TANSTAAFL and Rational Discussion of Jews

The purpose of this essay is to discuss one of the last decade’s most intelligent Internet activists dealing squarely with the JQ — and in my view he falls completely on the side of men crafting old-school rational discussion. For me, he is a rational counter-Semite par excellence.

He goes by the moniker “Tanstaafl,” which may, in this case, be an acronym for “There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch.” Here Tanstaafl claims that he liked the Heinlein novel The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, which is where he first encountered the term. In any case, this is the moniker he uses.

Before describing him and his work more thoroughly, I have to offer a heartfelt apology for completing most of this essay four years ago, then inexplicably putting it aside, despite never forgetting it. Possibly this is because much of the steam in Tanstaafl’s own activism had fizzled out by then, but I still don’t accept that as an excuse for my own failure. I still strongly stand by his integrity, his arguments, and his efforts to blend rational discussion of the JQ with Internet forums. It is to be much admired.

Now here is his own description of what he does:

Tanstaafl began Age of Treason in September 2005, writing first at age-of-treason.blogspot.com. Age of Treason Radio is an extension of this work into audio, which began as part of the White network in June 2012. Since May 2014, both have been brought together here at age-of-treason.com. Email: tanstaafl at age-of-treason dot com.

I likely first heard Tanstaafl when he appeared on the broadcast  “An Interview with Robert Stark” (Jan. 20, 2012). A few years later, I heard him on one of the more exciting Internet outlets, Red Ice Radio. I believe this must be the interview: Race, Biology & Modus Operandi of Jewish Extremists (Oct. 14, 2015). Host Henrik Palmgren provided us with this introduction:

Tanstaafl is a pseudonymous racialist blogger and podcaster at Age-of-Treason.com. He covers a general interest of science, history, psychology, and language, with a specific focus on Jewish influence.

Tanstaafl first describes his personal evolution of unraveling the mainstream, politically correct discourse that has propagandized the origin of Europeans and reduced Whiteness to a nonexistent social construct. We look into how the fundamental European understanding of the science of human origins has been politicized and weaponized during the 20th century. Tanstaafl explains how the past science of race, which was based in rationalism and objectivity, has been psychopathologized, demonized and derailed.

We discuss the Jewish saga of expulsion from societies across Europe since antiquity, and we evaluate the claim of oppression. Tanstaafl illustrates how Jews use mental word games to psychologically attack and intimidate any intelligent person who dares to question the Jewish parasitism that has crept into all facets of the government, corporate media and academia. Then we focus on the 40,000 years of genetically homogeneous European civilization that has been marginalized by a politically correct shift from physical to cultural anthropology, resulting in the insertion of racial animosity and huge handicaps for scientists who wish to connect the past with the present.

In the members’ segment (try this link), we explore more on the different origins of humans and understanding how the science of racial differences has been politicized. We consider where the manufactured problems of multiculturalism have created blinding ethnocentrism within Europe and opened the door for a dehumanizing transformation of the White European collective. We look at what it will take for Europeans to reach a critical mass of racial awareness and take actions to combat monsters like Barbara Spectre, who unapologetically advocates the destruction of ethnic European societies.

Then Tanstaafl specifies how Hollywood blockbuster movies are infused with psychological warfare designed to divide nations and move homogeneous cultures away from a kinship or biologically related mindset. Later, we examine why Scandinavia, and Sweden in particular, keeps getting pushed to accept more and more refugees, and how the beautiful, blonde-haired, blue-eyed sub-race of Nordics seems to be specifically targeted for replacement. We conclude with some thoughts on Ann Coulter’s calling out of official Jew numbers, and how top cuck Donald Trump is shaping up to be just another pawn in the globalist war game.

Personally, I found Tanstaafl to be one of the premier voices in today’s White Nationalist movement, though I may be biased because I share the “rational counter-Semite” approach. He is intellectually well grounded and provides a myriad of insights made in clear, compelling arguments. He has read and understood his Kevin MacDonald and expands on these themes to take us into new territory. Further, he has an excellent voice for podcasts, so listening is a highly positive experience.

One may approach Tanstaafl’s body of work as a post-textbook form of taking a university class. As a rational counter-Semite, Tanstaafl is methodical in addressing his subjects and arranges them in a highly accessible way. Let’s, then, take a look at Tan’s vast library of podcasts to get an idea of what he’s done. These links give you access to a brilliant array of podcasts.

A small sampling of his oeuvre includes the following topics:

  • Who’s White? (four parts)
  • Race and Genetics (five parts)
  • Jews and Organ Transplants (three parts)
  • Jewish Crypsis (fifteen parts)
  • Race and Jews (seven parts)

As I go back and revisit these links, I see that many of the podcasts come with associated text, but over the last decade, I have been familiar with Tans overwhelmingly through his podcasts, so I’ll try to highlight those.

If memory serves, the first time I heard Tan talk, he made an admission similar to this one:

My wife’s father was an ashkenazi jew. He died when she was young but was by all accounts a loving, intelligent, and productive man who was not involved in stereotypically jewish politics or activism. My wife was not raised as a jew, though she is of course genetically 1/2 ashkenazi, and thus our children are, on average, genetically 1/4 ashkenazi.

I distinctly remember that I was cross-country skiing when I heard this admission and stopped to rewind the podcast a bit to hear if he’d really said what I thought he said. He had. While I didn’t think then (or now) that it was a big deal, it still caught me off guard given his counter-Semitic stridency. I guess life is just messy.

Because I skied so much — and solo cross-country skiing is a sublime way to benefit from podcasts, as soft new snow is utterly silent — I listened to many different podcasts about Jews (or their extended phenotype such as the U.S. government, Wall Street, Hollywood, etc.), and a fair share of those podcasts were from Tan. For example, for a while he either co-hosted a program with Carolyn Yeager or regularly appeared on her show. Personally, I enjoyed their conversations but recall that somehow there was a falling out. Still, that didn’t affect me because I could still find new material from Tan, and three representative topics stood out because I had not understood them well until Tan unpacked them

The first is the assertion that “Jews Are Not White.” While it seems obvious now, at the time I had not realized how important it was to divide Jews and White Europeans so starkly. To be sure, I understood that Jews absolutely considered themselves in opposition to White European Christians and our diaspora, but we Whites ourselves are far less attuned to this reality. Until relatively recently in America, there has been little discussion from the Gentile side that Jews are not White. And because they are cautious not to blow their cover, Jews typically are not publicly explicit that they are not White but they sure do talk incessantly about their oppositional nature vis-à-vis White Christians. Non-stop. My recent Christmas review of Santa Inc. illustrates this in spades.

To see, hear or just imbibe this, be open to Jewish discussions on Jewish identity. Jews have written reams on this topic, as I can attest: I once got roped into spending a year reading and writing about Jewish identity, a wild goose chase if ever there was one, but ultimately it was a priceless experience. To give you a sense of their perception of being “the Other,” all I need do is amble over to my bookshelves and review the titles:

  • People of the Book: Thirty Scholars Reflect on Their Jewish Identity, edited by Jeffrey Rubin-Dorsky and Sally Fisher Fishkin
  • Members of the Tribe: On the Road in Jewish America by Ze’ev Chafets
  • In Search of American Jewish Culture and American Space, Jewish Time: Essays in Modern Culture and Politics by Stephen J. Whitfield (the latter book is a gem, I can promise you)
  • Blackface, White Noise: Jewish Immigrants in the Hollywood Melting Pot by Michael Rogin
  • How Jews Became White Folks by Karen Brodkin
  • Destructive Generation: Second Thoughts About the Sixties by Peter Collier and David Horowitz, which led me to . . .
  • Radical Son: A Generational Odyssey by David Horowitz
  • Red Diapers: Growing Up in the Communist Left, edited by Judy Kaplan and Linn Shapiro
  • Jews and the Left by Arthur Liebman
  • Roots of Radicalism: Jews, Christians, and The New Left by Stanley Rothman and S. Robert Lichter
  • Jews Against Prejudice: American Jews and the Fight for Civil Liberties by Stuart Svonkin

As far back as 2012, Tanstaafl exposed us to the Jewish critique that “the neutral citizen of liberal theory was in fact the bearer of an identity coded white, male, bourgeois, able-bodied, and heterosexual. … This implicit ontology in part explained the persistent historical failure of liberal democracies to achieve anything more than token inclusion in power structures for members of marginalized groups.” In his conclusion, he makes the important remark that Jews play a leading role in attacking White identity:

The take-away for Whites: “Identity politics,” as such, is a jewish, cultural-marxist, anti-White construct. It is wrapped in dishonest universalist-sounding rhetoric, but is in fact defined and deployed solely in opposition to Whites. The essence of its notion of identity is victimization – with Whites portrayed, in a variety of ways, as oppressors, and non-Whites portrayed as oppressed.

(I would add that the ur-narrative of Whites as oppressors is that of the Holocaust, a narrative that continues to be under strain in our day, as Thomas Dalton has shown repeatedly on TOO and elsewhere — here and here, for example).

Soon, however, Tanstaafl expanded his inquiry into White, Jewish and other identities, providing detailed analyses into genetics, organ transplants, crypsis, Francis Yockey’s views on Liberalism, etc. There’s a treasure trove of easily accessible files.

In the first of four podcasts on “Race and Genetics,” for example, he importantly noted that this attempt to erase the concept of race can be laid at the feet of Jewish activists, going all the way back to WWII. Here he argued that “in the 1940s the Boasian/jewish/commie anthropologists behind The Races of Mankind said race and race mixing don’t matter, and ‘science’ proved it? They were lying. Organ transplant incompatibility, most obvious in the case of bone marrow, is an undeniable, biological down-side of race mixing.”

“They were lying.” This is one of the most fundamental realities Whites must learn: Jews use deception endlessly and in highly sophisticated and successful ways. That’s why today we have the absurd beliefs that “Race is a social construct” and “Gender is a social construct, too.”

The Second Area: Blame

In this March 2020 blog Tanstaafl asks us, “How can jews blame goyim for what jews do?” That’s a very fair question, and Tan has devoted considered attention to it. For instance, in “Pathology and Pathogen” (Feb 2015) he writes that Jews “also tend to project their negative thinking onto the Other. Whites, in contrast, are relatively individualist and universalist, with a higher regard for objectivity. In the White mind rationalism trumps emotionalism. Whites tend to project our positive thinking onto the Other.”

Tan sees this as partially genetic, partially cultural, where Jews “inculcate their own [members] with an unapologetic preference for their own kind and distaste for the Other. Jews inculcate most Whites too, but with exactly the opposite moral standards.” Herein lies the problem, as “This kind of lopsidedness, or asymmetry, is characteristic of the entire history and nature of the conflict between Whites and jews. Jews have continuously aggressed against Whites. Whites, for the most part, have been oblivious of this. As [TOO writer Andrew] Joyce observes, jews unabashedly distort reality and invert the conflict, placing 100% of the blame for it on Whites.”

After reflecting on this and looking for further evidence for years, I have concluded Tan is right. To a great degree, Jews like Howard Zinn have transferred Jewish sins onto an oblivious White patsy, and reigning ideological trends like Critical Race Theory to a shocking degree blame Whites for what Jews themselves have so often done. (The complicated history of slavery in America comes to mind. See also Tan’s view that the “British” Empire was in fact Jewish, with its attacks on China, India, and, I would add, Boer South Africa. (Andrew Joyce, for example, wrote that, “Because of the obvious shared ethnic heritage of the mine owners and the diplomats who trod the path to war, ‘the view that the war was a Jewish war was commonplace among its opponents.’”) In fact, Whites have often tried to ameliorate the pains Jews have inflicted on others, so being held responsible is adding insult to White injury. Of course one of the ways Jews pull off this switcheroo is by using crypsis to convince others that they are “White.”

A small example of Tan’s unique ability to add depth and nuance to the JQ comes in his correcting the translation of a fairly well-known Jewish phrase, in this case “shanda fur die goyim.” This phrase, he writes, “is misunderstood as embarrassment. It is a reflection of jewish sensitivity to collective exposure/responsibility/vulnerability. It is an alarm, a call for the making of excuses and transferring of blame elsewhere.” One of the most common tactics is for Jews to point the finger at “Gentile anti-Semitism” rather than acknowledge actual Jewish behavior. Once one learns to recognize this ploy, along with projecting Jewish guilt onto others more generally, it is surprising to discover how routinely it is done. But how do we teach the right Gentiles to truly learn how to see this? I confess I’m at a loss.

(While I’m praising Tan for his parsing of Yiddish phrases, I’ll also note his explanation of how they translate “their cabalist term ‘tikkun olam’ as ‘social justice’. It means: ‘help us dismantle the [non-jew] system and build a better world [for jews].’” Tanstaafl’s podcasts and writing are full of these insights.)

The Third Area: “White Pathology”

The third important area Tan has expanded upon is the biological concept that Jews act as parasites on their host cultures, a familiar theme in European thought but less well known in The New World. Typical is this 2015 interview with John Friend. About an hour in, they talked about Jews as parasites, but what is fascinating is how Tan segues to the related area of “pathogen,” which leads to the common claim that Whites somehow suffer from “pathological altruism.”

Acknowledging that this is a claim made by Kevin MacDonald — and we ourselves can deduce that it’s related to the “critique” in Culture of Critique and subsequent writings — Tan distills it to its essence: “Some say the West is committing suicide due to some white pathology. But if there’s a pathology, then there’s a pathogen. My conclusion is that the pathogen is Jews.” [1]

I won’t get further into these topics because Tan’s podcasts deserve to tell these important stories, so I’ll move on to his July 2018 blog defending Greg Cochran’s views on Jewish attacks as another way Tan has unpacked what is going on under the surface. The link begins with this insightful cartoon:

Cochran, you may remember, is co-author of the 2009 book The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution, whose final chapter “sets out to explain why Ashkenazi Jews have a mean IQ so much higher than that of the population in general, as well as a higher rate of some genetic disorders such as Tay-Sachs disease.” This argument joins those of Richard Lynn, Nicholas Wade and others who have tried to employ the results of modern science to break the taboo on discussing the existence of race, racial differences, and of course the claim of higher Jewish intelligence. No doubt most readers already know about the last category because it is so central to Kevin MacDonald’s thesis about Jews and their group evolutionary strategy. Not surprisingly, the Wiki article on Cochran blames our editor for Cochran’s views, citing old friends in Alabama: “According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, these claims were based on the work of discredited psychologist and antisemitic conspiracy theorist Kevin MacDonald.”

In the Cochran piece, Tanstaafl follows Cochran’s exploration of the existence and origins of the Aryan people, though he offers that “[William] Pierce’s Who We Are is more detailed, and a better investment in time. Cochran adds the recent genetic corroboration of the story. He knows well that jews are genetically and mentally distinct from the Europeans whose pre-historic roots he describes.” Becoming even more politically incorrect, Tan further argues that:

Yes, the national socialists were mostly correct about race and the pre-history of Europeans. They are demonized today exactly because they were also right about the jews. They correctly saw the jews not merely as non-Aryan but as an existential threat. The jews, especially the more sciency jews, understand this perfectly well. That’s why they’re in crisis mode. They understand these genetic revelations are damning, and potentially explosive, exposing the anti-”racist”/anti-”nazi” narrative jews have perpetrated for the better part of the past century as a fraud, as an excuse for their own racial animus and ongoing war on Whites. The consensus among jews, including alt-jews, is that this fraud has been good for the jews. In their view it is the potential collapse of this fraud, or worse, potential reprisals for it, which might be bad for the jews, and therefore must now be averted at all costs. They agree the goyim must never ever be permitted to freely discuss race or the harm caused by all this jewing, then or now, or the proverbial jig is up, all over again.

In short, Tan concludes, Jewish deception is controlling the narrative on both race and Aryan history. “Cochran calls out the lying, but won’t explicitly identify it as jewing.” I agree that Cochran knows he’s talking about Jews and lying since he consistently calls individual Jews such as Lewontin, Gould, Montagu, et al. liars when it comes to these topics. And who can blame him for not taking this to its logical conclusion? Most people hate to be destroyed.

As mentioned, Tan mostly rounded out his “Age-of-Treason” series in the fall of 2015 but has continued with interviews, a blog and a collection of related audio files from others. It’s vast and highly informative. The research and choices are top notch, so those new to the JQ could benefit (and save time), partially informed individuals could as well, and even highly seasoned researchers could learn much, especially when non-reading moments are available, such as when driving, doing chores, etc. I’m not really aware of a collection as extensive, accessible, or timely as “Age of Treason.” We’re fortunate it is still available online.


By this point, most readers have likely noticed a few writing anomalies in Tan’s prose, beginning with his refusal to capitalize the group he’s focusing on, Jews. Obviously, this is impossible to detect in his podcasts, and up through about 2016 he was generally dispassionate in his examination of the JQ. After five or so years of intense focus on this abiding topic, however, he began to appear more exasperated, so in his shorter blogs that came after this period, he has become more irritable.

In other cases, I might find this immature, but having gone through similar experiences of peeling back more and more layers of the onion known as the JQ and finding how objectionable much Jewish behavior toward goyim truly is, I’ve responded at times in the same way Tan has: by using a lower-case spelling. Further, I feel justified because I do it only in private writing and consider it to be a minuscule expression of the rage I sometimes feel at the harm done to me and other Whites. I know we are the oppressed and powerless ones in this fight, so it’s the least I can do to vent that righteous anger.

Tanstaafl employs other kinds of language to harmlessly express his own sense of impotent outrage, such as calling highly emotional Jewish descriptions of their situation “screeching” and their talmudic twisting of the narrative to “jewsplain.” On the whole, he now thinks of public Jewish discourse as “jewspeak” and nearly at the end of his rope in observing a certain instance of such discourse, he labeled it as “peak jewing.” Last October he addressed actor and director Rob Reiner’s attack on Trump and White Republicans as “The Screeching Will Continue Until Democracy is Saved” and observed that “Every day the jewsmedia narrative gets insaner in its attempt to either distract from or jewsplain the totally jewed regime’s latest violation of its own previous political, medical, economic, financial, social, and legal norms.” In this podcast, he even coined the word “chutzpathically,” as in “jews chutzpathically assert” this or that. Not really a bad way to vent your frustration, all things considered.

My impression now is that Tanstaafl has greatly retreated from his efforts at rational counter-Semitic education, so this essay may not be as timely as hoped for. Still, his body of work is as valuable as ever, so I’ve shared what I’ve learned from it. Further, I sympathize with him if a sense of burn-out has crept in. Counter-Semitic activism is noble but hard work.

Here is one last point that I’m well advised to bring up: Tanstaafl has explicitly named the Jew and given immense amounts of his time and energy to making rational, cogent, compelling arguments, still readily available in podcast form to the post-reading generation. In contrast, I say don’t trust those who don’t name the Jew. The late Rush Limbaugh, Pat Buchanan, Alex Jones, Revolver News and so on either do not defend Whites explicitly, or they do so only obliquely and in round-about ways. Worse — much worse — they refuse to talk openly about the Jewish Problem. God bless Tanstaafl for being far more courageous.

In a better world, Tanstaafl would now be a tenured professor of rational counter-Semitism at a top university, cooly teaching undergraduate and graduate students alike the crucial story of Jews among the Nations. But we don’t live in a good world, and much of the reason for that is because of Jewish behavior that is so harmful to the rest of us. I sure don’t see Jews unilaterally changing that behavior, so we need to educate ourselves as best we can and gird for the exceedingly hard times to come. There is much work to be done. Thanks to the selfless devotion to duty Tanstaafl has exhibited, we still have access to superb materials for understanding our bleak situation. We all owe a debt of gratitude to the man.


[1]Tanstaafl expands on his arguments in Pathology and Pathogen:

Jews clearly see that there is a conflict of interests, first and foremost with Whites. Whites are now so deracinated and enervated that they are afraid to see any conflict whatsoever, because that would make them “racists”. Jews hate Whites. Whites worship jews. Whatever anyone thinks caused this situation, this lopsided Stockholm Syndrome relationship with jews, it’s clear that to the extent most Whites even see it as a problem, they blame jews for approximately none of it. Instead, the popular explanation is the jewish explanation: Whites are to blame for all of it….

Among the benefits of calling a parasite a parasite is parasitology – an existing body of understanding based on true science, which offers practical insights and potential solutions no amount of “white pathology” navel-gazing ever will. Another benefit: Rather than misdirecting White resentment toward ourselves, it is directed at the cause, where it belongs – the detestable, whiny, self-obsessed, manipulative, exploitative jews. Without jews Whites would still have problems – but these “anti-semitism”/”white pathology” bugbears wouldn’t be among them.

54 replies
  1. Junghans
    Junghans says:

    Thank you Edmund, for this incisive essay about Tanstaafl. I’ve been an admirer of Tan for a long time, and have to state that he understands and can articulately describe the Jewish Problem/Danger as few others can.

  2. Fred Penner
    Fred Penner says:

    Thank you for this piece.
    I love Tan and followed him for years.
    The man is brilliant. As you said, his podcasts are an education.
    He’s like a laser beam cutting through the small hat bs.
    I believe he’s some kind of high level computer engineer…….his IQ has to be off the charts.
    As I recall, he felt that he had to give up the cause because of his jewish wife…..I think he said he felt
    somewhat corrupted….as if he was unworthy of being a white advocate because of his wife. (I disagree)
    As you said, life is messy. Mike Enoch has a similar story.
    At any rate, Tan is great and his work is phenomenal.

    • Karl Haemers
      Karl Haemers says:

      Why does life have to be this messy? One of our best counter-semites, married to a Jewess? Why did he do it? A man like this should have rewarded an Aryan woman with marriage and high IQ Aryan children. To contaminate his children with Jewish genetics was a heresy. His children, if he has any, are degraded and will surely fail the legacy.

      • Tan Fan
        Tan Fan says:

        He only found out about the JQ after he married and had kids. Most people find out later in life. His wife agrees that Jews are not White and he feels torn between duty to his race and duty to his family. Because of his status he eschews any leadership position within the movement despite being one of its best thinkers. The great thing about him is his blog runs from 2007 ish to today and you can see his honest progression from race blind paleoconservative to red pilled JQ grandmaster.

        Really good guy.

        Check out his interview with Jewish ‘convert’ Luke Ford. Will be on bitchute.

      • Michael Adkins
        Michael Adkins says:

        A Jewish woman may see things a little differently:

        “Are there children in the Haredi community who are born from egg donors?” asked Rabbi Gideon Weitzman, referring to the ultra-Orthodox population in Israel. “The answer is yes, and not just one[child]. There are children in the Haredi community born from sperm donors, under Halakhic guidance.” He explained that, as long as the sperm donor is not Jewish, ‘there are certain cases where that is the option that is given the heter [rabbinic approval]” Weitzman thus revealed a little discussed fact – that in the most observant Jewish communities in the world there are women conceiving with sperm from non-Jewish donors, with the permission of and under the guidance of their rabbinic leaders.

        In one of the most controversial rulings regarding infertility, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein wrote a responsum in 1959 permitting the use of donor semen, as long as a non-Jewish donor was used. With a Jewish donor, it is possible that in the future, the offspring might establish an incestuous relationship. When the donor is not Jewish, he as no halakhic familial relationship to his offspring or to any other member of the Jewish community. Since the mother is Jewish, the child will be Jewish regardless of the origin of the sperm. Subsequent responsa written by Feinstein also support this view..

        Miryam Wahrman, Brave New Judaism

      • Rob White
        Rob White says:

        Just the way life goes.

        It’s a pity that he married a Jewess, but he did. Should one suspect his motives, in light of the fact that his children are second-degree mischlings? Certainly. Have I ever found them suspect? No, I can’t say I have.

        Of the few things Hitler can be criticized for, encouraging those Germans married to Jews to divorce is among the worst, along with failing to bring the USSR into the Axis to destroy Britain and the USA.

        • Lucius Vanini
          Lucius Vanini says:

          How absurd–this diehard idiocy about Jews not being White lol!

          Oh sure–Scarlett Johansson isn’t White: hell no, she’s an Australoid! Neither is Michael Douglas, Natalie Portman, Stephen Miller, Tzipi Hotovely, Tzipi Livni, nor any other person you couldn’t say was Jewish by looking at them.

          One of the funniest things about our movement is the White Nationalist who, seeing a public figure whose name might be Jewish, has to consult Wikipedia to see IF he or she is White and not Jewish–not perceiving lol that if every Jew were of another race they wouldn’t have to do that. Whoopi Goldberg has a Jewish name but no one needs to investigate whether she’s White or something else. The reason? She really is of another race.

          Ah, but there ARE Jews who aren’t black or Chinese but of a phenotype you CAN guess belongs to a Jew? And are there no phenotypical tendencies that might suggest a person is a Greek rather than a Swede? And does the fact that there are mean that Greeks and Swedes are not of the same ethnic/genetic mega-cluster? No, because there is variation with that mega-cluster or race.

          There is ethnic distance between very many Caucasoid Jews and Caucasoid non-Jews–but not racial distance, which is something existing between Caucasoids and Negroids and Mongoloids.

          West Eurasian Jews–the Ashkenazim and Sephardim–are part of what geneticist Brenna Henn has called “The Europeans/Near Easterners Ancestral Cluster,” and are very near Caucasoid non-Jews both genetically and in physically anthropological terms. LOL, Richards et al, 2013 finds 81% of Ashkenazi maternal lineage traceable to prehistoric and ancient European women, while Nebel et al found that even Middle-Eastern Jews are closer in Y-DNA, in patrilineal heritage, to West-Asian Indo-Europeans like Kurds and Armenians than to Arabs.

          And lest anyone object that Western Jews don’t identify as White, such an objection doesn’t wash for two reasons: self-identification is not self-validating, as in the case of dysphoric males identifying as what they’re clearly not–i.e., women; and, secondly, the Pew Research study “Portrait of Jewish Americans” states that 94% of American Jews identify as White. That’s quite close to the percentage of ALL Jews worldwide: 96%–80% Ashkenazi, 16% Sephardi.

          If this “Tan” fellow’s Jewish wife says Jews aren’t White (well, SOME aren’t), she ain’t very smart.

          Now, none of this has ANY necessary relevance to Jewish behavior. Jews are doing everything that so-called antisemites say they they’re doing. Well, who said Caucasianness necessarily makes one virtuous? Somebody who’s never heard of Macron, Merkel, Pelosi, the Bidens and Clintons? https://theeuropeanfamily.com/f/jews-racial-nature

          • Emicho
            Emicho says:

            Whoopi Goldberg is in the news just now for having the same opinion as you, you can’t be a different race if it isn’t blazingly obvious at first sight.
            Although everyone, including the Jews themselves have come out against her.
            Are Germans the same race as Slavs? Are Swedes the same race as French? What about Celts and Anglo-Saxons? Was the Norman conquest of Anglo-Saxon England one race displacing another? What about the Protestant Ascension in Ireland? Or Flemish and Walloon? Would you be able to tell all these folks apart without consulting Wikipedia?

          • RockaBoatus
            RockaBoatus says:

            As I understand it, Ashkenazi Jews have a combination of genes that are European and Semitic. Others say that Jews are descendants of the Khazars, and are not ‘white’ in the conventional sense and meaning. I admit I haven’t worked it all out yet, so I’m not dogmatic about the matter. With that said, I don’t really view Jews as ‘white’ in the way that most people might view them. This is perhaps due to my understanding of their long history of cultural subversion among White countries, including their fanatical commitment to being totally different than their host nations.

            While some Jews appear physically no different than gentile Whites, a good many of them DO have very distinctive ‘Jewish’ features. We’ve all seen it and, if we’re honest with ourselves, we would admit to it as well. Most Jews, in fact, do NOT look like Scarlett Johannsen, Michael Douglas, or Natalie Portman. They look like the stereotypical Jew with the large nose and other rather unattractive facial features. These Jews make it abundantly apparent that they are the ‘other,’ and not to be confused with any European White ‘Chad.’ The physical differences are so pronounced that it becomes laughable to deny it.

            Thus, Jews in a real sense do not look European in terms of what we think of when conjure up the image of a European man or woman. This is especially so among the Orthodox and Hasidic Jews who have eschewed mixing their genes with the Goyim. When this occurs, you get to see what an untainted Jew really looks like. That’s when you notice they are very much different than gentile Europeans.

            There is also another important point that we should consider: Jews do NOT really want to be White, and they go to great lengths to make it known – unless, of course, it benefits them somehow to claim they are ‘white.’ On such occasions, it’s for the purpose of lecturing White people so they are further demoralized racially.

            Jews will almost always emphasize that they are ‘Jewish’ and not White. For instance, the Jewish reporter, Mike Wallace of ’60 Minutes,’ did this sort of thing for all to see while interviewing actor Morgan Freeman a number of years back. While discussing Black History Month, Freeman mentioned something to the effect of a White History Month. Wallace quickly retorted that he was Jewish (and presumably not White) and that such a month would not really apply to him. Again, like many Jews, Wallace distanced himself from being seen as white.

            Jews go out of their way to make Whites their enemies. They culturally subvert their countries. They seek to destroy every last vestige of the White man’s historic religion (Christianity). They vilify Whites every chance they get. They weaponize other minority racial groups to turn on their nation’s White majority. They view even the slightest rise of Whites uniting on behalf of their own racial identity and cultural interests as nothing less than a second rising of Hitler and the Nazis. This is the level of paranoia Jews possess, and the degree of ill will they have toward their ‘fellow whites.’

            If this is how Jews view us, and if these are the sort of things they have a long history of doing against our people, why on God’s green earth would we even want to see them as White? What has crawled into our brains to make us think that they should have any part in our racial identity or play significant roles in our countries when they have such contempt for us? What kind of Whites are Jews that do all in their power to distance themselves from White Europeans, including creating nefarious social and immigration policies designed to reduce our numbers?

            If Jews don’t want to be White, I’d urge that we give it to them and forever bar them from our White nations. If we ever did this, I think they’d change their tune somewhat because parasites always need a host they can feed on.

      • z
        z says:

        What do you mean by that sort of writings. So you believe that all of a group are flaws, just because one group in the so called group are morons/or in these case sadistic psychopathic poisonkillers (gates, bourla soros, bezos blabla). Its pure simplification to assume that. In every ethnogroup there are destroyed indivividuals. In these particular group the percentage is maybe higher but that is not because the group as a whole are different from other groups, but because the group has not yet figured it out that their community has been infiltrated by an extremistic sect, talmudicsionists. Theirs totem are a judaistic one, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the judendomgroups prophet Mose. Its like that the shariaists has nothing to do with Muhammed and normal nonsecteristic muslims

        • Lucius Vanini
          Lucius Vanini says:

          Yeah, coincidentally this very shobbes goy I mentioned–Goldberg–was in the news for saying that the holohoax wasn’t racist because the Jews of Europe were Caucasian. I thought that might be brought up here!

          I hate her for her politics, but in the Facebook page of THE JEWISH TELEGRAPHIC AGENCY I’ve lambasted the Talmudic Leftists there for getting her suspended, especially since they pose as the friends of blacks.

          I think she hadn’t known that ethnologists of the Third Reich tended to classify Jews, even the West Eurasian ones with whom we’re so familiar, as of a different race. So whatever trouble European Jews had from the Third Reich CAN be made to look “racistically” inspired, though I think it’s pretty clear that the enmity was overwhelmingly political. This seems reinforced by the fact that there were not a few Germans of appreciable Jewish lineage in the military, that one of the founding members of Natl. Socialism and Hitler’s buddy was Emil Maurice–a Jew according to the Reich’s definition and one whom Himmler wanted expelled for that reason–and that Jewish child Rosa Bernile-Nienau was called “Hitler’s Sweetheart” in the press, invited to Obersalzberg, etc. (Hitler seems to really loved that child, and knew she was of Jewish lineage.) See “Remarkable tale of Hitler’s young Jewish friend–BBC News.”

          These examples–plus Hitler’s indulgent kindness toward Dr. Eduard Bloch, Jewish physician–leads me to think that A.H. was an antisemite only in the way almost all secular so-called antisemites are–namely someone dishonestly LABELLED an antisemite because he opposed things Jews do. My definition of “antisemite” is a person hostile to Jews simply for being Jews, irrespective of what they do as individuals. And I think there are FEW genuine White Nationalists who meet the definition. The people who do are likeliest to be those infected by the Semitic notion of congenital guilt, which came from Judaism through the Hebrew proponents of Christianity, much as did that sinister dogma of inherited guilt–“original sin.”

          As for the issues of race, since my understanding of race is that of an “ethnic/genetic mega-cluster,” rather than a monolithically homogeneous island of humanity, I will say YES, the Slavs, Germans, Swedes, French, Normans, Anglo-Saxons, Flemish and Walloons are of the same race–they’re Caucasoids, White people. And in very many cases, people WILL have difficulty distinguishing individuals of those ethnicities, because of their similarities.

          The idea of a race lacking variation is absolutely unrealistic! Of neither Caucasoids, Mongoloids nor Negroids is that true! But within each of those general portions of humanity there’s strikingly less difference than there is to people in the other portions, so that Greek and Swede are equally distinguishable from Nigerians and Chinese, merely at a glance.

          A race or ethnic/genetic cluster is made of approximating ethnicities–peoples much more closely related to certain other peoples than they are to others, such that if you draw a human map based on genetic and physically anthropological distance you find you’ve drawn ethnic/genetic archipelagos, with varying spaces between them. A useful analogy is that of individuals standing near each other and creating assemblage.

          Affinity and divergence alike relate to ethnic/genetic distance, according to whether it’s less or more. Homogeneity isn’t absolute, only relative. Anyone interested in a sophisticated way of looking at race might consult Cavalli-Sforza et al, 1994, “The History and Geography of Human Genes.”

          Now, the ethnicities you enumerated, along with all the other peoples of Europe, are so closely related that of all the continentals on Earth they most merit being considered a Family. Coop et al, 2013, “The Geography of Recent Genetic Ancestry across Europe,” finds “….individuals from opposite ends of Europe are expected to share millions of genealogical ancestors over the past 1000 years.” I don’t perceive that you’re much interested in race, or in the Europeans (if you’re a Brit, I’d bet you voted for Brexit–an exceedingly anti-White measure https://theeuropeanfamily.com/f/farage-and-brexit-and-their-crimes-against-britain ); but here’s the Coop et al link anyway:

          Of Jews, the Ashkenazim especially are in the same “archipelago” of which European non-Jews are part.

          • Lucius Vanini
            Lucius Vanini says:

            I might’ve added that Ashkenazi Jews are eight out of ten of Jews worldwide, and that they’re 90-95% of American Jews. The latter figures seem consonant with so many American Jews’ identifying as White in surveys, such as in the 2013 Pew Research study “Portrait of Jewish Americans,” 94% of whose respondents so identified. The latter had the option to respond with “other,” so they freely admitted to being part of a larger demographic including other groups, most notably Euroamerican non-Jews.

            Jews have jumped on Goldberg because the vast majority of them are addicted to their sick and despicable professional victimhood; and, thinking that people are bigger victims if victimized by THE most wicked thing–racism lol–they don’t want to lose the top of the victimhood scale to blacks lol!

            In any case, in your reply above you seem to suggest that those European ethnic groups, from Slavs to Walloons, might be considered races (something I and almost everyone I know take to be things more general, less specific than an ethnic group); and you talk as though there were no general classification under which they’re subsumed….

            Now, I keep all the TOO articles under which I’ve commented, and I see that under “Rogen & Silverman in Santa Inc.,” etc., of 21 December, 2021, you used in your reply to me the phrases “Blacks and whites” and “white communities in Africa.” Also, at the very end, you write “To you it’s just a racial battle. To me it’s much more than that, it’s a spiritual battle. If we win my battle, the racial thing takes care of itself.”

            Firstly, DO you, or do you not, believe there’s something which is reasonably called “the White race”? And when you see the words “White advocacy” and “White Nationalism,” do you think they make sense, or can there only be Slav advocacy and nationalism, German or French or Walloon advocacy and nationalism? Secondly, who exactly are the “we”? Y’know, I’m not a Brit (I think you might well be, based on some of your spelling), so if your “we” includes me–and most other posters here–I tend to think you’re not alluding to just your own ethnic group.

            I’m in shock that on a page of the most intelligent White-Advocacy site I know of, I have to ask such questions!!!! Well, I shouldn’t be. You almost tell the whole truth in saying “To me it’s much more than [a racial battle], it’s a spiritual battle.” The whole truth is that it’s ONLY a “spiritual battle” for you. And certainly if we win “your battle,” Whites–or, if you will, Slavs, Germans, Walloons et al–ain’t gonna win….

          • Lucius Vanini
            Lucius Vanini says:

            You bring up a pile of points, all of which I’ve met before. If I were to respond to them all, my reply would be overly long. I’ll try to deal with a few.

            1) Yes, genetic studies attest to a Semitic element in the Ashkenazim, though quite a few of the latter descend from converts. But DOES Semitic mean non-White (it certainly seems to mean non-Nordic, but if only Nordics are White, then Whites are FEW). Look at that famous people of antiquity, the Phoenicians: Semitic and classically Caucasian, as is reflected by countless coins and medallions, by sculpture (e.g., the Capuan bust of Hannibal), by mosaics, by Virgil’s AENEID wherein the founder of Carthage, “Tyrian” Dido, and her sister are pale, blond with flowing hair. Also, recent genetic studies trace 90% of the lineage of the strongly Caucasoid and even often leucodermic Lebanese to the Phoenicians; and Mansouri et al, 1996 says Europeans such as Italians and Greeks have a “genetic frequency profile EQUIVALENT to that of the Lebanese,” my emphasis.

            Even the ancient and Medieval Arabian images show strongly Caucasian phenotype. The reason why we see much less of that today is that the Arabs did what we are trying to stop our people from doing–mix with black slaves!!! That Trans-Sahara Slave Trade deeply adulterated the Arabs–and presumably the miscegenation helped lead to the steep decline of their once shining civilization. Also, the common patrilineal haplogroup of the Arabs, J1, seems to have come from the Caucasus region, as the oldest known traces of it come from a cave in Georgia.

            Caucasianness is NOT confined to Europe. There have been and are many millions in West Asia who, like you and me, even descend from the Indo-European urheimat, the Pontic-Caspian Steppe. The Near East has been not only Semitic but Indo-European. Did you read my first post above? Nebel et al, 2001 found that even Middle-Eastern Jews have Y-DNA closer to that of the I-E Kurds and Armenians than to that of Arabs.

            The Khazar Hypothesis has been debunked. Actually, I never thought it figured. The Khazars are ethnic Turks, and ethnic Turks cluster with East Asians. Where is a hint of the epicanthic fold on Ashkenazi Jews?

            2) No, most Jews don’t look like those movie stars, just like most of us don’t look like movie stars. But very many of them equally align with europid anthropological traits, so that I could stump you by putting all sorts of Whites in a room and ask you to pick out the Jews.

            Of course you can distinguish many Jews. I can distinguish many members of other parts of the Europeans/Near Easterners Ancestral Cluster too. Big noses? The purely I-E Romans were famous for them, and how many Italians and Greeks have pronounced aquiline noses?!

            I don’t see that degree of difference you speak of. I think you’re projecting a desire. And that leads to–

            3) I believe you say much when you ask “….why would we WANT to see them as white?” (My emphasis.) Me, I don’t WANT to see them as anything! I look, observe, study, reason and consider, and I find what I find lol! But that’s not the way many other people do things.

            Whiteness has sometimes been denied to people thought unworthy, as though white identity is a reward for conduct that pleases. EVEN THE IRISH lol were denied Whiteness in the USA, back in the day when they were widely despised, and businesses had signs saying “No Irish need apply.”

            My irresistible impression is that White Nationalists tend to deny Whiteness to West Eurasian Jews because the latter are (understandably!) viewed as arch-foes. The Third Reich had to classify them as of another race: Whites were the good guys, and how can the good guys include the bad guys? But look at the supremely White-supremacist Confederate States of America, where Jews were not seen as arch-foes. There was the “Florida Fire-eater” Senator David Levy Yulee, fiery advocate of slavery and secession; there was Abraham Myers, Colonel and Quartermaster General of the CSA; and Judah P. Benjamin, at different times the CSA’s Secretary of War, Secretary of State and Attorney General. And these prominent Jewish Southerners all married upper-class Christian White women–in a country where miscegenation was verboten…. well, they were as White in race as their wives, and no valuation interfered with Confederate eyesight.

            And in 20th C. America, before Jews were widely classified as White, people in effect rejected the notion that they are racially different, inasmuch as then, like now, marriage between Jews and non-Jews wasn’t considered interracial but only interfaith; nor were the offspring considered to be mixed-race. Back when America had a healthy opposition to miscegenation, the marriage of Norma Shearer and Irving Thalberg was celebrated in every newspaper; and the romance and then marriage of stars Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall were conceived as ideal love.

            Lol whether or not Jews want to be White doesn’t wash, pal–unless, like believers in the transgender myth, you think that desiring makes a duck a goose instead of a duck.

            As for what you say about Jewish behavior–YES, ALL OF IT TOO TRUE! I wish to hell they’d all do Aliyah, get out of Western countries, because though I do believe there are beneficial individuals among them they are in too large a majority the compulsive foes of our European Civilization. I really don’t think they can help themselves. It’s become instinct in them, it appears.

            Still, that can’t make me think they’re of a different race. Y’see, anthropology and my eyesight get in the way. Moreover, the Jesuits and Freemasons haven’t had to be of another race to be slimy conspirators.

  3. Hitmarck
    Hitmarck says:

    Weibisches Volk
    You could substitute the word ‘Jew’ in this text with ‘women’ fix the individual names accordingly and it works.
    Weininger was spot on.

  4. kolokol
    kolokol says:

    Great article. I like the 5-paragraph 2015 introduction to Tanstaafl by Henrik Palmgren, quoted near the beginning. I especially like the reference to “how top cuck Donald Trump is shaping up to be just another pawn in the globalist war game.” He was right, back then in 2015. Trump and Biden are the same. Both are anti-White.

    Globalists have been pushing CRT in our schools and universities since before 1990. Today, they flatly deny it all. They say that CRT is not being taught in our schools, despite all the evidence. They are lying as usual – more jew-hypocrisy. And they censor the truth, including all discussion and exposure of their genocidal agenda.

  5. Tan Fan
    Tan Fan says:

    I agree. Tanstaafl is among the top leading lights of our movement. His demolitioj of Lawrence Auster, his vivisection of various part Jews who have attempted to challenge/ guilt trip him and his incisive aphorisms regarding the Jewish question are magnificent!

    His explanations of how exactly Jews take over White societies/institutions are excellent (infiltration, manipulation and exploitation being his best).

    His body of work and disclosure about his wife marks him out as an extremely intelligent and moral man.

    I have learned so much from him.

  6. B. Smith
    B. Smith says:

    Tanstaafl is treasure.
    His self-recusal from leadership noble.

    He didn’t stop because he didn’t care but because he had said it all, all that he had to say.

    If any reader has not read or heard his body of work please do!

  7. Dr. Doom
    Dr. Doom says:

    Rational discussion of an irrational subject could just be mental masturbation. All the knowledge in the World is useless unless you act on it. The only solution to Cancer is to kill the cells. You should see this like a pathogenic disease and not as any rational opponent. It operates on a parasitic instinct that doesn’t change over time. This is not a “plan” that is devised with a target in mind. It is not “catered” to a host. This is a parasitic pathogen that operates the same exact way in every instance and can only be stopped by destruction.
    You cannot reason with them. They will not stop. They are fanatical in their parasitic mannerism. They are not a rational enemy. They operate exactly like a disease by seeking a vulnerable host, stealing its resources and ultimately trying to kill it.
    Any resemblance these creatures have to you is deceptive camouflage. Much like an ant lion using false scents to live among ants. Trying to humanize them is to fall into their trap. Treat them like a disease organism. That is what they actually are to you.

    • MOB
      MOB says:

      Expertly stated. There’s nothing more to say, however brilliant. As in all the literate centuries before us, the jewish problem has been analyzed and lamented over through all of my 20+ years on the Net and longer. Why? Jews CAN do no other. Jews WILL do no other. Period. Your move.

    • moneytalks
      moneytalks says:

      ” This [ the Jews ] is a parasitic pathogen that operates the same exact way in every instance and can only be stopped by destruction.”


      ( whom are predominantly descendants of :
      Nordics / Euroman / Europeans / Aryans / Indo-Europeans / Caucasians /
      [and perhaps a few other unspecified White cultures] )

      generally do not have any adequate

      theology and/or ideology and/or sociology

      to prevail against their chosenhite jewmasterss ;
      hence , much less are they able to destroy them .

      This T.O.O. website is primarily a platform only for facilitating informed discourse that would be essential for Whites to acquire sufficiency of those three major factors necessary for them to prevail against their jewmasters’s predations and parasitisms — if that is possible at this late stage of White
      social/political/economic/religious pathogenesis .

      Strategic discourse on actionable resistance to jewmasterr operations would be DOA if conducted on a public informational forum such as this site .

      In particular , Whites would need to have covert organizational discourse and activities in order to avoid USA federal government jewmasterr/Vatican controlled intel agency sabotage and successfully establish an overt WN ethnostate .

    • Ed Connelly
      Ed Connelly says:

      Dr. Doom and MOB, thank you for your comments. Frankly, it’s hard to argue with your conclusions.

      A commenter over at Unz with the handle (((They))) Live wrote: “I wish they would stop trying to destroy us, but like the Scorpion and the Frog, it’s in their nature.”

      To which I replied: “The fable ‘The Scorpion and the Frog’ is an excellent description of our relationship with Jews, and the late William Pierce often used it to illustrate our plight. Personally, I’ve simply accepted that Jews will eternally bring this fight to us no matter what, so we’re idiots not to notice, let alone not to react.

      “I mean, look at their own literature and myths, with things like Esau and Jacob telling us explicitly how they see the world. Meanwhile, we Whites are mostly clueless, and perhaps the Church has been best in protecting us from Jews … maybe … sort of … kind of. Otherwise, it’s just hit or miss in local regions when Jewish behavior gets just too bad.

      “BTW, your (((They))) Live name tag is perfect, for Carpenter’s film of that name HAS TO BE about the presence of Jews among us, no matter what claims he might make to the contrary.”

      • Ed Connelly
        Ed Connelly says:

        Oh, I might add, Dr. Doom, that your comment reminded me of something I included in my “Condition Red” article in late 2020 about the deliberate erasure of White males in advertising, on TV and in film: “We cannot ignore this, just like the protagonist Connor family could not ignore the cyborg stalking them in the 1984 film, ‘The Terminator.’ The man sent to save this family tells the mother, ‘That Terminator is out there, it can’t be bargained with, it can’t be reasoned with, it doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.’” 

      • moneytalks
        moneytalks says:

        …” perhaps the Church has been best in protecting us from Jews … maybe … sort of … kind of.”

        Presumably you are referring to The RCC . It looks as if the only protection now , since capitulating to Jewish supremacy after the 1964 Vatican Counsel II , is a static one with no live guards at the perimeter wall .

        Pope Francis is a proponent of
        socialism / communism / marxism / collectivism
        all of which are predominantly jewish religio-political constructions . He recently praised taxation , which is mostly a legacy of judaism , as being a necessity for redistributing wealth to the poor “for the common good”. Ironicly in the case of the USA , taxpayers pay for the federal government which is neither poor nor has much in common with Whites whom are the largest USA ethnic group . Taxpayers do not pay for the redistribution of wealth per se . More details of the Pope’s speech is at this link ___


        Christianity ( including also Catholicism ) is virtually kaput and many Christians are in profound denial .

  8. Karl Haemers
    Karl Haemers says:

    This is the first I’ve seen another word creation such as “chutzpathically”.
    I’ve used the term “chutzpocracy”, which applies a lot.

  9. Lord Shang
    Lord Shang says:

    Excellent overview of someone I was unfamiliar with. I know more about the JQ than the average American, but still very little overall. I have read the landmark KMac trilogy, as well as:

    Douglas Reed, The Controversy of Zion
    Lindemann, Esau’s Tears
    Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion
    Finkelstein, The Holocaust Industry
    Ginsberg, The Fatal Embrace
    Slezkine, The Jewish Century
    Johnson, A History of the Jews (philosemitic, but enjoyable)

    I also have:

    Vital, A People Apart
    Wheatcroft, The Controversy of Zion (same title as Reed’s book)
    Sachar, A History of the Jews in the Modern World

    I know I should acquire and read (though I suspect I have already read much of the contents of these books at TOO and TOQ; I wonder how much never previously published material they contain …):

    Sanderson, Battle Lines
    MacDonald, Cultural Insurrections

    What else would Dr. Connelly (and others) add to this list?

    • Bobby
      Bobby says:

      “Hitler’s Revolution,” By Richard Tedor.
      “Stalin and His Hangmen.” The Tyrant and Those Who Killed For Him. By Donald Rayfield.
      “The Devil and Karl Marx.” By Paul Kengor.

    • Ed Connelly
      Ed Connelly says:

      Lord Shang, even in that short list, you have an impressive array of English-language books on Jews. Well done!

      I’ve been making notes this afternoon about books but decided I’d better first respond by just adding two more “must-read” books now, then expand, hopefully tomorrow.

      To review, here are your best books already:

      Kevin’s “Culture of Critique” (the first two help, of course)
      Ginsberg, The Fatal Embrace*
      Lindemann, Esau’s Tears
      Johnson, A History of the Jews**
      Slezkine, The Jewish Century

      Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion

      For now, here are two more:

      E. Michael Jones, The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit (2008)
      A thousand pages, so read the first two chapters, then, if it’s too much to read, jump to Ch. 13 or any subsequent chapter. In my view, Jones’s analysis gets better with each chapter, i.e., the closer you get to the present. While the J revolutionary spirit is the key point, pay special attention to all the chapters that clearly show how Jews have been using blacks in America as battering rams or foot soldiers against Christians/ Whites. In other words, don’t think BLM is anything original.

      Jones has a new edition out in three volumes, which I know I’ll break down and buy, so consider that as well.

      The second recommended book is glorious …. but exceedingly hard for our non-reading younger crowd to grasp. Having admired your many comments over the years, Lord Shang, I know you’ll have no problem and will thank me profusely once you’ve found the book, so here it is: John Murray Cuddihy’s “The Ordeal of Civility.”

      This Irish American academic in NYC definitively proved that a mere goy can dance literary circles around these verbally proficient Jews. Years ago, I physically gathered all the major reviews of the book — most written by Jews — and the grudging admiration they gave Cuddihy was well deserved. “Ah, an actual goy is on to us. Amazing.”

      OK, gotta go now because there are ballgames on TV now …. JUST KIDDING!!! But I will recommend more in the morning. Thanks for sharing your list.

    • Ed Connelly
      Ed Connelly says:

      Lord Shang, even in that short list, you have an impressive array of English-language books on Jews. Well done!

      I began making notes yesterday about books but decided I’d better first respond by just adding two more “must-read” books now, then expand later.

      To review, here are your best books already:

      Kevin’s “Culture of Critique” (the first two help, of course)
      Ginsberg, The Fatal Embrace*
      Lindemann, Esau’s Tears
      Johnson, A History of the Jews**
      Slezkine, The Jewish Century

      Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion

      For now, here are two more:

      E. Michael Jones, The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit (2008)

      A thousand pages, so read the first two chapters, then, if it’s too much to read, jump to Ch. 13 or any subsequent chapter. In my view, Jones’s analysis gets better with each chapter, i.e., the closer you get to the present. While the J revolutionary spirit is the key point, pay special attention to all the chapters that clearly show how Jews have been using blacks in America as battering rams or foot soldiers against Christians/Whites. In other words, don’t think BLM is anything original.

      Jones has a new edition out in three volumes, which I know I’ll break down and buy, so consider that as well.

      The other book is glorious …. but exceedingly hard for our non-reading younger crowd to grasp. Having admired your many comments over the years, Lord Shang, I know you’ll have no problem and will thank me profusely once you’ve found the book, so here it is: John Murray Cuddihy’s “The Ordeal of Civility.”

      This Irish American academic in NYC definitively proved that a mere goy can dance literary circles around these verbally proficient Jews. Years ago, I physically gathered all the major reviews of the book — most written by Jews — and the grudging admiration they gave Cuddihy was well deserved. “Ah, an actual goy is on to us. Amazing.”

      I’lI recommend more after lunch. Thanks for sharing your list.

    • Ed Connelly
      Ed Connelly says:

      Sorry, I’m a day late but I hope you and others will still see this.

      In addition to “The Revolutionary Jewish Spirit” and “The Ordeal of Civility,” I’ll add more to your already fine list.

      You have Benjamin Ginsberg’s excellent “Fatal Embrace,” so I’ll add JJ Goldberg’s 1997 “Jewish Power: Inside The American Jewish Establishment.” (For an older but even simpler read, try Charles Silberman’s 1986 “A Certain People: American Jews and Their Lives Today.”)

      Next, go with David Horowitz’s “Radical Son,” which is especially honest on Jewish (American) hatred for goyim (still).

      A serious student would also want to read Stephen Birmingham’s classic 1967 book  “Our Crowd: The Great Jewish Families of New York.” (And I see a great deal here on Amazon: check

      George Lincoln Rockwell, “White Power”

      Philip Roth, “Portnoy’s Complaint”

      Given my own focus on media, especially Hollywood, the book to read is Neil Gabler’s “An Empire of Their Own: How the Jews Invented Hollywood” (1988) Also read Michael Medved’s “Hollywood vs. America: Popular Culture and the War on Traditional Values” (1992)

      More focused books are:
      — Lester D. Friedman, “The Jewish Image in American Film”
      — Patricia Erens, “The Jew in American Cinema”
      — Kathryn Bernheimer, “The Fifty Greatest Jewish Movies” 
      — Anything by Rothman and/or Lichter on media

      One financial crimes of the 80s, see:
      — James Stewart, “Den of Thieves” (which is a bit better than Connie Bruckner’s “Predators’ Ball”)

      For counter-Semitic fiction, definitely William Pierce’s “The Turner Diaries” (under the name Andrew Macdonald) Be sure to read Robert Griffin’s biography of Pierce, “The Fame of a Dead Man’s Deeds.” Also, Harold Covington’s five novels on The Northwest Front. If you have to read one, get “The Brigade.”

      For a taste of Jewish political power in America, look at my long essay “Israel’s Willing Executioners: The Role of Israel in the Neoconservative Movement” (The Occidental Quarterly Vol. 7, No. 4 (Winter 08);

      plus my review of Jeff Gates’ “Guilt by Association” 

      Finally, if you want to immerse yourself in the topic, begin reading The Jewish Weekly Forward, a newspaper (if they still have it). For most of us, it’s more than we want to know …

      Hope that helps

      • Lord Shang
        Lord Shang says:

        Thank you very much, Dr. Connelly, for taking the time to avail me of your superior bibliographical knowledge and judgment in this area! I’m bookmarking this essay until I have time to put these titles onto my (alas, ever expanding) TO READ tablet list.

        Interesting (to me, anyway) that I actually own (or have read) a number of these suggestions. I will take your word for Jones’s TJRS. I recall being excited back in the 00s when a friend mentioned this book, and had considered purchasing it, but didn’t. I recall thinking it expensive, and perhaps I thought I’d wait for a paperback version. When I next remembered it, I had started hearing some bizarre stuff about Jones (“our real problems are religious, not racial”, or something similar) which prejudiced me against making the expenditure for it. That’s a bit ironic, because I own and had appreciated his Libido Dominandi.

        I’ve heard of the Cuddihy book, but had forgotten it (I seem to recall the late Joe Sobran once praising it in the pages of National Review, many decades ago – or was it that he got in trouble with Buckley for having praised it elsewhere?). I will search it out.

        I have Horowitz’s (and Collier’s) Destructive Generation, and have heard of Radical Son. Didn’t realize the latter had non-biographical value.

        Hilarious that you mention Our Crowd! For me, anyway. I have seen that book high up on my parents’ bookshelves for as long as I can remember. I bet theirs is a first edition. I once took it down, but I thought it was merely something gossipy. My dad is long gone, and I had to put my nonagenarian mother in a nursing home a few years ago, so I myself now have the book … somewhere. I will read it if I ever dig it out.

        I own a copy of Rockwell, and an original edition of Portnoy, which I read long ago (I’ve read 6-7 other Roths as well). Portnoy was among the most memorable (that family steak – or was it liver? lol!)

        I’ve heard of the Gabler book. Medved’s I would have assumed to be excessively ethnically protective. I will pass on the other media books, though I appreciate your effort. My JQ interests are less sociological, and still less media studies oriented (I know Jews have controlled Western media for a long time), than historical, political and intellectual (Culture of Critique and Revolutionary subversion-oriented).

        I read The Turner Diaries (and later Pierce’s Hunter) decades ago. I picked up my used copy – an original (the one with illustrations) – for I think a quarter at a garage sale. I read the excellent Griffin biography in the e-edition available at Unz.com. Pierce and his novels were a bit too strong medicine for me. Although ideologically I’m a serious mainstream conservative (ie, the Hard Right), racial-nationalistically I tend to be on the “soft-left” side of the white preservationist movement. I’m not at all a Nazi, just a counter-diversitist conservative who is sociobiologically aware and realistic, and wishes to prevent white extinction. I’m a bit of a squish in hoping for ultimately peaceful politico-geographical separation rather than violent revolution, at least for America. [Our European cousins, with their ancient nations and ‘thick’ cultures, have every right to demand the total return of their entire ancestral homelands, which will obviously necessitate the physical removal of all alien colonizers, which is sadly unlikely to be effectuated wholly pacifically.]

        I’ve been thinking about reading the Covington novels for a long time. I will read your two linked essays (in a sense, the best reading on the JQ is, of course, TOO itself!).

        Two additional titles for consideration. Have you read Heine, Jews and the American Soul? I vaguely believe KMac once rec’d it.

        Finally, here is a possible recommendation from me to you. Have you read Gitlin, THE SIXTIES – Years of Hope, Days of {Jewish} Rage? The “Jewish” is my addition, but well deserved. The book is essentially a study of 60s radicalism in America by one of the original New Left student leaders (who subsequently became a professor). I bought this book 35 years ago, but never read it (a not infrequent theme in my life). I just started it after Christmas. I’m only about a quarter into it, but the number of Jewish surnames is already staggering.

  10. Tanstaafl
    Tanstaafl says:

    Thank you Edmund. I made a deliberate effort, especially in my monologue-style podcasts and later blog posts, to boil down and share what I thought were the key bits on race and jewing as I was figuring it out for myself. I had a feeling it would be useful to others, and I’m gratified to hear that it has.

    My discussion with Henrik has two parts. The 2nd was paywalled so I didn’t post it until a few months later:


    The direct link for this:

    In this March 2020 blog Tanstaafl asks us, “How can jews blame goyim for what jews do?”

    is: http://age-of-treason.com/2020/03/15/a-brief-history-of-virulence/

    The direct link for this:

    July 2018 blog defending Greg Cochran’s views on Jewish attacks

    is: http://age-of-treason.com/2018/07/06/turkheimer-attacks-cochran/

    The link for “this podcast” is not right:

    In this podcast, he even coined the word “chutzpathically,” as in “jews chutzpathically assert” this or that. Not really a bad way to vent your frustration, all things considered.

    Also, I believe Alex Linder coined the term chutzpathic. I can’t recall which podcast I might have used it in, but apparently (http://age-of-treason.com/?s=chutzpathic) I used it quite a bit in 2018 blog posts.

    BTW, Linder also invented the term loxism and popularized Joe Sobran’s term semitical correctness. I admire and share Linder’s surgical, irreverent use of language.

    The king’s english is called the king’s english because it is spoken by the king. The jewsmedia spells jew in uppercase and White in lowercase because it is the jewsmedia.

    • Ed Connelly
      Ed Connelly says:

      Tan, fantastic to hear from you again. Thanks for corrections and additional links, especially Hour 2 of Red Ice.

      And let me second the praise you have gotten from so many commenters, but here and on Unz Review. It is well deserved. I hope my modest efforts to re-expose your great library bears fruit.

    • MOB
      MOB says:

      Hello Tanstaafl, I read some of your writings years ago and agree it was excellent reading. I’m wondering, while you were very engaged in what could be called high-level anti-jewish activism, did you have goals, beyond that of your articles being read and appreciated, that you hoped your work would contribute toward bringing about? Now that you’ve somewhat retired and look back, was it worth it? Would you do it again? Do you believe the jewish problem can be mitigated or eliminated? How?

  11. Jerry
    Jerry says:

    In the cartoon in the body of the article where it shows the response/behavior of the animals, the fourth should not show a Jew but rather a cuckoo chick pushing out its foster mother’s eggs off the nest.

  12. moneytalks
    moneytalks says:

    ” In the White mind rationalism trumps emotionalism. ”

    Among White men , rationalism strongly tends to trump emotionalism ; and it is vice versa for White women . However , the jewmasterr driven genocidal tactic of eliminating biologicly evolved sexual differentiation , by feminizing White men and masculinizing White women , is beginning to eliminate the obvious sexually based differences between men and women .

  13. katana17
    katana17 says:

    Here are three transcripts of Tan discussing the JQ:

    The Realist Report Interviews TANSTAAFL — 2016 — TRANSCRIPT


    The Realist Report – Tanstaafl: The Jew As A Parasite — TRANSCRIPT


    Luke Ford – JQ Debate with Age Of Treason – Mar 2018 — TRANSCRIPT


  14. Anonymous
    Anonymous says:

    Can anyone here answer this? In the 3rd Reich, how did the Nuremberg Laws define a “Jew”? That is, what was the minimum ethnic ancestry that one had to possess to be considered Jewish? I had always thought it was 1/32; ie, if one of your great-great-great-grandparents was a Jew, the Nazis defined you as a Jew, but you were not so designated if merely one of your great-great-great-great-grandparents was Jewish. I have recently been challenged on this.

    • Al Ross
      Al Ross says:


      Oddly enough , the Jews, upon creating post 1948 Israeli identity, copied the German National Socialist definition and further refined it after a British police – employed , forensic scientist was the first to apply Cambridge University – discovered DNA to a crime scene in England in 1983.

      Also an American scholar , Dr Bryan Rigg , was conferred a Cambridge PhD for his successful doctoral thesis , i.e., ” Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers.”, which , slightly rehashed as all theses must inevitably be , became a successful book.

  15. SchmuelyMoneywitz
    SchmuelyMoneywitz says:

    “That’s why today we have the absurd beliefs that “Race is a social construct” and “Gender is a social construct, too.”

    Gender is a social construct. It was a PC term for the human sexes that was mainly introduced in the 80’s and 90’s,so they could do the UN “six million genders” thing they’re doing today.

    Gender is an irrelevant meaningless term as applied to the two human sexes and human sexual characteristics,but this is what jews do. They make up some nonsensical ill-defined gibberish,popularize it,get two different groups confused about what their nonsense means;where one of them is convinced that it means this thing and the other is convinced that it means the exact opposite thing.

    The correct answer to “Gender is a social construct.” is not “Nuh-uh,idiot, you can’t just be whatever gender you want to be,you’re born one way or the other.” It is “Yes. Jews literally just made up the idea of gender,it’s irrelevant and unscientific. What is relevant is that there are two human sexes;male and female. Those who do not conform to the secondary sexual characteristics of the sex they were born into are mentally-ill perverts. The 2% of the population that has both sets of genitalia are medical freaks and are irrelevant to the larger category.”

    • moneytalks
      moneytalks says:

      …” this is what jews do. They make up some nonsensical ill-defined gibberish,popularize it,get two different groups confused about what their nonsense means;where one of them is convinced that it means this thing and the other is convinced that it means the exact opposite thing.”

      Superb observation .

      “The Jews” have been sabotaging vernaculars since no later than when the ancient biblical King Nimrod terminated his Tower of Babel project , which was subverted by the project slaveworker Judaism founder Abraham and his merry band of co-worker saboteurs , about 2500 years ago ; where The Lord God is given credit for creating workplace vernacular disparaties among the project workers ( whom were slaves from different regions with different languages and whom were taught the Tower project vernacular ) and then scattering them abroad .

      “The Jews” to this day have language supremacy and are masters of creating and injecting linguistic confusions among the goyim in order to maintain control over them . It works like a charm — for Jews .

      Biblical reference ___

      The Jewish Holy Torah / KJV / Book of Genesis / 11 : 1-9 .

  16. Susan
    Susan says:

    I want to add a few more plaudits for Tanstaafl. I appreciate how he provided his commentary in writing as well as in audio. This helps a lot and avoids having to scratch out notes as best as I can when something important is spoken. He recently posted a long list of feeds for other online audios to listen to. He has left his wonderful work up for years now. He has never asked for a cent in financial contributions, as far as I know. This shows what a generous spirit he has. My thanks to him.

  17. Sam J.
    Sam J. says:

    “…the national socialists were mostly correct about race and the pre-history of Europeans. They are demonized today exactly because they were also right about the jews. They correctly saw the jews not merely as non-Aryan but as an existential threat. The jews, especially the more sciency jews, understand this perfectly well. That’s why they’re in crisis mode. They understand these genetic revelations are damning, and potentially explosive, exposing the anti-”racist”/anti-”nazi” narrative jews have perpetrated for the better part of the past century as a fraud, as an excuse for their own racial animus and ongoing war on Whites. The consensus among jews, including alt-jews, is that this fraud has been good for the jews. In their view it is the potential collapse of this fraud, or worse, potential reprisals for it, which might be bad for the jews, and therefore must now be averted at all costs…”

    I have the same views as Tanstaafl but likely worse.

    The above quote is something I’ve been thinking about for a long time. I have thought that the Internet would eventually break the lock on the Jews infobarrage and it has.

    What has bothered me is what will they do about it? It’s fairly well known that the Jews put together a think tank to decide where to go next and that most thought it would be China.

    I’ve been saying that their behavior should change because it appears that the Chinese have outsmarted them and they will not go to China. But…for reasons I couldn’t understand, they continue to push for destruction in the US and Europe. In fact they have upped the pressure.

    Some may disagree but I think it extremely likely, I think 100%, that the Jews are responsible for Covid, and yet they still push. Even with the possibility of serious blow back.

    And then I had what be the most depressing, black pilled idea that I’ve ever had in my life and even worse if you really have studied the Jews it seems very likely to be correct.

    The Chinese can’t absorb the Jews. Their land is seriously poisoned by industrial waste. I’ve heard that 80% of the water supply is contaminated with serious pollutants. They do not have enough farmland to survive, and they are very crowded. What if instead of the Jews moving to China, they promised the Chinese the US?

    So covid is made and a poison vax is pushed. The Jews have always been partial to poisons. Right now who knows what the uptake on this vax is and if the poison takes a few years to take hold we will not know for a couple of years. When it does, could be over half the population or more in the US and most ALL the military will die. We would be completely defenseless. To wage modern war you need an air force and not only all our pilots have been vaxed but most airline pilots also. It takes a long time to train a pilot. The Navy has a huge number of things that would be almost impossible to train people for. A lot of the stuff they know is passed institutionally.

    So after the great die off the Chinese invade and murder us all.

    My only consolation is the Chinese seeing what the Jews did to us can’t be so stupid as to not genocide them also.

    The only reason I didn;t think of this before is ir’s so horrible that the inborn nature of people to ignore things that they can do nothing about when the end is dore that I thinkmy mind just refused to believe it.

    The only people that could or would save us Europe are in just as bad or worse shape. The whole country US and Europe are packed with military age males from aggressive cultures that would be glad to massacre the Whites for the Jews. It may very well be that the Jews have a antidote, and I think likely they do.

    Even at the best and the Chinese don’t invade, it looks like the vax will finish this country off. We’re the walking dead and we don’t know it yet.

    I wonder if you will censor this comment. It’s so horrible that you may just not be up to even thinking about it.

Comments are closed.