Chapitre 3 de “Culture de la critique” : LES JUIFS ET LA GAUCHE

/1 Comment/in /by

LES JUIFS ET LA GAUCHE

Je n’ai jamais pu comprendre ce que le judaïsme avait à voir avec le marxisme, et en quoi se poser des questions sur ce dernier équivalait à être déloyal envers le Dieu d’Abraham, d’Isaac et de Jacob.

(Ralph de Toledano [1996,50] discutant de ses expériences avec des intellectuels juifs d’Europe de l’Est).

Le socialisme, pour beaucoup d’immigrés juifs, n’était pas simplement une opinion politique ou une idée, mais une culture inclusive, une manière de percevoir et de juger qui structurait leurs vies.

“L’association entre Juifs et gauche a été largement remarqué et commenté au début du XIXème siècle. Peu importe leur situation, dans presque chaque pays pour lesquels nous avons des données, une part de la communauté juive a joué un rôle très éminent dans les mouvements construits dans le but de saper l’ordre existant.” (Rothman & Lichter, 1982, 110).

Au moins en surface, l’implication juive dans l’activité politique radicale peut sembler surprenante. Le marxisme, du moins celui envisagé par Marx, est la totale antithèse du judaïsme. Le marxisme est l’exemple d’une idéologie universaliste dans laquelle l’ethnie et les barrières nationalistes à l’intérieur d’une société -et entre les sociétés- sont finalement supprimées, dans l’intérêt d’une harmonie sociale et d’un sens de l’intérêt commun.

De plus, Marx lui-même, bien que né de deux parents Juifs, a été perçu par beaucoup comme étant antisémite. Sa critique du judaïsme (De la question juive)[Marx 1843/1975])conceptualisait le judaïsme comme s’intéressant fondamentalement à une recherche égoistique d’argent; ce dernier ayant atteint une domination mondiale en transformant l’homme et la nature en objets cessibles.

Marx voyait dans le judaïsme un principe abstrait d’avarice humaine qui ne finirait que dans une société communiste du futur. Read more

Don’t Give People a Club to Beat You Over the Head With

/85 Comments/in /by

In November of 2016, I wrote an article called “The Alt-Right and Tyler Durden’s Advice” (I’ll get into the meaning of the Tyler Durden reference at the end of this writing), and in December, the next month, I did a modification of it called “Seize the Center: A Critique of the Alt Right, Including Tyler Durden’s Advice.”  The two pieces were written just after Donald Trump had been elected president and there was a feeling in the air that the alt-right—its spokesmen and their take on things and ways—was the action in white racial activism, and more, that alt-right was now who we all were, including me.  The writings reflected my discomfort with the alt-right nomenclature and approach, including the way it had latched on to Trump in a big way, which I saw as being, on balance, detrimental to the white racial movement as a whole.  Closer to home, I personally didn’t see myself as an alt or right anything, and Trump wasn’t my guy.  Really, the two articles were one; there was very little difference between them.  For shorthand, I’ll refer to the two here as the Tyler Durden article, or just Tyler.

When I finished Tyler Durden, I ran it by some people whose opinions I value.  All of them had a negative take on it.   Either they disagreed with my analyses and assertions, or thought that that while Tyler made some valid points, going public with it wouldn’t help the white cause.  So it went, our man Trump has just won the presidency, the alt-right has become a visible and vocal part of the mainstream public discourse, alt-right is us now, all of us collectively, and we’re on a roll.  The alt-right train has left the station and we’re all on board, except you it sounds like. To stay with that metaphor, the word I was getting is that this article I had put together just put a bend in the track up the line and caused trouble.

I accepted the responses I was getting and put Tyler on my personal web site, which as far as I can tell, nobody reads.   There it sat until now—it’s March of 2018 as I write this. Read more

Review of Nothing Sacred: The Truth about Judaism

/58 Comments/in , /by

I had known about Douglas Rushkoff’s treatment of Judaism; Nothing Sacred: The Truth about Judaism, for some time and had always meant to read and review it.[i] A video of Rushkoff discussing his take on Judaism surfaced online discussing the infamous ‘Barbara Spectre moment’ — that is a political gaffe from the tribe’s mouth. We can say these “Spectre moments” are when a Jewish activist candidly discusses Jewish cultural activism on non-Jews and their nations. Here’s Rushkoff’s Barbara Spectre Moment:

The thing that makes Judaism dangerous to everybody, to every race, to every nation, to every idea, is that we smash things that aren’t true, we don’t believe in the boundaries of nation-state, we don’t believe in the ideas of these individual gods that protect individual groups of people; these are all artificial constructions and Judaism really teaches us how to see that.

 

In a sense our detractors have us right, in that we are a corrosive force, we’re breaking down the false gods of all nations and all people because they’re not real and that’s very upsetting to people.”

The central reason Jews like Rushkoff and Barbara Spectre allow themselves to speak candidly about Jewish social engineering is because they believe that by manipulating predominantly non-Jewish societies they are doing the world a service — they are in fact doing God’s work. By undermining their host nations so as to bring about conditions of disunity, Jews like Rushkoff and Spectre believe that in performing this role of “a corrosive force” “breaking down the false gods of all nations and all people,” they are performing a mitzvah as part of their god-ordained task of tikkun olam. A mitzvah is translated as a ‘commandment’ but more commonly means a good deed done from religious duty. Rushkoff describes tikkun olam as “a poetic way of expressing the responsibility Jews have to ‘heal the earth.’[ii] In my two part essay on integration, “Manspreading for Lebestrum,” I discuss the HBO series Show me a Hero, based on a book by Jewish New York Times writer Lisa Belkin about the integration struggle in Yonkers between the NAACP and their Jewish lawyers versus the ethnic Whites of Yonkers. Again we discern the same underlying self-justification:

Belkin seeks to frame the issue of integration in terms of a progressive Jewish solution to the Jewish problem, while fully retaining her Jewishness. When asked about the overtly Jewish role in integration, Belkin neither denies nor downplays the Jewish role. Instead she invokes the Jewish religious principle of Tiklun Olam, a Hebrew phrase meaning ‘repairing the world.’ Tiklun Olam, was described by Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch in terms of a Kehilla (community) of Jews in galut (diaspora) successfully influencing their non-Jewish neighbors.”[iii]

Read more

“Cutting the Throat of Whiteness”: The Suffering of White South Africans May Redeem the West

/50 Comments/in , /by

“The time for reconciliation is over. Now is the time for justice.”

These are the words of Julius Malema, the head off South Africa’s Economic Freedom Fighters party/gang. To use a contemporary cultural reference point, Malema is essentially the Killmonger to Nelson Mandela’s T’challa, a more nuanced take on Black power, but both of which have proved symbiotic.

The words in the quote came in a speech supporting a new bill that was overwhelmingly passed  by the South African Parliament by 241 votes to 83 that makes it now legal for the South African government to seize land and other property without compensation.

The bill was brought before parliament by Malema, who also said, “We must ensure that we restore the dignity of our people without compensating the criminals who stole our land” 400 years ago. And even more ominously: “We are cutting the throat of Whiteness.”

The ANC, seeing the enormous opportunities for graft and personal enrichment as happened in Zimbabwe where the main beneficiaries were politically connected to Mugabe, quickly fell in line, coming up with some choice phrases of their own.

ANC deputy chief whip Dorries Eunice Dlakude said, “the current policy instruments, including the willing-buyer willing-seller policy and other provisions of Section 25 of the Constitution may be hindering effective land reform,” while ANC rural affairs minister Gugile Nkwinti added, “The ANC unequivocally supports the principle of land expropriation without compensation. There is no doubt about it, land shall be expropriated without compensation.” Read more

“Too Reflexively Ornery”:  E. Michael Jones and “Culture Wars,” Part 2 of 2

/43 Comments/in , /by

Jones often responds to Letters to the Editor, and the September 2017 issue was no exception, with Jones volunteering that “It is clear that the Jews are orchestrating Muslim migration to destroy European Christian culture.” Yes, Jones has read Kevin MacDonald and is familiar with this and other Culture of Critique theses.

In this issue, Jones concludes his thoughts on Meyer Lansky and ballet, but the topic now becomes homosexuality. Jones notes that even in 1970, “anywhere from 95 to 99 percent of APA [American Psychiatric Association] members believed that homosexuality was pathological.” Well, guess what: by 1973 a cabal of Jews succeeded in removing homosexuality from the APA’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Fully in line with his thesis about the revolutionary Jewish spirit, Jones here discusses a “small cabal of revolutionaries,” a “small band of very bright men and women,” who “swindled” the APA into accepting their degenerate definition of homosexuality. In research that few others could achieve, Jones exposes a wide range of actors, from psychiatrists, “liberal-minded easterners,” gay activists, a gay grandfather and his granddaughter.” Jones then asks what this diverse group of activists had in common: “The answer is that they were all Jews.” And the granddaughter who wrote about this failed to mention this fact “because she is Jewish, too.”

This is quintessential E. Michael Jones.

The October issue introduces us to a valuable YouTube site that covers the thesis of Jones’ book The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit. Called “The Goy Guide to World History,” it may provide access to Jones’ own revolutionary thought for those who are less than fond of reading.

This issue also gives us the cover essay, “The Rise and Fall of the New Atheism,” in which Jones critiques the arguments of the atheist “Gang of Four” that made big headlines in the beginning of this new century. The four are Richard Dawkins, the late Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, and Daniel Dennett. The topic under discussion certainly deserves a review of its own, so I will ignore it here after adding a few observations.

For instance, did readers know that Christopher Hitchens’ mother died an unnatural death? Jones claims that the mother committed adultery and was subsequently murdered by her lover, who then took his own life, but after a Google search I found a YouTube video where Hitchens himself claims both parties had voluntarily taken drugs, washed down with alcohol, to end their lives. Read more

“Too Reflexively Ornery”:  E. Michael Jones and “Culture Wars,” Part 1 of 2

/14 Comments/in /by

In January, I wrote about E. Michael Jones and his book on usury, Barren Metal (Part one and Part two). In that review, I called Dr. Jones a “Catholic iconoclast” and “welcome maverick,” and I labeled his writing “little short of incendiary.” That seems to be the consensus about him. For instance, one of the most astute commenters to this TOO site recalled that Jones had been dismissed as “too reflexively ornery” to try to work with on Catholic or conservative goals, a charge I suppose is hard to escape. But in our vile times where lies predominate and viciously policed speech abounds, I positively love to read Jones’ ornery writing (though I think he’s actually having a darn good time while doing most of it).

Today I’d like to visit his monthly magazine Culture Wars as my focus. Over the years, I’ve subscribed to many periodicals that intelligently address the battles Western culture has experienced for over a century and I’ve also read specifically Jewish periodicals as well, hoping to get an inside perspective on many of these battles. From First Things, American Renaissance, and The American Conservative to The Jewish Daily Forward and Commentary, I used to receive a steady stream of print publications. Because I lost interest or because the print publication became unavailable, I stopped getting all five of these publications, but I continue to subscribe to Jones’ Culture Wars because Jones writes so courageously about Jews. What a rare commodity.

In this essay, I hope to cover twelve monthly issues of the magazine. For some reason, I have at home the first six months of 2016 followed by the last six months of 2017. Still, that should give us a fine sample of writing in this unique periodical.

I don’t know how many years ago it was, but I came close to abandoning Culture Wars after just a few issues. Quite frankly, I was dismayed by the lack of professional editing and crazy formatting in the magazine, something First Things or Commentary would never allow. For instance, quotes in the text would not be indented, italicized or be bracketed in quotations, so I wasn’t sure who was speaking. Or the index would have the wrong page number for an article. Perhaps it was God’s will, but after unsubscribing, I resumed my subscription because I was practically addicted to what Jones was writing about. Over time, I became used to these stylistic flaws, seeing them as quirks in a one-of-a-kind magazine. Today I am immensely grateful that I kept up my subscription. Read more

Fundraising Appeal

/25 Comments/in /by

Your support is important for many of our writers, and we are trying our best to be competitive with other websites in paying them. Donations of all amounts are welcome. As always, the financial base for projects like TOO is dwarfed by the financial resources of our enemies. Nobody is getting rich here. This is basically a one-person show in terms of editing and posting articles.  Writers are not making a living by writing for TOO, but your support is a huge psychological boost for many. We are still trying to get back to normal after getting bounced by PayPal.

The PayPal campaign to cripple the Alt Right financially is part of the new reality, where the SPLC is now participating in censoring You Tube videos, and Alt Righters still on Twitter are wondering when the next round of purges will happen. There does appear to be a bit of pushback against the SPLC lately, since Mark Potok, Heidi Beirich, et al. are now going after mainstream conservatives like Senator Rand Paul and moderate immigration critic Mark Krikorian (who writes for Trump-hating National Review) . I guess going after AltRighters like me wasn’t bringing in enough money.

As Ramzpaul notes, Google uses the ADL and the SPLC, “both are left-wing Jewish organizations,” for advice on censorship. As we have noted, the SPLC is indeed funded predominantly by Jews.

But the bad news is that the mainstream continues to move ever further left. Or maybe it’s good news because the Democrats will nominate someone so far to the left (Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren) that she won’t be able to win even with the usual stratospheric percentages from non-Whites (not to mention voter fraud by illegals) and White people will continue the process of waking up to the reality that there is indeed a hostile elite that hates traditional White America with a passion.

This is from the donations page.

Non-Tax-deductible Donations:

Non-tax-deductible donations can no longer be made to TOO via PayPal but an account has been set up at Patreon. Or, please send check or a money order to:

The Occidental Observer
1750 Delta Waters Rd Suite 102, #374
Medford, OR 97504

Note: If you send a check or money order to the above address and do not wish to be anonymous, we would like to acknowledge your contribution. The easiest way to do this is by email. Please include an email address with your donation if you would like us to acknowledge it personally. Thanks!

Crypto Donations at Coinbase in Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, Etherium, and Litecoin: Click here.

Tax-Deductible Donations:

Tax-deductible donations can no longer be sent through the Charles Martel Society via PayPal (part of the campaign against Alt Right sites). If you want a tax deduction, please make it clear that you want a tax deduction and send a check to our NEW MAILBOX:

The Occidental Observer
1750 Delta Waters Rd Suite 102, #374
Medford, OR 97504