"Jews instinctively fear and feel threatened by nationalistic, particularistic societies." Part I
In a recent
in this forum, Hereward Lindsay wrote
that "Jews instinctively fear and feel threatened by nationalistic,
particularistic societies." Allow me to offer three examples of this.
That all three come from vastly different places only points to the
central truth Lindsay identifies.
First, consider the United States Air Force, a group which is heavily white, with a strong evangelical presence. Per Lindsay’s maxim, a Jew saw this as a threat, as a recent article in the Jewish Forward makes clear: "One of the primary critics of the Air Force has been Michael “Mikey” Weinstein, president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation and a Jewish graduate of the Air Force Academy. Last March, Weinstein’s organization sued the federal government to combat what it calls creeping evangelism in the armed forces, arguing that it violated the constitution."
The Air Force
Academy, incidentally, is located in Colorado Springs, CO, home to so
many major Evangelical groups that it has earned the nickname “the
Protestant Vatican.” One might credit Mr. Weinstein,
then, with the courage to go to the heart of the particularistic
point to note here is the brazenness with which American Jews in power
put other Jews in top slots. The above story from
The Forward makes it sound
like Jews are hardly represented in America’s armed forces, but the
facts speak otherwise about a group that is only about 2% of the U.S.
appointment, Schwartz becomes the third Jew in the top ranks of the
military, alongside Lieutenant General Steven Blum, who heads the
National Guard, and General Robert Magnus, who is the assistant
commandant of the Marines.
tries to dismiss the obvious—that a Jew now in charge of the service
that is most likely to act against Iran is an unlikely coincidence—by
passing it off as some nutty Iranian conspiracy mongering. But of course
it is too much to be a coincidence, just like
the odds are heavily
against both our Secretary of Homeland Security and
Attorney General “just happening” to be committed Jews.
Steve Sailer writes about the actions of one
Coen, "an Italian Jew in an overwhelmingly Roman Catholic
city who lives in an apartment filled with Jewish art [who] was in
charge of multicultural policy under the former mayor of Rome, Walter
Veltroni. Ms. Coen recalled a year when Chinese celebrated their New
Year with dragons around the Day of Epiphany."
alluding to Coen’s goal of diluting the Italian Catholic nature of
Italian society, closes with a quip that mirrors Lindsay's maxim above:
Do you ever get
the impression that Kevin MacDonald has secretly bought a controlling
interest in the New York Times
and is rewriting its articles to make them prove his theories correct?
reviewing a NYT’s article on
diversity in Italy, sarcastically titled his blog “Italy lagging
lamentably on de-Italianification.” As he paraphrases:
whole world be better off if Italy weren't so damn Italian? I mean, what
has Italian culture ever contributed to anything? When will the Italians
get with the program and adopt the Universal Globoculture? The
New York Times wants to know!
Just by quoting
Ms. Coen, Sailer achieves his point about Jews in fact working to
deconstruct nationalistic, particularistic societies:
The newspapers said the
Chinese were against Christianity,” she said. “So we held a public event
on the Campidoglio about Chinese culture and the New Year celebration,
and now we have a Chinese parade each year.
“It was the same with the
Sikhs,” she added. “We had a public event after 2001. We also organized
tours of the Capitoline Museums for immigrants. Then we asked them to do
something. The Poles, for example, had someone play Polish music at the
“Little things,” she called
them. “They can overcome big fears. I saw all these immigrants become a
little bit Italian citizens. Culture is crucial to give people here a
chance to see that to be foreign is to bring a different ethnic life to
the city, that diversity is a positive.”
psychologist Kevin MacDonald spelled out Lindsay’s formula about Jews in
a longer version. While we've seen it in the final book of his trilogy
The Culture of
Critique, a quote from his essay in the compilation
Race and the
American Prospect will suffice. In "Jews, Blacks, and
Race," he writes:
Consistent with what we know of the psychology of ethnocentrism, this
implies that a fundamental motivation of Jewish intellectuals and
activists involved in social criticism has simply been hatred of the
non-Jewish power structure, perceived as anti-Jewish and deeply immoral.
This hatred is typically combined with the specific complaint
that the pre-World War II U.S. culture was deeply anti-Jewish. A
particular focus of Jewish anger was the Immigration Law of 1924, which
closed off immigration of Eastern European Jews to the U.S.
There is no question that the 1924 law was partly motivated by a
consensus in the U.S. opposed to the political radicalism and clannish
ways of the recent Jewish immigrants.
The emotional intensity of Jewish involvement in the black-Jewish
alliance is mirrored in Jewish involvement in altering U.S. immigration
policy; both of these movements had strong overtones of hatred against
the entire white, Christian culture of the U.S., which was viewed as
anti-Jewish and profoundly immoral (emphasis added).
This year I've
been reading a decidedly non-racialist account of the black-Jewish
alliance, written by Culture Wars
editor E. Michael Jones. While I cannot agree with his insistence that
the religious/spiritual is primary in this struggle, I do find much of
great value in his wide-ranging writing.
In the March
issue (Vol. 27, No. 4), Jones addresses the founding of the NAACP and
the role played by "revolutionary" Jews.
Jones has long been at work on a book about the revolutionary
Jew, and it now seems to be available as a colossal book of over 1,000
The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on
with a useful overview: "The founding of the NAACP marked the beginning
of Jewish impact on American life. . . . The NAACP was a Jewish
organization, run by a board with no black representatives. . . Harold
Cruse [said it was created] 'to fight anti-Semitism by remote control.'"
Jones shows how
these revolutionary Jews ("Spingarn argued for violent insurrection")
recruited a black face for the movement, and thus W.E.B. Du Bois became
the public face for the NAACP. What is interesting is not just the fact
that such Jews used blacks as a battering ram against white rule and
independence, at the same time they prevented blacks from forming a
nationalistic, particularistic society of their own.
To wit, they
mercilessly attack Booker T. Washington and his movement, using Du Bois
as the main agent. Washington was destroyed by a manufactured "scandal":
"Washington, the leading black figure in America, was now associated
with voyeurism and the fatal sin of sexual attraction to white women."
Jones sums up
his essay thus: "Du Bois's job at the NAACP was to delegitimatize any
Negro leader whom the New York German Jewish elite found unacceptable."
Jones explains how "Du Bois moved on to his second job; the destruction
of Marcus Garvey." (The
April and May issues deal with the Leo Frank Affair.
Southerners especially might be interested to read how Jewish
animus against the "nationalistic, particularistic society" that was the
South motivated the long assault on that part of white America.)
from Jones's writing, I find more modern parallels. For instance, Jones
writes that "Du Bois's job was to promote integration and destroy any
black leadership in competition with the NAACP." Isn't that what we saw
Jews doing with William F. Buckley and his attack on “anti-Semites,” as
suggested by Murray Friedman in his book
Neoconservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of
In a bombshell revelation, Jones writes of the (in)famous An American Dilemma,
that Myrdal 'was neither Jewish nor American,' but, even after
indicating that Myrdal did not in fact write
Dilemma, he fails to tell us
that people like University of Chicago sociologist Louis Wirth, who
wrote large sections of
Dilemma, was both, and that
Myrdal had been brought in to give credibility to
what was largely a Jewish project,
because, as Friedman himself points out,
"the scholarly critique of
society that evolved into sociology had, like psychoanalysis, earned the
reputation of being a Jewish science (emphasis added)."
Then, in a key passage, Jones writes:
The NAACP was interested in
'integration,' especially in the South, because they understood that
integration would mean the end of the South as an independent culture.
The same was true of all of the other 'white' ethnic groups in the
North. As Harold Cruse later pointed out, the Jews were interested in
the integration of every ethnic group but their own, and in the Negro,
people like [Jew] Louis Marshall, now on the board of the NAACP and
still smarting from his defeat at the hands of Southerners like Tom
Watson, had found the vehicle for that subversion.
Jones goes on
to document the destruction of black nationalist Marcus Garvey, who had
started a steamship line to repatriate blacks back to Africa:
Once Garvey cited the NAACP as one of the conspirators determined to
bring him down, it was only a matter of time before he would bring the
Jews into the same picture. Garvey's suspicion that he was the victim of
an NAACP/Jewish-inspired conspiracy was strengthened when he learned
that the presiding judge at his trial was Julian Mack, in Friedman's
words, "a member of the German-Jewish aristocracy who also served on the
board of the NAACP." When Garvey's motion to have Judge Mack dismissed
for conflict of interest was denied, he became even more convinced that
he was the victim of an 'international frame-up,' declaring: "I am being
punished for the crime of the Jew Silverstone [an agent for the line]. I
was prosecuted by Maxwell Mattuck, another Jew, and I am to be sentenced
by Judge Julian Mack, the eminent Jewish jurist. Truly I may say 'I was
going to Jericho and fell among the thieves.'"
Garvey got the maximum sentence of five years, integration became the norm, and here we are where we are today.
Part II of this article.
See also Part II of this article.
Edmund Connelly is a freelance writer, academic, and expert on the cinema arts. He has previously written for The Occidental Quarterly.