Review: How the Jews Defeated Hitler: Exploding the Myth of Passivity in the Face of Nazism, Part 2 of 2

Andrew Joyce, Ph.D.


Go to Part 1.

After the outbreak of war, Jews were instrumental in restructuring the American economy in order to finance the cost of fighting it — ushering in what has been called ‘the military-industrial complex” and the massive expansion of government power. One of the key features of the Jewish historical profile has been the involvement of Jews in systems of taxation. In keeping with this trend, during the early 1940s Jews were conspicuous in transforming the American economy to one based on mass taxation. The Treasury Department was of course headed by Henry Morgenthau, but what is less remarked upon is the fact that Morgenthau staffed his department very heavily with fellow Jews including Jacob Viner, Walter Salant, Herbert Stein and Milton Friedman. Ginsberg states that these Jews “fundamentally changed America’s tax system.”[1] It is not without irony that while Roosevelt was effectively pardoning high-ranking media Jews such as Joseph Schenk for large-scale income tax evasion, the Jews in his administration were championing the introduction of payroll withholding or “collection at the source” taxation for the common working man.

Although the Constitution’s Sixteenth Amendment, ratified in 1913, allowed the levying of an income tax, exemptions and thresholds meant that prior to the New Deal only 3 percent of Americans were subject to it. By 1940, Morgenthau’s Jewish team had added more than 5 million Americans to the income tax machine. The same team’s 1942 Revenue Act brought the number of Americans paying income tax to 40 million — a move Ginsberg describes as a “turning point in the history of American income taxation.” Since closely administering such a huge transition would be difficult, Jews employed much the same style of propaganda as their counterparts in the Soviet Union did to ensure popular compliance in the war effort — blanket efforts of persuasion and coercion.

In the area of persuasion, Jewish treasury officials “presented tax payment as a patriotic duty and launched an extensive propaganda campaign to convince Americans that paying taxes was a form of sacrifice required to win the war.”[2] Ginsberg adds that “Jewish films studios and radio networks, as well as Jewish composers and media personalities, played an active role.” At Mogenthau’s request his co-ethnic Irving Berlin wrote a song, “played incessantly on the radio,” titled “I Paid My Income Tax Today,” aimed at lower-income Americans who had never previously been asked to pay income taxes. Suspicious that this wouldn’t be enough, Morgenthau, along with Milton Friedman and Elisha Friedman, pushed for a permanent coercive system of payroll withholding. Ginsberg comments that:

The result of the gradual increase in tax rates mandated every year between 1940 and the end of the war, accompanied by payroll withholding, was conversion of the income tax from a minor tax levied on wealthy Americans into a major tax levied on all Americans — from a class tax to a mass tax…According to Elisha Friedman, one key, in addition to collection at the source, was gradualism. Raising taxes gradually, Friedman told the Congress, “got the people’s minds accustomed to things” and lessened the chance of tax resistance and political opposition.[3]

Gradualism has of course also been applied with devastating effect in European societies in relation to immigration and the slow erosion of rights and freedoms.

Advertisement - Time to SUBSCRIBE now!

The sale of government bonds was another means of raising revenue for the war effort, and here too Jewish influence in the treasury and beyond was crucial. The two names most associated with popularizing war bond sales were Irving Berlin (who wrote the song ‘Any Bonds Today?’ at the behest of Morgenthau) and Bugs Bunny. Ginsberg writes that “Bugs, along with his animated friends Elmer Fudd and Porky Pig, was created by a Jewish producer, Leon Schlesinger, for the Jewish-owned Warner Brothers Studio. Bugs had been designed in the late 1930s to compete with the Judenfrei Disney Studio’s popular animated character Mickey Mouse. As opposed to the all-American Mickey, Bugs was quintessentially Jewish, sporting a thick Brooklyn accent, and was “sarcastic and disrespectful.”[4] After the studio was approached by Treasury, the studio produced a series of Bugs Bunny cartoons promoting war bonds at its own expense.

Jews were of course also dominant in the production of American wartime propaganda. The largest organization devoted to this enterprise was the Office of War Information (OWI). The OWI was heavily staffed with Jewish writers, the most important being Samuel Lubell. Lubell and the OWI authored a large number of pamphlets and guidelines that were disseminated to every organ of public communication with the aim of reinforcing hostility toward Germany. Guidelines were even issued to the movie industry, although, as Ginsberg remarks, “not unlike their Soviet counterparts, Hollywood’s large cadre of Jewish studio heads, producers, and directors needed little urging to join the war effort. … Most of the great propaganda films of this era were written, produced, or directed (or all three) by Hollywood’s Jewish filmmakers. Indeed, several of Frank Capra’s famous films were in fact written by Julius and Philip Epstein.”[5] The most famous wartime film, Casablanca, was funded by the Warner brothers, produced by Hal Wallis, directed by Michael Curtiz, and written by Julius and Philip Epstein and Howard Koch — all were members of Hollywood’s Jewish leadership cadre. The overall result of the activities of this network was that the American people “were the recipients of a steady diet of material emphasizing the need to support the war effort.”[6]

Aside from Jewish networking in the United States and the Soviet Union, Jews also presented formidable problems to National Socialism via their efforts in international intelligence operations. Code breaking and signals intelligence first emerged in significant fashion during World War I, and in 1919 the US army formed the Cipher Bureau, sometimes known as the ‘Black Chamber.’ It was disguised as a private civilian corporation and was heavily involved in decoding the diplomatic communications of other nations. However, in 1929 Secretary of State Henry Stimson famously declared that “Gentlemen to not read each other’s mail,” and withdrew funding for the Cipher Bureau, forcing it to close. The army, however, moved to establish the Signals Intelligence Service (SIS) and placed it under the leadership of William Friedman, a Russian Jewish immigrant who specialized in code-breaking. The move away from the kind of gentlemanly conduct espoused by Stimson, to what would eventually morph into the National Security Agency under Friedman’s direction is at least as profound a social and political change as the income tax transformations undertaken by Jews at the treasury.

Indeed, many traditional soldiers scoffed at the wholesale adoption of what they saw as under-handed, Jewish tactics. In particular there was resistance from the navy to the idea of working with Friedman’s SIS. Ginsberg remarks that:

Normal interservice rivalries were exacerbated by the fact that the navy’s intelligence officers did not want to cooperate with an army unit that was headed by a Jew and that employed a number of Jews in its upper echelons. The U.S. Navy was thought by many to be even more anti-Semitic than the U.S. Army, and according to a British naval officer who visited the U.S. Navy’s cryptology unit, “The dislike of Jews prevalent in the U.S. Navy is a factor to be considered in the prevailing animosity between army and navy code-breaking operations as nearly all the leading Army cryptographers [William Friedman, Abraham Sinkov, Solomon Kullback, and Genevieve Feinstein] are Jews.[7]

As well as the code-breaking successes of Jews at the SIS, Jews were prominent in human intelligence. One of the most important Soviet spies was Leopold Trepper, a Jewish Communist who operated a spy ring known to the Germans as the ‘Red Orchestra.’ Posing as a Canadian industrialist, Trepper and fellow Jewish Communist Leo Grossvogel ran a Europe-wide import-export firm via several frontmen who were clueless that the firm was linked to Soviet military intelligence [GRU]. Once the initial set-up was carried out, the GRU sent further ‘orchestra’ members Anatoli Gurewitsch, Hermann Isbutsky, Isidor Springer, David Kamy, and Sophie Poznanska — all Jews. They were later joined by more Jewish Communists — Abraham Raichmann (from Belgium), and Hillel Katz (from Poland). After the fall of France in 1940, Trepper set up two companies in Paris, Simex and Simexco. After soliciting German contracts, the Red Orchestra was able to obtain passes to German commercial circles, enabling them to gather information on German preparations for an attack on the USSR. By far the most devastatingly effective asset of the Red Orchestra was, however, a German traitor — the anti-Nazi aristocrat Harro Schultze-Boysen, who provided the Jewish Communists with volumes of information from the aviation ministry that he worked in. The Germans would later claim that the Red Orchestra was responsible for the loss of as many as 200,000 German lives. The group was finally broken in 1942 when German direction-finding equipment was able to get a lock on the locations of Red Orchestra radio broadcasts. Its entire staff was located and arrested in a rapid series of raids.

Other important spy rings were the Red Three, operated from Switzerland by the Hungarian Jew Alexander Rado, and one operated by the Polish Jew Rachel Dubendorfer that successfully obtained  advance knowledge of German plans to attack Stalingrad and the oil fields in the Caucasus. Since the acquired material was Hitler’s entire directive, it proved “invaluable to the Soviets.” Enabling the Soviet forces to counter the Germans and ultimately defeat them at Stalingrad, Jewish human intelligence yet again cost the German forces tens if not hundreds of thousands of lives.

The Soviets were of course aware of the threat of similar German operations. The Soviet Union’s lead counterintelligence agency was SMERSH, an acronym for Smert Shpionam, or ‘Death to Spies.’ Jews were hugely over-represented in SMERSH, and Ginsberg remarks that “Jews played an important role within SMERSH throughout the war.”[8] Led by Jews such as Iakov Serebrianski, Isidor Makliarskii, and Vilyam Fisher, the tight ethnic cohesion of Soviet intelligence circles meant that infiltration by non-Jewish agents of any nationality was especially difficult. “During the course of the war, SMERSH alone killed or captured nearly 40,000 of the 44,000 agents the Germans acknowledge having sent into the USSR.” This is a remarkable level of success.

British and American spy agencies were also heavily Jewish. Britain’s Special Operations Executive (SOE), which would be instrumental in the assassination of Reinhard Heydrich, employed more than 1,000 Jewish spies, the most famous of whom were the female spies Vera Atkins (born Vera Rosenberg) and French Jew Denise Bloch (later executed at Ravensbruck concentration camp). The director of the SOE was the Jewish banker Sir Charles Hambro, while its chief cryptographer was the Jew Leo Marks. The American equivalent of the SOE was the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), an early incarnation of the CIA. As well as boasting a large number of Jewish spies, Ginsberg writes that one group of ‘analysts’ within the OSS “consisted of a number of refugee Jewish intellectuals associated with the so-called Frankfurt School of neo-marxist social theorists. These included such luminaries as Franz Neumann, Herbert Marcuse, and Otto Kirchheimer.”[9] These Frankfurt School intellectuals were tasked with assessing the prospects for propaganda and psychological warfare as weapons against the German people.

Ginsberg’s final chapter deals with Jewish armed partisan activity. I found this particularly interesting because, much like the latter sections of David Cesarani’s Final Solution, accounts of such activity provide a (previously omitted) brutal logic to increasingly harsh treatment by the German military of Jewish populations within its reach. The first point worth emphasizing is that Jewish populations were deadly to German military aspirations. For example, while more than 25 percent of French Jews were involved in resistance efforts, only one percent of the non-Jewish population was engaged in similar activity.[10] The anthem of the French resistance was written by the Jewish novelist Joseph Kessel, while the most popular anti-German novel in French during the period, La Silence de la mer, was written by the Hungarian Jewish immigrant Jean Bruller. Two of the most important resistance fighters in France were Jean-Pierre Levy (who headed the nucleus of de Gaulle’s ‘secret army’) and Leo Goldenberg who operated the main Paris resistance movement.

In Belgium “the most militant resistants were Jews,” and the country’s heavily Jewish resistance network (RR) was responsible for multiple acts of sabotage as well as the targeted assassination of Jews co-operating with Germans. Resistance in Greece was orchestrated by the Greek People’s Liberation Army (ELAS). Ginsberg writes that “a significant percentage of the officers and leaders of ELAS were Jews” who adopted Greek names.[11] Greek Jewish partisans were responsible for the deaths of more than 2,000 German soldiers and forced the deployment of an entire combat division in order to counter ongoing sabotage efforts. Similarly, in Yugoslavia, “several thousand Jews fought in the partisan movement.”[12]

By far the most destructive partisan activity took place in the Soviet Union where “very often these early partisan groups were led by Jewish Communists.”[13] Partisan activity was relentless and devastating from the earlier days of the invasion of the Soviet Union, eventually prompting Hitler to issue a memorandum to the armed forces demanding the spread of “a kind of terror that would make the population lose all interest in subordination.” However, there was often a disconnect between local populations and the partisans operating in their midst. Indeed, because many partisans were Jews (and therefore outsiders dedicated to the regime) many villagers would often readily supply Germans with information on partisan movements. Despite being a relatively small percentage of the population of the Soviet Union, Jews constituted the third largest nationality group among Soviet partisans, and occupied many of the most influential roles. Because of this, anti-Semitic actions by partisans became subject to extreme punishment and one prominent Ukrainian partisan leader was executed for killing five Jews.[14]

According to Soviet sources, partisans killed 500,000 Germans in Byelorussia, and 460,000 in Ukraine, along with 5,000 locomotives, 50,000 railway cars, and 15,000 German automobiles. While historians debate the accuracy and extent of these figures, it is clear that partisan activity was hugely detrimental to the German war effort. Because of their extremely long supply lines and often ad hoc logistical planning, partisan activity emerged like an ever-recurring pestilence or plague, and was often heaviest in and around Jewish areas. This activity, rather than irrational prejudice, provided the Germans with the logic for the mass relocation and concentration of Jewish populations in ghettos during wartime, and prompted harsher measures as a means of deterrent to future attacks. While Ginsberg’s exploration of Jewish partisan activity is succinct and useful, it is ultimately inferior to Cesarani’s treatment of the same topic both in terms of factual information and analysis. For this reason and others, this was in my opinion the weakest of the four major chapters in How the Jews Defeated Hitler.

Ginsberg’s brief concluding chapter strikes the reader as a strange and ill-fitting addition intended to ‘beef up’ the book and make the slender manuscript a little longer. Titled ‘From Tragedy to Farce,’ Ginsberg moves onto a personal, neocon-style screed against “liberal anti-Zionism.” Ginsberg attacks the House Un-American Activities Committee and the contemporary American and European Left as anti-Semitic, as well as discussing ‘Black anti-Semitism,’ and ‘self-hating Jews.’ It’s really rather remarkable that after a volume that essentially discusses the importance of Jewish influence, and apparently rejects the notion of Jewish victimhood, Ginsberg should lift his final chapter right out of the ADL playbook. I believe that this is the result of Ginsberg’s own inner nature on these matters reasserting itself (as indicated by his own publication history), as well as being designed to appease mainstream Jewish elements and appeal to fashionable discussion points within that demographic.

Ginsberg’s How the Jews Defeated Hitler is nonetheless a fact-filled, concise, and efficient guide to the extent of Jewish power and influence before and during World War II. The fact that it places Jews in a belligerent role, both in terms of armed conflict and in more abstract forms of warfare, is a welcome and very much novel contribution to mainstream historiography on the experiences and actions of Jews during that period. Ginsberg’s writing style is quite bland, but the facts being relayed, and the splitting of each chapter into multiple sections, mean that this is not a volume that will bore readers. The production quality of the paperback is also quite good.

As always when I read a volume of history, I question at its conclusion whether there are any valuable lessons to be derived from the material and arguments presented. In this instance I was moved to reflect on a chapter from Kevin MacDonald’s Separation and Its Discontents, in which MacDonald puts forward a very strong argument that National Socialism was a group evolutionary strategy that in many ways mirrored Judaism. Taking this to be an accurate assessment, which I do, Ginsberg’s volume prompted me to conclude that National Socialism had failed to mirror one crucial element of the modern Jewish evolutionary strategy — its international nature. Germany ultimately had no answer for the vast exercise of Jewish international power during the era, and it was this expression of power and influence that, in the final act, was how the Jews defeated Hitler.

Those in the contemporary movement for White advocacy, the Alt Right, White Nationalism, or however they choose to self-describe, would do well to heed this lesson when discussing how to challenge modern manifestations of Jewish influence. Very often I see expressions of common contempt for Jews that run the risk of under-estimating their formidable strength. I always try to keep in mind that much wiser men than me have wrestled with this issue. The daunting task facing us is to rise to a challenge that many before us have failed. One of the key reasons for the failure of our predecessors was the rooting of their efforts in the nationalism of the nation state. This movement can and must evolve, and adopt a system of ‘international White nationalism.’ Today, the nation state has been reduced to an expression of civic globalism. Citizenship is paperwork and nothing more. Borders are weak, and will continue to disintegrate. Our strength can come only from cross-border cooperation.

I’ll end with the same thoughts that occurred to me at the conclusion of my 2015 article on the German dispossession under Merkel:

In this, the hour of our dispossession, there is no such thing as German nationalism, English nationalism, French nationalism, or Swedish nationalism. Your fight is mine, and my fight is yours. If any White nation falls, we all fall. To paraphrase John Donne:

No White nation is an island, entire of itself; every White man is a part of the race, a piece of the continent. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend’s or of thine own were: any European nation’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in their kind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee.


[1] Ginsberg, p.56.

[2] Ginsberg, p.58.

[3] Ginsberg, p.59.

[4] Ginsberg, p.61.

[5] Ginsberg, p.63.

[6] Ginsberg, p.65.

[7] Ginsberg, p.72.

[8] Ginsberg, p.87.

[9] Ginsberg, p.96.

[10] Ginsberg, p.101.

[11] Ginsberg, p.110.

[12] Ginsberg, p.111.

[13] Ginsberg, p.113.

[14] Ginsberg, p.117.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks

39 Comments to "Review: How the Jews Defeated Hitler: Exploding the Myth of Passivity in the Face of Nazism, Part 2 of 2"

  1. Kai Wesselchak's Gravatar Kai Wesselchak
    July 16, 2017 - 8:39 am | Permalink

    FYI, Villiam Fischer, AKA “Rudolf Abel”, does not appear to have been Jewish. His father was a Volksdeutsche (ethnic German) from Russia, and his mother ethnic Russian. However, nowadays most people with German-sounding surnames (especially ambiguous ones like Fischer, which are common amongst both Jews and Germans) tend to be Jews (mainly due to the brutal privations that many ethnic Germans suffered at the hands of (((Soviet Authorities))), and due to the fact that many of the surviving Volksdeutsche emigrated from Siberia back to Germany after the fall of the USSR)

    • Kai Wesselchak's Gravatar Kai Wesselchak
      July 16, 2017 - 8:43 am | Permalink

      However, his father, though an ethnic German (as far as I can tell, at least), was a devout Marxist, and was expelled from the Russian Empire for his Marxist views. No doubt he was at least good friends with many Jews.

      • Kai Wesselchak's Gravatar Kai Wesselchak
        July 16, 2017 - 8:50 am | Permalink

        Oh, and Viliam Fischer/”Rudolf Abel” took on the alias “Emile Goldfuss” when he lived in Brooklyn as an illegal Soviet agent… I wonder (((why)))?

        • Kai Wesselchak's Gravatar Kai Wesselchak
          July 16, 2017 - 8:51 am | Permalink

          And Wikipedia says he was fluent in (((Yiddish)))!

          • ex South African's Gravatar ex South African
            July 16, 2017 - 10:21 am | Permalink

            When it boils down to politics and history, Wikipedia is unreliable. For example the Cold War. South Africa and Rhodesia is not mentioned as a theatre of the Cold War.

            If one looks at the history of the authors of articles, many times it looks like a teenager posing as an historian amended articles from his backroom. No credentials need to be listed. Sometimes a single person of unknown origin acts as the chief historian.

            Very weak.

  2. AceOfLances's Gravatar AceOfLances
    July 16, 2017 - 9:15 am | Permalink

    I had no idea that the Internation of Jews had such effect during the war and, obviously now, after. The manipulation of whites, through our honor and sacrifice traits, is astounding. We really do need more vigilance, understanding and information sharing among the Internation of Caucasians as a rebuttal to this force. Thank you for sharing this article.

    • July 16, 2017 - 10:31 am | Permalink

      Hello, AceOfLances,
      ” … The manipulation of whites, through our honor and sacrifice traits, is astounding. …”
      I think that we should acknowledge that there are non-white groups, for instance the Jews as a group, that have their own interests. — For one simple reason no group can affront the whites openly. That reason is: because we whites (if we stand together) are by far the most important group in many fields (military, scientific, arts, the building of the modern world of today and possibly that of the next future).
      Therefore other groups have to behave friendly or stay away or fight without being recognized as fighters against us. If the other groups fight that secret way than it is their good right do so. As said above, that is the only way that they are able to fight.
      It is our own duty towards our own children to open our eyes. We whites must rescue ourselves. No one else will do that (and by the way: why should he?). — As the saying goes: Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

  3. anarchyst's Gravatar anarchyst
    July 16, 2017 - 9:43 am | Permalink

    It was Milton Friedman who came up with the idea of “withholding”…

    • Kai Wesselchak's Gravatar Kai Wesselchak
      July 16, 2017 - 9:15 pm | Permalink

      Just goes to show that the (((libertardian establishment))) is not what it claim to be. Then again, Cucky Gary Johnson believes in the government forcing “non-discrimination” (i.e. continuing the government policy of denying Whites and others free association and choice. This is most disastrous in the arena of housing, where anti-discrimination laws, Section 8, pro-minority lending, etc. all conspire to make it harder and harder to find a nice White neighborhood unless you work a TON to be able to afford defacto economic segregation.

      Not a problem for (((economic parasites))) like (((trial lawyers))), (((financiers))), etc., but getting harder and harder for ordinary, hard-working Whites.

      • T. J.'s Gravatar T. J.
        July 17, 2017 - 10:45 am | Permalink

        Friedman- I mean (((Friedman)))- advocated for guaranteed annual income [“negative income tax”]. That means he was a socialist. Hayek and Nixon favored similar plans, which means they were not libertarian at all.

        The voucher plan for public schools [(((Friedman)))] is an attempt to blend socialism with the market. It cain’t be done. . .

        Note that none of the above believed in natural individual rights- the cornerstone of true liberty.

    • Jud Jackson's Gravatar Jud Jackson
      July 17, 2017 - 3:55 am | Permalink

      Good Point. Back in my National Review Days, MF was one of my heroes. (Murray Rothbard)) has an excellent article called “Milton Friedman Unraveled” which shows that MF was no Libertarian or even Conservative.. Note I used 1 1/2 parentheses instead of 3 because I think MR was a good Jew. He supported Pat Buchanan in 1992.

      • T. J.'s Gravatar T. J.
        July 17, 2017 - 11:20 am | Permalink

        Both Rothbard and Rand tried to blame inflation on government instead of jews.
        Murray wrote What Has Government Done to our Money?

        From a review on the (((Mises))) site:

        When this gem first appeared in 1963, it took the form of a small paperback designed for mass distribution.

        Innumerable economists, investors, commentators, and authors have learned from this book through the decades. After fifty years, it remains the best book in print on the topic, a real manifesto of sound money.

        Rothbard boils down the Austrian theory to its essentials. The book also made huge theoretical advances. Rothbard was the first to prove that the government, and only the government, can destroy money on a mass scale, and he showed exactly how they go about this dirty deed. But just as importantly, it is beautifully written. He tells a thrilling story because he loves the subject so much.

        https://mises.org/library/what-has-government-done-our-money

        (((They))) tried to blame government rather than (((government))). (((Government))) because the private/jew setup would not exist without government granted monopoly privilege.

  4. thinkingman's Gravatar thinkingman
    July 16, 2017 - 1:19 pm | Permalink

    Just an idea, why not a movement “Goyem”, pro-goyem, because I think the muslims, and other non-whites, a few who do understand the enermy we share, would also like to work together. And of course we can’t critise or name the Jew, so use their name for us to bring every non-jew together regarless of nationality or race. Might be interesting to imply, so avoiding the tratorous and greedy amoung the goyem who like to take the easy money, that its a good of selfless goyem. Anyway just an idea, I’m sure others have thought about much more than me. Great post, thanks.

    • Kai Wesselchak's Gravatar Kai Wesselchak
      July 16, 2017 - 9:17 pm | Permalink

      I think that we should happily pursue this with any non-White group that respects White sovereignty (just as we should show the same respect to non-Whites, condemn (((neocon))) wars in the Mideast, etc.). “Nationalism for Everyone” is a great idea and can help us disarm the (((lugenpresse))) slur that we’re “White Supremacists”

  5. Armor's Gravatar Armor
    July 16, 2017 - 8:15 pm | Permalink

    This comment of mine has nothing to do with Jews during WW2 – it is related to the article conclusion:

    “No White nation is an island”

    Twenty years ago on French TV, phony political analysts used to register fake consternation at the fact that some small village in some corner of the country, “where no African migrant had ever set foot”, had voted heavily for the Front National. As if small villages felt like safe islands.

    A good illustration of the problem: All in the same boat.

    “Our strength can come only from cross-border cooperation.”

    Personally, my first interest is in Brittany. The Breton nationalist cause is now dying. The movement is so weak it can not do any harm to the French National Front. Even so, I think the National Front would get more support in Brittany if it decided to reject French civic nationalism. In fact, it would get more support all over France.

    One reason the Breton nationalist movement is dead is that, like everything else, it got co-opted. While the Breton establishment was co-opted by the French system, the rebellious nationalist movement was taken over by the leftists. The right-wing separatists were marginalized by the left and by the media. There were smear campaigns against them, in relation to WW2. Meanwhile, the left-wing elements got a few government-paid positions. They worked with the socialists to get a few of their people elected. They became even more corrupted. And so on. I guess something similar happened to the direction of the Scottish National Party, even though it is still a thriving party.

    We know the leftist takeover of Western society is largely a Jewish problem. The French tradition of jacobinism and centralized statism is narrowly linked to Jewish influence too. I think the same is true of the government’s hostility to the Christian religion and to the Breton language. I wonder who was to blame, a hundred years ago for the French government’s policy of destroying Breton identity. The Parisian bourgeoisie? The Jews, already? The abbé Grégoire, a French Revolution figure, was famous for advocating both the destruction of the Breton language and the integration of Jews in French society.

    Until a few years ago, the politically correct left-wing phony Breton nationalists saw racism as a French problem. The third-world invasion was only a problem in France. Brittany was not in the same boat. That was clearly a childish point of view. Today, the Jewish role should be obvious to everyone. Even so, most people in Western countries still blame the liberals, the media, the capitalists, the baby-boomers, women, and so on. Anyone but the Jews. As for Breton nationalists, they are still blaming “France”. That too is a childish point of view. They should know better. At least, they don’t risk any lawsuit if they blame “the French”. But they won’t get anywhere either.

    Even though Bretons are becoming a minority among White people in Brittany, I think it still makes sense to appeal to the Breton identity. The French civic identity isn’t appealing anyway. But people need to learn about the JQ.

    • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
      July 17, 2017 - 3:22 am | Permalink

      Excellent comment. Local movements are all the more viable that they are less visible and (((newsworthy))).

      • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
        July 17, 2017 - 3:24 am | Permalink

        I think this is the message I gleaned from Dr. Joyce’s article. The decentralized, protean Judaic model was extremely formidable.

      • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
        July 17, 2017 - 11:39 am | Permalink

        I share your admiration for Armor’s comment.

        I think that the crucial phrase in Dr. Joyce’s closing self-referential quote is its opener: “In this, the hour of our dispossession.” That is to say, the Donnean admonition, at least as here applied, to look at the big picture is a contingent one, the necessity to subordinate our otherwise vital local priorities for the sake of our posterity’s very survival being the apposite contingency. We need not, must not, become Jews in all but name if we are to defeat them.

        • John Walton's Gravatar John Walton
          July 18, 2017 - 11:09 am | Permalink

          Your comment raises the issue that much of the Alt Right seems to have absorbed most of the cultural changes that were so traumatic when they were being pushed on us. They are too young to remember a USA without black militants, women’s lib, gay lib, religion-bashing, smutty language, legal porn, legal abortion, nihilistic music, daycare centers, pot-smoking, speech codes, psychobabble, and Islam substituted for Communism as the official enemy. The social views of many on the Alt Right would put them in the counter-culture with Abbie Hoffman. We need to insist on going back to the older norms.

  6. Bennis Mardens's Gravatar Bennis Mardens
    July 16, 2017 - 9:07 pm | Permalink

    Great article.
    Thank God the truth is slowly seeping out.

  7. Ger Tzedek's Gravatar Ger Tzedek
    July 16, 2017 - 10:16 pm | Permalink

    For the NASA thing. I was accepted to speak at Mars Society convention in 2015 about how to cut the price tag by a factor of 10 with currently available technology. Ever since have greatly improved. I am, among other things, aerospace engineer. In 2015 I couldn’t go, the week after I had 5 qualifying exams for my second PhD. The choice was very hard, I had to choose. Now they didn’t accept my talk and I understand why.

    A minor thing called Icarus Interstellar would be fine with me, and they have always been thrilled with my science and engineering. Mike Mongo, the big guy of Icarus, called me genius, and that’s nice. Now they rejected my talk. The true reason is that I am too much… pro-Trump. OK, they don’t like my other ideas either. They offered to pay half of my expenses so that I could go and informally talk to people. That was too little for me and I declined.

    Had Eisenhower listened to Wernher von Braun, we’d be in Mars now. I am being overlooked for the same ideological bigotry.

    • Ger Tzedek's Gravatar Ger Tzedek
      July 17, 2017 - 4:41 am | Permalink

      The other ideas that they don’t like are that I have become open antisemite. I think that’s the way to be. Especially for somebody visible, being open does more damage to them. Whoever cannot afford open, must be closet antisemite. And actions must show it. Every little helps. Voting against the Jewish candidates, no matter the party.

      • T. J.'s Gravatar T. J.
        July 17, 2017 - 12:23 pm | Permalink

        Ger Tzedek – A Righteous Convert

        The word Ger has many meanings. The verb root from which it derives implies sojourning. However, in its noun form it means a stranger or outsider. When used alone, Ger almost always means a convert. When Ger is in any way used together with the word Toshav, it means a Ger Toshav, something entirely different than a convert. The Talmud devotes extensive analysis to determining correct interpretations of the Torah’s use of the term Ger. For clarity, the Talmud qualifies its own use of Ger with the term Tzedek, meaning a righteous convert. The term Ger Tzedek, as used in the Talmud and codes of Jewish law, means exclusively a full convert to Judaism.

        If a ger tzedek is a full convert to Judaism, then why does the Talmud call them a ger tzedek and not simply a “Jew?” The reason is that a convert is not 100% identical to a born Jew. For example, a female convert may not marry a Kohen (descendant of Aharon). A convert may also not serve in a position of communal authority (such as being a synagogue Rabbi) nor sit on a beis din (Rabbinic tribunal). For the purposes of discussing the laws involved, the Talmud must have some way to distinguish a convert from a born Jew. We should note also, that there is no other term in Hebrew for convert – only ger tzedek.

        6 Exodus 23:33.

        7 Avodah Zarah 64b.

        8 Arakhin 29a

        http://www.noahidenations.com/index.php/academy-of-shem/more-torah-wisdom/795-what-is-a-ger-ger-toshav-ger-tzedek

        • July 17, 2017 - 5:32 pm | Permalink

          Philosopher Martin Heidegger’s now well-known clarification of Jewish racism is, again, pertinent:
          “The Jews, with their marked gift for calculating, live, already for the longest time, according to the principle of race, which is why they are resisting its consistent application with utmost violence.” Talmudic sophistry then solves any emerging problems.

  8. Forever guilty's Gravatar Forever guilty
    July 17, 2017 - 5:10 am | Permalink

    Well frankly I think that Mr. Ginsburg book (about Big invincible Jews) is a little exaggeration. It’s the first time I heard that leaders of Greek and Soviet Partisan resistance has been Jews.

    I probably know less history, then typical TOO reader, but isn’t the Stalin killed Trotsky and practically all his Jewish allies in Soviet government? And the commander of Soviet secret service Yagoda and his wife Ida Averbakh were also shot on Stalin orders

    • Rosa's Gravatar Rosa
      July 17, 2017 - 2:47 pm | Permalink

      Trozky, Yagoda’ death was after.
      That the Soviet partisans were overwhelmingly Jew, it’s not a novelty. That many Soviet agents were the leaders of resistance groups in Europe, not a novelty too. They started with the Spanish Civil War. Not all of them were Jew, but a great proportion yes. In Italy, for instance, Levi, Ginzburg, Terracini…

      • Forever guilty's Gravatar Forever guilty
        July 18, 2017 - 1:36 am | Permalink

        “Trozky, Yagoda’ death was after”.

        After what? Sorry Rosa. I do not buy it. Trotsky was killed in 1940. Ygoda was killed in 1938 . Germans attacked in 1941. So Trotsky and Yagoda handled Russians from the grave?

        “Soviet partisans were overwhelmingly Jew”

        False. Give me the name just one Soviet partisan of Jewish origin. Jews preferred stay well behind the front line.

        • Franklin Ryckaert's Gravatar Franklin Ryckaert
          July 19, 2017 - 9:59 am | Permalink

          Jews are reluctant to fight for others, but they are willing to fight for themselves (See Israeli army).

          A number of Jewish partisan groups operated across Nazi-occupied Europe, some made up of a few escapees from the Jewish ghettos or concentration camps, while others, such as Bielski partisans, numbered in the hundreds and included women and children. They were most numerous in Eastern Europe, but groups also existed in occupied France and Belgium, where they worked with the local resistance.[1] Many individual Jewish fighters took part in the other partisan movements in other occupied countries. In all, the Jewish partisans numbered between 20,000 and 30,000.

          Source : Wikipedia, Jewish partisans.

  9. Mike's Gravatar Mike
    July 17, 2017 - 6:09 am | Permalink

    Thanks for another great article. One result of the last war was the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgenthau_Plan, the idea of destroying Germans & Germany. It confirms the reality of the hate and the power.

  10. Curmudgeon's Gravatar Curmudgeon
    July 17, 2017 - 6:14 am | Permalink

    “Ginsberg attacks the House Un-American Activities Committee and the contemporary American and European Left as anti-Semitic,…”
    I presume this refers to the “Left” at the time of House of Un-American Activities.
    The “Left” at this time, other than Jews, was almost always trade unionists. Anyone familiar with trade union history understands that while Jews were prominent in trade unions, the rank and file is generally reflective of the population as a whole, and in many ways conservative. Unlike today, old time trade unionists, other than Jews, were extremely anti-immigration, understanding that it reduces wages. Once landed and part of the workforce, however, the immigrants were embraced as brothers and sisters.

  11. July 17, 2017 - 4:23 pm | Permalink

    The account of Milton Friedman’s role instituting the federal withholding tax reminds me of something Arthur Laffer (of the Laffer Curve) is widely alleged to have said: “You want to prove that Milton Friedman is a fascist? It’s easy. Quote him.”

    Here’s Ayn Rand on isolationism (footnote 3 of “Ayn Rand on World War II”):

    “… if you want to go further back, go to World War Two and read about the campaign of … the Democrat-Liberal axis that were insulting as ‘isolationists’ everybody who was opposed to our entering World War Two. ‘Isolationism’ was regarded as a very dirty word. You were accused of being narrowly patriotic and selfish because you didn’t want to mix into a foreign war.”

  12. Elizabeth's Gravatar Elizabeth
    July 17, 2017 - 9:51 pm | Permalink

    All of the disagreements between ourselves–all
    members of the European family–whether religious, nationalistic, economic have led to our cultural and demographic dilemma. The only way to solve our collective problem is to act collectively. All previous attempts to simply hand the problem to our neighbors have been obviously ineffective. Prepare to expose, isolate and remove from power everywhere at once.

    • Harvey's Gravatar Harvey
      July 18, 2017 - 3:36 pm | Permalink

      Yes, much agreement. We ought to plan toward a decentralized intra-national strategy of culturally conscientious white nations. Conceptually, possibly the way a symphony plays; or how diplomatic or military operations achieve dynamic coherence.

  13. July 18, 2017 - 6:21 am | Permalink

    I stand in awe at this piece. While it adds to a burgeoning collection of knowledge to which I have now been made privy, the sheer volume of interconnectedness in this particular article is overwhelming. The presence of the Jew at critical points in history is truly breathtaking. Jews are indeed a formidable adversary.

    While Whites should work at assessing and exploiting the Jew’s weaknesses, they must be wary not to underestimate this enemy!

    For us, this is not a problem you can turn a blind eye to-one to be solved by small concessions. For us, it is a problem of whether our nation can ever recover its health, whether the Jewish spirit can ever really be eradicated. Don’t be misled into thinking you can fight a disease without killing the carrier, without destroying the bacillus. Don’t think you can fight racial tuberculosis without taking care to rid the nation of the carrier of that racial tuberculosis. This Jewish contamination will not subside, this poisoning of the nation will not end, until the carrier himself, the Jew, has been banished from our midst. ~ Adolf Hitler

    • Franklin Ryckaert's Gravatar Franklin Ryckaert
      July 19, 2017 - 9:51 am | Permalink

      And that was what it was all about : banishing the Jews from their midst, not exterminating them.

  14. Sam J.'s Gravatar Sam J.
    July 18, 2017 - 10:36 am | Permalink

    “…National Socialism was a group evolutionary strategy that in many ways mirrored Judaism… National Socialism had failed to mirror one crucial element of the modern Jewish evolutionary strategy — its international nature…”

    I have said often that infighting between the various White groups should be stopped. At least until the Jews are all walled up in Israel.

  15. Captain John Charity Spring MA's Gravatar Captain John Charity Spring MA
    July 18, 2017 - 7:10 pm | Permalink

    I think Hitler only grasped a small fraction of the power they wielded.

    They truly are a formidable race.

  16. Ed's Gravatar Ed
    July 20, 2017 - 9:30 am | Permalink

    I couldn’t help but think of the current Jewish media/Hollywood attack on Trump and white nationalism that has been prominent in European elections. The same Jewish apparatus, the same Jew propaganda of how white nationalism will plunge countries into death and despair. The Jews stating that Trump and Putin want to subvert the West- the same west that was obviously subverted by Jews as explained in these two articles. All this Jewish bullshit. Trump and Putin could be the winning combination for whites and the Jews obviously know and fear that. These articles should be shared with as many people as possible.


Comment Policy
Comments that include personal insults, epithets, or profanity may be censored. Comments that promote or suggest illegal activities will be censored.


Comment Formatting
<b>BOLD</b>
<u>UNDERLINE</u>
<i>ITALIC</i>
<a href="http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net">HYPERLINK</a>

<blockquote> BLOCKQUOTE </blockquote>

Leave a Reply