|
|
Strange Bedfellows
E.
Michael Jones and Israel Shamir: “A Report from Planet Mammon”
Edmund
Connelly
December
6, 2008
Anyone
who has followed the writing career of Catholic iconoclast E. Michael Jones will
likely agree that his writings on Jews over the last half decade have been
little short of incendiary. Thus the Internet site Fringe
Watch claims that Jones “represents one of the foremost proponents
of ‘religious’ anti-Semitism in Catholic circles.”
Jones’s
major vehicle for airing his views on Jews is his magazine Culture Wars, which
in recent years has run cover stories such as "Judaizing: Then and Now," "The
Converso Problem: Then and Now," "Shylock Comes to Notre Dame," and “Too Many
Yarmulkes: Abortion and the Ethnic Double Standard.” He then packaged these
arguments in a monumental book called The
Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History,
which I began to read last month.
Viewed
in isolation, some of Jones’s essays in his monthly magazine may appear as
rambling, disjointed streams of thought, but once you have read enough of them,
a central theme appears.
In essence, Jones’s view is that Jews, having rejected Logos (by rejecting Christ) were inevitably rendered revolutionaries. Jones’s treatment of various modern Jewish revolutionaries reads very much like Kevin MacDonald’s description of Jewish “movements” that undermined the West, movements such as Freudian psychology, Boasian anthropology, and so on. In effect, Jones is describing some of the subversive Jewish movements that MacDonald did not address in The Culture of Critique.
With
respect to the Civil Rights movement, for instance, Jones notes that “virtually
every black leader in the 20th century had a Jewish mentor, backer or controller
who introduced him to revolutionary ideas or organizations.” Jones sees the
process as Jews “luring Blacks away from Christianity into fantasies of heaven
on earth, which could only be brought about by the violence which flowed from
Messianic politics.”
Other
fascinating approaches include film critiques such as Jones's review of
Spielberg’s Munich. “We live,” Jones
begins, “in a culture which erects monuments to Jewish culture. We also live in
a culture which prohibits unauthorized interpretations of Jewish
monuments.”
Here
Jones introduces his claim of Jewish control of discourse, proffering such lines
as “Munich is a movie about the rules
of Jewish discourse. It is also a movie about how giving the wrong answer to a
Jew will result in your death or the death of your
career.”
In
an analysis sadly lacking in most modern discussions of modern American culture,
Jones illuminates the way in which “Jewish literary critics like Stanley Fish
and Jacques Derrida were changing the rules of discourse.” “Discourse had become
Jewish, which is to say, those who wanted to be heard and taken seriously had to
follow the new rules.”
At
every turn Jones violates those new rules. Consider, for example, his blunt
assessment of abortion in America: “Support of abortion is a largely Jewish
phenomenon. Indeed, although no one is allowed to say this, if there is a group
responsible for the legalization of abortion in America, it is Jews.”
Ouch!
Jones also examines popular music and architecture. Bob Dylan, Jones argues, was a leading revolutionary — “the bard who made Jewish revolution plausible in a peculiarly American way.” Frank Gehry, according to Jones, designs ugly buildings because as a Jew, he rejects Logos. Throw in other such Jewish architects as Daniel Libeskind or Peter Eisenman and you end up with “grotesque buildings” which they have built as “monuments to their hatred of Logos.” The photos accompanying the essay support such a claim.
Daniel Libeskind's Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto
Now
comes his November issue of Culture
Wars, with yet another provocative cover, this time showing the tall,
sandy-haired Jones standing with his arm around the diminutive Israel Shamir.
The Latin title “Ut Unum Sint” refers to the Catholic encyclical “That They May
Be One,” but it is the subtitle that is so delicious: “A Report from Planet
Mammon.”
Jones
opens his essay by noting the power of the neocons to push America in a warlike
direction that benefits Israel. Soon, however, he warms to his theme of the last
half dozen years: Jews are a disruptive revolutionary force because of their
rejection of Logos. In November’s essay he allows Shamir to carry the load in
expounding upon this.
Peter Eisenman's City of Culture of Galicia in Santiago de Compostela, Spain
Shamir
can do this because he is a Jewish convert to Christianity, a conversion both he
and Jones see as a rebirth away from “the Judaic cult of Death.” Drawing from
Shamir’s book Cabbala
of Power, Jones employs quotes that reinforce St. Paul’s ideas on the Jews,
namely that they are “the enemy of mankind.”
Earlier
this year Shamir had written an article on Jimmy Carter and the Jewish “swarm attack”
against him. In Cabbala,
Shamir returns to this idea of a reflexive Jewish assault, arguing that Jews
“have no king, but they attack in formation and devastate whole countries as if
by plan.” The metaphor is apt.
Neither
Jones nor Shamir buy the oft-heard Jewish explanation for anti-Semitism, that
“it is because of what we are, not what we do.” Jones berates Jewish apologists
who are “determined to ignore the toxic effect of Jewish behavior on native
populations and the inevitable reaction which it brings forth from them,” a
theme developed at length in Kevin MacDonald’s second book in his Jewish
trilogy, Separation
and Its Discontents: Toward an Evolutionary Theory of
Anti-Semitism.
One
can understand Jones’s affection for Shamir by dint of the fact that both reject
a physical, essentialist identity for Jews based on DNA. Instead, both men
accept a theological basis for their definitions, with the Catholic Church as
the true path.
Through
this lens, the current neocon takeover of American Middle East policy becomes
“The Jewish-American empire,” “the church of darkness” — literally a church in
competition with the True Church.
As
developed in Shamir’s latest book, Masters
of Discourse, this idea of theological competition speaks directly to
today’s world events. Jones credits Shamir as being a “man of his age precisely
because . . . he can name the evil of this age without hesitation or
circumlocution.” Shamir sums up this evil situation:
When
the Church is subjugated, Jews triumph and when Jews triumph, mankind suffers.
The Jewish universe is good for Jews. It is a curse for the others. . . . In
Eastern Europe, times of Jewish
dominance were the worst experienced by the ordinary people. . . . A good
time for the Jews is not a good time for mankind. . . . The blessing of the Jews
is a curse for others. . . . The regimes that are “good for Jews” are rarely
good for anybody else.
Shamir
also touches on a number of points I too have addressed. For instance, he claims
that Jews, through the elevation of the Holocaust and other efforts, have
attempted to replace Christianity in America and Europe with worship of Jews. In
the American instance, belief in Jewish superiority has become the official
faith of Pax Americana. I reached a
similar
conclusion by examining Jewish predominance in 20th-century American
psychology.
Another
theme Shamir and I share is that of “Judaic paranoia of hating and being hated.”
I wrote about that in my review of books by James Petras (here)
and in columns
which can be found on this blog, particularly my column “A Hate
with No Name.”
It
is edifying to think that approached from two vastly different perspectives,
Jones’s theological account can so well mirror and add to evolutionary
psychologist Kevin MacDonald’s scientific discussion of a Jewish “group
evolutionary strategy.” Whichever version you accept as “getting to the root of
the matter,” either will oblige you to take seriously the effect Jews and their
movements have had on the modern world.
Edmund Connelly is a freelance writer, academic, and expert on the cinema arts. He has previously written for The Occidental Quarterly.
Permanent link: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Connelly-JonesShamir.html
