Lance Welton on Jewish ethnocentrism: Fairness, Paranoia, and Self-Deception

Lance Welton’s article on VDARE is a nice summary of research on Jewish ethnocentrism and its consequences: “Did the ADL Think It Could Get Away with  Hypocrisy on Replacement in U.S. vs. Israel? Answer: It Probably Didn’t Think At All.” As noted below, some of his presentation touches on my Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition as well as my books on Judaism.


“Fairness,” as I noted in my article on blacks, is “impartial and just treatment or behavior without favoritism or discrimination.” This is a high-order value which demands that you put aside nepotism, ethnocentrism, and even personal gain, in favor of this abstract goal. So, on this basis, would we expect Jews to be as high in “fairness” as Whites?

No. Firstly, there is abundant evidence that Jews are more ethnocentric than whites; meaning they cooperate strongly with their own people and are hostile to other peoples. Jews have been stereotyped as being highly ethnocentric throughout their history, as Kevin MacDonald showed in his 1994 book A People That Shall Dwell Alone [Chap 8, 228ff]. There is overwhelming evidence that racial stereotypes, like all stereotypes, tend to be true; that’s why they develop [Social Perception and Social RealityBy Lee Jussim, 2012].

This goes very deep. Jewish babies react with far greater horror to strangers of a different ethnic group than do German babies [Security of Infant-Mother, -Father, and -Metapelet Attachments Among Kibbutz-Reared Israeli Children, by Abraham Sagi et al., Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 1985].

Data from the University of Wisconsin’s MIDUS survey of middle-aged Americans demonstrated that among Whites there is a positive correlation between how religious you are and how group-oriented you are. However, the same study found that Jews are the most ethnocentric—group-oriented religious group—even though they were the least religious group of those surveyed. When factors such as intelligence (which tends to make people less ethnocentric) and religiousness level were controlled for, Jews were still way more ethnocentric than the gentile White groups. (This is discussed in Religiosity as a Predictor of In-Group Favoritism Within and Between Religious Groups, by Curtis Dunkel & Edward Dutton, Personality and Individual Differences, 2016).

If you take into account the number of Jews in a population compared to the number of Whites, then the extent to which Jews “marry out” is far lower. Jews are about 49 times less likely to marry someone of a different faith than Protestants are, for example. [See Andrew Joyce’s “The Cofnas Problem.“]. The most obvious explanation for this, in the context of the other research: ethnocentrism. Jews seem to be evolved to be higher in ethnocentrism [see “A Genetic Perspective on Individualism/Collectivism,” A People That Shall Dwell Alone, Ch. 8: p. 236ff], something that would be heightened by their small gene pool; with people tending to be more ethnocentric when the gene pool is small [Natural History of Ashkenazi Intelligence, By Gregory Cochran et al., Journal of Biosocial Science, 2006]. This higher ethnocentrism would make them less able to suppress ethnocentric instincts in favor of creating fairness than are gentile Whites.

Fairness is one of the traits that is higher in Western societies based on individualism versus the kinship-based societies of the rest of the world. Joseph Henrich and colleagues reviewed research showing differences between subjects from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic (WEIRD) nations and subjects in a wide range of other cultures, finding important differences in fairness and moral reasoning. This is reviewed in Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition: 

In non-Western societies based on extended kinship, morality is defined in terms of whether an action satisfies obligations within the family or kinship group, whereas in individualist societies, morality is thought of as satisfying abstract notions of justice such as Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative: Act according to the maxim that you could wish all other rational people to follow, as if it were a universal law. … The differences between individualist and collectivist cultures—whether in fairness and altruistic punishment, moral reasoning, cognition, or perception—are all “of a piece;” they all fit into a consistent pattern in which Westerners detach themselves from social, cognitive, and perceptual contexts, whereas non-Westerners see the world in a deeply embedded manner. This pattern is highly consistent with Western peoples being more prone to scientific reasoning (p. 110).

On the other hand, collectivist cultures—my view is that Judaism is a paradigmatic collectivist culture—see the world from the standpoint of group interests, so that even scientific reasoning in the social sciences is performed through the lens of group interests. Hence, The Culture of Critique.

The Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic (WEIRD) people discussed in Chapter 3 developed scientific and scholarly associations in the post-medieval West which assume groups are permeable and highly subject to defection—that there is a marketplace of ideas in which individuals may defect from current scientific views when they believe that the data support alternate perspectives. On the other hand, collectivist cultures create group-oriented intellectual movements based on dogmatic assertions, fealty to group leaders, ethnic networking, and expulsion of dissenters [i.e., the thesis of The Culture of Critique]. …

Moreover, … WEIRD people tend more toward analytical reasoning (detaching objects from context, attending to characteristics of the object and developing rules for explaining and predicting phenomena) as opposed to holistic reasoning (attending to relationships between objects and surrounding field). Westerners tend to categorize objects on the basis of rules that are independent of function and hence more abstract whereas non-Westerners are more likely to categorize on the basis of function and contextual relationship. Science is fundamentally concerned with creating abstract rules independent of context and developing explanations and predictions of phenomena in the empirical world. Such traits, which can be seen even in the ancient Greco-Roman world of antiquity, clearly predispose to scientific thinking. …

For collectivists, moral reasoning involves taking account of the social context, which is fundamentally centered on fitting into and strengthening a kinship group. For individualists, the social world involves a greater need to interact with strangers and to consider their reputation for respecting impersonal rules. …

Individuals are evaluated as individuals on traits—e.g., honesty, intelligence, military talent, and the logic and usefulness of their arguments—in abstraction from their (relatively weak) kinship connections. Moral situations are evaluated in terms of abstract concepts of justice that apply to all individuals rather than being vitally concerned with social obligations to particular people enmeshed in a particular extended kinship network. When confronting the natural world, individualists more easily abstract from social context and personal experience, seeking out and applying universally applicable laws of nature.

Back to Welton:

In addition, there is evidence that Jews are perfectly happy for a situation to be unfair. One study compared religious groups in the US—Baptists, Catholics, Methodists, Jews, and Atheists/Agnostics—and asked people what they thought was most important to live a “good life.” Jews, in contrast to all the other groups, highlighted “extra money” [“For Tomorrow We Die”? Testing the Accuracy of Stereotypes about Atheists and Agnostics, by Edward Dutton & Curtis Dunkel, Mankind Quarterly, 2019]. They see it as important to be richer than other people in a way that the whites do not, which implies that they are less concerned about a possibly unfair situation as long as they benefit. And, being more intelligent than gentile Whites on average (as Richard Lynn has shown in his book The Chosen People) they will better be able to rationalize achieving such an advantage, as intelligent people are typically better at finding ways of rationalizing their biases [Why smart people aren’t better at transcending their biased views, by Tauriq Mousa, The Big Think, June 13, 2012].

Finally, Jews are less mentally stable than Whites. Ashkenazi Jews have significantly elevated levels of bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, both of which can make people paranoid [Genome-Wide Association Study of Schizophrenia in Ashkenazi Jews, by Fernando Goes et al., American Journal of Medical Genetics, 2015]. When people are paranoid, they are less interested in what is “fair”—they are interested simply in surviving and doing so may involve being very “unfair.” People with paranoid personalities tend to be hypocritical and self-seeking [Understanding Paranoia, by Martin Kantor, 2004, p.71].

Because Jews are better at finding ways of rationalizing away their bias and hypocrisy, they may well not believe that they are being “unfair” at all [a kind of self-deception one expects to find among highly ethnocentric people—Ch. 8 of Separation and Its Discontents  and elaborated by Andrew Joyce here]. In this sense, it can be said that intelligent yet paranoid people do not “know themselves”—meaning that they live in a fantasy world in which there is nothing wrong with them; only with others.

This personality type will see the world as packed full of hostile persecutors who want to destroy them, meaning that an obviously Mostly Peaceful protest at the Capitol becomes an “insurrection” in which people could have been killed.

This personality type will also engage in “paranoid projection,” whereby they purport to find an aspect of themselves they dislike in others, causing them to despise these people. “I hate them” becomes “They hate me,” based on finding some minor evidence of this. Hence the Leftist obsession with how “hateful” their opponents are [8 Key Traits of Paranoid Thinkersby Shahram Heshmat, Psychology TodayFebruary 24, 2016].

It’s interesting in this regard that paranoia about the surrounding world is a very central aspect of Jewish culture—analyzed as what behavior geneticists label genotype-environment correlation (e.g., paranoid parents with genetic predispositions to paranoia would socialize their children (who share their genes for paranoia) in a manner that would reinforce a worldview that the outside world is dangerous). From A People That Shall Dwell Alone, Ch. 7:

A permanent sense of imminent threat appears to be common among Jews. Writing on the clinical profile of Jewish families, Herz and Rosen (1982) note that for Jewish families a “sense of persecution (or its imminence) is part of a cultural heritage and is usually assumed with pride. Suffering is even a form of sharing with one’s fellow-Jews. It binds Jews with their heritage—with the suffering of Jews throughout history.” Zborowski and Herzog (1952, 153) note that the homes of wealthy Jews in traditional Eastern European shtetl communities sometimes had secret passages for use in times of anti-Semitic pogroms, and that their existence was “part of the imagery of the children who played around them, just as the half-effaced memory was part of every Jew’s mental equipment.”

This evolved response to external threat is often manipulated by Jewish authorities attempting to inculcate a stronger sense of group identification. Hartung (1992) provides anecdotal data on the emphasis on Jewish suffering and its exaggeration as aspects of modern synagogue service. Such practices have a long history. Roth (1978, 62) notes that Jewish “martyrologists” maintained lists of Jewish martyrs for commemoration during synagogue services during the Middle Ages, and Jordan (1989, 20) refers to the “forbidding martyrocentric self-image” during this period.

Woocher (1986) shows that Jewish survival in a threatening world is a theme of Judaism as a civil religion in contemporary America. Within this world view, the gentile world is viewed as fundamentally hostile, with Jewish life always on the verge of ceasing to exist entirely. “Like many other generations of Jews who have felt similarly, the leaders of the polity who fear that the end may be near have transformed this concern into a survivalist weapon” (Woocher 1986, 73). Woocher (1986) notes that there has been a major effort since the 1960s to have American Jews visit Israel in an effort to strengthen Jewish identification, with a prominent aspect of the visit being a trip to a border outpost “where the ongoing threat to Israel’s security is palpable” (p. 150).

Or, as Elliott Abrams (Faith or Fear, 190) wrote, “the American Jewish community clings to what is at bottom a dark vision of America, as a land permeated with anti-Semitism and always on the verge of anti-Semitic outbursts.”

Hence the Jewish motivation for diversifying America, the theme of Chapter 7 of The Culture of Critique (corroborated by Otis Graham (Unguarded Gates [2004]: 80), who notes that the Jewish lobby on immigration “was aimed not just at open doors for Jews, but also for a diversification of the immigration stream sufficient to eliminate the majority status of western Europeans so that a fascist regime in America would be more unlikely.” The motivating role of fear and insecurity on the part of the activist Jewish community thus differed from other groups and individuals promoting an end to the national origins provisions of the 1924 and 1952 laws.

Writing in the 1970s, Isaacs (1974: 14ff) describes the pervasive insecurity of American Jews and their hypersensitivity to anything that might be deemed anti-Semitic. Interviewing “noted public men” on the subject of anti-Semitism in the early 1970s, Isaacs asked, “Do you think it could happen here?” “Never was it necessary to define ‘it.’ In almost every case, the reply was approximately the same: ‘If you know history at all, you have to presume not that it could happen, but that it probably will,’ or ‘It’s not a matter of if; it’s a matter of when.’ ” (p. 15).

Writing long after the passage of the 1965 law, prominent Jewish social scientist and ethnic activist Earl Raab remarked very positively on the success of American immigration policy in altering the ethnic composition of the United States. Writing for a Jewish publication, Raab noted that the Jewish community had taken a leadership role in changing the northwestern European bias of American immigration policy (Raab, 1993a, 17), and he also maintained that one factor inhibiting anti-Semitism in the contemporary United States is that “an increasing ethnic heterogeneity, as a result of immigration, has made it even more difficult for a political party or mass movement of bigotry to develop” (Raab, 1995b, 91). (Culture of Critique, Ch. 7).

Welton concludes:

The self-centeredness and implicit unfairness of the ADL operatives’ fantasy world means they indeed might very well not have thought at all about what to any outside observer appears to be the utter hypocrisy of their position on the Great Replacement [via immigration] in the U.S. as opposed to Israel.

For such people, objective truth is “defamation”—but their “defamation” of others is objective truth.

Any objective observer would indeed have to agree that the ADL is utterly hypocritical in its stance toward immigration in Israel versus the United States. But activist Jews like Jonathan Greenblatt may not even be aware of it due to their powerful tendencies toward ethnocentrism and its corollary of self-deception. And now these people are firmly ensconced in the hostile elite that is running the United States. A dire situation indeed for the traditional White population of America.

32 replies
  1. Richard McCulloch
    Richard McCulloch says:

    Today’s verdict in the Chauvin trial, and how it is generally seen by Whites compared to non-Whites, might be a good illustration of the difference between individualist, objective, analytical and rule-based concepts of fairness and justice on the one hand versus collectivist, subjective, holistic and contextual perceptions on the other. It is the latter version of justice that has won, and the former Western version going back to the Anglo-Saxons and even Greece and Rome that has been overthrown.

  2. Stefani Pachenic
    Stefani Pachenic says:

    I disagree that Jews do not know they are being hypocritical.
    Jews know very well they are hypocritical liars. They just don’t care
    because they have elevated their tribe to the status of God….and this makes them
    evil as a group….the ultimate in blasphemy. They have usurped God, or at least they are
    trying their best to do so.
    Quite frankly, as a people, they are nuts.

  3. Junghans
    Junghans says:

    The Chauvin trial was a Jewish led, media orchestrated legal lynching. Their (premature) takedown of White America is running in high gear, and clearly meant to intimidate. His ‘conviction’ is arguably a death sentence, to be suffered in a prison full of hostile Negroes. To add insult to injury, the streets of Minneapolis were full of renegade White libtards celebrating this travesty! With the media front running the perverse, masochistic show, of course.

    America has become a systemic
    aberration of destructive double standards, mislead & cajoled by the “people of the double standard”.

  4. Eric
    Eric says:

    Jews are paranoid in the same way someone who just committed murder is paranoid. They’re paranoid not because of their psychological makeup. but because of the injuries they inflict on innocent people. They know they deserve to be exposed and punished. Even their ethnocentric “morality” recognizes that. And they’re afraid the well-deserved exposure and punishment will happen.

    They feel no guilt the way a goy might, but they recognize that deliberately injuring other people (especially when you’re the minority and they’re the majority) is likely to elicit an unfavorable response.

    Of course, because Jews have been behaving very badly for millennia, it is possible, even likely, that the paranoia that arose (and still arises) from their bad behavior has been selected for in the Jewish genome, such that a Jewish baby is born paranoid.

    The bad behavior that originally caused the paranoia also reinforces Jewish ethnocentrism. Only among other Jews can a Jew feel safe, because they are all in the same position and do the same bad things to the goyim.

    The bad behavior also explains the hatred for goyim expressed in the Talmud. Although incapable of feelings of guilt and remorse (like any sociopath), the Jews as a group feel the need to justify themselves, at least to each other. Thus, it is the goyim who must be given the role of villain. Whatever goes wrong, it is the fault of the goy.

    In sum, Jewish paranoia, Jewish ethnocentrism, and Jewish hatred of the goyim all derive from the criminal nature of the Jew.

    In order to protect themselves, these criminals must — to the greatest extent possible — take control of the societies in which they commit their crimes.

    So they will aim for the “power and influence” positions in any society they inhabit, climb the ladder through nepotism, and then brag about how brilliant they are.

    In the last three-to-four hundred years, the Jews have managed to take possession of most of the world’s money, either directly or indirectly. A proper understanding of the Jew comes from a proper understanding of the Golden Rule as it pertains to Jews: The one with the gold makes the rules. A good example of this is Mr. Fink of BlackRock, which controls over $8 trillion in assets and demands that the Fortune 500 companies he invests in embrace cultural Marxism, critical race theory, wars for Israel, hatred of White goyim, etc.

    It is a good policy in war to take advantage of the other side’s weaknesses. The way to do that with a paranoid person is through gaslighting — by getting him to perform a self-defeating action. More imaginative people than me will have to come up with appropriate strategies.

    In the meantime, Jewish paranoia is perhaps the world’s greatest danger. Jewish hatred of Christian Russia is so intense that Jews in the last several presidential administrations have directed our foreign policy at provoking Russia, imposing sanctions, playing “chicken” in Syria, creating color revolutions in neighboring nations, and pushing NATO troops right up to Russia’s border while accusing the Russians who simply move troops around in Russia of “aggression”.

    Russia will not put up with these provocations forever. And confrontation of this sort can lead to hair-trigger mistakes that morph into all-out war.

    My understanding is that Russia has almost 7,000 nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them…

    • Carolyn Yeager
      Carolyn Yeager says:

      “Jews are … paranoid … because of the injuries they inflict on innocent people. They know they deserve to be exposed and punished … they’re afraid the well-deserved exposure and punishment will happen.”

      Eric – Apart from what they did to Russia, the lie of the “Holo-cost” is the greatest injury inflicted by Jews on innocent non-Jews — in this case Germans. Yet it is precisely non-Jews who have, since 1944, enabled Jews to continue to inflict this profound injury upon what you’re calling us “goyim.” Unfortunately the goyim themselves assist the Jews in this assault on our own ethnic kin, for reasons political and financial, and even face-saving. The Jews couldn’t and wouldn’t be succeeding without our cooperation, would they? So what does that do to your neat little theory for which you’re getting so many kudos?

      Where is your proof that Mr. Fink of Blackrock “demands that the Fortune 500 companies he invests in embrace cultural Marxism, critical race theory, wars for Israel, hatred of White goyim, etc.”? Did you just pull that out of a hat?

      “Christian Russia” fiercely defends the Holo-cost as a real event, even though it knows better. For what reason? Not because of the reasons you give, but to distract attention from their country’s Stalinist horrors which were very real. They also want to play up their role as savior with their victory in the “Great Patriotic War” that is essential to holding their racially diverse country together.

      The West is trapped in a Big Lie, and refuses to liberate itself because of competitiveness and unworthy reasons. The Jews, like the Blacks, only have the power we give them, and we vie to have them on our side rather than against us, don’t we? There is no one innocent, is there? Can you, or anyone here, give a different explanation for the persistence of the “holo-cost lie” and why we keep it in spite of the hurt it causes?

      • Timothy Treinen
        Timothy Treinen says:


        You seem to have a contrary bone….you fancy that nobody could possibly know more than you do…..Eric clearly knows more than you do…..and KMAC knows a LOT more than you do.

        Fash The Nation had a deep dive on Blackrock and Larry Fink…..Eric is 100% correct.

        Your arguments are very cucky, blaming the white victim.

        Yes, shabbos goy sellouts are scum….but they sellout most often when it’s related to money and work, and also because the jew media can cancel people at will.

        Eric is absolutely right and his analysis is spot on.

        • Carolyn Yeager
          Carolyn Yeager says:

          I don’t take “Fash the nation” as proof of anything, nor did Eric mention it in his second comment. No matter how much money Fink controls, he can’t force any company to do what he wants if they don’t want to. That is just conspiracy crap based on believing white people have no will. If white men have no will, that’s on them.

          The two men you mention do not know “a lot” more than I do on EVERYTHING. And you don’t either. So what exactly does “a LOT” as used by you refer to? It’s dumb.

          • Eric
            Eric says:

            According to Fash the Nation, BlackRock positions itself (with its $8 trillion in assets) as the largest shareholder of any company it invests in. It invests in all the big companies. Companies will not do anything to offend their largest investor.

            “That’s on them.” Okay, Carolyn. I won’t deny that. But you act as though I’ve excused rather than explained their actions. All you’re doing is creating a straw man and then knocking it down.

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            “Companies will not do anything to offend their largest investor.”

            This is a surmise from you, not a proven fact. It’s an assumption that Fink/Blackrock controls the world bc they represent 8 trillion in corporate stock investment wealth. This is the kind of item that hundreds of thousands of average IQ whites take hold of to convince themselves there’s nothing they can do to improve their life. It’s not the right message.The right message has to be one of empowerment.

          • Eric
            Eric says:

            No, Carolyn. The right message has to be one of truth. If you have to lie to get people on your side, your battle is not worth fighting and you will most likely lose.

            “This is a surmise from you.” No, it isn’t. Companies have gone “woke”, showering BLM with money, because BlackRock wants them to. Companies have boycotted Indiana, North Carolina, and now Georgia, because those states passed “anti-woke” legislation BlackRock didn’t like. Those are facts. Try joining us here in the real world.

            You can’t get “empowered” by underestimating your adversary.

      • Eric
        Eric says:

        “Unfortunately the goyim themselves assist the Jews in this assault on our own ethnic kin for reasons political and financial, and even face-saving. The Jews couldn’t and wouldn’t be succeeding without our cooperation, would they? So what does that do to your neat little theory for which you’re getting so many kudos?”

        Did I say the goyim weren’t assisting the Jews in betraying their fellow goyim? Nope.

        In fact, I suggested the opposite when I noted that in the last three to four hundred years, the Jews have managed to take control of most of the world’s wealth, either directly or indirectly.

        Control of the wealth means control of everything else. That doesn’t excuse money-hungry goyim betraying their fellow goyim, but it certainly explains it.

        Here are some interesting excerpts from a letter written by Menasseh ben Israel to Oliver Cromwell:

        “…the Examples of great Monarchs make good; especially of such who have afflicted the people of Israel: For none hath ever afflicted them who hath not been, by some ominous Exit, most heavily punished of God Almighty; as is manifest from the Histories of those Kings, Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezar, Antiochus Epiphanies, Pompey, and others.

        “And on the contrary, none ever was a Benefactor to that people, and cherished them in their Countries, who thereupon hath not presently begun very much to flourish…Hence I…make this humble addresse to your Highness, and beseech you, for God’s sake, that ye would…grant us place in your Countrey, that we may have our Synagogues, and the free exercise of our Religion.

        “It is a thing confirmed that marchandizing is, as it were, the proper profession of the Nation of Iewes…God…having banished them from their own Countrey, yet not from his Protection, he hath given them, as it were, a natural instinct by which they might not onely gain what was necessary for their need but that they should also thrive in Riches and possessions; whereby they should not onely become gracious to their Princes and Lords, but that they should be invited by others to come and dwell in their Lands…

        “Now, in this dispersion, our Fore-fathers, flying from the Spanish Inquisition, some of them came in Holland, others got into Italy, and others betook themselves into Asia; and so, easily they credit one another; and, by that meanes, they draw the Negotiation where-ever they are, wherewith all of them marchandizing and having perfect knowledge of all the kinds of Moneys, Diamonts, Cochinil, Indigo, Wines, Oyle, and other Commodities that serve from place to place; especially holding correspondence with their friends and kinds-folk whose language they understand; they do abundantly enrich the Lands and Countreys of strangers where they live, not onely with what is requisite and necessary for the life of man; but also what may serve for ornament to his civil condition…

        “From hence, if it please your Highnesse, it results that the Iewish Nation, though scattered through the whole World, are not therefore a despisable people; but as a Plant worthy to be planted in the whole world and received into Populous Cities; who ought to plant them in those palaces which are most secure from danger; being trees of most savory fruit and profit, to be always most favoured with Laws and Privileges or Prerogatives, secured and defended by Armes…

        “…the chiefest place where the Iewes live is the Turkish Empire, where some of them live in great estate, even in the Court of the Grand Turke at Constantinople, by reason there is no Viceroy or Governour or Bassa which hath not a Iewe to manage his affaires and to take care for his estate: Hence it cometh that in a short time they grow up to be Lords of great revenues, and they most frequently bend the minds of Great ones to the most weighty affaires in government…Moreover they are exempted from going to Warres and that souldiers should be quartered in their houses…In all of which they are preferred before the natural Turks themselves.”

        The above letter was written in 1651.

        What has changed since then? Very little — except the Court Jews of the past have been replaced by the BlackRocks of today.

        One might think being scattered around the world would have been a disadvantage to the Jews. On the contrary, it was a great advantage. While the goyim were rooted to their blood and soil, the Jews were creating the infrastructure of international finance, which brought them both wealth and the control of nations, empires and rulers.

        As for BlackRock’s control of Fortune 500 companies, my information came from an episode of Fash the Nation. I have no reason to believe they just made it all up.

        TOQ and TOO have numerous articles about Jewish financial power. I wouldn’t be surprised if Larry Fink and BlackRock have been mentioned in them. I would be surprised if they weren’t mentioned.

        Russians and Poles were caught between Jews and Germans, and their nations were turned into a bloody battleground as a result. I agree, they should blame the Jews who started the whole mess more than they do, and maybe someday they will see the light.

        Don’t include me in the “we” that accept the Holocaust lie. I am just as frustrated as you are by the revoltingly supine behavior of most Christians and most White people in the face of Jewish insolence.

        • Carolyn Yeager
          Carolyn Yeager says:

          Eric – Your reply to me is nothing but a red herring. Do you deny the West is trapped in a Big Lie? Would you agree that not making use of the Holo-cost Lie is fighting jews with one arm tied behind our back? Can you explain why we’d do that or is it just that you’d rather not.

          This stands out, not in a good way:
          “Russians and Poles were caught between Jews and Germans, and their nations were turned into a bloody battleground as a result.”
          How do you figure that? I doubt you have any idea. It’s just another throwaway line that
          you hope will placate all sides.That’s how I see it.

          I’m just disappointed–as usual.

          • Eric
            Eric says:

            Carolyn: You seem to want to fight over nothing.

            What makes you think I would deny the West is caught in a big lie?

            Where have I done that?

            Give me the specific quote.

            Where have I said we should not expose the Holocaust lie?

            Again, give me the specific quote.

            How do I figure that Russians and Poles were caught between Jews (without whom Bolshevism would not have taken hold in Russia) and Germans?

            Because that is what happened.

            If you deny that, tell us what you think happened.


          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            I’m not fighting. Do you consider legitimate questions based on your public statements unfair to the point of ‘fighting?’

            You write a lot of words about what the jews have done to harm Europe and European life. Correct. But when I ask you to comment on why Europeans *help* jews by perpetuating the holo-cost, you run away from that like a scared rabbit. You cry, “When did I say that? Quote me!”

            Germany was always friendly to Russia (and Poland) until the Czar in league with France mobilized against Germany in 1914 (pre-Bolshevik revolution), with the definite intent to attack her from both sides. It’s never a pure villain vs a pure innocent, as you portray jews vs us.

            And when/where have you defended Germany from the holocaust lie? (Give me the specific quote.) And you ignore whether we are “fighting the jews” with one hand tied behind our back because of our failure to utilize holo-cost. Would you agree with that? And if so, why keep doing it if we really think jews are the cause of our problems?

            I’m one who believes in getting to the bottom of things – the source of the problem – and fixing that. It’s usually an avoidance of the whole truth in order to protect something/someone.

          • Eric
            Eric says:

            Carolyn: Your “legitimate questions” have not been based on anything I’ve said. I never said that goyim are not cooperating with the Jews, and you haven’t shown that I’ve made such a statement — even after being invited to do so.

            It’s really as though you were arguing against someone else. You bring up topics I did not bring up and then get snarky because I didn’t address them: “…so what does that do to your neat little theory blah, blah, blah”.

            My claim was very simple Carolyn: The ultimate reason for Jewish paranoia is Jewish bad behavior.

            Jewish paranoia was he subject of the article I was responding to.

            Jews are not paranoid because the goyim cooperate with and bow down to them. That would be ridiculous.

            I suggest you respond to what is being discussed and not put words in other people’s mouths.

        • PL
          PL says:

          This YT video hits exactly the issue brought up by ‘Eric.’ Will need your patience, English captions, but in it you’ll see accomplished highly intelligent men asking again and again and again: Why THEY do it, it is so easy to disprove their distortions in their ‘academic’ work, and yet they do it hundreds times in just one book!! video:

    • Rob
      Rob says:

      I have noticed that there are often two types of reactions when a non-Jewish person points out Jews run the media or whatever.

      One type of Jew will respond with indignation, claiming the accuser simply hates Jews or is a conspiracy theorist (Jews are not tribal, you are!). The other type of Jew will suggest the non-Jew is simply jealous of Jewish success (it’s a meritocracy and we beat you!). Neither is prepared to admit that Jewish nepotism is at the heart of their success, because the reasonable solution would be to impose quotas on Jewish representation to curb their nepotism. They really don’t want laws like that. Yet if any group needs to be investigated and disciplined for discriminatory hiring and promotion (or college admissions, etc), it is them.

      Likewise, beyond immigration, Jews have worked very hard to ensure that whites cannot engage in ethnic nepotism they way that they do. You see this in laws forbidding discimination in the workplace. Imagine, for example, if companies were allowed to have a “whites only” hiring policy. These laws ensure that companies can be investigated and sued over any suspected discrimination. But when Jews pack Hollywood studios, no investigation ever occurs. How strange!

    • William Gruff
      William Gruff says:

      The decline and dissolution of the United States is going to present the Jews with a thorny problem: who will protect them, prosecute their proxy wars and promote their anti-liberal interests? China seems set to snatch the global power crown from the US head, which may be why the Jews are now cosying up to the Chinese.

      Are there any synagogues in China?

      • Chad Wilmington
        Chad Wilmington says:

        You mention the very thing that always puzzles me…..who will fight the Jew’s wars when they have wrecked every white nation on earth? You would think they’d have the common sense to take better care of their golem.
        This is very perplexing…it seems like their hatred for whites takes priority over the need to have a white army to fight wars for Israel.
        If I were organized Jewry I’d be nice to whites, and thankful for all that whites have done for world Jewry.

    • James
      James says:

      Well put.

      As an aside.. I see the extensive arguing by this ‘Carolyne’ person below. In spite of her/his/its declaration to the contrary the screen space occupied is pure bunk and not worth time to refute. No honest person getting “to the bottom” of things posits such an incredible world where propaganda doesn’t work, Stockholm syndrome could not exist and money has no effect on outcomes. The blather is purely combative and provides neither an alternative explanation nor a supported rational contradiction.

      I suspect a plant.

  5. Ávóntanácsadónő
    Ávóntanácsadónő says:

    The ideal state of the Jews is the state-security they rule. They consciously play with the fears of the little Jews, and increase it. Even their leaders need the support of their people.
    Once they had these kind of states, and adored those, in the Soviet Union and her occupied countries.
    Rákosi, the Jewish the leader of Hungary after 1945 complained to Stalin that it is very hard to create a people’s democracy with 9 million fascists (the whole population of Hungary!).
    Jews were so decisive in the ruling of the Soviet Union that in the first days (according to Szűrös, once a Hungarian leader of the party) Dilas was worrying for the fate of Hungary so much that Stalin had to assure him by saying: calm down, I send the Hungarian Jews to Hungary, and they will put order in the country.

    • Charles Frey
      Charles Frey says:

      01 East Berlin revolted against the Bolsheviks in 53, predictably resulting in a consolidation of the Bs.

      02 Brave, principled, Catholic, patriotic Hungary revolted in 56, but predictably succumbed to the invasion of the SU and its surrounding Warsaw Pact partners, including East Germany.

      03 One East German Volks Armee soldier defected and sought refugee status over the fence of the West German Embassy, in unison with several hundred East German ‘ tourists ‘.
      All were granted safe passage to Austria.

      04 Said soldier later deposed, that a Hungarian civilian admonished/asked him why he was there ” again ” ! ?

      05 I found the visages of the Secret Police fleeing their burning HQ very telling.

      06 Kudos as well, to electrician Lech Walesa of Gdansk !

      07 Pity for those left behind in Saigon by cowardly Kissinger and now, most likely, in Kandahar by cowardly Biden puppet-masters, which latter, is, as before, a boon to poppy-based, Warlord-controlled heroin imports to Europe via land and sea. Assisting, to a degree, the success of THE MORGENTHAU PLAN 2.0 for Europe.

      08 2,500 troops at the Capitol to safeguard their sorry asses [ with exceptions ] is warranted: 2,500, as currently in Afghanistan is not.

      09 WHAT A [S]ELECTED RABBLE ! How long will it take the US, all of Europe, Canada and Australia / NZ, to shake off its own version of THE MORGENTHAU PLAN 2.0 ?

  6. HK Wills
    HK Wills says:

    ” In this sense, it can be said that intelligent yet paranoid people do not “know themselves”—meaning that they live in a fantasy world in which there is nothing wrong with them; only with others.”

    I have long speculated that the Jews have evolved a moral blind spot to their own conduct; and given their ecological niche as exploitive alien parasites in other peoples’ countries this blind spot would be adaptive. Just as moles lose their vision to an overgrowth of skin which shields their eyes to the abrasives of the soil they must burrow in, so too did the Jews become insensate to the harm they do.

    What at first seems improbable in evolution – the absence of a mode of sense conferring a benefit – upon closer examination becomes one of paradoxes of evolution.

  7. Karlfried
    Karlfried says:

    Some words about “fairness”.
    The language is a mirror of the real world but it cannot tell the whole story.
    Every word is an abbreviation of a large field of things. One main trick of our competitors is to frame and twist the use of words. To narrow the words´ meanings and say a thing that is normally a sub-meaning of the word is the main-meaning.
    Of course it is our duty not to give up. Why should we let the other side win? That does not make sense. So we use the words “fairness, justice” in the follwoing way:
    “We must be fair towards our own children and grandchildren. We must give justice towards our own children and grandchildren. We must keep Germany and the German volk alive. We are not allowed to kill our own folk.”
    If we do the opposite of keeping our folk alive, we are not “fair to our own children”. Maybe a Turk, Jew, Arab, negroe in Germany will feel well with this situation: But we would not be fair toward our own children.
    Using the word “fair” in this true sense makes the lies and the word-twisting of our competitors openly seeable (viewable).

  8. neil
    neil says:

    Watching some diverse George Floyd vids which are edited by Orwell’s ministry of truth, I despair.
    First, he collapses after being assaulted by some invisible entity, as no policeman touched him (Anybody would have thought he was trying to garner sympathy as a Black Vic)
    Then as he is put in the Station wagon (We in the UK get a cage in a transit van) anyway he is half stood and half sat with no police hands near the neck and he is already screaming about not being able to breathe !!
    Evolution gave blacks a big fucking nose to take in more air in Africa anyway, so why can’t breathe?
    I will give my humble opinion–He was a Drug addict(Meth and morphine and fentanyl) and was busted and he was going down, so naturally, he knew he was in deep shit (Not from the police boot but agonising withdrawal from 3 separate Hard drugs) that is called a Panic attack. That is why most blacks try to leg it (Its called guilt)
    Squeeze your hand to the side of your neck and you will still breathe and talk (The vulnerable front is protected by the chin)
    Also, he was Claustrophobic? so why is he driving around in a car half the size of the police wagon conning shopkeepers without any panic?. still, we hear nothing about whether he was committing a crime.
    Like the Black dude asleep who assaulted one cop nicked his taser -shot it at his colleague (First and then got blasted) The BBC said ”the case faltered”???? rather than say the guy got what he deserved and the case against the cops was a bunch of shit and god knows what had happened had he got the Glock..
    I get sick to fuck of edited videos by UK media, who obviously KNOW they are withholding the real story.
    Anyway, on a positive note we got ST Stephen Lawrence day today and also we also admit to being racist in WW1(For not building memorials in Africa-should not BLM do this, no?)
    I wonder whether the BBC will tell us That tomorrow of April is saint Georges day??
    For Georgie boy, crime certainly paid-I saw his Bro in his $5,000 suit talking bollocks whilst thinking about all them white ho,s he gonna hire with his $26 million ”Comp” from his Gentle Giant bro who wouldn’t hurt a fly”!

  9. Larry
    Larry says:

    “ On the other hand, collectivist cultures create group-oriented intellectual movements based on dogmatic assertions, fealty to group leaders, ethnic networking, and expulsion of dissenters ”, in other words, shitlibs

Comments are closed.