surface.

          P.S. That’s interesting about Eli Roth. His movie “Hostel”, which is about physical torture, has to be one of the most depraved movies I have ever seen— depraved even by Jewish standards.

        • Sgt. Pepper's Gravatar Sgt. Pepper
          January 30, 2016 - 3:18 am | Permalink

          I think that the ‘generalized’ psychopathy that psychologists talk about is psychopathy at the level of individual identity.

          Whereas the hyper-ethnocentrism that is so characteristic of Jews is psychopathy at the level of group identity.

          So they’re not quite the same thing psychologically, but they are similar. Perhaps the hyper-ethnocentrism of the Jews (which has a genetic basis) predisposes them to the other kind of psychopathy, at least to some degree.

        • Sgt. Pepper's Gravatar Sgt. Pepper
          January 30, 2016 - 3:38 am | Permalink


          I find the Jews to be horrifying and fascinating at the same time. I figure you’re in the same boat that I am in.


      • Kayla's Gravatar Kayla
        January 26, 2016 - 11:58 pm | Permalink

        That list can’t be right- it doesn’t mention politicians !

  8. John S's Gravatar John S
    January 22, 2016 - 1:34 pm | Permalink

    I sure HOPE everyone enjoys their freedom on the internet. I have been hearing some rumors on other sites that our freedom to use pseudonyms will come to a halt in the near future. I don’t know what will be the spark to achieve such a thing by our lovely elites, but I suspect it will come in the aftermath of some “terrorist attack,” thanks to the Western created caliphate.

    I just finished reading a book called Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation, written by Patrick Wood, a Christian who has been a critic of the Trilateral Commission since its creation back in 1973. The mission of the TC is to deal with a post-Capitalist economic era where energy credits substitute fiat currencies. The TC’s plan euphemistically called “The New International Economic Order” has to do with a system in which all debt is erased, all money turned into a form of credit whereby each individual is limited to how much they can spend (or use) based on their carbon footprint.

    The Global Warming phenomenon is an idea created by Al Gore and other shills, used as an instrument to change the way we think about consumption, and the challenge for the globe moving forward, according to the TC and other Jewish policymakers, is to address the threat of increased CO2 in our atmosphere, which, according to these elite groups, is to destroy Capitalism and strip private property from the goyim, and, most importantly, to let science replace politics/religion insofar that this new way of thinking will ensure the prosperity of mankind.

    The reason why multiculturalism is prevailing in the West is because it’s all part of this global plan to tackle our environmental challenges. It’s a holistic approach that will guarantee the breakdown of national sovereignty. Also, this whole fight against terror is part and parcel to the TC’s plan in the post-Capitalist era, which means that at some point, additional terrorist attacks will be needed in order to empower the global state, justifying its need for mass surveillance and the removal of all pseudo-names on the internet. Good times are coming, I sure HOPE you Christians out there are ready for this science-based Bolshevik revolution, something that will make Russia’s Bolshevism look like a Sunday picnic.

  9. January 22, 2016 - 12:28 pm | Permalink

    “…the nature of the work of the leading Jewish historian Heinrich Graetz and its enthusiastic reception among German Jews.”

    At Resisting Defamation, we are glad to see Heinrich Graetz added to the founders list of anti-German defamation. His hatred was so palpable that Graetz may easily be thought of as the penultimate cause of WW II with the 1933 declaration of war by Jewish organization as the ultimate cause.

  10. January 22, 2016 - 11:44 am | Permalink

    One wonders if Heinrich ‘we must above all work to shatter Christianity’ Graetz has been reincarnated as the 105th Archbishop of Canterbury. Addressing an ‘inter-faith’ gathering in Southall, London, a couple of months after the murder of Fusilier Rigby, Justin Welby said that ‘he did not want to live in a “monocultural” society.’

    An archbishop who shudders in horror at the thought of living in a Christian country. The Jews have indeed done their work well.

    • PaleoAtlantid's Gravatar PaleoAtlantid
      January 22, 2016 - 1:24 pm | Permalink

      “Archbishop” Justin Welby is of jewish ancestry.

      • Seraphim's Gravatar Seraphim
        January 22, 2016 - 4:07 pm | Permalink

        Anglicanism, Presbyterianism, Calvinism, Catholicism are thoroughly Judaized Parasynagogues.
        Was not Heinrich Heine writing:
        “In the Scandinavian and Anglo-Saxon sections of Europe and America, especially among the Germanic races, and also to a certain extent in Celtic countries, the customs of Palestine have been reproduced in so marked a degree that we seem to be in the midst of the ancient Judean life. Take, for example, the Scotch Protestants: are not they Hebrews, whose names even are biblical, whose very cant smacks of the Phariseeism of ancient Jerusalem, and whose religion is naught else than a pork-eating Judaism? It is the same in Denmark and in certain provinces of North Germany, not to mention the majority of the new sects of the United States, among whom the life depicted in the Old Testament is pedantically aped….
        The readiness with which these races have adopted the Judaic life, customs, and modes of thought is, perhaps, not entirely attributable to their susceptibility of culture. The cause of this phenomenon is, perhaps, to be sought in the character of the Jewish people, which always had a marked elective affinity with the character of the Germanic, and also to a certain extent with that of the Celtic races…
        I have spoken of the affinity which exists between the Jews and the Germans, whom I once designated as the two pre-eminently moral nations.”
        [Heine wrote these ‘Confessions’, which form one of his most characteristic works, in the winter of 1853-4].

  11. royalbrecht's Gravatar royalbrecht
    January 22, 2016 - 4:07 am | Permalink

    First, please allow me to thank Mr. Brenton Sanderson for wrtiting this piece! You just can not fathom the depths of teary eyed appreciation I have for any writer who merely tries to shed a balanced light on the NSAPD and German behavior during this period in general!
    It’s like half a century of bottled up frustration and anger at the things Jews have done being released like a torrent of emotional “I told you so!”
    Again, from the bottom of my soul, thank you.

    Now for the critique commentary:

    “…Aly can safely posit that “intellectually inferior” Germans who “lacked confidence in their identity” had an envy-driven hatred for “intellectually superior” and upwardly mobile Jews, yet never assert that intellectually inferior Blacks have an envy-driven hatred for intellectually superior and upwardly mobile Whites.”

    I don’t think Blacks are the envious types. Living on the fringes in Iceland, I am graced through the overflowing kindness of the Icelandic people with the usage of free computer use and WiFi at one of the many “libtard”-administered community centres where Sub-Saharan and West Africans congregate.

    The Africans have a very different personality than the Islamics here.

    Africans, although sticking together as an in-group, they really do their best to integrate and respect thee locals. Even though they probably do quite well for themselves in bedding the local women, they do so quite discretely as the women are well aware of the stigma attached to being caught by the population at large for having sexual relations with them.

    The Islamic N. Africans on the other hand are suspicious, secretive, devious, and, I suspect, agenda driven. They do not even attempt to integrate and instead expect the locals to accommodate and serve them with respect to food, government social security money hand outs, religious customs, and sexual gratification from Icelandic women.

    If I was not clear on the long term genetic ramifications of letting Africans blend with Icelanders or the consequences of having Africans coalescing in their own neighbourhoods, demographically overpowering/outnumbering the locals and the “Jewish anti-Kultura” that eventually takes hold of them, as in inner city Detroit for example, I would almost welcome them myself with open arms.

    “…In 1928 Hitler wrote:

    The goal is the destruction…as its only intellectual element.[ii]”

    It is truly amazing to me, whenever I read snippets of Hitler’s writings, how similar my views of Jews are to those of Hitler’s considering that I have never read Mein Kampf or much of anything that Hitler ever wrote!

    I once saw a “crazy” Youtube creation claiming Hitler actually escaped to Argentina after the war and died there in June of 1961.
    Further, according to what I read about enlightenment and reincarnation from a Tibetan point of view, after achieving “some limited” success in this area myself, I learned that Tibetans believe that the dead persons spirit “roams the planet” searching for a suitable body in which to reincarnate for some three to six months after dying.
    I was born in mid-November 1961.
    Okay…, now you can start throwing tomatoes and calling me insane, but sometimes I wonder if I am not Hitler’s reincarnation! LOL!

    “…Given the ubiquity of “anti-Semitism” throughout history, it should be obvious to everyone that Jews themselves are the carriers and transmitters of “anti-Semitism.”

    Edgar J. Steele also said, “Antisemitism is a disease, you catch it from Jews.”

    • John's Gravatar John
      January 22, 2016 - 2:40 pm | Permalink

      I’m surprised to learn that there are blacks and Muslims in Iceland. Just a few years ago, I heard about some scientific study of human genetics that was only possible to carry out in Iceland because it was so homogeneous.

      Are there many Icelandic men who are hooking up with black females? I bet not. It used to really bother me that white women get involved with blacks but that was due to the fact that that behavior didn’t fit with my understanding of how women behave. I have since revived my model and get a small amount of satisfaction at successfully predicting whores. And I think it’s inevitable that all hell is going to break out in Europe due to the massive influx of primitives and there may well be a backlash against all those who participated in the filth. All the whites (male and female) that got involved with the elemental peoples can be sent back with them which will benefit both black and white societies genetically because most of the lowest whites are greater than the average black.

      • royalbrecht's Gravatar royalbrecht
        January 25, 2016 - 3:07 am | Permalink

        I can not speak Icelandic well, but understand the lingo a bit better than I speak it, however I can read…, due mostly to one a year program sponsored by the Red Cross of Iceland (a charitable organization that I have come to regard as a sincerely well meaning and worthy outfit) and conducted at the local public library that invites foreigners to learn Icelandic through reading the local news paper.
        I attended these lessons religiously and basically was almost the only one to ever show up!
        So essentially I was doing several hours of preparation work for one hour of private tuition, given by a librarian who did his MA in Icelandic language studies no less!…, and revolving mostly around politically themed articles of my choosing!…, Holocaust denial and all!! Paradise!!
        Now I can read and understand a lot about local politics.

        So just this morning I read published stats showing that between the last three years (2013 [5 west Africans], 2014 [13 Syrians] and 2015 [35 Syrians] ) Icelandic Retards let in a sum total of 52 North African “refugees”.


        This does not make sense to me though, because there are half a dozen Ghanaian “studs” [these guys are prime specimens of African virility!] at the community centre almost everyday who just showed up within the last few months!

        Since precedent has shown that most of the Lame Stream Media throughout the West lie for the Establishment Freemasons and Jews, I believe I am within my rights to suspect that the source above is only telling the people part of the story.

        Iceland, in my estimation, is a country of contrasts.
        On the one hand, the people here exhibit cultural tendencies that are very provincial. In fact so provincial as to be at a level comparable to that of Canada during the time of my birth (early ’60s).
        So breeding with Negros is viewed a bit like importing foreign horses into Iceland…, a sin on par with Antisemitism or preserving the White gene pool (a.k.a. “Anti-diversity”) in Canada today.

        However, the relentless and coordinated onslaught of the Liberal-Psychopaths by Jewish Induction in the Establishment, through their usual channels, has the effect of rousing curiosity amongst the weakest female members in society. Moreover, a lot of menopausal, mentally retarded and infertile “mid life crisis” women have typical Jew-induced filth-fantasies regarding Black experiences…, but everything is done quite clandestinely to be sure.

        On the other hand Icelanders clamor to be on the cutting edge of technology, no matter how prone it is to surveillance (i.e. Facebook, “smart”-tech, etc.), detrimental with respect to the long term motor-development of their youth (gaming-kultura, etc..) or other self-harming, Jew-Induced, anti-kultura trends (i.e. homo-culture, fashion, “musak” [i.e. techno-rap, effeminate “Bieber-barf” genre, etc..], Jew proxy-owned and controlled “cripple-sports” [i.e. basket-ball, “robot-aeroibics”, blow-up body-building, cripple-skate-boarding, etc…]).

        However, on the whole, there are many positive signs here.

        One is that the politicians here, as retarded and corrupt as most of them are, are still largely Icelandic (not Jewish) and are deftly cunning liars, especially when it comes to spouting platitudes about tolerance and diversity to appease the tourism industry and the international press.
        But when it comes to actual numbers let into the country…, well…, I’ll let the numbers above speak for themselves. As incorrect as they may be, I suspect they are accurate within 10% to 20%.

        Another encouraging sign is that, although the people are by and large pathologically Altruistic by Jewish Induction, the politicians are either criminally complicit or suffer no such Jew-induced delusions.
        These politicians surely see the ongoing destruction of Europe through Jew engineered African and Asian invasion and and recognize it for what it is. They seem therefore poised to skip ahead to “phase three” of the sickness, namely; that phase that like in Denmark and other EU nations has effectively suspended the Schengen agreement and are doing boarder checks to keep out invaders.

        So in effect, because Iceland, due largely to its provincial nature, lags behind the rest of the West with respect to many Jew-induced psychotic characteristics, because of the country’s “plugged-in” nature (social media, alternative news sources, etc.) it is poised to forgo many of the mistakes the Jews have “Pied Pipered” the rest of the West into.

        Although Iceland is by all accounts controlled by a few families, there still exists a strong ethno-homogeneous “Volksvereinigung or Volksangelegenheiten”.

        I would say that culturally, Icelanders exhibit many of the same characteristics that the Japanese exhibit with respect to maintaining tradition yet embracing modernity.

  12. Amasius's Gravatar Amasius
    January 22, 2016 - 3:08 am | Permalink

    It’s almost painful to contemplate how closely the situations in 1920s-30s Germany and modern America (and the West generally) mirror each other. Painful but not surprising, since identical inputs will get you identical results. The Jewish impact on White societies is metronomically consistent.

  13. Seraphim's Gravatar Seraphim
    January 21, 2016 - 5:23 pm | Permalink

    Jews delusions of their own “election”, “superiority”, “exceptionalism”, their lack of insight for their real situation, belong to the domain of psychopathology.
    “Doing the same thing over and over and expecting it to come out different” is the definition of insanity (ironically misattributed to Einstein!).

    • Karen T's Gravatar Karen T
      January 22, 2016 - 6:06 am | Permalink
    • T. J.'s Gravatar T. J.
      January 22, 2016 - 9:29 am | Permalink

      Psychopathology means breaks from reality. But if you don’t deal with reality routinely, you can’t break from it. The antidote to narcissism is getting bitch-slapped by cold, unyielding Objective Reality. Creative Whites have much less self-absorption. Whites yield to reality, jews want reality to yield to them.

      jews don’t allow reality to smash their delusions.

      jews need to come to their senses? They don’t think so. So long as Whitey provides the goods jews can live in LA-LA land delusions. Cognition that would fail on a desert island “works” when Mighty Whitey subsidizes all losers.

      I wonder if all narcissists are subsidized. I wonder if narcissism would even be possible without subsidization.

      An argument could be made- let me make it here- that the world’s foremost problem is White Creators not caring which trash gets their output. Whites too make evolution go backwards.

      Karen- you must read Borderline Conditions and Pathological Narcissism by Otto Kernberg. [jew] “Narcissists cannot stand the autonomy of others.”

      Now, off to install a throttle return spring on my ’67 Chevy, and set the idle speed.

  14. mari's Gravatar mari
    January 21, 2016 - 4:54 pm | Permalink

    If you live near Los Angeles there is an exhibit of German impressionism at Los Angeles County Museum of Art the big one on Wilshire. The art is mediocore but there are some great anti bolshie posters. I bought a copy of one that says bolshievism is murder. There is a great one showing a jew bolshieveik standing on a pile of corpses.

    And yes, in my experience jews are immensely proud of their role in communism, affirmative action and school bussing

  15. Director's Gravatar Director
    January 21, 2016 - 3:08 pm | Permalink

    The books remind us of the pyschopathic behaviour of the Semites. The books are useful records of past crimes.
    Jesus was if anything a big softie.

    Big difference.

  16. John's Gravatar John
    January 21, 2016 - 1:47 pm | Permalink

    People with names like “Götz Aly” and “Gregor Gysi” or similar should not be allowed to live in Germany.

  17. John's Gravatar John
    January 21, 2016 - 1:38 pm | Permalink
  18. John's Gravatar John
    January 21, 2016 - 1:32 pm | Permalink

    I’ve often wondered about the reasoning that “the persecution of the Jews weeded out the weak ones and made them stronger as a group” but “the persecution of the blacks ruined them and keeps them in perpetual poverty”.


  19. Bobby's Gravatar Bobby
    January 21, 2016 - 11:51 am | Permalink

    I can’t understand why most folks seem to miss the obviousness as to why so many intellectually great Jews came out of Germany. They had great teachers in the Germans. LOL Can any one think of an Einstein or any Jewish nobel prize winner coming out of say, the India or China or even America of THAT TIME??

    • January 22, 2016 - 7:58 am | Permalink

      Hello Bobby, that fact is well known in Germany. This minority had full access to the knowledge of the German universities plus the advantage of open and secret ethnic networking of their group plus the money of their group plus the support of the jewish influenced press. And if someone did critic to this, than the jewish influenced press called him “Antisemit” (it was meant as a negative word). All this you can find in the book of Treitschke (Germany in the year 1880). Heinrich Heine is a very prominent example of that jewish typus. — Because these points were helping each other, this group could produce some scientists or painters or musicians who were more than average in the press. — But some Jews were just Germans. I guess, Robert Koch was one of them. — The book from Treitschke, in part in English, see http://www.probonocontramalum.de/Laufendes-2013-246.html

  20. January 21, 2016 - 11:10 am | Permalink

    “the obligation to look after fellow Jews was deeply embedded in Jewish law and culture, and it existed not just in theory but in practice.”

    Virtually all Jewish cultural dispositions can be traced back to their Torah’s levitical laws, injunctions and commandments. Christianity was nothing more than a Jewish revolt against Judaism.

    The modern versions of Christianity, especially the evangelical varieties, maintain their savior Jesus upheld the Torah’s laws. Christians therefore practice a bastardized version of Old Testament religion, not far removed from Judaism in its world view.

    Without a doubt, the Torah is the most psychopathic, destructive, self-serving book ever written and embraced by man (call now with a donation if you want me to pray for your wealth and success). For millennia, this historically fictitious account of what is in fact a law book, has been the source of countless wars, genocides, misery and suffering of those both embracing AND rejecting its teachings.

    If mankind wants peace, if humanity desires the restoration of the world to its original form and balance, then by necessity it must obliterate all traces of the horrible hag Judaism and her two ugly step daughters, Christianity and Islam.

    Otherwise, those following the literary roots of these religious carrion plants will continue to entwine, strangle and feed off mankind to the same bitter conclusions described by the authors of these horror stories.

    • T. J.'s Gravatar T. J.
      January 21, 2016 - 1:56 pm | Permalink

      Is the problem jews, or a certain jew book?

      That is, would jews act normally had Torah never been written?

      • DivaEl's Gravatar DivaEl
        January 21, 2016 - 4:30 pm | Permalink

        Jews don’t follow the Torah, which promoted the worship of God. They don’t even read it. They read and follow the Talmud, a compilation of the opinions and laws of the Pharisees and their rabbinical descendants. The Talmud promotes the worship of the Jews by the Jews — and, if they have their way, by everyone else on the planet.

        It’s important to realize that modern Judaism is a relatively new religion that sprang up after the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. After rejecting the fulfillment of Judaism by Christ and being deprived of the temple and the ability to offer sacrifice there, the Pharisees had to create their own religion to fill the void.

        • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
          January 22, 2016 - 5:21 pm | Permalink

          Attaboy, DivaEl.

          I’ve been saying and writing the same thing for years, to virtually no avail. I hold out little hope that you will fare any better.

          Before the Second Vatican Council your accurate account of history was a commonplace among all Catholics. What was truth yesterday remains truth today, of course—save that the only Catholics still embracing this truth are a figurative handful of my fellow Traditionalists, a group treated as pariahs by the Judeomason-corrupted hierarchy and the dangerous monster in the Vatican.

          Thus, on this matter I could hardly disagree more with our otherwise insightful colleague AnotherAmalekite, who writes just below that “this is why religion is completely useless for opposing jewdaism.” Yet surely it is the very fabricated and falsified nature of Jewish “religion” that lies behind its Dracula-like* fear and hatred of the Cross, which stands as the antithesis of Jewish perfidy and godlessness. As a consequence this is why the Jews’ near-total subversion of Christian churches represents so profound a defeat for Western man.
          *I’ve suspected for years that Bram Stoker’s celebrated novel is, among several other things, an allegorical account of Jewish depredation.

        • Hbm's Gravatar Hbm
          January 22, 2016 - 7:36 pm | Permalink

          Jews were acting like Jews hundreds of years before there ever was a Talmud. Their behavior among the Greeks and Romans was the same as it is among us. Even a cursory look at what the Ancients had to say about them reveals the Jews then as the same Jews we know.

          Your argument is a Christian one meant to protect your precious Old Testament, and it’s thoroughly Jewish in its desire to deflect away from the truth and redact reality.

        • Tudor's Gravatar Tudor
          January 24, 2016 - 1:50 am | Permalink

          Stoker’s adviser for Dracula was a hungarian jew, Ármin Bamberger, aka Vámbéry, no one else than the father of the pan-turanism.
          Somewhere on the internet it is said that Stoker is not a common irish name, and his initial succes is not natural.

        • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
          January 25, 2016 - 2:21 pm | Permalink

          Dear Tudor,

          Thank you for the information about Bamberger. But are you suggesting that the novel’s title character is its hero? If I have misread you, I apologize. If I haven’t, then trust me, he isn’t. There isn’t a paragraph in the novel that could possibly inspire sympathy for Dracula in a reader—unless that reader be a queer Jewish Hollywood filmmaker!

          Do you really think that the novel’s success wasn’t natural? Once I started reading it (fifty years ago), I couldn’t put it down.
          Dear Hbm,

          Your argument is a Christian one meant to protect your precious Old Testament, and it’s thoroughly Jewish in its desire to deflect away from the truth and redact reality.

          Neither testament requires human “protection,” least of all by me. And isn’t the assumption that one can psychoanalyze someone about whom he knows absolutely nothing “thoroughly Jewish,” too?

        • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
          January 25, 2016 - 5:53 pm | Permalink

          @Tudor: This is a belated follow-up to your earlier comment and my reply.

          Your remark that Stoker isn’t a common Irish name took me by surprise. My internal reaction amounted to “Irish? What do you know! All my life I’ve thought he was English.” And I let it go at that, or so I intended.

          But as the itch persisted, I finally gave in to it and looked him up. Lo and behold, Stoker was not stricto sensu Irish but Anglo-Irish! To the genuine-Irish half of moi-même, “Anglo-Irish” has always translated as “pure-blood Anglo-Norman occupier of conquered Irish land.” NB: I mean no discourtesy to any actual Britons hereabouts; I just ask that they remember that deprogramming the imprinted reflexes of one’s tenderest years is no small matter!

          In short, I suspect that Stoker is anything but an uncommon name among the author’s fellow Englishmen, though of course it’s far more likely that the name’s roots are Saxon rather than Norman.

      • January 21, 2016 - 6:16 pm | Permalink

        I think it’s possible the Talmud caused the Jews. And this applies both to the traditional conception of Jews, and the later Khazar idea. In either case, IF the book became institutionalised, there would be selection pressure on the readers. Non-compliers would be killed or thrown out. ‘Rabbis’ would gain in money, influence, and children. Believers would be advantaged. Sceptics and thinkers of a rationalist type would be killed, scorned, or whatever. Women who rebelled would no doubt meet unpleasant fates. It wouldn’t surprise me if the ugliness of Jews acted as a sort of uniform and identifier.
        . . . The same thing is true of Islam, though (I think) less so as Islam allowed conversion.
        . . . And, though this didn’t strike me until recently, something similar may have happened with the Latin church hierarchy and later, when there were translations into European languages, there must have been a similar effect on Protestants.
        . . . After all, books on medicine, art, agriculture, war, must have had genetic effects. Why not the Talmud?
        . . . BUT all the above is conditional on the beliefs having some advantage.

      • AnotherAmalekite's Gravatar AnotherAmalekite
        January 21, 2016 - 7:00 pm | Permalink

        Jewdaism is not a religion. It is merely an age-old worldwide syndicate of influence peddlers, blackmailers and other assorted criminals.
        It’s origins stem from man’s inability to justly rule himself.

        It is my belief that sometime in the dawn of history, some people within whatever government prevailed at the time (probably a monarchy of some sort), and just outside of official government circles, realized that their position and knowledge of government affairs and decisions allowed them to often preempt, circumvent or otherwise take advantage of decrees, laws and whatever else affected the average person, thus enabling them to maintain a quality of life above that of the average person.
        They eventually formed informal and even secret associations, by which they were increasingly able to coordinate their actions and better manage the affairs of their group.
        Then someone had the clever idea of establishing a religion, which was useful to deflect criticism from people outside of the group, who had noticed the group’s constant affluence. The group could then claim that their success was not due to their own criminality, but due to the superiority of their God, who bestowed upon them riches in return for their belief in him/her/it, while punishing others.
        This is my opinion on the origin of jewdaism.
        There is nothing spiritual about jewdaism. It is therefore not a religion the way most people understand the concept of religion.
        This is why religion is completely useless for opposing jewdaism.

        The most important thing to realize about this, is that if it hadn’t been a group called jews that did these things, it would have been some other group under a different name – but the end result would have been the same.
        Again, the existence of jews is simply a reflection of man’s inability to justly govern himself.

        Jews are the embodiment of very person’s greed, fears, desires, anger and practically all other emotions. This is why they are always accused of pandering to people’s base instincts – because that’s where the action is.
        You want Senator so-and-so to vote your way, all you have to do is let him know that you are aware of his extramarital affair, or that he’s molesting his niece or nephew, or whatever dirt you can get on him. After that, he will vote whichever way you want him to – or leave politics, to be replaced with someone more malleable.

        What can be done about this?
        In my opinion, the practice jewdaism in any form needs to be outlawed, under penalty of death.
        All living jews need to be given the option of renouncing their “religion”. They wouldn’t necessarily be required to adopt a “real” religion (this is not a conversion), but just to renounce jewdaism. Those who refuse, are executed immediately.
        Those caught practicing jewdaism thereafter, will be executed if/when caught.
        The goal is nothing short of the total eradication of all forms of jewdaism. Not a trace is to be left.
        If, after perhaps a couple hundred years, or several hundred, not a trace is left, then the world might be a better place – provided jews haven’t been replaced by some other similar group perpetrating the same deeds, as described above.

        The world has always been, and will always be, full of all manner of criminality, which stem from man’s base instincts, as described above, and his inability to justly govern himself.
        Societies outlaw criminality to varying degrees, depending on the particular offense. All forms of jewdaism need to be recognized as presenting a grave danger to any organized society and need to be dealt with in the harshest manner, in my opinion.
        Any associations that might evolve to replace jewdaism need to be dealt with likewise.

        • PaleoAtlantid's Gravatar PaleoAtlantid
          January 22, 2016 - 4:57 am | Permalink

          Masonry is saturated with judaic symbolism, goals and criminality. Attempted eradicaton of both masonry and judaism would only force both underground and make them more lethal to civilization.
          Better to have both visible and under surveillance.

        • AnotherAmalekite's Gravatar AnotherAmalekite
          January 22, 2016 - 2:40 pm | Permalink

          Masonry is saturated with judaic symbolism, goals and criminality. Attempted eradicaton of both masonry and judaism would only force both underground and make them more lethal to civilization.
          Better to have both visible and under surveillance.

          By this line of (non-) reasoning, we might as well legalize robbery, rape, murder and all other crimes, since prosecuting the offenders thereof only serves to drive their activities “underground”.

          All criminality is by its very nature “underground”. That doesn’t mean society should stop prosecuting criminals.
          Criminalizing jewdaism would de-legitimize it, which would have a profound effect on its pernicious influence on society.

      • royalbrecht's Gravatar royalbrecht
        January 25, 2016 - 3:21 am | Permalink

        A better question might be; “Would ‘North-African-Turkic-Slav’ mongrels act differently had the Talmud never been written?”

  21. FKA Max's Gravatar FKA Max
    January 21, 2016 - 9:40 am | Permalink

    Again, absolutely superb review.

    Thank you very much!

Comments are closed.