Second Reply to Nathan Cofnas

I have posted a second reply to Nathan Cofnas, this one on his comments to my first reply. It is long and tedious but I thought I would post the Introduction and an excerpt from the exchange on immigration.


Nathan Cofnas has responded to my reply to his review of The Culture of Critique. Prior to getting into the details of his rejoinder, there are several general points that should be kept in mind.

  1. CofC stands or falls depending on whether I have adequately described certain specific intellectual and political movements as Jewish. In doing so, I focused on movements that were or are influential and provide evidence of their influence. In describing these movements, I focus on the main figures, discuss their Jewish identities and their concern with specific Jewish issues, such as combatting anti-Semitism. I discuss the dynamics of these movements—the authoritarian atmosphere, the guru phenomenon, ethnic networking, and non-Jews who participate in the movement. I am not attempting to discuss all well-known Jewish intellectuals if they are not part of these movements. Thus, I never claim that Marx was part of a specifically Jewish intellectual/political movement, since he died long before the rise of the Jewish left in the twentieth century which is the focus of CofC. Noam Chomsky is a well-known Jewish intellectual, but he doesn’t fit into any of the movements I discuss, and I have never investigated the nature of his Jewish identity (or lack of it) or how he sees Jewish interests. The same could be said for someone like Paul Gottfried who is linked to paleoconservatism. Paleoconservatism is not a Jewish intellectual movement, and indeed neoconservatism, which I argue is a Jewish movement, played a decisive role in the eclipse of paleoconservatism (see “Neoconservatism as a Jewish Movement”). Or one could point to a Jewish supporter of the populist positions of President Trump, but the existence of such a person does not make populism a Jewish movement or erase the effective opposition of the New York Intellectuals to American populism in prior decades as discussed in Chapters 5 and 6 of CofC.
  2. Individual influential Jews or a separate influential Jewish intellectual movement may be critical of a specific Jewish intellectual movement that I discuss. The split beginning in the 1930s between the Stalinist left, which is the topic of Chapter 3, and the Trotskyist left which is a topic of Chapter 6 and “Neoconservatism as a Jewish Movement,” comes to mind. It is possible that opposition to the Israel Lobby may also be reasonably analyzed as a Jewish movement. I have not attempted this, although I have noted in several places that criticism of Israel is increasing among Jews and non-Jews. But in order to establish that critics of Israel constitute a Jewish movement, one would have to pursue the program presented in CofC: discuss whether participants have a Jewish identity and whether they see their activities as furthering Jewish interests as well as explore the dynamics of these movements—whether there is any evidence for an authoritarian atmosphere, the guru phenomenon, ethnic networking, and the status of non-Jews who participate in the movement.

This project would thus go well beyond the “default hypothesis” of Jewish IQ as explaining Jewish involvement in intellectual movements. Such situations may be analogized to arguments between different factions in the Knesset—both dominated by Jews but with different perceptions of Jewish interests.

  1. I am therefore not attempting to develop a general theory of Jewish viewpoint diversity. I am studying certain specific intellectual and political movements that I attempt to establish as influential. I am not trying to develop a theory of why each Jew or most Jews believe what they do—a much more ambitious project. Thus, for example, I have no interest in describing or explaining the diversity of Jewish attitudes on affirmative action—an interesting question, but not relevant to the thesis of CofC which is that certain specific Jewish movements have the features I describe and that they have been influential. Nevertheless, as discussed below, at particular times and places, there is often substantial consensus within the Jewish community on particular issues, e.g., immigration and refugee policy and church-state relations.
  2. My writing in CofC is restricted to the movements discussed therein—movements that I have argued have been influential in the twentieth century and whose influence often extends into the present. In addition to these movements, it may well be the case that I have left out individual influential Jews, such as Steven Pinker, whose Jewish identity and sense of pursuing Jewish interests would bear investigation and may result in a broader perspective on Jewish influence. Pinker’s recent book, Enlightenment Now,[1] is reminiscent of the hostility toward American populism that characterized the New York Intellectuals whose Jewish identities and sense of Jewish interests were discussed in CofC. However, whatever the results of such an investigation, they would be subsumed into the general topic of Jewish viewpoint diversity.

[1] See Ricardo Duchesne, “Steve Pinker’s Anti-Enlightenment Attack on White Identitarians,” Occidental Quarterly 18, no. 2 (Summer 2018): 49–68; in press.

An excerpt from the exchange on Chapter 7:

In my original reply, I noted that Jewish activism was aimed at making White Americans a small minority. Cofnas: The quote above (taken from CofC) provides no justification for the claim that “Jewish activists were promoting making Whites a small minority in [the] country.” The idea that removing the immigration quotas would cause non-white people to come in large numbers was not something that people obviously would have anticipated at the time, given that virtually all immigration was coming from different European countries.

On the contrary, it was already well-known that non-Whites would come in large numbers—hence the Chinese Exclusion Act and the concern of many restrictionists at the time who were worried that immigration would dramatically change the country (Rep. William N. Vaile: “It is a good country. It suits us. And what we assert is that we are not going to surrender it to somebody else or allow other people, no matter what their merits, to make it something different. If there is any changing to be done, we will do it ourselves. (Cong. Rec., April 8, 1924, 5922)).

And during the 1950s, immigration restrictionists emphasized that the U.S. was already under siege from people wanting to immigrate. Senator Pat McCarran in 1953: “Today, as never before, untold millions are storming our gates for admission and those gates are cracking under the strain. The solution of the problems of Europe and Asia will not come through a transplanting of those problems en masse to the United States. . . . I do not intend to become prophetic, but if the enemies of this legislation succeed in riddling it to pieces, or in amending it beyond recognition, they will have contributed more to promote this nation’s downfall than any other group since we achieved our independence as a nation.” (Senator Pat McCarran, Cong. Rec., March 2, 1953, 1518)

And where would the 900 million immigrants that Louis Marshall (the key Jewish activist in the 1920s) envisioned come from after the national origins provisions had been gutted? Jewish activism during the entire period from the 1880s to 1965 was aimed at promoting multiracial immigration to the U.S. Recall this statement from the American Jewish Committee quoted from Chapter 7: “Americanism is not to be measured by conformity to law, or zeal for education, or literacy, or any of these qualities in which immigrants may excel the native-born. Americanism is the spirit behind the welcome that America has traditionally extended to people of all races, all religions, all nationalities” (in Cohen 1972, 369). American Jewish Congress had the same perspective:

During this period [1950s] the Congress Weekly, the journal of the AJCongress, regularly denounced the national origins provisions as based on the “myth of the existence of superior and inferior racial stocks” (Oct. 17, 1955, p. 3) and advocated immigration on the basis of “need and other criteria unrelated to race or national origin” (May 4, 1953, p. 3). Particularly objectionable from the perspective of the AJCongress was the implication that there should be no change in the ethnic status quo prescribed by the 1924 legislation (e.g., Goldstein 1952a, 6). The national origins formula “is outrageous now . . . when our national experience has confirmed beyond a doubt that our very strength lies in the diversity of our peoples” (Goldstein 1952b, 5).

Jewish activists opposed the idea that the United States had any ethnic connotations—that the U.S. should be seen as a proposition nation dedicated only to certain ideals. Thus the comment from Joseph L. Blau (1958, 15) writing in a publication of the American Jewish Congress:  “[Horace] Kallen’s view is needed to serve the cause of minority groups and minority cultures in this nation without a permanent majority”—the implication being that Kallen’s ideology of multiculturalism opposes the interests of any ethnic group in dominating the United States.” Note particularly the phrase “no permanent majority. These Jewish activists were maintaining that the U.S ought to be up for grabs ethnically and culturally at a time when an ethnic status quo had been legislated by the 1924 immigration law—a status quo designed to make Northwest Europeans a permanent majority. This type of thinking was already on the table in the 1920s, as exemplified by Maurice Samuel’s opposition to an ethnic conception of the United States:

The well-known author and prominent Zionist Maurice Samuel (1924, 215), writing partly as a negative reaction to the immigration law of 1924, wrote, “If, then, the struggle between us [i.e., Jews and gentiles] is ever to be lifted beyond the physical, your democracies will have to alter their demands for racial, spiritual and cultural homogeneity with the State. But it would be foolish to regard this as a possibility, for the tendency of this civilization is in the opposite direction. There is a steady approach toward the identification of government with race, instead of with the political State.”

Samuel deplored the 1924 legislation as violating his conceptualization of the United States as a purely political entity with no ethnic implications.

We have just witnessed, in America, the repetition, in the peculiar form adapted to this country, of the evil farce to which the experience of many centuries has not yet accustomed us. If America had any meaning at all, it lay in the peculiar attempt to rise above the trend of our present civilization—the identification of race with State. . . . America was therefore the New World in this vital respect—that the State was purely an ideal, and nationality was identical only with acceptance of the ideal. But it seems now that the entire point of view was a mistaken one, that America was incapable of rising above her origins, and the semblance of an ideal-nationalism was only a stage in the proper development of the universal gentile spirit. . . . (pp. 218–219)


35 replies
  1. Junghans
    Junghans says:

    The Talmudic doublespeak of most Jewish spokespersons, as well as their brazen effrontery, are some of the more stereotypical and telling characteristics of what Tanstaafl, in his inimitable way, refers to as ‘Jewing’.

  2. Tom Sunic
    Tom Sunic says:

    Kevin. Your point is well taken. It seems to be quite in line with your preface to my Homo americanus; Child of the Postmodern Age. However, the notion of the USA as the “proposition state,” championed by US neocons and globalists of all ilks, no longer applies to the US only. It has also become a trademark of the EU, as seen by its “welcoming culture” extended to millions of undocumented non-European migrants. The historical dynamics of Liberalism was bound to result in the withering away of the classical nation-state and the rise of an amorphous mixed-race-civil war-prone entity. A merchant could not care less who his customer is — as long as he pays well for the purchased goods. Even Israel itself can’t forever stay a Jewish enclave, as witnessed today by floods of Sub-Saharan cheap labor knocking at its door. Both the early Liberals C. Montesquieu and later A. Smith wrote that “merchant ignores all borders.” This is how the West was designed by the world improvers in the wake of WWII. Time to revise the Liberal doctrine of “free movement of goods and capital.”

    • Trenchant
      Trenchant says:

      It’s hard to make sense of Smith’s scanty “merchant ignores all borders” He and many of his family worked for Customs.

    • Leon Haller
      Leon Haller says:

      I must disagree strongly with this last statement. The “free movement of goods and capital” is a SUBSTITUTE for the free movement of labor. What is wrong with businessmen selling their wares overseas? What is wrong with an investor (owner of PRIVATE capital) investing HIS property overseas? The raceless doctrine of liberalism must be substantially revised in ways to ensure ultimate ethnonational preservation, to be sure – that is the essence of “conservatism” properly understood. But many of us who have always strongly opposed nonwhite immigration invasions, as well as totalitarian racial integrationism domestically, nevertheless also believe strongly in individual liberties, private property, and the free market order. The group of anticapitalist nationalists (National Socialists?) is far smaller, at least in the USA, than those of us who oppose all forms of socialism, including what might be called “genetic inclusivist socialism”, or “socialism of the gene pool”. There is no need, however, to discard the “baby of liberty” along with the “bathwater” of alien colonization, and indeed, the focus needs to be narrowed to the latter without stirring up the hornet’s nest of interfering with the former.

      IOWS, vast legions of decent White patriots have vested interests in overseas trade, whereas only White traitors (along with certain selfish cheap labor interests) have any interest in importing nonwhites into White nations. And the damage of mass immigration is infinitely greater than the (alleged) damage of free trade. So keep the focus on the former (Trump would do well to follow this advice, too, and for purely self-interestd political reasons).

  3. Rob Bottom
    Rob Bottom says:

    Well, I suppose it is necessary to get the trash out of the way now so that it doesn’t pile up in future.

  4. Chinese Nat Maiden
    Chinese Nat Maiden says:

    “Indeed, my attitude in writing CofC was that, since I knew it would be controversial, I had to make it as bullet-proof as possible.”
    – Prof. Kevin MacDonald

    This is exactly what I felt when I was reading CofC: it is a unique book that has been meticulously researched and carefully fact-checked. I believe that CofC is a classic and that it will be seen in the future as one of the greatest academic works of our time, much like Darwin’s On the Origin of Species. Prof. Kevin MacDonald’s book CofC is a game changer: never will we think about group evolutionary strategy in the same way as we did before CofC. Prof. Kevin MacDonald has succesfully managed to set in motion a change in ethnic and racial discourse that is going to shape the future of humanity in the coming centuries. His ideas will evolve over the coming decades, just as did Darwin’s ideas even long after Darwin left us. Few people do yet realise what a great man Prof. Kevin MacDonald is, because he has given us all the tools we need to save the West and indeed save the entire world from the racial malaise that is spreading around the globe. The interests of the human species are at stake here, because we will be set back thousands of years if the White man is brought to his knees. Western civilisation must survive, because it is a moral cause for all of humanity. For this reason, CofC must be carefully studied and expanded upon by future generations of racially aware people. The centuries of racial enlightenment will come, because now we know more about race than ever before, even though the opposition to racial research has never been greater. The truth will prevail, I believe, because no matter how much authorities seek to manipulate and control information, the truth will still not be entirely lost on people who are subjected to indoctrination. I am optimistic about the future, because this century has only just started and this century offers new opportunities for White civilisation. I believe that there will be a White rejuvenation in the 21st, 22nd and 23rd centuries, characterised by ever more sophisticated knowledge of group evolutionary behaviour. This will in turn neutralise the threats to White interests. The 20th and early 21st centuries will probably be seen as a time period when Whites were put under genetic evolutionary pressure to become more ethnocentric.

    • ariadnatheo
      ariadnatheo says:

      “never will we think about group evolutionary strategy in the same way as we did before CofC.”
      It may be ignorance on my part but I never heard the concept of group evolutionary strategy discussed before Prof. Kevin MacDonald published his MCofC. He OWNS it. I feel confident that I share this ignorance with the vast majority of people who have been enlightened by him.

      • Chinese Nat Maiden
        Chinese Nat Maiden says:

        As far as I know, the concept of “group evolutionary strategy” is unique to Prof. Kevin MacDonald’s work. A quick Google search shows that this concept only appears in reference to his work. It is a concept that we ought to adopt and popularise. As to the origins of the concept, I wonder how Prof. Kevin MacDonald came up with it if it is entirely his. I am always interested in the development/origin of neologisms and entirely new concepts because language evolution is of much interest to racial evolution as well.

    • Luke
      Luke says:

      From my perspective, whenever I see the word ‘ethnocentric’ being used – I sense that this term is often used to describe some sort of abnormal human condition. Sort of like how someone might be seen as a hypochondriac, which is defined as:

      “pertaining to or suffering from hypochondria, an excessive preoccupation with and worry about one’s health”

      Hypochondria might also be expanded to encompass an excessive preoccupation with just about anything, if our jewish wordsmiths wish to try to pathologize any healthy gentile behavior that threatens their agenda.

      Personally, I define ethnocentrism as simply taking your own racial group’s side in any conflict that arises between two or more competing races. Nothing could be more normal, reasonable or rational.

      What has happened to the White race – is that, thanks to multiple decades of jewish media control and the malicious anti-White brainwashing that has relentlessly flowed from that media – Whites have allowed their mortal enemies to switch off their normal instincts to take their own side in any racial conflict and at the same time, all other racial groups have been encouraged to base their entire world view from an ethnocentric basis. And, most importantly, all non-white racial groups can openly engage in ethnocentric behavior and suffer no penalty for doing so. No worries about being fired from their jobs, no concerns about being stigmatized or called ‘racists’.

      “I am optimistic about the future, because this century has only just started and this century offers new opportunities for White civilisation.”

      I wish I could share this optimism, but it is very difficult for me to see anything but total disaster and a nightmarish future ahead for Whites in America – if current trends of demographic displacement are not radically changed, and in 20 to 25 more years, the jews manage to reduce Whites to a hated and despised minority. Once Whites are subjugated to being ruled by a majority non-white run nation – laws can easily be passed that mandate that Whites will not be allowed to marry or have children with other Whites, and our colored rulers will declare that this policy must be enacted in order to, once and for all, wipe out White racism and White privilege.

      I think one of the biggest and most dangerous mistakes that Whites in our pro-White survival community make is that they do not seem to have a complete grasp of just how determined the jews are to engineer White racial genocide and many of us tend to underestimate the lengths that our enemies are willing to go to, in order to complete their genocide plans for White European people.

      Look around our nation today – and we all can see the epidemic levels of raw, festering, rage and hatred that is being spewed at Whites by non-whites, self-hating white liberals, by the Democrat Party establishment politicians, and, of course, by jews and their media. And, this is happening while Whites are still about 62% of the country’s population. Imagine how much worse this anti-White rage and hate will be in another 25 years?

      • Chinese Nat Maiden
        Chinese Nat Maiden says:

        I share your worries about the future of the White race. However, I remain optimistic because Whites have been born to survive. Those who do not have this instinct will perish and those who do have this instinct will remain. I believe that ethnocentric has a genetic component and that under current pressures, the ethnocentric Whites are being selected for. The White gene pool is changing rapidly. As the pressure will only increase, Whites will only become more ethnocentric. This is evolution. The White race is becoming better thanks to the persecution, brainwashing and genocide. Those Whites who survive will be vastly superior to their predecessors. The Jews are creating the ultimate foes. They are creating a racial opponent that they cannot beat. Evolved Whites will be so much more cunning and racially adept than the naïve Whites that Jews could easily brainwash in the past. The world is always changing and evolution has not ended. The centuries of White racial awareness are upon us. The Jews are creating something that they cannot control ultimately. Jews are victims of their own folly; their tendency for revenge and persecution is creating a powerful opponent. The White race will not be defeated. However, those who will be left will have unprecented racial understanding and awareness that even the Jews lack. I can see already that some Whites know the truth much better than any of the Jews who seek to control Whites. This shows a major evolutionary advantage: These Whites are more capable of grasping the complex realities of racial conflict than Jews are. Prof. Kevin MacDonald has proved with his work that Jews are not entirely aware of biological racial genetic realities as much as some Whites (and also some Asians like myself) are at this moment in time. In fact, Jews have an outdated manner of thinking that will not be adaptive in the long run. When the Western world has evolved more sophisticated, more powerful instincts of ethnocentrism, the Jews will find themselves in a new environment that they can barely recognise and this will not be the same one as where they had previously thrived and pushed for their genocidal scheme. Ultimately, whenever peoples survived genocide and war, the survivors were more prepared to face the challenges of the future. Evolution is going along a harsh difficult path. However, all of us will be better for it in the end. I love human life and so I embrace all the suffering. I feel compassion for Whites who suffer and at the same time I foresee future greatness beyond the current calamities pestering the White race.

    • Hildegarde
      Hildegarde says:

      If we survive the genetic evolutionary pressures, we will become more ethnocentric. As it is our competitors have taught us not to be aware of, and what’s worse, not to care about the genetic evolutionary pressures.

      • Chinese Nat Maiden
        Chinese Nat Maiden says:

        There will be plenty survivors. For all those who are completely oblivious to White interests, there will also be a great many who are aware of what is good for White people. Only those who act in the interests of Whites will be fertile and produce the offspring of the future. So Whites are going to be more pro-White, it is an evitable result of evolutionary pressures originating from multiracial society.

    • Barkingmad
      Barkingmad says:

      Western civilisation must survive, because it is a moral cause for all of humanity.

      Why would anyone want western civilization to be a moral cause for everybody. It’s not possible in any case. Asians and Africans have their own particular “morality”; let them stew in it.

      • Chinese Nat Maiden
        Chinese Nat Maiden says:

        I have my own conscience, and I do not believe it is moral to let Whites go extinct. So I do not oppose Western civilisation but I embrace it as a moral cause which has brought prosperity to all of mankind. Whites are not uniquely evil, they are just human. Therefore, it is immoral to stand by and let Whites be pushed to extinction. I have a conscience too and I do not feel right about the genocidal scheme against Whites. I support Whites on principle, no one can tell me about what my morality should be because I have my own moral compass, my own conscience.

          • Chinese Nat Maiden
            Chinese Nat Maiden says:

            This is the opinion of just one Japanese individual. I am not even Japanese and so I care not to comment on this.

            The fact remains that many Whites are liberals. I could say that the pro-Whites here prove they are the exception, not the rule.

            However, I think reality is not as simple as that. The number of pro-Whites could easily increase given the right circumstances, such as those I have described.

            If the pro-White movement becomes stronger, there will also be more Asians supporting this. Right now there are many Asians being influenced by liberalism, but pro-White race realism will also influence Asians once pro-White racial thinking becomes more commonly accepted in society.

            Ideas change the world. You ought to be aware that when the West succesfully changes their mind about a lot of things, other parts of the world will do the same. Change ia simply inspiring.

            For this reason, I expect the amount of Asians openly sympathising with the pro-White cause will increase when the pro-White movement becomes more powerful and more popular. There could be various reasons why Asians are attracted to such a movement, but power is usually an important factor for anyone to support a movement. Most people do not want to bet on a losing horse, after all.

            Success is attractive, and I believe the pro-White movement is going to be more succesful. I would not be spending my time on studying pro-White race realism if I did not firmly believe this would be the victorious movement of the future. Many Asians do not know of the existence of the pro-White cause, they have only heard of the liberal ideas of the West.

            Most Chinese think that all Whites are very sexually open and that Whites have very liberal ideas. This is not true, but this is the stereotype that Chinese currently hold. This might change when the West itself starts changing.

            The point here is that the West influences the perception of others about the West, and so when the Western worldview changes, which I believe is inevitable given the evolutionary pressure of multiracial society, more Asians are eventually going to support the White cause. Asians are very different from other non-White races in how they think and act, and this will probably also be reflected in the fact that Asians are going to be much more likely than any other race to support the White race. After all, a great many Asians in Asia already have a quite positive view of Whites and so a pro-White worldview could easily be cultivated among Asians. Moreover, Asians are intelligent enough to grasp the refined complexities of pro-White racial realism.

        • Karen T
          Karen T says:

          Whites are definitely not uniquely evil, and being as racist as the Mongolians and Negroids, I say with certainty that Caucasians are the least evil race. You say that we Caucasians are “just human” but we are the only race that has rejected that limitation, striving throughout our national histories to rise above the merely human so comfortable in its frailities, slave mentality (no offence to the Chinese) and base animal behavior (no offence to the Negroids). Unfortunately we have been temporarily blindsided, our masses lost and our leaders corrupted by those that envy and wish to dominate us but we Caucasians will win.

          • Chinese Nat Maiden
            Chinese Nat Maiden says:

            I admire the heroic culture of the Teutons and the other Europeans. These peoples had polytheist cultures which inspired them to be warlike and adventurous. The genetic personality traits of Teutons and other Europeans were reflected in their strand of polytheism. When polytheism became supplanted, some of that old heroic culture disappeared but the desire for adventure and glory still remained strong in the White man. I am myself a Chinese polytheist (practising folk religion) and so I completely sympathise with this adventurous heroic manner of thinking that characterises you and your White race. Chinese folk religion (also called Shendao or Shenism), which is similar to the Japanese Shinto, has been suppressed and almost completely exterminated by the Communists. In recent years, China has seen a revival of the old polytheism. Due to my polytheist worldview, I believe in embracing humanity completely and using it for achieving higher ideals that will perfect our souls. I believe human beings should strive to be like the Gods, because the latter represent the ultimate ideal for humanity, no matter what “flaws” the Gods may have, because evolution requires some form of “imperfection” so that the living being remains adaptive. I believe polytheism to be fully in line with evolution and survival. Whatever your thoughts may be about the old polytheism of the Chinese and European peoples, we certainly agree that morality and heroism are important for mankind.

  5. Leon Haller
    Leon Haller says:

    Not sure if I am the first commenter, but I wanted to congratulate Prof. MacDonald on his mention in today’s Wall Street Journal. Of course, the short article on the Jewish role in agitating for the 1965 Amendments which gutted the 1924 Immigration and Nationality Act, written in a remarkably pedestrian fashion by one Abraham Miller, is misleading, mendacious and of course derogatory towards Prof. MacDonald. Still, I had not previously seen MacDonald in the WSJ, and cannot help but think this is progress of sorts – as if the enemy of White Preservation is moving from feeling able to ignore TOO, the alt-right, and WP, to feeling the need to discredit us.

    Thank you for your important work, TOO!

    • Michael Adkins
      Michael Adkins says:

      Leon Haller,

      Perhaps, Mr Miller might consider writing an article about the race relations laws of the United Kingdom.

      The Board of Deputies of British Jews formulated the ‘Race Laws’ which now amend the Public Order Act and various other Statutes. The first Race Relations Bill was introduced into the House of Commons by the Labour Attorney General, Sir Frank Soskice in 1965. The amendments to the Race Relations Act of 1976 (which, for example, removed from the Crown the need to prove ‘intent’ in prosecutions for ‘Incitement to Racial Hatred’) was passed in the House of Commons with only 132 of the 635 Members being present. It is well known that numerous M.P.’s are privately opposed to the Race Relations law but they were terrified that if they went to the House and spoke up and voted against the amendments they would be:

      Smeared in the mass media as being “racist,” which might deprive them of the votes of the ever-increasing ‘ethnic minority’ communities

      Made targets of physical violence by organised “anti-racialist/anti-Fascist” organisations

      Deprived of funding and patronage – personal as well as political

      A subsequent series of amendments to the Act were introduced to the House of Commons in 1986 by Home Secretary Leon Brittan(isky) – now a European Community Commissioner.

      You may wonder why all the various amendments to the Race Relations Act have had such extensive backing from the Home Office. Quite apart from the Home Secretaries and campaigning by pressure groups such as the Jewish Board of Deputies, there is the crucial factor of the behind-the-scenes influence of Jewish Civil Servants – one in particular being Neville Nagler.

      Throughout the 1970s and 1980s Mr. Nagler was the head of the Home Office Department responsible for race relations matters. The Jewish Chronicle has boasted of the influence of this Pinner, Middlesex, Synagogue official.


  6. Bennis Mardens
    Bennis Mardens says:

    It’s all good.
    They are scared, so now they are changing the paradigm from “race is a social construct,” to “Jews are just smarter.”
    Of course this newfound race realism will only apply to the tribe, and not to blacks and hispanics.

  7. Inspector General
    Inspector General says:

    Thus, I never claim that Marx was part of a specifically Jewish intellectual/political movement, since he died long before the rise of the Jewish left in the twentieth century which is the focus of Noam Chomsky is a well-known Jewish intellectual, but

    “which is the focus of…what? One thought is incomplete when Chomsky is introduced. Needs editing.

  8. Curmudgeon
    Curmudgeon says:

    Interesting to note that the various quotes (lies) from Jewish activists/intellectuals, of long past, regarding “welcoming”, “diversity is strength”, etc are now part and parcel of every speech made by virtually any “leader” in our (((Western liberal democracies))). Their speech writers must be channeling Goldstein, Samuel, and undoubtedly others.
    Every now and then, I watch the !974 Ian Parkinson interview with Muhammad Ali, in which Ali blows holes in the multicultural narrative, which includes “welcoming” and “diversity is strength”, all the while mocking Parkinson. It is still entertaining.
    It is interesting to note that Parkinson concedes that “his” positions in his 4 interviews with Ali were defeated by Ali.
    Many years ago, I sent the link to a young high school teacher, who was big on diversity. She was stunned to hear a “hero” speak so bluntly about about the topics.

  9. T
    T says:

    On the contrary, it was already well-known that non-Whites would come in large numbers—hence the Chinese Exclusion Act and the concern of many restrictionists at the time who were worried that immigration would dramatically change the country

    Regarding the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 people had good reason ‘to be worried’ as in the years prior to that act elements of the corporate media of the US as in the examples below were already ‘celebrating’ the massive expected demographic change by the importation of tens of millions of Chinese wage slaves (ie ‘cheap laborers’ so called) by diktat as a done deal. Just as today the claim was made the border (in this case the California coast line) could not be controlled, though first Spain and then Mexico had had no problem doing so, of course those two powers had not first flooded China with drugs (as elements of the elites of the Anglo-Saxon and Jewish peoples had) and then crushed them, not once but twice, in the two Opium Wars of the British Empire, causing the mass exodus.

    The below excerpt is from pg 118 of the 1853 book The New Rome produced by the major US establishment publisher GP Putnam (now Penguin). This remarkable book is something like a geopolitical future history of the world, with an emphasis on the United States and the United Kingdom and is well worth the time to read.

    …the day will not be far distant when America will number more Chinese than Caucasians..

    ‘In August, [1852] the number of Chinese emigrants in California was estimated at 50,000…and the Anglos having learned to understand the value of these
    patient laborers, and to treat them accordingly, the influx will soon be greater than ever. If it is as well supported by the masses of the mother country, as that from Europe has been, the day will not be far distant when America will number more Chinese than Caucasians…From these relations we may calculate upon an emigration of American businessmen to China, in return for that of Chinese laborers to California.’

    Excerpts from pg 511-515 of the 1870 US book One Hundred Years Progress of the United States and its chapter entitled Marvels that our grandchildren will see; or, One hundred years’ progress in the future

    ‘The Chinese question, viz., whether the Chinese and other oriental nations shall be allowed to swarm into our territory and take the place of our present laboring classes and whether, if, as is probable, this right is conceded…’

    ‘The Chinese will come to us, mainly, like some of the European immigrants, as candidates for filling our more menial positions; they will be house-servants, washermen, railroad laborers, miners, laborers in the field, &c…’

    ‘The Chinese question, viz., whether the Chinese and other oriental nations shall be allowed to swarm into our territory and take the place of our present laboring classes and whether, if, as is probable, this right is conceded, they should be admitted to the same political and social privileges with ourselves…‘We say it [‘the Chinese problem’] is in one sense already solved, because it is evident that we can not, if we would, keep them [the Chinese] out, as they are now arriving upon our Pacific coast at the rate of several thousand a week, and already number about 150,000 of our population. ‘Regarding this point as settled, and believing as we do that before 1880 we shall have 5,000,000 of Chinese on this continent, and before 1900, 20,000,000 or 25,000,000…’

    In a Spring 1874 edition the Pall Mall Gazette of London expresses its pleasure that hundreds of thousands of Chinese are being utilized as “cheap labor” (as mentioned previously much more accurately referred to historically as ‘wage slaves’) in such far flung places as North and South America, Hawaii, and in Australia, but laments that there is growing worldwide resistance to this phenomena. Race and people’s natural instinctive aversion to genocide was specifically referenced as the primary impediment to this scheme in both the US and Australia. The newspaper, besides referring to this “anxiety and alarm” as “out of proportion”, comments that there is…

    ‘A dread of what might happen if capitalists could command and control these vast hordes of workmen as against men of their own race, has made the labouring class, at any rate, blind to their good qualities.’

    In an article that’s reminescent in certain ways of the biblical rendition of Christ’s temptation, the Gazette attempts to pursuade its readers that the Chinese as cheap laborers do work others won’t do, are great cooks, are excellent gardeners, etc. The writer attempts to induce guilt, and lastly, almost beggingly to the reader, makes the claim that untold wealth is to be taken from the Earth if only the Chinese could be brought in to do the work. Finally, the writer acknowledges that peoples’ resistance (particularly from Europeans in Australia and North America) as to their physical, cultural, and economic displacement, by the importation of Chinese wage slaves is strong, and everywhere things are tending “to their discouragement.”

    It would be over a hundred years yet before they would develop the perfect ideological vehicle to make the world safe for cheap labor…or so they would think. They would call this ideological vehicle with its integral anti-race campaign ‘multi-culturalism’.

    Chinamen Out Of China

    ‘OF late years we have heard so much of “Chinese cheap labour” from various parts of the world that it is somewhat difficult to realize the fact that not more than 200,000 Chinamen are working in foreign countries at the present time. Even this number is quite an outside estimate. America and Australia have so far been the favourite resorts for Chinese emigrants…’;cc=livn;rgn=full%20text;idno=livn0121-2;didno=livn0121-2;view=image;seq=00134;node=livn0121-2%3A1

    • Karen T
      Karen T says:

      The Chinese Insurance Regulatory Commission has ‘seized control’ of the assets of Wu Xianchuii, placing billions of dollars of Canadian commecial real estate in the hands of the Chinese government…
      The China National Oil Company bought Calgary based oil and gas company Nexen…
      The Chinese Company Hytera bought Norsat, a satellite technology company based in Vancouver, one of whose customers is the U.S. Department of Defence….
      Having bought up most of Vancouvers commercial and residential properties, the Chinese have now set their sights on Toronto, Montreal and Calgary. There has been a 30% increase of sales to Chinese investors since 2017…

      • T
        T says:

        Interesting links, Karen.

        I can only suppose that’s just a small part of what ‘the labouring class’ was ‘dreading’ in that long ago Pall Mall Gazette of London editorial.

    • T
      T says:

      Lest anyone think it’s a ‘concern’ or ‘compassion’ for one’s fellow man driving the push for mass immigration it’s not and never has been, it’s all about profit, ie money.

      You’ve first got to start out with just who the direct political and spiritual forebears of today’s self described ‘progressives’ and liberals were. These were the powerful elements of the elites of the Anglo-Saxon and Jewish peoples, and their hangers on which were heavily involved in chattel slavery and its trade, the slave dealers; in British colonial North America they tended to be located in the northeast, Massachusetts colony figuring prominently, and they not only owned slaves themselves but more importantly largely ran the show as to the slave trade in that part of the world. Chattel slavery and its trade was not abolished but rather monetized by these slave dealing elites when after realizing just how profitable it was they introduced wage slavery (ie ‘cheap labor’ so called) to the world in the latter late 18th and early 19th century. The systematic theft of labor is acquired much more efficiently by simply paying significantly below what was or would be the real time local cost of labor to pay the employer’s (typically) own people were the ‘immigration’ not taking place, which is all ultimately what a slave owner cared about, and hence the term wage slavery as opposed to the physically owned chattel slavery. Realizing that, the former slave dealers set about providing these wage slaves to the former would be chattel slave owners. As most people want to be payed what everyone else is, rather than for example let’s say half, you have to find persons (or peoples) who have first been reduced to an unnaturally low state of being, such as a famine stricken/British occupied Ireland, or a drug addicted war ravaged China. Just as with chattel slavery, it’s the broken and defeated peoples that provide the wage slaves. It’s true that in time the wage slave might move on wanting higher wages, and that’s perfectly okay to the former would be slave owner as they’ll simply hire another immigrant, it not being called mass immigration for nothing.

      And just how profitable is the wage slavery system in comparison to chattel slavery? We actually have some rough idea of this as calculations based upon 1860 US census data comparing chattel slavery based South Carolina with wage slavery based Massachusetts were made in 1863 and published. The latter state’s formerly majority Anglo-Saxon population had largely been displaced by the importation by diktat of great numbers of Irish wage slaves in the preceding years. South Carolina’s largely Anglo-Saxon population had been reduced to a minority, chattel slaves also imported by diktat in the preceding centuries forming fifty-five percent of the population.

      The educated free labor of Massachusetts, we have seen, doubles the products of toil, per capita, as compared with Maryland, and quadruples them (as the Census shows) compared with South Carolina. One day’s labor of a man in Massachusetts is more than equal
      to…four in South Carolina
      Former US Treasurer and slave speculator Robert Walker writing from London in December, 1863. Pg 9 The Continental Monthly – March 1864

Comments are closed.