Jewish Loot and Neglected Fruit: How the Mainstream Right Serves Jews and Betrays Whites

“Low-hanging fruit!” cry deluded right-wingers all over the West. “Why doesn’t my favored party on the mainstream right pluck that fruit and defeat the left?” Well, they’ve been crying that for decades and will still be crying it when the left pack them off to a slave-labor camp or an organic gas-chamber. Some of those right-wingers are too stupid to see the truth; some are too frightened to admit it. Their favored party on the mainstream right doesn’t pluck the low-hanging fruit because it doesn’t want to defeat the left. And it doesn’t want to defeat the left because it is the left. That is, it’s financed and controlled by Jews who support the left and its anti-White, anti-Christian, anti-Western agenda.

The lies and delusions of perverts

Take the question of transgenderism. In 2021 Boris Johnson, British prime minister and leader of the so-called Conservative party, was presented with some low-hanging fruit — ripe, delicious, and trembling on its stalk. Johnson was asked to affirm that “only women have a cervix” after his supposed opponent, the Labour leader Keir Starmer, had said that this simple statement of biological fact was “transphobic.” According to Starmer, “it is not right” and “should not be said.”

The Goy Grovel: Sajid Javid, Priti Patel and Boris Johnson betraying Whites and serving Jews

If Johnson had wanted to stand up for “conservative values,” defeat the left, and rally millions of ordinary Whites to his party, he would have said that, yes, of course only women have a cervix and that the Labour party are pandering to the lies and delusions of perverted and mentally ill men. But Johnson didn’t say that. He’s a cuckservative and he cucked. If he’d spoken the truth about transgenderism, he would have pleased ordinary Whites. But he would have angered Jews. As Kenneth Vinther pointed out in his review of Scott Howard’s The Transgender-Industrial Complex (2020) at Counter Currents, transgenderism is a thoroughly kosher campaign: “at the top of the [transgender] pyramid rests a series of charming Jewish billionaires like George Soros, Paul Singer, Dan Loeb, Seth Klarman, Jennifer Pritzker, David Gelbaum, Andrew Shechtel, Sheldon Adelson, Loren Schecter, Martine Rothblatt, David T. Rubin, and Mark Hyman, to name a few.”

Take the fight to Labour!

Now take the question of racism. A typically deluded right-winger called Patrick O’Flynn has recently complained in the cuckservative Spectator about “renewed lurches into race-baiting by Labour.” He condemns Labour for demanding “a posthumous royal pardon of those who took part in an anti-slavery uprising in Guyana in 1823” and for blaming “health inequalities” and the poverty of Black-headed households on racism.

O’Flynn rightly says that all this inflated anti-racist rhetoric “will be hated” by the working-class White voters who have switched allegiance from Labour to the Conservatives. Labour’s claims “ought to be meat and drink to a competent Conservative party.” After all, he says, a “cabinet in which the Home Secretary, Chancellor, Health Secretary, Education Secretary, Business Secretary and several others are from non-white backgrounds should be taking the fight to Labour about its unfair characterisation of modern Britain.”

“Anti-racist” means “anti-white”

O’Flynn points out the obvious: “Now would be the perfect time for some of these ministers to step forward and make the case that Britain is one of the least racist countries in the world and a place that should be aspiring to a post-racial politics rather than buying into Labour’s relentless grievance-mongering.” But alas, none of those non-White ministers has stepped forward to defend Britain, so O’Flynn concludes his article on a puzzled and despondent note. Despite the low-hanging fruit waiting to plucked by the multi-hued hands of that admirably vibrant cabinet, Labour’s racial rhetoric has “gone pretty much unanswered.” O’Flynn can’t bring himself to admit the truth, you see. The Tories don’t want to defeat the left’s rhetoric on racism, let alone attack the anti-White ideology central to the concept of racism.

That’s because the Tories accept the anti-White ideology themselves and proudly proclaim themselves to be an anti-racist, anti-sexist, anti-homophobic party. As the Jewish Conservative Tom Tugendhat has said: “Anti-Semitism sits alongside racism, anti-Islam, homophobia, and sexism as a cretinous and divisive belief that has no place in our public life and particularly not in government.” O’Flynn doesn’t mention at the Spectator that the Pakistani Muslim Sajid Javid, one of those non-White ministers in the Tory government, did indeed recently “step forward” in response to leftist hysteria about racism. In fact, he stepped forward not once but twice. And what did Sajid Javid do after he stepped forward? He heartily agreed with the left, first about the need to stamp out racism by White sportsmen and second about the need to punish a White comedian called Jimmy Carr for a good joke about Gypsies: “When people talk about the Holocaust they talk about the tragedy of six million lives being lost to the Nazi war machine, but they never mention the thousands of Gypsies killed by the Nazis, because no one wants to talk about the positives.”

Diligently kissing Jewish backsides

In between those two anti-White interventions, Sajid Javid found time in his busy schedule to extend “early Chanukah greetings” to Britain’s tiny but very powerful Jewish community. Javid knows which side his bagel is buttered. He wants to be prime minister and that’s why he has been diligently kissing Jewish backsides ever since he entered politics.  Being anti-White is part of being pro-Jewish. The same is true of Priti Patel, the high-testosterone Indian Hindu fem-pol who was fired as a minister by Theresa May for having secret meetings with Israeli officials under the supervision of the little-known but very powerful Jew Stuart Polak, a former chairman of Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI). Theresa May didn’t object to Patel being a shabbos-shiksa, agent of Israel and cringing step’n’fetchit for Britain’s Jews. After all, May was all those things herself. No, she objected to Patel being a clumsy shabbos-shiksa and bringing Jewish control of British politics to public attention. But Patel didn’t spend long out of high office. When the part-Jewish Boris Johnson became prime minister, he appointed Patel Home Secretary and she’s now overseeing a harshening of Britain’s already draconian laws against “hate speech.”

She’s also been revealed as an obnoxious bully of her White staff. That’s poetic justice, because White officials at the Home Office are heavily leftist and have been imposing ethnic enrichment on ordinary Whites for many years. Now they’ve experienced for themselves a little — very little — of the misery inflicted by non-Whites. All the same, if rules on ministerial conduct had been followed, Patel would have been fired for the second time. But obnoxious behavior towards Whites doesn’t count. Patel performs the goy-grovel before Jews and that does count. She’s still in her post, still obeying Jewish orders, and still declining to “step forward” and defend Britain from the left’s anti-racist (and anti-White) hysteria. Rishi Sunak, the Indian Hindu Chancellor in the Tory cabinet, has also declined to step forward and bat for Britain. He’s much more intelligent than Patel, which isn’t difficult to be, and he’s a former employee of Goldman Sachs, which is exactly what you would expect him to be (Richard Sharp, his Jewish overseer at Goldman Sachs, became “the BBC’s third Jewish chairman” in 2021).

The logic of looting

At least, Sunak’s earlier work for Goldman Sachs is exactly what we haters at the Occidental Observer would expect. Sunak has been placed at the top of British politics to serve Jewish interests, not the interests of Whites. But his work for the great “vampire squid” went unremarked in another of Patrick O’Flynn’s deluded articles at the Spectator. O’Flynn was complaining that Sunak hasn’t plucked yet more low-hanging fruit. The policies Sunak is pursuing don’t help the former Labour-supporting Whites who switched to the Conservatives. Their hard work isn’t being rewarded and Sunak is deliberately pushing them down the social scale. As O’Flynn says:

Think about how this must feel to workers on roughly median earnings. Two decades ago they earned two-and-a-half times as much as minimum wage workers. Now they earn less than twice as much. By 2024, Sunak has decreed that minimum wage workers in entry level roles will be earning two-thirds of the amount that median earners do. This will represent a massive compression of wages within a single generation.

For those working people who put in a lot of effort in their schooldays compared to their more idle classmates, or who perhaps underwent apprenticeships on very low earnings at the start of their careers, this is highly unlikely to feel like progress. … Sunak has no parallel policy of ensuring that median earnings catch up as a proportion of the top 10 or 1 per cent of earners. In other words, his approach defies logic. Those in the modest middle of the pay scale have every reason to feel victimised. (Does Rishi Sunak really understand red wall voters?, [“red-wall voters” = traditionally Labour-supporting Whites who switched to the Tories], The Spectator, 13th November 2021)

O’Flynn is wrong. Sunak’s approach doesn’t defy logic. It’s perfectly logical for an alumnus of Goldman Sachs to continue serving plutocratic Jews, not ordinary Whites. Sunak is there to help mega-rich Jews get richer, not to defend Britain against their looting. Of course, you can’t expect O’Flynn to mention Jews in a cuckservative magazine like the Spectator. But he could at least have mentioned Sunak’s connections to Goldman Sachs and drawn the obvious conclusion. I suspect he was scared to bring an obviously Jewish bank into the argument. After all, look at what happened to the great conservative philosopher Roger Scruton when the left whipped up a hysteria about a speech he had once made in Hungary. He had criticized George Soros and said, with perfect truth, that “Many of the Budapest intelligentsia are Jewish, and form part of the extensive networks around the Soros empire.” Scruton was denounced as an “anti-Semite” by Luciana Berger, the very Jewish Member of Parliament for a very non-Jewish constituency in Liverpool.

Blind to the truth

As I described in “A Philosopher Falls,” Scruton’s response was typically cuckservative. He should have denounced Berger for her dishonesty and turned the blowtorch of his mighty intellect on the flimsy and regularly misused concept of “anti-Semitism.” He didn’t. Instead, he indignantly denied that he was an anti-Semite, thereby accepting the validity of the charge and merely rejecting its application in his particular case.

That is not how a great philosopher should behave. But then I don’t think Scruton was a great philosopher or an effective defender of Western civilization. To defend something, you have to recognize who its enemies are. Then you expose and oppose them. Jews are the central enemies of Western civilization, but far too many self-proclaimed defenders of the West are still blind to the enemy within the gates. Thanks to their blindness, they are betrayed by the Jew-controlled right again and again. When they stop being blind, they’ll stop being betrayed, because they’ll stop supporting the Jew-controlled right.