“The Necessity of Anti-Semitism”
“There has always been an abyss between Europeans and Semites, since the time when Tacitus complained about the odium generis humani.”
Heinrich von Treitschke, Ein Wort über unser Judenthum, 1879.
In 1989, the Jewish screenwriter and journalist Frederic Raphael was invited to deliver the 25th Anniversary Lecture at the University of Southampton’s Parkes Institute for the study of Jewish/non-Jewish relations. Founded by Rev Dr James Parkes (1896–1981), a neurotic Church of England minister who made a career out of the promotion of philo-Semitism in Christianity and the promotion of guilt narratives among Christians (in 1935 he was both celebrated by Jews and targeted for assassination by National Socialists), the Institute quickly became a hub for the production of scholarly-appearing pro-Jewish propaganda. Rather than offering objective analyses of Jewish/non-Jewish relations, the Institute furthered the familiar narrative that Jews were the blameless and catastrophic victims of an entirely irrational European hatred. Raphael, given the honor of addressing the 25th anniversary of this project, opted on the appointed evening to be a witty gadfly, choosing “The Necessity of Anti-Semitism” as the title of his address. It could be the title of a book, said Raphael, one that could sit in the Parkes Institute library but for the fact it had never been written, and did not exist.
In the meandering speech that followed, Raphael explored the putative contents of this imaginary book, suggesting its potential arguments, and what they might say about the author and about European culture. Confirming the opinions of everyone present, Raphael offered the assurance that although this ghostly and ghastly book did not exist, such a haunting product would not be out of place on a continent where anti-Semitism is “a constant and essential working part of Europe’s somber and unreformed logic.” For Raphael and his smug audience, “The Necessity of Anti-Semitism” lay only in its utility in salving the pathological European mind. Anti-Semitism was in fact extremely illogical and, in a moral sense, completely unnecessary.
Since reading Raphael’s speech several years ago, The Necessity of Anti-Semitism has, in a sense, haunted me too. As a single book, of course, it does not exist. But it perhaps has existed, after a fashion, in the thousands of tracts, pamphlets and books on the Jewish Question that have been written by Europeans over many centuries. In this collected body of anti-Semitic apologetics, one finds The Necessity of Anti-Semitism inflected in varying religious, political, and social hues. But what would the book look like if it was in fact written today? How could any author distill the various aspects of the Jewish Question into a single volume? In the essay that follows, part literary experiment, part historiography, I want us to join Raphael in imagining that this spectral book exists, even if our approach is rather different.
I imagine our author to introduce his volume with the broad case for The Necessity of Anti-Semitism, namely the presence of Jews and their influence in the four primary cultures of White decline: the Culture of Critique, the Culture of Tolerance, the Culture of Sterility, and the Culture of Usury.
The Culture of Critique
The section titled ‘Culture of Critique’ is a both a nod to the work of Kevin MacDonald, and an expansion upon the same. Setting out this section, our author might recall the notorious remark of the Jewish historian Louis Namier (1888–1960) when asked why he did not deal with Jewish history: “The Jews do not have a history, they have a martyrology.” It is this martyrology that lies at the heart of the Culture of Critique. Whereas almost every nation possesses a history that is in most respects objective, the Jews alone possess a mere quasi-history, riddled with mythic and esoteric self-deceptions that give psychological permission for the most clannish and subversive of social behaviors and the most hostile of attitudes towards other peoples. The Culture of Critique, a kind of cultural revenge inspired by the Jewish martyrology, is the clearest expression of the corrosive nature of the disastrous Jewish/non-Jewish relations so mourned by the woefully misguided Rev James Parkes.
In the Jewish mind, the corrosive nature of their interactions with European peoples has always taken on a heroic aspect. The ruse is played out, for themselves and us, that in these interactions we see a unique and virtuous questioning by ‘insiders/outsiders’ uniquely and helpfully placed to show Western culture its own flaws. Jews believe themselves to possess special talents in this respect, and maybe in a perverse sense they do, but in any case, in their great charade they break us down to “benefit” us. David Dresser and Lester Friedman, Jewish scholars of the media, maintain the position that Jewish filmmakers have a unique, untainted objectivity because of their Jewishness. They write that “Jewish artists’ marginality allows them a vantage point denied other, more culturally absorbed, creative thinkers.” This compares remarkably well with a writer in the Times of Israel who, commenting on the activities of the Jewish politician Alan Shatter in destroying the legal supports of the family in Ireland, has argued that Shatter’s Jewishness “appeared to put him at an advantage, freeing him from the baggage that weighed on his Catholic counterparts.” Just like the Frankfurt School, these cultural heroes know us better than we know ourselves, which allows them to help us see that we are irrational and evil, bigoted and in need of Jewish redemption. We are constantly and warmly assured by our Jewish helpers that this process is undertaken for the West’s own good. They free us from our “baggage.”
In truth, this process is undertaken for our destruction. The Critique, having no coherent objectives beyond the will to decay, never ends. It never ceases the search for novel and unsullied corners of Western culture to drag through the mud. The ‘Rabbi’s Speech’ from Hermann Goedsche’s Biarritz (1868) is a work of fiction, but it drew on a multitude of facts and instincts. In the Jewish cemetery of Prague, Goedsche’s Rabbi addresses a secret nocturnal meeting of thirteen Jewish elders, promising they shall “extirpate all belief and faith in everything that our enemies the Christians have venerated up to the present and, using the allurements of the passions as our weapon, we shall declare open war on everything that people respect and venerate.”
The direction here is accurate, but Goedsche didn’t get everything right. There are no clandestine midnight meetings, no gatherings of Elders of Zion, but instead a shared instinct defending shared interests in a spirit of bitterness and, in reality, the Culture of Critique is not a declaration of open war, but the pursuance of war disguised as friendship, as medicine, as liberation. Boas tore down Western cultural confidence while claiming to set Westerners free from the errors and burdens of chauvinism. Freud perverted everything that was sacred about sex and marriage, and called it a cure. Marx called on the workers of the world to unite, and unite them he did — in the lines for food, in the gulags, and in the mass graves of a starved Ukraine. War has been noisily and bloodily waged, but it has been only silently and subversively declared.
And still they wage it, even if they’ve already toppled “everything that people respect and venerate.” The churches are infiltrated, vanquished, mocked and disdained. The history of Christianity has been put through the Jewish intellectual meat grinder, and emerges today only as a tale of persecutions and slavery. It is a shell, co-opted for endless tolerance. Even discounting religion, no notable Western historical figure has survived the Culture of Critique. And when our uniquely insightful Jewish helpers tired of toppling reputations, they used their ethnic proxies to start toppling statues, removing names, and burning portraits. No aspect of Western culture was to be left standing. Its science, philosophy and moral systems were mocked, derided, and savaged, with every sonnet, concerto, and technological innovation leading obscurely but somehow definitely to a World War II camp in Poland where to this day, we are earnestly told, no birds sing.
Except that I’ve visited what remains of this camp, and the birds do sing. There is no magic there. Time does not stand still. The children, forced to be there by their schools, laugh and scrawl graffiti on old bunks and doors, while adults, clearly worried that someone is watching them, do their best to appear solemn and moved rather than cold and bored.
Our author might concur, pointing out in The Necessity of Anti-Semitism that this particular camp is the jewel in the crown of the Jewish martyrology, and perhaps even the engine of the most advanced form of the Culture of Critique. Almost 55 years after it was written, Jerzy Kosiński’s The Painted Bird is now back in the news. It’s a memoir about his experiences around this same notorious wartime Polish camp, and it is replete with child-rape, bestiality, and pornographic depictions of violence including the feeding of a man’s eyes to pet cats. It’s also a long-exposed fraud, a fanciful pastiche of Kosiński’s own psychosexual fantasies. This hasn’t stopped it recently being made into a film that is being roundly applauded by critics, nor has the fact it has induced viewers to vomit, faint, and remove themselves from movie theaters. Perhaps, in the age of the Culture of Critique, many Whites have learned to love being told how evil they are towards Jews, taking each condemnation like a dose of welcome medicine. Joanna Siedlecka, a journalist and author of writers’ biographies, studied the life of Kosiński and concluded “[The Painted Bird] has nothing to do with Kosiński’s real childhood; he invented those horrors, while he himself experienced only good, while the villagers took the risk to hide his whole family. (…) Kosiński is still treated as a victim, even though we now know a lot more about his biography. We know Poles didn’t torment him.”
Our author might point out in The Necessity of Anti-Semitism that the example of Kosiński and the Poles is wholly commensurate to the historical relationship between Jews and Europeans. A biographer of these two peoples can attempt to show the reality of the situation, but the Jew “is still treated as a victim.” And this “victim” elevates himself to the position of moral arbiter and arch critic. Armed with their very own sadomasochistic historical pastiche, Jewish activists direct the Critique into action for what one assumes to be a Racial Endgame. They deny this, of course, and call it a wicked conspiracy theory. But in reality, they are like the proverbial Irishman who denies he stole the bucket, adding the indignant criticism that it had a hole in it anyway. The Jews vigorously deny any role in the decline of Western culture, adding indignantly that Western culture is rotten, sick, racist, bigoted, and irrational anyway. Their denial is a form of admission. This is the essence of the Culture of Critique.
The Culture of Tolerance
This section might open with the remark that the Culture of Tolerance is itself a child of the Culture of Critique. When did Jews first start calling for Whites to abolish themselves in their own lands? Our author might argue that they began right at the first Jewish entry into European culture — not European lands, but European culture. Isn’t it Moses Mendelssohn (1729–1786) who is often held up as the first “assimilated” Jew, the first real Jewish intellectual who wanted to be ‘part of German culture’ and who advocated for “tolerance”? Well, what did Mendelssohn, the first “German of the Jewish faith,” actually ask Europeans to do? That much is clear, and a matter of historical record. He impudently and impatiently asked, “For how long, for how many millennia, must this distinction between the owners of the land and the stranger continue? Would it not be better for mankind and culture to obliterate this distinction?” [emphasis added].
And there we have it — the very first Jewish intrusion into Western culture was accompanied by a call for the obliteration of borders and the migration and settlement rights of “the stranger.”
From the very beginning of Jewish activism in Western culture, it was in the interest of Jews to undermine the position of the owners of the land and to promote “tolerance.” It was Mendelssohn’s 1781 work, On the Civil Amelioration of the Condition of the Jews, that is said to have played a significant part in the rise of “tolerance” in Western culture. But tolerance, despite all the glowing propaganda, is a curious word. Place it in a medical context, and tolerance means “the immunological state marked by unresponsiveness to a specific toxin or other foreign substance which induces an immune response in the body, especially the production of antibodies.”
And isn’t this exactly what Mendelssohn prescribed almost two and half centuries ago— that the owners of the land should be “unresponsive,” suppressing all natural “immune responses” even in the face of intruding toxins? We have to ask ourselves how tolerance ever became regarded as a virtue. The answer is that it became a virtue in the context of the Jewish intrusion into Western culture.
The Culture of Tolerance is now more than two centuries old. It matured slowly, but there can be little doubt that it has now come of age. Kevin MacDonald’s work has conclusively demonstrated that Jewish groups organized, funded and performed most of the work aimed at combating America’s 1924 immigration law, toppling it finally in 1965. Brenton Sanderson has shown that Jewish intellectual movements and ethno-political activism were pivotal in ending the White Australia policy — a policy change opposed by the vast majority of the Australian population. I have written on how Jews were conspicuous in the dramatic changes in Britain’s citizenship, race, and speech laws from the 1950s to the 1980s. A Jewish Minister for Justice transformed Ireland’s citizenship process, opening the country up to Africans and Pakistanis. Today, Jews dominate the mass migration NGO scene, demonstrably holding executive roles at the International Rescue Committee, International Refugee Assistance Project, the Immigrant’s Rights division of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), National Immigration Justice Center, Equal Justice Works, The Immigrant Defense Project, National Immigration Law Center, Lawyer’s Committee for Civil Rights Under the Law, Northwest Immigrants Rights Project, the Asylum Advocacy Project, Refugee Council USA, the New York Civil Liberties Union, American Immigration Council, The Immigrant Learning Center, the Open Avenues Foundation, the Political Asylum/Immigration Representation (PAIR) Project, Central American Legal Assistance, Halifax Refugee Clinic, and the UK Refugee Law Initiative. The migration policy advisor for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is not a Catholic, but a Jewish woman.
Third World mass migration into Europe and the West is a Jewish project. It has been curated by Jews, promoted by Jews, explained and excused by Jews. It is driven by a Jewish need, as old as Mendelssohn’s tract and perhaps older, to dispossess the owners of the land and open up that land to the stranger in the name of tolerance.
Much like the Culture of Critique, Jews offer us the Culture of Tolerance in the guise of friendship. With broad grins and mellifluous tones, they assure us that we are doomed if we don’t obliterate “the distinction between owners of the land and the stranger.” After all, haven’t we been helpfully informed that our own culture is worthless, bigoted, illusory, tainted, and morally bankrupt? Why not import an array of new, vibrant cultures? That way we can experience a more exciting life and, what’s more, it would go some way to proving ourselves morally acceptable to our Jewish friends, the innocent martyrs of humanity. And we should listen to them primarily because their advice makes perfect sense. After all, we need unemployable Africans to fund our pensions, Islamic terrorists to care for our ageing populations, and millions more people in our countries in order to solve our housing crises. We need floods of cheap labor to increase our wages. We need poorly trained foreign sex criminals to staff our hospitals, perform our surgeries, and nurse us back to health. We need to tolerate the burqa to demonstrate how profoundly feminist we’ve become as a society. We need to express our patriotism by denying we exist as a people. We need more speech-gagging laws to ensure freedom. And, most importantly of all, we need to become a less racist society by eliminating Whites everywhere.
Our helpful friends deliver these messages to us in a number of ways. When they are feeling generous, they simply bombard us with screen garbage, portraying multiculturalism on film in a manner entirely divergent from the way it plays out in reality. Jewish cinematic magic is a form of cultural alchemy. Take Black crime and low academic achievement, dip it in Hollywood, and muggers and rapists are transformed into educated Black “love interests” fawned over by nubile blondes. Or, take the stability and tranquility of the White middle-class family, dip it in Hollywood, and what now emerges is a claustrophobic den of neuroticism, control and bigotry.
When our Jewish friends are feeling less generous, they force their way into your child’s school curriculum, and when they are angered they remove your right to free speech and imprison you. On the other hand, if you try to impede Jewish particularism by, for example, banning one of their tribal rites such as circumcision, the lesson of the ADL’s threats to the sovereign nation of Iceland shows that blackmail, slander, and unrelenting economic warfare are equally deployable tools in their armory. In this example, of course, we’re back to the Irishman and the bucket. The Jews deny they have outsized influence, adding that if you make that accusation again, their little club in New York will bring your entire country to its knees.
While the Culture of Tolerance is in full swing, one lingering problem is that White babies, for now, keep coming. Here our author might begin the third section of his book.
The Culture of Sterility
Jews are everywhere in the Culture of Sterility, an appropriate term for what the world’s leading scholars have described as the “rapid increase” in “levels of childlessness in most European countries.” Our author could start with the fact the oral contraceptive was invented by the Jew Gregory Goodwin Pincus, but really Jews have everywhere in the West been, to use the Jewish historian Howard Sachar’s own words, “pioneers in the underground contraceptives industry.” By plan, co-ordination, or raw instinct, Jews have accumulated in those areas toxic to the White birth rate — contraception, abortion, divorce laws, and the promotion of pornography, homosexuality, gender confusion, and promiscuity.
The pioneers of abortion clinics, birth control literature for couples, and birth control policy measures in America were, according to one scholar, “Anna Samuelson in the Bronx; Olga Ginzburg and Rachelle Yarros in Chicago; Sarah Marcus in Cleveland; Nadine Kavinoky and Rochelle Seletz in Los Angeles; Esther Cohen and Golda Nobel in Philadelphia; Hannah Stone, Marie Warner, Cheri Appel, Anna Spielgeman, Naomi Yarmolinsky, Bessie Moses in Baltimore, Elizabeth Kleinman in Boston, and Lena Levine in New York, Hannah Seitzwick-Robbins in Trenton, and Lucile Lord-Heinstein in Massachusetts.” All of these women were Jews. Stone was particularly influential, working closely with Sanger and producing key birth control texts like Contraceptive Methods of Choice (1926), Therapeutic Contraception (1928), Contraception and Mental Hygiene (1933), and Birth Control: A Practical Survey (1937).
In the 1920s and 1930s, the primary lawyer for Margaret Sanger, the non-Jewish public face of the pro-abortion and birth-control movement in New York, was the Jew Morris Ernst. And when Sanger decided to move for Federal birth control legislation, she wrote to Rabbi Stephen Wise in 1931 asking him to use Jewish political influence and his own extensive list of political contacts to help make it happen, a request he happily obliged. Of course, Sanger had married a Jew, and according to one biographer “surrounded herself with Jewish colleagues and friends.”
In fact, Jewish influence is so tightly bound up with the origins of abortion in America that historian Daniel K. Williams has characterized the abortion debate of the 1930s as a “religious conflict because nearly all the doctors speaking out against abortion were Catholic while the most vocal proponents of abortion legalization were Jewish.” Williams adds the fact “Reform Jewish rabbis also became early leaders in the abortion law liberalisation movement.” The link between Jewish organizations and the more sordid (and often Jewish-dominated) corners of the medical profession came into stark relief during investigations into illegal abortions in the 1940s and 1950s, when the crossover was such that, according to historian Leslie J. Reagan, local authorities in New York, found “pro-birth control and Jewish organisations of particular interest.” By the time Pincus developed the Pill, he was sufficiently aware of the potential for birth control and Jewish activism to be linked in the popular mind that he deliberately selected John Rock, a Catholic, rather than Abraham Stone and Alan Guttmacher, long-term colleagues and leaders of the birth control movement, to develop a contraceptive regimen in women, in order to avoid “anti-Semitic stigma.”
The same pattern has been repeated in every other Western nation. Alan Shatter may have acted as chief propagandist for birth control legislation in Ireland in the 1970s, but even a century before Shatter’s actions a member of the Irish clergy reported:
There arrived in town a Jew with a lorry [ … ] and he started selling contraceptives made up as pencil holders . … Someone told the parish priest about the traffic . … He notified the police who could do nothing. He then set up a court of his own and tried him and fined him £10. The Jew paid £10 and cleared out.
In New York, Jews like Moses Jacobi and Morris Glattstine were particularly influential and conspicuous in the sale of illicit contraceptives and in the underground abortion scene as early as the 1870s. Similarly, during the late nineteenth century, “Jews were among the leaders of the revolution in birth control in southern Germany.” In interwar Germany, according to scholar Harriet Freidenreich, “Jewish women physicians played a very prominent role in the campaign to legalise abortion. … Jewish women physicians were disproportionately involved in the sex reform movement that promoted more widespread availability of birth control. They were very visible in the dissemination of contraceptive devices.”
In the Polish Second Republic, the central pioneer of sexual education, contraception, the promotion of homosexuality, and abortion was Irena Krzywicka (née Goldberg). As well as founding Liga Reformy Obyczajów (The League to Reform Mores), Krzywicka wrote for the influential journal Wiadomosci literackie (Literary News) where she argued the case for civil unions, easy divorce, easily accessible contraception, female “sexual liberation,” and abortion. In his Antisemitism and Its Opponents in Modern Poland, historian Robert Blobaum points out that the “anti-Semitic press” in Poland made the link between Jews and “the spread of birth control literature” as well as pornography, but is notably shy of discussing Krzywicka’s career or that of her many Jewish colleagues. Ronald Modras notes that even the Polish birth control movement’s non-Jewish leaders stood out for their “philosemitism.”
In France, the main body behind the legalization of contraception and abortion was Choisir (To Choose), founded by the Jewish lawyer Gisèle Halimi, and the relevant legislation was finally passed by the Jewish Minister of Health Simone Veil (born Simone Jacob). In the United States, of course, Roe v. Wade was effectively the product of activism by the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws, founded by the Jew Bernard Nathanson. Nathanson worked closely on abortion legislation activism with Jewish feminist Betty Friedan, until he experienced an apparently legitimate crisis of conscience in the late 1970s and subsequently converted to Catholicism. By that date, he had personally performed more than 60,000 abortions, later explaining in an interview: “We fed a line of deceit, of dishonesty, of fabrication of statistics and figures; we coddled, caressed, and stroked the press. … We were calling ourselves pro-abortionists and pro-choice. In fact we were abortifiers: those who like abortion.” And Jews certainly like abortion. According to Pew data, Jews have a higher rate of support for abortion than any other religious group in America. In fact, Jews enjoy limiting the fertility of other populations so much that in 2013 Israel admitted giving birth control to incoming Ethiopian migrants without their consent.
Our author might linger on the subject of birth control and abortion only because the prevalence of Jews in other areas of the Culture of Sterility is now so well-documented. Jewish involvement in early sexology, through influential figures like Albert Moll, Iwan Bloch, Magnus Hirschfeld, Albert Eulenberg, Hermann Joseph Lowenstein, Julius Wolf, Max Marcuse, and Eduard Bernstein, was universally concerned with the need for “tolerance” and social pluralism. What they in fact promoted were pathological sexual aberrations, distant from reproduction and toxic to social cohesion. Hirschfeld, probably the originator of “Love is Love” propaganda, had “subverted the notion that romantic love should be orientated toward reproduction,” arguing instead for the acceptance of homosexual lifestyles and hedonistic, non-reproductive, sexual relations in general.
Here it is worth stressing that Jews have not accumulated in the promotion of “tolerance” for homosexuals, gender-benders, abortion-seekers, and transvestites because they genuinely believe in the “rights” or “worth” of these people. Rather, Jews see in these people traits that it wishes to promote in the population at large and recruit them to the Culture of Tolerance. Society never really accepted homosexuality and transgenderism, but rather society itself first became ‘homosexual’ in its traits before it could tolerate actual homosexuals and transgenders. As the West became progressively more childless, promiscuous, hedonistic, and brimming with delusional self-confidence, the differences between the normal and the abnormal narrowed, and there appeared fewer reasons to continue to deny ‘equality.’ Societies with demographic concerns will have harsh penalties for both homosexuality and abortion/infanticide. The West, celebrating both, is in demographic free fall but, ignorant of the profound implications of this racial death, its people are actually in the process of indulging a culture cultivated for their demographic assassination. Homosexuality has never been more tolerated. Abortion has never been easier and less stigmatized. And Whites have never been closer to leaving the stage of history.
Promiscuity has replaced the pushchair. A glance at the modern generation of Whites of child-bearing age is sobering. Rates of sexually transmitted disease in America have never been higher. According to senior physicians, the U.K. is heading for a “sexual health crisis.” The same phenomenon has been reported in Australia, Canada, Ireland, France, and Germany. Meanwhile, the Gatestone Institute reports that: “Abortion has recently assumed epic proportions in countries such as Sweden or France. In France, there are 200,000 abortions a year. To put things in perspective, there are in France around 750,000 births a year. France, therefore, is aborting 20% of its babies/fetuses/embryos/cell clusters — choose according to your personal convictions — each year.” You can be sure it isn’t French Muslims who are aborting their babies by the hundred thousand, and this perhaps explains why they’ve been telling the Archbishop of Strasbourg that “France will be theirs one day.”
In The Population Bomb (1968), the Jewish biologist Paul Ehrlich wrote that the best method to reduce population is the legalization of abortion. That was without considering the effect of birth control or the broader Culture of Sterility that glorifies perverted, empty, childless visions of “love.” When Europeans began to legalize both birth control and abortion 40 years ago, a few years after Roe vs. Wade (1973), the Catholic Church warned of the risk of Europe entering into a “morbid civilization.” This is what we now inhabit.
The Culture of Usury
In a West gone wildly materialistic, it can be difficult to see the extent of Jewish usury. When you mention Jewish moneylenders to most people, the response normally relates to the Middle Ages. But Jewish usury is alive and well in modernity, and entire countries are in debt to Jewish financiers, who then pass on some of their wealth to Jewish organizations dedicated to the promotion of the three other cultures of White decline (Critique, Tolerance, Sterility). Paul Singer, of the Jewish “investment fund” has been described by Bloomberg as “The World’s Most Feared Investor,” but really he’s the world’s most feared exploiter of debt. The Democratic Republic of Congo owes Singer and his Jewish colleagues $90 million, Panama owes him $57 million, Peru owes him $58 million, and Argentina owes him $1.5 billion. When payments have been late, Singer seized and detained the flagship of the Argentinian Navy, and when South Korea put up a fight to prevent him getting control of Samsung, he drove the nation’s President to impeachment and imprisonment.
While these activities may appear very high-level, and distant from the reality of day-to-day life (unless you are a citizen of the Congo and Singer is blackmailing you for payment by withholding essential work on your water supply), Singer and his Jewish financial clique have a hand in almost every purchase you make, and every war your country wages. Singer, his son Gordin, and their colleagues Zion Shohet, Jesse Cohn, Stephen Taub, Elliot Greenberg and Richard Zabel, have a foothold in almost every country, and have a stake in every company you’re likely to be familiar with, from book stores to dollar stores. With the profits of exploitation, they fund the Culture of Sterility, boost Zionist politics, invest millions in security for Jews, and promote wars for Israel. Singer is a Republican, and is on the Board of the Republican Jewish Coalition. He is a former board member of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, has funded neoconservative research groups like the Middle East Media Research Institute and the Center for Security Policy, and is among the largest funders of the neoconservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies. He was also connected to the pro-Iraq War advocacy group Freedom’s Watch. Another key Singer project was the Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI), a Washington D.C.-based advocacy group that was founded in 2009 by several high-profile Jewish neoconservative figures to promote militaristic U.S. policies in the Middle East on behalf of Israel and which received its seed money from Singer.
Although Singer was initially anti-Trump, and although Trump once attacked Singer for his pro-immigration politics (“Paul Singer represents amnesty and he represents illegal immigration pouring into the country”), Trump is now essentially funded by three Jews—Singer, Bernard Marcus, and Sheldon Adelson, together accounting for over $250 million in pro-Trump political money. In return, they want war with Iran. Employees of Singer’s firm, Elliott Management, were one of the main sources of funding for the 2014 candidacy of the Senate’s most outspoken Iran hawk, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), who urged Trump to conduct a “retaliatory strike” against Iran for purportedly attacking two commercial tankers. These exploitative Jewish financiers have been clear that they expect a war with Iran, and they are lobbying hard and preparing to call in their pound of flesh. As one political commentator put it, “These donors have made their policy preferences on Iran plainly known. They surely expect a return on their investment in Trump’s GOP.” When Adelson and Singer first made overtures to Marco Rubio, Trump tweeted that Rubio would be their “puppet.” Trump has now taken money from the same puppetmasters, but has thus far refused to go “all the way” with their demands, even firing John Bolton, a favorite of the Jewish triad. How the latter will proceed in the face of Trump’s defiance on the matter remains to be seen.
The Intersection of the Culture of Usury and the Culture of Zio-Wars: Paul Singer, Bernard Marcus, and Sheldon Adelson
The Jewish triad behind Trump is a perfect example of the role of Jewish finance and the Culture of Usury in sustaining and advancing Jewish power and influence in contemporary society. Singer embodies usury and vulture capitalism, while Bernard “Home Depot” Marcus is symptomatic of bloated consumerism, and Adelson represents the sordid commercial exploitation of vice (gambling). There is nothing productive in the economic activity of any of these figures, their vast accumulations arising from sociopathic parasitism, ethnic nepotism, and the will to cultural decay.
We feel this decay lower down the scale, since we live in a society of conspicuous consumption, funded by ever-escalating household debt. Everywhere, people buy things they don’t need with money they don’t have. Household debt is rising yet again in the United States. According to the New York Federal Reserve, Americans owe $13.86 trillion in household debt, slightly higher than the total amount right before the 2008 financial crisis. In Australia, the household debt to income ratio is above 190%, among the highest in the developed world. The same situation is seen in the U.K. Jews, of course, were involved disproportionately in the development of department stores, the fashion industry, retailing business, and other aspects of the consumer society. Jews in late nineteenth-century Germany, as they did in several other Western countries, initiated the “consumer revolution,” and “held, or at least started, the overwhelming majority of department stores and clothing and fashion houses throughout the country.” Werner Sombart remarked at the time that department stores were the herald of a new, degenerative economic culture, typified by “the anonymous, objectifying forces of capitalism and marketing.” Contemporary anti-Semites saw these centers of the economic culture as “a consuming temple in two senses, as both a temple of consumption and a temple that consumes — that is, a place of destruction, a Moloch even, that greedily devours vulnerable customers and neighbouring businesses.”
Today, largely worthless “branded” consumer products are overwhelmingly Jewish, are promoted via Jewish dominance of the advertising industry, and their purchase by consumers is funded by Jewish financiers. Calvin Klein, Levi Strauss, Ralph Lauren, Michael Kors, Kenneth Cole, Max Factor, Estée Lauder, and Marc Jacobs are just some of the Jews whose very names have become synonymous with debt-fueled consumer culture and the subscribing to carefully cultivated fashion fads, while Jewish-owned companies like Starbucks, Macy’s, the Gap, American Apparel, Costco, Staples, Home Depot, Ben & Jerry’s, Timberland, Snapple, Häagen-Dazs, Dunkin’ Donuts, Monster Beverages, Mattel, and Toys “R” Us have come to epitomize the endless and superfluous production of garbage for mass consumption on credit.
The consuming temple of debt-fueled consumerism is also linked to the cultures of Critique, Tolerance, and Sterility. So-called anti-racism, support for gender confusion, and the celebration of mass migration and multiculturalism have become mainstays of modern advertising as the Racial Endgame nears its conclusion and the West commences its death rattle.
You might ask what tortilla chips have to do with sodomy, but that’s only because you’re suffering from a tolerance deficiency, and the best way to correct that is to admit White privilege, buy a
Starbucks, and go try on a new pair of $200 jeans at Macy’s.
Critique, Tolerance, Sterility and Usury have converged. This is the necessity of anti-Semitism. As much as The Necessity of Anti-Semitism has haunted me, so too has the image of Goedsche’s Rabbi addressing the graveyard meeting of thirteen elders. It haunts me because it appears so antiquated and naive, as if the situation could ever have been so simple. The reality has always been much more profound, and infinitely more dangerous. The Jewish Question, such as it might exist for Jews, has always amounted to “Is it good for the Jews?” For Whites, it should always have been “Are the Jews good for us?” An answer might be found in their accumulation in their four aspects of White decline. Our opposition to this accumulation and its associated activities is perfectly logical, and morally necessary.
 F. Raphael, The Necessity of Anti-Semitism (London: Carcanet, 1997), 49.
 D. Dresser and L. Friedman, American Jewish Filmmakers (University of Illinois, 2004), 7.
 M. Mendelssohn, “Anmerkung zu des Ritters Michaelis Beurtheilung des ersten Teils von Dohm, über die bürgerliche Verbesserung der Juden,” (1783), Moses Mendelssohn gesammelte Schriften, ed. G. B. Mendelssohn (Leipzig, 1843), vol. 3, 367.
 M. Kreyenfeld Childlessness in Europe: Contexts, Causes, and Consequences (Cham: SpringerOpen, 2017), v.
 Cited in T. Russell, A Renegade History of the United States (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2010).
 M. R. Klapper Ballots, Babies, and Banners of Peace: American Jewish Women’s Activism, 1890-1940 (New York: New York University Press, 2013), 151.
 Ibid, 159.
 E. Chesler Woman of Valor: Margaret Sanger and the Birth Control Movement in America (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2007), 51.
 D. K. Williams Defenders of the Unborn: The Pro-Life Movement Before Roe v Wade (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 27.
 Ibid, 66.
 L. J. Reagan When Abortion Was a Crime: Women, Medicine, and Law in the United States, 1867-1973 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997), 173.
 J. Reed The Birth Control Movement and American Society (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984), 351.
 M. P. Leone Atlantic Crossings in the Wake of Frederick Douglass (Leiden: Brill, 2017), 111.
 J. F. Brodie Contraception and Abortion in Nineteenth-century America (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1994), 234.
 A. C. Crombie (ed) History of Science (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990), 371.
 H. P. Freidenreich Female, Jewish, and Educated: The Lives of Central European University Women (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2002), 154.
 Y. Hashamova (ed) Transgressive Women in Modern Russian and East European Cultures: From the Bad to the Blasphemous (New York: Routledge, 2017), 16.
 R. Blobaum, Antisemitism and Its Opponents in Modern Poland (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2005), 87.
 R. Modras The Catholic Church and Antisemitism: Poland, 1933-39 (New York: Routledge, 2004), 62.
 N. Las Jewish Voices in Feminism: Transnational Perspectives (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2015), 91.
 E.R. Dickson, Sex, Freedom and Power in Imperial Germany, 1880-1914 (Cambridge University Press, 2014), 7.
 G. Reuveni, Consumer Culture and the Making of Modern Jewish Identity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017), xiii.
 P. Lerner, The Consuming Temple: Jews, Department Stores, and the Consumer Revolution in Germany, 1880-1940 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2015), 5.
 Ibid, 9.
I am just now finishing up a new novel – Love Song of the Australopiths – which will comprise the most heartfelt denunciation of the Jews ever penned.
I believe it will soon be published. Look for it.
“…No, not from without
Was the European soul’s redoubt
Overtaken, but from within the Enemy
Began to undermine it with an enmity
Unfathomed by the conscience
Of his host in depth and patience.”
What a concise bombshell of an article. I doff my cap to the author and offer my humble thanks and gratitude. This is a masterpiece.
“Freud perverted everything that was sacred about sex and marriage, and called it a cure.” But how does Andrew Joyce adduce this as an example of Jewish hostility toward non-Jews, given that so many of Freud’s clients and followers were themselves Jewish?
You must be new around here.
“Freud took great pains to ensure that a non-Jew, Jung, would be the head of his psychoanalytic movement—a move that infuriated his Jewish colleagues in Vienna, but one that was clearly intended to deemphasize the very large overrepresentation of Jews in the movement during this period. To persuade his Jewish colleagues of the need for Jung to head the society, he argued, “Most of you are Jews, and therefore you are incompetent to win friends for the new teaching. Jews must be content with the modest role of preparing the ground. It is absolutely essential that I should form ties in the world of science” (in Gay 1988, 218). As Yerushalmi (1991, 41) notes, “To put it very crudely, Freud needed a goy, and not just any goy but one of genuine intellectual stature and influence.” Later, when the movement was reconstituted after World War I, another gentile, the sycophantic and submissive Ernest Jones, became president of the International Psychoanalytic Association.” (From Chapter 4 of The Culture of Critique)
“It is well known that Freud was hostile to Christian civilization, seeing himself as Hannibal leading the Semitic armies against Rome.” (https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2012/02/16/a-dangerous-method/)
Thanks for the reply. I don’t dispute your evidence, but I don’t find it to the point. Joyce, like MacDonald, seems to think that Freud invented psychoanalysis as a weapon against non-Jews. I maintain that he saw himself as a true researcher and thinker and that whatever unpleasantness his work brought to the non-Jews was a side effect, not the principal aim.
To my mind, Bob Roberts’s question has still not been answered. Psychoanalysis contributes to psychological disfunction of Jews as well as Gentiles. Perhaps someone here can make the argument that Freud was utterly indifferent to the fate of his fellow Jews as long as he was able to undermine Western Civ (in a similar fashion that the Zionists during WW2 were more interested in ensuring the Allies’ support for founding of Israel at war’s end at the cost of what was happening to the fate of Jews and assimilated Jews in Central Europe who had failed to emigrate to Palestine in the 1930s). I see a parallel as well in that throughout centuries, the few ultra-wealthy Jews have always been indifferent to the poor Jews among them and far more interested in seeking political influence and even more power. Perhaps one can say that the Jewish soul is such a dark place that it wills ultimately the destruction of everything. Maybe the scholars here can provide more precise evidence of these ideas.
I think this quote from the above comment (if true) would be the answer to your question:
“It is well known that Freud was hostile to Christian civilization, seeing himself as Hannibal leading the Semitic armies against Rome.”
If Freud saw himself as Hannibal and had great hostility to non-Jews (“deep in my heart, I am a fanatical Jew”) then one is left with a sense that his critique is out of antagonism/spite and not concern.
I’m sure Freud wasn’t above earning a few extra for the ‘good of the cause’ and even more so if other unsuspecting jews ‘contributed’ to it.
Bob, You might find the answer to your question, that’s assuming you want an answer, by listening E.Michael Jones on YouTube channel Yoryevrah, video ‘Goy Guide to World History (Frankfurt School, ISR). Dr.Jones outlines how Freud was in the vanguard to re-define the soul- the tripartite soul; this Dr.Jones concludes was to invert the Greek philosophical ideal of Logos, Ethos and Pathos:Reason ruled passion, etc; so in time, the sexually abberrant became the norm and the traditional and heterosexual has become the heretical.
One example of this trickle-down the age-range is toy maker Mattel have introduced a new range of dolls that are “gender inclusive”-“I’m a Barbie girl….or perhaps boy”.
This tyranny of ‘tolerance’ will echo into future decades wreaking havoc and, may I say your important writing Dr.Joyce is a vital counter to the insidious and pernicious attacks on our fragile way of life.
I don’t think you’ll be able to get very far in claiming that Freud caused these new barbie dolls to be made.
EMJ’s whole logos thing is a little far-fetched, tbh. Not really a winning polemic.
I think you’ll find more about Freud’s real motivations in The Century of Self:
Thanks Trenchant. I do enjoy the Adam Curtis documentaries and his insightful analysis; one in particular, “Bitter Lake” stands out. Needless to state that in hindsight, post-learning of Jewish activism in anthropology and social engineering, that Curtis’s collective body of work ignores this big fat fundamental question.
‘We have to ask ourselves how tolerance ever became regarded as a virtue.’
In some White countries, ‘tolerance’ still is not regarded as a virtue: rather, it retains its medical meaning. That meaning is implicit in a remark I have often heard my Hungarian relatives and friends make: ‘Jews always take that one step too far; at which point they cop a hiding.’
So Hungarians see themselves as (medically) tolerant of Jews, and to a point only, after which they regurgitate (cease to be tolerant of) them. Yet, oddly though, I see among Hungarians far more genuinely assimilated Jews than among Anglo-Saxons. Genuinely Hungarian Jews have learned to be Hungarian.
I am, since reading your first-class article, inferring freely that the ‘virtue’ sense of ‘tolerance’ is uniquely Anglo-Saxon, and hence the amazing level of impudence, and contempt for the host nation, of Jews among Anglo-Saxons. I.e., the Anglo-Saxon concept of ‘tolerance’ is responsible for excessive Jewish self-aggrandisement and contemptuous approach to the host nation.
I am serious: I have a fair grasp of several European languages, but ‘tolerance’ carries the ‘virtue’ connotation in none of them except in English.
‘Yet, oddly though, I see among Hungarians far more genuinely assimilated Jews than among Anglo-Saxons. Genuinely Hungarian Jews have learned to be Hungarian.’
This may explain why Hungary has the second most people with Ashkenazi ancestry outside of Israel according to genetic studies. There are apparently 150,000 half Jews in Hungary.
Jews do not respect those that are nice to them. To reverse an age old aphorism when dealing with Jews you will catch more flies with vinegar than honey. Many times I have made the mistake of being open, friendly and honest with Jews only to have it thrown back in my face. Try being a little tougher though and they will respect and like you. Remember Jews are a very craven and power worshipping people.
As for Jewish assimilation I would contend that there is no such thing. Merely mimicking another culture is not enough.
What are the attitudes of Hungarian Jews re migration, etc.?
At their loudest; barely audible !
As a Hungarian I can confirm that most Jews are as hostile, and most influential Jews are as subversive here as anywhere else. I do know of apolitical Jews (and half Jews) that don’t care, and that would be as surprised as anyone else if they heard of what Jews are doing to the white world. They usually live and think like any person who is clueless about Jews. But if you look around the country we have a Jewish problem as much as anyone else does. Sometimes they even appear to hate us more, given that anti-Semitism is quite high due to the communist era of Bela Kun (original name Kohn, a variant of Cohen). (Though not nearly enough; they still manage to conceal the facts from most people.)
What is a Jew?
Genetic studies diverge.
How do Jews define themselves?
What makes them herd together?
What is the end-game?
“I am serious: I have a fair grasp of several European languages, but ‘tolerance’ carries the ‘virtue’ connotation in none of them except in English.”
How about French?
Brilliant article; I have saved it. To understand who semites are read http://www.truedemocracy.net/hj32/39a.html
Not in my work, but an excellent description of Anti-semitism:
People who take up the sword against so-called “anti-Semitism” generally have no understanding of what they are saying. They are psychologically conditioned to react to a label, the bottle of which is without content but adduced as an instrument of dishonest political strategy. Approximately ninety per cent. of modern Jewry is not Semitic but of Ashkenazic central European origin. The numerically few Sephardim only are Semitic. Moreover the Arabic peoples, who comprise a large segment of humanity are Semitic. Many critics and commentators do not even spell the word correctly, which error speaks to their gross ignorance of the subject and the prevailing low level of academic rigour–or integrity, whichever the case may be. Anyone who is familiar with the writings of early Zionist protagonists will have observed that they adopted “anti-Semitism” as a primary strategic weapon essential to achievement of their ultimate policies and objectives. In other words, where it did not exist it would have to be created. The term must be inculcated incessantly in the public psyche by constant discussion in the information media and “educational” institutions. Guilt is a potent factor in determining human action. If it can be implanted in the human mind it can be employed as a powerful abstract instrument to influence human behaviour. Unless self-righteous zealots and/or sentimentalists, who are more reactive than rational in taking up the cause against the misnomered and abstract “anti-Semitism” can present a concrete definition of the chimera against which they imagine themselves to be arrayed, their basic intelligence, academic objectivity and ethical integrity must be subject to close scrutiny. At very least they are surely naïve souls who are mere uncomprehending tools in a political strategy which transcends their understanding.
To access the rest of my work, click on the icon that says Magazine.
The “fellow White” form of crypsis is less popular now.
Read the Times of Israel, the next form is upon us: crypsis as “people of color”.
Superb article! Definitely the best of Dr Joyce’s uniformly excellent work. Usury and the general ‘love of money’ are the driving forces behind all the social evils that afflict European peoples. To break the power of usury we need some sort of moral re-armament, perhaps a modern equivalent of ‘bonfire of the vanities’ as happened all too briefly in renaissance Florence.
To those of us who have been paying attention it’s nothing too new.
However, my 85 year old mother said to me yesterday that most people don’t want to know because of they have been propagandised long enough to feel guilt that they even remotely contemplate jewish wrong/evil. The other factor is that real cognisance will force self admission and demand change in their comfortable ignorance.
To change all of this is a monumental task, akin to rehabilitating a heroin addict.
Brilliant and well-researched article. Welcome expansion from the confined examination only of immigration/invasion.
Thanks for the article.
One point of disagreement: consumerism is merely a derivative of monetary policy. The lending of money at interest is no more problematic than renting out a car. It’s the creation of money *ex nihilo* by the Central Bank and its commercial banking cartel, the root problem. If money loaned were actually money saved and not created by way of special privilege, the bulk of today’s programs and lifestyles literally couldn’t be funded. Wall St. would be the dwarf to the Main St. giant, and not vice versa.
It’s hard to be optimistic that a Trump victory won’t see his sponsors rewarded with their war on Iran.
September 27, 2019 at 6:17 pm
“It’s the creation of money *ex nihilo* by the Central Bank and its commercial banking cartel, the root problem. The lending of money at interest is no more problematic than renting out a car. It’s the creation of money *ex nihilo* by the Central Bank and its commercial banking cartel, the root problem. If money loaned were actually money saved and not created by way of special privilege, the bulk of today’s programs and lifestyles literally couldn’t be funded. Wall St. would be the dwarf to the Main St. giant, and not vice versa.”
I agree the type of obsessive ‘consumerism’ and worthless objects that have no longevity by virtue of being made just to be replaced could no longer exist. So too will the advertising to lure people into the latest consumer fad disappear.
Labour would be important again, rather than just an ‘input cost’ workers savings will be necessary again to fund entrepreneurs and business expansion.
The present international monetary system allows for currency misalignment to persist over long periods, long enough to make it worthwhile for companies to move manufacturing and services offshore. Currencies can be manipulated to achieve policy agendas to the detriment and benefit of different groups without the exercise being perceived or understood by the layman.
What you call creation of money ex nihilo is little different than debt funding. It is planned in the same way. It is debt funding for the government.
In this article, Andrew Joyce explains the effect of Jews on Western culture. Jews are a toxin, and the deadly enemies of the White race.
Former VP Joe Biden agrees, although he didn’t use the word “toxin”, for some reason.
In a speech to a Jewish gathering in May 2013, Biden credited the Jews for their “outsized influence” on our culture. He likes it, though. He thinks it’s great that Jews are behind the tidal wave of decadence that has covered the West.
Do an Internet Search for “joe biden on jewish influence.” And locate Kevin MacDonald’s essay, “Joe Biden’s Faux Pas”, May 20, 2013
Brilliant article, great work by Dr Joyce, it says it all really. Maybe the only angle not explicitly covered here is the Jewish attack on and undermining of Christianity, since the Enlightenment at least and probably well before that….
The root of all our problems ..
There is one issue which should be clear for anyone examining the Jewish Tribe.:
In an end analysis their REAL POWER ..is based on their POWER of the PURSE .. as one of their tribesmen has expressed it.
Without that .. they would be NOTHING but an irritating Mosquito .. easily squashed with a casual smack of the Hand…
The acquisition of this power has correctly been connected to USURY.
And that has been true for many decades… even millennia.
Today and for the time being we have a minimal Interest environment ( except on Credit Cards and Loan sharking ofc .. a Business overwhelmingly on Jewish Hands)
.. and they still hold that Power..
WHY ? ..
Because in the end it is not Usury which is the Power…
Usury is just a TOOL to an end… and the end goal is DEBT…..
INDEBTED PEOPLE and NATIONS are at the Mercy of their Creditors …
and forces Debtors to hand over their REAL TANGIBLE ASSETS
The real tangible Asset of normal People is their Labour .
Today .. common People of the West are more indebted than ever before .
That .. even applies to Nations.
How did that happen?
It happened because the common people were enticed to buy a roof over their head
.. on CREDIT..
A roof .. purchased at irrational Prices, a roof which generates No Income .. additionally being a TAXATION Trap, from which normal people cannot escape. (One of the reasons the POLITICAL has been playing along)
Simultaneously Nations due to incompetent and corrupted Politicians have allowed miniscule Elites to fleece the Public by an endless row of financial machinations , including Tax avoidance , an avalanche of criminal Accounting Practices as well as Market Manipulations and unrestricted flow of criminally obtained Capital across Borders ..
All the while the usurious clan has been busy transforming its criminally obtained fictional paper wealth and profits into REAL TANGIBLE ASSETS
In this criminal Scheme they have purchased the majority of all Productive Assets available on Earth.. Tangible Value which produces INCOME.
Anyway as long as there are any dumbed down Buyers of their Products.
(their long term Achilles heel)
And the Globe is with lightning speed transforming into a NEO – FEUDAL World
Just like in the DECAYING ROMAN EMPIRE .. as one of many historical examples.
In reality they don’t need Usury anymore.. to stay on top and wield POWER.
Because Wealth, just like in the Dark Ages of Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire
is .. RELATIVE.
And in the End not what is desired.
What is desired is POWER … over People !
I refer to 3 economic studies in this context , the conclusion of which should be self – evident for anyone with a modicum of economic knowledge and still with their mental faculties intact ..
Vitali, Glattfelder Battison ; ETH , Zurich . Switzerland
The Network of Global Corporate Control
Conclusion of the study : approx. 50 named Companies mainly Financial Corporations control over 40 % of all known 37 Million Companies on the Globe
and by TAX JUSTICE NETWORK : https://www.taxjustice.net/
The Price of Offshore revisited. New Estimates for missing Global Private Wealth . Income . Inequality , and Lost Taxes
Conclusion of the Report :
A handful of major private banking institutions now accounts for 62 to 74 percent of all offshore private wealth. The names mentioned are identical to the Names in Study No 1
A Swedish Research group A Folke et al
Beijer Institute of Ecological Economics, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Stockholm, Sweden
Transnational corporations and the challenge of biosphere stewardship
Conclusion of study : Ownership of most tangible real Assets on the Globe is concentrated to a minuscule group of Corporations , where the names are more or less identical to the names in Study No 1 and 2
As a Grand Final in this series of financial Studies the last research Group , who has been financed by the same Group they have been “investigating “ frivolously and un-ashamed suggests to hand over more POWER to these miniscule Elites .. please consult the “Acknowledgements” of the Study
WHAT IS THE REMEDY ?
I KNOW !…
But saying so, could land me in Prison
Let me end this diatribe with a referral to a POEM
A POEM by an informed sensitive Human
Who has produced a scathing denunciation of “ The Tribe “
On par with the best Ezra Pound has written .
Try and read it loud for Yourself …..
keep the flowing Rhythm of the Verses !:
From “Platos Guns” : “Jewish terrorism” :
PROsemitism ——- what is it?
If there is an “antisemitism” you must ask: “What is PROsemitism?”
PROsemitism must be a supporter of “semitism”, which really means Judaism (though most Moslems are SEMITIC and most JEWS are NOT). So what are you supporting if you are a PROsemite? Well first of all we must define Judaism:
Judaism is neither a race or a religion, it is Xenophobic Tribalism.
A person unduly fearful or contemptuous of that which is foreign, especially of strangers or foreign peoples.
1. The organization, culture, or beliefs of a tribe.
2. A strong feeling of identity with and loyalty to one’s tribe or group.
So right off the get-go you hate all NON-Jews, NON-members of YOUR group(TRIBE).
You “bundle together” for support and safety, the very definition of Fascism
THAT means, that if I am not one of the TRIBE, you do not like me.
Jews have been practicing eugenics for 3,500 years. Jewish mother “makes” you a Jew. Jewish father decides your tribe.
Since Jews BRAND all NON-Jews “gentile” automatically denigrating them, to be PROsemitic one must by definition be ANTI-GENTILE.
They hate all NON-Jews so fundamentally, that they have to SPECIFICALLY name “RIGHTEOUS GENTILES”.
Those are NON-Jewish HUMANS that went so far out of their way to help/save Jews that the Jews were FORCED to ACKNOWLEDGE the humanity of that specific ‘gentile”. You see, PROsemites do not acknowledge the EQUALITY of spirituality and humanity of “gentiles”
What the Jewish Rabbis think of JESUS “As for Christianity, there is a dispute among Halachic authorities, but the vast majority consider it idolatry as well. Islam, on the other hand, is not considered idolatry.” Read that last bit again VERY SLOWLY so the “christianzionists” can follow: “ISLAM, on the other hand, is NOT considered idolatry.” ………..
According to the SPLC & ADL an organization is a “HATE GROUP” if it has
“beliefs or practices that attack or malign an entire class of people”.
Jews have HATED Egypt for 3,500 years.
Jews have HATED Babylon for 2,500 years.
Jews have HATED CHRIST and his followers for 2,000 years.
For 3,500 years antiGENTILISM has been the glue binding Judaism
Israel’s entire being is predicated on the hatered of non-jews holding “The Tribe” together.
David Ben-Gurion, one of the father founders of Israel, described Zionist aims in 1948: “A Christian state should be established [in Lebanon], with its southern border on the Litani river. We will make an alliance with it. When we smash the Arab Legion’s strength and bomb Amman, we will eliminate Transjordan too, and then Syria will fall. If Egypt still dares to fight on, we shall bomb Port Said, Alexandria and Cairo… And in this fashion, we will end the war and settle our forefathers’ account with Egypt, Assyria, and Aram “………….. read that again
“and settle our forefathers’ account with Egypt, Assyria, and Aram”
They are STILL HATING and planning deadly attacks after 3,500+ YEARS .
How do you think they feel about JESUS CHRIST whom they have HATED for 2,000 years.
(1) NEVER forgive & NEVER forget.
(2) By Way of Deception you will Do War.
Their ONLY(monotheistic) “god” is a WAR god
PROsemitism is antiGENTILEism and Gentiles are ALL NON-jews.
For 3,500 years antiGENTILISM has been the glue binding Judaism
For 2,000 years antiCHRISTianity has been a prime focus of Judaism.
antiGENTILISM is the problem. Cavemen did not sit around their caves:
GROK: “HEY, me hate Jews.”
HORG: “What a Jew?”
GROK: “Me not know …. but me hate”
HORG: ” We wait for Jew to come so we be mean to him”
Then non-Jews sat for tens of thousands of years waiting, waiting, waiting, for a Jew to come along, so we could all be mean for no reason. Sorry, what happened was Jews created a social system of Xenophobic Tribalism (look it up) wherein THEY hate all NON-Jews, and this hate of all non-Tribe members has, naturally, caused People to not like them.
anti-semitic … that’s what they called Jesus of Nazareth in the Galilee …
JUDAS ISCARIOT was a JEW beloved by the Temple Priests.
Judaism is neither a race or a religion, it is Xenophobic Tribalism.
A person unduly fearful or contemptuous of that which is foreign, especially of strangers or foreign peoples.
1. The organization, culture, or beliefs of a tribe.
2. A strong feeling of identity with and loyalty to one’s tribe or group.
Quick summation? They are the enemy of anyone who is not a TRIBAL MEMBER …… and only “tolerate” Gentiles.
They have practiced eugenics for 3,500 years …. both Mother and Father are supposed to be Jews for true membership.
Jews HATE Christianity even more then they hate most Gentiles — The Jewish Rabbis hold ISLAM in esteem while spitting on Jesus “As for Christianity, there is a dispute among Halachic authorities, but the vast majority consider it idolatry as well. Islam, on the other hand, is not considered idolatry.”
Read that last bit again:very very slowly so the “christianzionists:” can keep up … “Islam, on the other hand, is not considered idolatry.” The Rabbis despise Christianity.
The World should insist Israel live by the standards Israel demands of others. Be judged as Ye judge others. If Israel wants to be recognized, Israel must recognize the EQUALITY and HUMANITY of ALL People. Quit calling NON-Jews SHISKA, GOYIM, GENTILE. If Israel wants Hamas to ‘repudiate’ their charter, Israel must REPUDIATE their manual of hate, the TORAH, which openly proclaims that all ‘gentiles’ should be ‘Hewers of wood, and bearers of water’ …….. for Israel.
Israel must recognize the Native People’s RIGHT to a Palestinian state.
Israel REFUSES to sign the Non Proliferation Treaty or open It’s NUKES to inspection, Israel should have the exact same sanctions that were put on Iran.
There are no adequate words. I’m simply blown away, not just by the massively-learned and complex bibliography, but more importantly still, by the breadth and depth of Dr Joyce’s profound understanding of those works, and the critical importance for our world of the message which arises from them.
Ironically, I felt initially that the new essay from the great man had started out badly – I struggle a little with medieval art, and lazily felt that the two phrases in Latin and German would have been better placed with a translation to hand. But almost at once, a name – Frederic Raphael – came to the eye, which happens to be a name I have only very recently discovered as that of yet another typically talentless, neurotic, sexually-obsessed, endlessly-self-promoting Jew “writer” – one of whose garbage plays recently invaded the BBC radio airwaves for two wasted hours.
Then I was sold, and I read on with anticipation, amidst the sobering, still-shocking accounts of their low, hypocritical, self-righteous, godless, satanic nation-wrecking treachery, and the ever-growing, near-endless list of the Levantine names which have cursed us already for generations. I’m not surprised anymore – only devastated, and murderously angry – by our failure as a people to rise up and finally remove them all, before it is too late.
Please God, Dr Joyce – write “The Necessity of Anti-Semitism” – and sooner rather than later. Our dying world needs it – much more than it has ever needed, or ever will need, those who are destroying us all.
Boom. May Joyce be the choice for Ireland and beyond… Genius
… and Martin Heidegger’s comment on this subject is still relevant to this day, and interestingly, although he died in 1976, this comment was not published until 2014:
>>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.<<
… and though I have received critical comments from some individuals, my maxim still stands:
>>Don’t only blame the Jews – also blame those that bend to their pressure.<<
Thanks for that quote, it is pretty powerful, coming from a truly brilliant man as Heidegger.
“And then one day, for NO reason at all…”
As soon as I started reading this article, “The Psychopath Next Door”, the book that helped me so much, came to mind. It’s a must read for all white people. This is beyond personal and is at a collective level. The psychopaths, sociopaths and narcissists are preying off a whole race of kind, unsuspecting victims. It is always safest to steer clear of them once you identify one because it can never be underestimated just how dangerous they are and what they’re capable of. But at this point, they are so deeply infiltrated in our societies and so heavily protected and privileged in them, that I can’t see how we will ever undo the damage they’ve done. Our societies are scarcely our own anymore so we’re not even a majority to a protect ourselves.
Truly, it is the best con job the world has ever seen, the scope and the magnitude of it is incomprehensible, so infiltrated in almost every western country, in every western institution from banking to education, to immigration, to culture and the demoralization of culture, to everything that has bankrupted us spiritually and morally and financially and near brainwashed every mind…. it doesn’t look good.
I’m reading Eustace Mullin’s The Curse of Canaan: A demonology of history, in an attempt to understand a somewhat scientific explanation of these people. It’s one of many books I have read to help me understand. And probably a hundred more won’t help me either because it’s beyond the scope of normal. I’ll never understand. It is a con job so perfectly orchestrated, so wide-spread that literally the entire planet has fallen to or is about to fall to…Satan.
Reply to Bethany:
If you are wondering why the world is in this deplorable state, you might like to check out Second Corinthians 4:4.
I am actually stunned to read this “scholarly” article titled “The Necessity of Anti-Semitism” by Andrew Joyce without finding a single mention of Adolf Hitler and his 1920 speech “Why We Are Antisemites.” This is a long speech, even for a man known for long speeches, and very detailed, covering a great deal of ground. [You can read it at https://carolynyeager.net/why-we-are-antisemites-text-adolf-hitlers-1920-speech-hofbr%C3%A4uhaus%5D
I waited to see if any readers would pick up on the fact that Germany in the heart of Europe was hardly mentioned in this article – let alone not even a hint toward Adolf Hitler – but not a single comment out of 20 has so far taken note of that glaring omission.
I would say that everyone who writes about Jews in the present day, including “Andrew Joyce” and even Kevin MacDonald, owes a great debt of gratitude to Adolf Hitler who, throughout his career, taught us about the Jewish mentality with unerringly accuracy. If you haven’t read his 1920 speech “Why We Are Antisemites,” you should. If Hitler had been listened to, we could have avoided a WHOLE LOT of trouble and pain.
Carolyn .. You are right !
My guess is that the omission is tactical.
But ..at the same time realizing that the omission is self-defeating
in spite of all the learned and well-researched academia , from
which I gratefully both learn and quote .
It is high time for White Man to become again what he is :
Proud , Self interested and unashamed violent , if need be
.. realistic ..in other words …
Before that happens it will just be a long row of increasingly
Humiliating Defeats !
There seems to be some problem with the link I gave to Hitler’s speech “Why We Are Antisemites.” If so, use this: https://carolynyeager.net/fuhrerspeeches
and .. Thank You for the Link ! I have the speech somewhere in my Files as a Movie Clip .. but never listened to it. I am now reading the Speech .. which is Brilliant and Witty !
This speech at the Hofbrauehaus in 1920 was not recorded as far as I know, so you could not have listened to it. Still, I’m glad you replied about it and are reading it. Yes, brilliant and witty indeed! Thanks so much.
Yes , You are right.. i discovered perusing those clips i have due to a probability reflection . Those I have are all later .. .Would have been interesting if they had existed ..though. I have made it a habit to download important things to my own PC , even back those files up on external devices … before the Jewish Thought Police removes evidence which should be preserved for posterity….. which happens more often than not.. Besides of this .. it certainly loooks dark !. The only small candle in the darkness i can discover are the Young people behind Generation Identitaire. They dont just TALK .. they ACT.. and therefore I support them.. They deserve it !
I do the same, save key videos and audio to the harddrive and make sure my backups are current. The jews are ruthless in their re-writing of history and the suppression of any evidence that contradicts their narrative.
Thanks Carolyn. Very interesting. This is the first time I have read a speech by Hitler. Not quite like the snippets.
Hollywood features in the “Documentaries”, huh? But you know that people like Joyce and MacDonald think that
referencing Hitler and National Socialism is playing to the enemy’s strengths. Of course you would probably say that the enemy’s strength is rooted in the Big Lies about Hitler and NS. It is a conundrum
I’m so glad you read the speech. There are more there, you know.
Is ignoring Hitler a conundrum or a denial of history? This is an article to goes through modern European history re the Jews, so not mentioning him makes for a very noticeable empty hole. And I don’t think it is Joyce’s preference, but definitely MacDonald’s. It’s only the lies about the World Wars that “play to the enemy’s strengths.” If the truth could be presented, which actually disproves the Jewish narrative, it would be to *our* strength. But what do we mean by ‘Our’? That’s the question.
I also appreciate Carolyn’s tireless work. As a former decades-long liberal I used to think that any appreciation for the era of National Socialism was a reflection of pathology. It has been only after much study, acquainting myself with verifiable facts of history (starting with Rhonhof’s The War with Many Fathers), that I learned to understand objectively the task that Hitler faced in 1933. Sad to say (but “the truth shall set you free”), I have learned to strongly despise the cravenness of Roosevelt and Churchill for creating a world war out of a border conflict. From there I was also able to convince myself of the hollowness of the alleged Holocaust, and finally, from websites such as this one, reasons why Hitler and crew correctly perceived the threat that the jews did and do present Europe. My point: the majority of our fellow citizens are so ignorant of history and yet, so exposed to jewish propaganda as distributed by Hollywood (Schindler’s List, etc, a new Nazi movie every year) or the History Channel that for them a direct lauding of NSDAP will set them into emotional lockdown. I favor detailed presentations such as this article as the only way to drive a wedge into the “Closed American Mind”. Meanwhile, I also support websites such as Carolyn’s to make sure they are available to people when they are independent enough of mind to make use of them.
Incidentally, I just looked over Rotten Tomatoes to search for the latest Nazi movie. I could not find it, but did find “Cuck”. From the description one can easily how it is an attack on anything to do with White Identity, Trump-ness, rejection of postmodernity. Jews are consistent.
No one here will believe my words but the ultimate and ‘only’ remedy for the ‘ages old ‘Jewish problem was discovered in 2013(that’s right just after late 2012 and that Mayan paradigm shift thing,if you remember).
Biological immortality/aging reversal was discovered in 13 by a very deeply spiritual method/process that again any one reading this will not find farfetched and something that could only happen in dreams………
Mark my words, the time is coming soon enough when vile and evil minded Humans(Jewish or other wise) will have to decide between evil and the fountain of youth because pure spirit is the antithesis of evil.
The meek really do get to inherit the Earth,as was the plan all along.
What a marvellous article. It gives me many new avenues of Jewish abuse and exploitation to chase down.
But who reads it, barring the converted?
We need to figure out what gets people on the pathway to being Jew wise and act on it. We must have some people in the relevant university departments. They can disguise their work under the cover of what radicalises people. Or perhaps we can use some existing work on that topic?
No, sometimes others do read this stuff. I was, until recently quite unconverted. I am an old and “well educated” dog meaning I got post war Jewish dominated social science and history up the kazoom. 3 years ago I came to this site almost as if it was pornography in the 50’s. But I came and began my process of deJudaization. Others are coming too. This is going to take time. Hopefully we have it.
While Joyce and TOO churn out another brilliant summary, Jews are systemically depriving Whites of access to global communication. The Jewish response to perceived or conceivable challenges to their forward march is Action; the presumptive “leadership” of Whites responds to actual and violent challenges to their future existence with – – – another brilliant article.
There are many things that informed and motivated Whites could have done, and wanted to do, other than read articles. Unfortunately, the only person who was accepted–enthusiastically-across all lines of otherwise fractious White groups had been bitten by a bug — to create the “Gentile Intellectuals” on the so un-comparable model of the brilliant ones from New York. A lesser calling by far.
Twenty years of inactivity – a whole generation. So many good people who’ve wandered away … And so many who’ve hung on, saddened, frustrated, or embittered.
Correct !… Still .. something is better than nothing ,,especially if that something is as brilliant as TOO. In my comment to a Lady here I have pointed at some YOUNG PEOPLE .. who not only talk .. but who ACT . GENERATION IDENTITAIRE : https://generationidentitaire.org/presentation-eng/ … They deserve all the Support ..we ” Oldies can giv them !
Opposition to Jewish ambition “to impose its rule on other nations”, be it globalist, communist, mulitcult, or liberal, is not anti-Semitism, even if the Jews imagine it so.
Western nations have an equally solemn duty to prevent Jewish subversion of identity, faith and morals.
Jews have been hated since the beginning of time to the present and usually for the same repeated offenses against their host countries.
Usury, Subversion, Subterfuge, Revolution, Exploitation, Cultural Pollution, Goy Hatred, Tribal Nepotism
Yes a truly brilliant article. An extraordinary combination of rigorously documented verifiable factual claims with testable valid logical inferences, all expressed in a very readable almost literary style. It’s a virtual lesson plan for students of the decline and fall of Western culture (civilization), at the hands of the Jewish nation.
From its inception Western Civilization has beat back invasions from the Middle East (Phoenicians [Hannibal – Freud admired him], Arabs, Turks, etc.). Each time it succeeded in defeating them and survived. This time the Middle Eastern Jews have finally succeeded in conquering the West. But, unlike their predecessors, they did not confront the West militarily. Rather, they infiltrated within.
…Also, it is interesting to compare the comments here with those for the same article over at The Unz Review. “Different Drummers” as the saying goes.
Great article, Dr. Joyce. I have no compunction whatsoever about committing all the Jews you named to a salt mine with or without a Starbucks. They could join the hundreds I’ve already sent there in cattle cars to honor their role in forced busing and the destruction of my public school, the overdose deaths of millions of white people courtesy of their counter-culture chic (later the Sacklers), and their documented propagandizing for pornography, our demographic displacement, interracial victimization and mongrelization. I grew up in the 60s and every white boomer I remember who fell in with their project uncritically is now either dead or a shambling brain zombie. And yet I personally have never met a Jew I hated–and I’ve met many, usually as fellow students. Indeed, many of them seemed as much victim of the Jewish program as we whites, sometimes more so. You may recall Himmler’s lament: “Every German knows a good Jew.” And so do I. And probably so do you. Maybe at some point you can fashion an article as to what we owe these decent, inoffensive Jews. (If you know no good Jew personally, think Stephen Miller.) If one of these good Jews asked me, I think I would tell them I’m acting in their best interest when I fantasize about remanding certain of their co-ethnics to salt mines, that I’m making distinctions on their behalf while distinctions are still possible—before all whites (not just National Socialist Germany’s) realize their fate is sealed.
I have known two extremely red-pilling Jewish people.
My aunt is Jewish, and her father was a NYC slum lord who ended up getting locked away in prison for his practices for like 20 years.
I met an old pervert at a gym I went to who loved to talk about his adventures on sugar daddy websites. He complained about the patriotism in the olympics and the lack of news coverage of military developments in Israel in American media. He bragged about little cheap things he did. Once his vacuum broke and he demanded that he get refunded by bed bath and beyond. The vacuum was 20 years old, and the clerks thought the idea was crazy and had no way of checking that it was ever sold there. He forced them to look into inventory backlogs (probably took hours) until they found it, and got his money back. Once the nearby grocery store mailed coupons to residents in nearby apartments (typically each resident got one in their mailbox). He saw a stack of them and took the whole stack. He continued to use them for months, even well after the coupons expired, and lied to the clerks by saying the coupons were not delivered to him on time. He told me many stories of how clerks argued and doubted him, but gloated that he stuck to his guns and won his discount in the end. He also constantly changed bank accounts to get money bonus offers. Often he would terminate accounts early, costing him a fine described in the fine print, which he would then escalate to branch management until they just gave in and dropped the fine.
Andrew Joyce’s essays are a pleasure to read. Insightful, articulate, eloquent and delightful prose.
Great article except for this:
“The history of Christianity has been put through the Jewish intellectual meat grinder, and emerges today only as a tale of persecutions and slavery. It is a shell, co-opted for endless tolerance”
While Christianity has been attacked it is only because the shell casing is no longer needed, the bullet has already done its damage. Christianity was always a Jewish, moral inversion or European values, spreading among women and slaves. Christianity was the original Cultural Marxism, attempting to destroy everything it can into contact with.
Thinking on this further I think you have missed a vital bit of dot connecting. You say, ” Just like the Frankfurt School, these cultural heroes know us better than we know ourselves, which allows them to help us see that we are irrational and evil, bigoted and in need of Jewish redemption. We are constantly and warmly assured by our Jewish helpers that this process is undertaken for the West’s own good. They free us from our “baggage.””
You then lament the attacks on Christianity, but fail to see this is exactly the Christian story.
Christianity is a story, written by Jews, about jews, based on “jewish history”, for gentiles. It is sold to us as, ” You filthy goyim don’t understand how evil you are. You are born with a sin nature and you need to be saved. Boy do we have a deal for you, we know just the guy. He happens to be the son of god. God wants to love you, but he needs you to give up on your family and heritage heritage first. I mean, it is all wickedness anyway. Who would pick all this worldliness over eternal life?”
Does the New York Times allow Trump supporters who abide by this paper’s standards of courtesy, to comment?
If so, please let me say that I do support and admire this president though I hope that future presidents will take the next necessary step toward making America 90% white again.
For nearly 400 years, America was 90% white, or better, and those were the years during which our country developed into the world preeminent country. Now that the white portion of the demographic has been decimated and has been targeted for minority standing, the United States, (and the West generally) has precipitously deteriorated in relation to the rest of the world, the Far East in particular.
China, wise enough to avoid foreign wars, retain its monocultural dispensation and keep its minorities under tight control, is on track, I believe, very soon to preempt this country’s ruinous efforts at world dominance. An America reduced to third-world standards will likely prove very uncomfortable for those uninvited sectors of the population most especially promoted by this newspaper.
1. USA is not going to revert its demographics. It is a crazy proposition. Advancing it will embitter our enemies. We would have better luck asking for a piece of USA/Canada
2. Advancing the cause of white well-being with racist arguments (“the brown ppl will crash the ecomony and make us third-world!”) is also horribly destructive to our cause. For some normies, they get confused into thinking that this is the entire root of our desire to survive, when it is not even the root at all. After getting this idea of the right-wing, they then go on to meet perfectly fine and intelligent non-white people. They then are filled with rage that these people have to suffer through condescending, hateful thoughts and words from racists, especially since they aren’t even necessarily true. Racism has been the weak point of the right-wing for centuries.
After seeing the blurb about this Kosiński guy, I felt I had to search him online and to see what others are saying. Starting with Wikipedia, I saw some terrible and demoralizing bombshells:
The Painted Bird, Kosiński’s controversial 1965 novel, is a fictional account that depicts the personal experiences of a boy of unknown religious and ethnic background who wanders around unidentified areas of Eastern Europe during World War II and takes refuge among a series of people, many of whom are brutally cruel and abusive, either to him or to others.
Polish literary critic and University of Warsaw professor Paweł Dudziak remarked that “in spite of the unclear role of its author,The Painted Bird is an achievement in English literature.” He stressed that since the book is a work of fiction and does not document real-world events, accusations of anti-Polish sentiment may result only from taking it too literally.
After being translated into Polish, it was read by the people with whom the Lewinkopf family lived during the war. They recognized names of Jewish children sheltered by them (who also survived the war), depicted in the novel as victims of abuse by characters based on them.
The problem with saying that frustrated people are “only from taking it too literally” is that OF COURSE readers will take it literally! Are readers supposed to already know that this (((guy))) is massively exaggerating in his descriptions of the evils of the Polish people? And why might a man “paint” the Poles in such a bad light, I wonder? Most good goys don’t for a second suspect that the Jews, spotless lambs that they are, would misrepresent others!
Yes, people believe the descriptions of humanity given to them by movies and literature. This is why so many people, after seeing Hidden Figures, genuinely came to the belief that three black women basically put a man on the moon.
And all writers should accept this burden of knowing that they are the ones whose position it is to teach the society about the history and nature of humanity. This critic should know better than to say “the audience should know better!” You should not expect people to believe things contrary to what they are taught; it is evil to maintain a web of lies and blame people for believing them.
“Advancing it [racism] will embitter our enemies.”
Indeed, but I very much wish to embitter them. My desire is to so embitter our enemies that we may more quickly move forward to that belated racial war that will empower me to kill as many enemy as I may be able to accomplish.