Israel, the American left, and the Emerging Multipolar World.

The new Israeli government is by far the most radically right in its history—and that’s saying a lot. As a result, there have been a number of protests against Israel and Zionism both in Israel and on American college campuses recently. These are likely to increase in number and intensity because of the new government which is the result of a long process of demographic change resulting from the high fertility of Orthodox and strongly ethnonationalist Jews. As we are well aware, demography is indeed destiny.

Recently there was a large protest against Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich in Washington. Since the new government was installed, there has been increased settler and IDF violence, and “Smotrich called for the Palestinian village of Huwwara to be ‘wiped out.’ His remarks have received widespread condemnation. The U.S. State Department called them “disgusting,” but approved Smotrich’s visa.”

This is a typical U.S response to Israel—big on words but no action. Smotrich also told an audience in Paris that “there’s no such thing as “Palestinian people”—again the U.S. complained but again, nothing will change. Smotrich outlined his belief that Israel has exclusive Jewish, God-ordained rights to the land, and the lectern was adorned with a map of Israel that included the occupied Palestinian territory and the country of Jordan as part of Israeli territory.” And after Jordan, all the land between the Nile and the Euphrates as promised in Genesis. After the speech, Jordan says it is reviewing its relationship to Israel

This is having repercussions in the U.S., at least among liberals. What Israel is doing is the direct opposite of the Wokeness promoted by the left in the U.S.:

For the first time in Gallup’s polling, going back to 2000, Democrats said they sympathized with Palestinians more than with Israelis in the long-standing conflict between the two: 49% of Democrats said they sympathized more with Palestinians, 38% with Israelis and 13% said they favored neither side.

Overall, a majority of Americans, 54%-31%, sympathize more with the Israelis, the poll found, but the gap between the two in U.S. opinion has narrowed significantly. Much of the shift in U.S. opinion has come from millennials, whose sympathy for the Israelis has dropped sharply over the last decade.

The old guard in the Israel Lobby and the big money are still on the side of whatever Israel does. But over time, the skepticism many younger Americans have about the use of U.S. power overseas will likely change American policy as Israel becomes an increasing embarrassment to the woke West.

A particular focus of the protests is the attempt to have the Knesset, which is decidedly on the right, be able to override Supreme Court decisions which have “repeatedly defended the rights of vulnerable populations in Israel, including Arab Israelis, LGBTQ people, non-Orthodox Jews and women.” So progressive American Jews in the U.S. are furious:

The Progressive Israel Network, a coalition that includes J Street, Americans For Peace Now, T’ruah, and the Rabbinic Call for Human Rights, organized a demonstration outside [Smotrich’s] hotel that also targeted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s judicial overhaul. “This is a moral emergency,” said National Council of Jewish Women CEO Sheila Katz during a speech at the event. “We must name this deep pain that so many of us feel for what’s happening in Israel right now, a place that we love.”

Various Reform rabbis are calling it an existential crisis for American Jews (the word ‘existential’ will appear quite a bit in this article), and Israel’s president has warned “He who thinks that a real civil war, one that costs lives, is a line we won’t reach, is out of touch. In this moment, of all moments, in the 75th year of the state of Israel, the abyss is within reach.” Moreover, the protests are

taking place without a constitution. This means, for instance, that the government can decide to hold elections once every ten years instead of the standard four-year limit still in effect, and no one can override it; or it could pass laws granting the government total control over the media, or it could put LGBTQ people in jail. But the true crisis will emerge when the Israeli High Court of Justice repeals the judicial reforms and regards them as illegal — that is when the state will enter a constitutional crisis without a solution. Who will the Israeli security apparatus obey: the government or the judiciary?

Ironically, Biden called Netanyahu urging some kind of compromise, even though many in his own party want to pack SCOTUS to achieve permanent dominance of the left in the U.S.

While all this is going on, the recent Saudi-Iran rapprochement brokered by China is another huge concern for Israel and its supporters because it portends an ever-wider coalition arrayed against the West—China and Russia (which are already allied), Iran (allied with Russia), Syria (the Saudis had been supporting the rebels, while Iran and Russia have been supporting Assad), other Arab countries (Jordan and the United Arab Emirates are reviewing the relations with Israel, undoing Jared Kushner’s work in the Trump administration), and quite possibly India—Prime Minister Modi recently spoke of India’s “unbreakable friendship” with Putin and pushed to avoid any joint communique because of disagreement about the war in the recent G7 meetings.

What this confrontation is really about is the globalist, woke West still tolerant of Israel versus nations that reject the Western model of exporting wokeness in defense of their own traditions and culture. Putin’s recent speech emphasizes this:

Look what they are doing to their own people. It is all about the destruction of the family, of cultural and national identity, perversion and abuse of children, including pedophilia, all of which are declared normal in their life. They are forcing the priests to bless same-sex marriages. Bless their hearts, let them do as they please. Here is what I would like to say in this regard. Adult people can do as they please. We in Russia have always seen it that way and always will: no one is going to intrude into other people’s private lives, and we are not going to do it, either. …

The Western imposition of wokeness is already happening in Ukraine. Christopher Caldwell of the usually neocon friendly Claremont Institute and author of The Age of Entitlement: America Since the Sixties (2020), notes that

Few people have paid attention to how rapidly Ukrainian society has been evolving since the Maidan protests [of 2014]. In a recent interview in the New Left Review, the sociologist Volodymyr Ishchenko described a power bloc that has lately come into being, uniting Ukraine’s globalizing oligarchs, Western-funded progressive foundations, and Ukrainian nationalists The latter argued for ripping up the Minsk accords and ripping out the Russian roots of Ukrainian public life and high culture, leaving Ukraine with a hard-line form of [pro-Western] political correctness.

Opponents were driven out of public life. All of these countries have traditional cultures that are out of step with the West’s wokeness. Caldwell calls attention to Western NGOs pushing wokeness, such as George Soros’s Open Society Institute. Hungary requires that NGOs that get donations from abroad be publicly labeled as foreign funded, and Russia has banned several foreign NGOs linked to politics, including the Open Society Institute and Amnesty International. Because of the saliency of Soros as a funder of woke causes (including liberal-radical prosecutors, such as Alvin Bragg who indicted Trump) and the fact that he is well known to be Jewish, the activist Jewish community has attempted to ban any mention of Soros as funding the left.  When Trump highlighted Soros’s support for Bragg, the JTA wrote that he had “once again invoke[d] the name of a Jewish billionaire who is at the center of antisemitic conspiracy theories.”

Putin emphasizes U.S. warmongering since 9/11 and its support for imposing neoliberal totalitarian values on the rest of the world.

According to US experts, almost 900,000 people were killed during wars unleashed by the United States after 2001, and over 38 million became refugees. Please note, we did not invent these statistics; it is the Americans who are providing them. They are now simply trying to erase all this from the memory of humankind, and they are pretending that all this never happened. However, no one in the world has forgotten this or will ever forget it.

None of them cares about human casualties and tragedies because many trillions of dollars are at stake, of course. They can also continue to rob everyone under the guise of democracy and freedoms, to impose neoliberal and essentially totalitarian values, to brand entire countries and nations, to publicly insult their leaders, to suppress dissent in their own countries and to divert attention from corruption scandals by creating an enemy image. We continue to see all this on television, which highlights greater domestic economic, social and inter-ethnic problems, contradictions and disagreements. …

Russia is an open country and at the same time, a distinct civilisation. There is no claim to exclusivity or superiority in this statement, but this civilisation of ours — that’s what matters. Our ancestors passed it to us and we must preserve it for our descendants and pass it on to them….

This message of preserving traditional cultures is obviously at odds with the woke values that the West is attempting to impose on the rest of the world. It’s a message that undoubtedly resonates with many societies with unwoke cultures that would like to preserve and may well be one of the main reasons we are seeing the new alignment mentioned above.

Putin continues:

Step by step, they proceeded to revise the existing international order, to dismantle security and arms control systems, and plotted and carried out a series of wars around the world. To reiterate, all of that was done for the sole purpose of dismantling the post-WWII architecture of international relations. This is not a figure of speech. This is how it all unfolded in reality. After the Soviet Union collapsed, they sought to perpetuate their global dominance regardless of the interests of modern Russia or other countries for that matter.

The Western elite make no secret of their goal, which is, I quote, “Russia’s strategic defeat.” What does this mean to us? This means they plan to finish us once and for all. In other words, they plan to grow a local conflict into a global confrontation. This is how we understand it and we will respond accordingly, because this represents an existential threat to our country.

An existential threat. I take him at his word, and that means that the feel they cannot lose this war, which could lead to a nuclear Armageddon because the West apparently also sees it as existential given their full-on, ever-escalating support of Ukraine. What our elites really hate is Putin’s claim that “There is no claim to exclusivity or superiority in this statement, but this civilisation of ours — that’s what matters. Our ancestors passed it to us and we must preserve it for our descendants and pass it on to them.” This is an anti-globalist manifesto. Combined with Russia’s attitudes on LGBTQ+, it’s easy to see why Western elites are furious.

Recently Putin complained that NATO is proposing to expand to countries like Australia, New Zealand, and South Korea, further exacerbating Russian paranoia.

Putin’s claim that the West has sought to perpetuate its dominance resulting from the fall of the Soviet Union is quite correct. In the 1990s Jewish neoconservatives saw a unipolar world as in the interests of Israel, surrounded by hostile countries in the Middle East. From a paper I wrote in 2004, “Neoconservatism as a Jewish Movement”:

With the end of the Cold War, neoconservatives at first advocated a reduced role for the U.S., but this stance switched gradually to the view that U.S. interests required the vigorous promotion of democracy in the rest of the world. This aggressively pro-democracy theme, which appears first in the writings of Charles Krauthammer and then those of Elliot Abrams, eventually became an incessant drumbeat in the campaign for the war in Iraq. Krauthammer also broached the now familiar themes of unilateral intervention and he emphasized the danger that smaller states could develop weapons of mass destruction which could be used to threaten world security. A cynic would argue that this newfound interest in democracy was tailor-made as a program for advancing the interests of Israel. After all, [despite the reality of Israel as an apartheid state], Israel is advertised as the only democracy in the Middle East, and democracy has a certain emotional appeal for the United States, which has at times engaged in an idealistic foreign policy aimed at furthering the cause of human rights in other countries. …

Krauthammer was on the cutting edge of neocon thinking on how to respond to the unipolar world created by the collapse of the Soviet Union. Krauthammer has consistently urged that the U.S. pursue a policy to remake the entire Arab world—a view that represents the “party line” among neoconservatives (e.g., Michael Ledeen, Norman Podhoretz, Bill Kristol, David Frum, and Richard Perle). In a speech at the AEI in February 2004, Krauthammer argued for a unilateral confrontation with the entire Arab-Muslim world (and nowhere else) in the interests of “democratic globalism.” He advocated a U.S. foreign policy that is not “tied down” by “multilateralism”: “the whole point of the multilateral enterprise: To reduce American freedom of action by making it subservient to, dependent on, constricted by the will—and interests—of other nations. To tie down Gulliver with a thousand strings. To domesticate the most undomesticated, most outsized, national interest on the planet—ours.”

Krauthammer’s claim that this is in “our” interests is clearly an attempt—common among neoconservatives—to present themselves as American patriots, but his declaring war on the Islamic world is clearly far more in the interests of Israel than it is in the interests of the United States. Continuing from my 2004 paper:

Democratic globalism is aimed at winning the struggle with the Arab-Islamic world [quoting Krauthammer]:

Beyond power. Beyond interest. Beyond interest defined as power. That is the credo of democratic globalism. Which explains its political appeal: America is a nation uniquely built not on blood, race or consanguinity, but on a proposition—to which its sacred honor has been pledged for two centuries…. Today, post-9/11, we find ourselves in an … existential struggle but with a different enemy: not Soviet communism, but Arab-Islamic totalitarianism, both secular and religious.

“Existential.” Meanwhile, neoconservatives with their post-racial framing of the West welcome Third World immigration throughout the West from Muslim countries. Again, it’s hard to see how this is in “our” interests.,

This post-racial neocon interest in “promoting democracy continues today, except that once again, as in Soviet days when a formative influence on the neocon movement was that Jews were gradually being pushed out of the Soviet elite. But now the target is Russia. It’s interesting that Max Boot, formerly a self-described neocon, has recanted, tweeting: “I was wildly overoptimistic about the prospects of exporting democracy by force, underestimating both the difficulties and the costs of such a massive undertaking.” But he’s all in on the Ukraine war which has also been advertised as a war for democracy. In fact, he’s become a liberal interventionist typical of MSNBC and CNN and fits right in with The Washington Post, where he puts out op-eds quite compatible with their far-left views. The neocons (or whatever they call themselves now that the term has come into disrepute because of previous disasters like the Iraq war) attempt to dominate both sides of U.S. foreign policy, as the Israel Lobby has always done. They are now well ensconced in the Biden Administration, the notorious Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland (main operative in the 2014 coup against the pro-Russian government), Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman, and Secretary of State Anthony Blinken—all Jewish and all involved in masterminding the war in Ukraine.

The neocon interest in destroying the Arab-Muslim world intersects with their interest in destroying Russia via victory in the Ukraine war. As noted, Russia has supported both Iran and Syria, both of which, especially Iran, are seen as enemies of Israel. It’s thus no surprise that today’s neocons (including veteran neocon Bill Kristol) went ballistic when Ron DeSantis (along with the much-hated Donald Trump—who can forget neocon “Never Trump” hysteria in the 2016 election campaign when comparisons to Hitler abounded) stated that the dispute between Russia and Ukraine is a simple territorial dispute and not relevant to U.S. national interests. In the mainstream media, Tucker Carlson has also championed such views.

Chiming in with Kristol were other prominent Jewish neocons (Jennifer Rubin, David Frum, Mark Levin, Jonah Goldberg) and their gentile allies (Rick Wilson, David French, Adam Kinzinger, etc.). This list includes “ex-neocon” Max Boot who retweeted one of Bill Kristol’s meltdown tweets against DeSantis.

The Saudi-Iran deal is important because for decades Israel has been attempting to make peace with the Arab world while continuing to oppress the Palestinians. The agreement also signals that the Arab world is pulling away from the U.S. and the West, likely reasoning, like Russia and probably China, that aligning with the West intent exporting wokeness is definitely not in their interest. The U.S. is once again complaining about Israeli behavior, as they have done since the 1967 war, but this will have no effect on the fanatics now running Israel and the powerful Israel Lobby will continue to dominate US foreign policy in the Middle East.

The multipolar world is coming into being and is being speeded up by the war in Ukraine. For the neocons in charge of U.S. foreign policy, it’s an existential moment because their much yearned for unipolar world run by the U.S. in close alliance with Israel may be unraveling, in large part because of their own ambitions to destroy Russia—a hatred borne of old grievances specific to the long sojourn of Jews in Russia, where anti-Jewish attitudes have a long history, as recounted in Alexander Solzhenitsyn in his 200 Years Together, and even under Bolshevism. Then there was Putin’s banishing of politically involved Jewish oligarchs like Michael Khordorkovsky who dominated the Russian economy and media after the fall of the Soviet Union,  Russia’s alliances with Israel’s enemies Iran and Syria, their rejection of globalism in favor of nationalism (the ADL considers calling out any Jew for supporting globalism as “anti-Semitic“), and their support for traditional Russian Christian culture rather than, e.g., LGBTQ+ which is championed by powerful Jewish organizations throughout the West. Recently White House spokesman John Kirby said that supporting LGBTQ+ is a “core part of our foreign policy,” presumably including funding drag queen shows in Ecuador.

It’s interesting therefore that in a recent UN General Assembly vote, earlier this month calling for an end to the fighting and Moscow’s immediate withdrawal from Ukraine, Russia voted against, while China, India and South Africa abstained. Add to that the recent Saudi-Iran rapprochement along with Syria and the U.S. may well be looking at an alliance among Russia, China, India, and much of the Islamic world that rejects what the West has become—promoting globalism at the expense of nationalism (which comes down to a small cadre of Western oligarchs and multinationals as represented by the World Economic Forum running the world) and moral crusades at the expense of traditional cultures which are inevitably seen as retrograde and change-worthy by the woke elites that run the West.

Ukraine’s transformation under Zelensky is paradigmatic. This transformation is clearly top-down exactly like those that have occurred in all Western countries beginning with the elite media and academic culture. I suppose that this transformation has a long way to go to capture the hearts and minds of Ukrainians, but, as with the West, control of the media and academic culture along with Zelensky’s heavy-handed methods of handling dissent (banning political parties and religions that dissent from the war despite constantly be advertised in the West as a democracy) may prevail in the long run in whatever is left of Ukraine.

In summary, there is quite a bit of evidence that U.S. hegemony has become intolerable for much of the world and this hostility is rapidly creating a multipolar world centered around the China, Russia, Iran and the Arab countries, and perhaps the emerging economic powers of India and Brazil at a time of U.S. decline. The BRICS coalition

has become the hottest ticket in geopolitics. Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (the BRICS) have been toying with the idea of forming a political/monetary counterweight to U.S. dominance since 2001. But beyond some aggressive gold buying by Russia and China, there was more talk than action.

Then the floodgates opened. Whether due to the pandemic’s supply chain disruptions, heavy-handed sanctions imposed by US-led NATO during the Russia-Ukraine war, or just the fact that de-dollarization was an idea whose time had finally come, the BRICS alliance has suddenly become the hottest ticket in town. [Brazil and China have agreed to trade in their own currencies, and Russia is using the yuan to trade with Africa, Latin America, and Asia.] In just the past year, Argentina, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Mexico, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Egypt have either applied to join or expressed an interest in doing so. And new bilateral trade deals that bypass the dollar are being discussed all over the place.

Combine the land mass, population, and natural resources of the BRICS countries with those of the potential new members and the result is more or less half the world. …

  • If the BRICS have the commodities and the US and its allies are left with finance, pricing power for crucial things like oil and gold will shift to Russia, China, and the Middle East.

  • Falling demand for dollar-denominated bonds as reserve assets will send trillions of dollars now outside the US back home, raising domestic prices (which is to say lowering the dollar’s purchasing power and exchange rate).

  • The loss of its weaponized reserve currency will lessen the US’ ability to impose its will on the rest of the world (witness China as Middle-East peacemaker and India buying Russian oil with rupees).

None of these countries has any particular love for Israel.

What does this mean for White interests?

First, anything that weakens or discredits the U.S. establishment is good for us given that the system is completely broken and can’t be reformed at the ballot box. Granted the neoconservative disaster in Iraq did not result in them losing power, but this time, if U.S. hegemony is seriously weakened, it could be very different. The U.S. has benefited greatly from having the world’s reserve currency, for example by lowering borrowing costs and being able to impose economic sanctions on countries it doesn’t like. Quite clearly, this nascent alliance is motivated to end dollar supremacy, especially given the sanctions imposed on Russia and Iran, both of which have already been trading Russian oil in rubles. Such a transition would bring economic repercussions to the US addicted as it is to massive deficit spending that has allowed it to fund our foreign wars while funding the huge entitlement programs that keep millions of Americans reasonably content. But this transformation would affect all Americans negatively. Ideally, a sane America that was not spending trillions to export wokeness and impose it here could right the ship. But I can’t see that happening.

And since Israel is linked to the West, it would also hurt Israel, as it will remain an outsider in this rising alliance. The Israel Lobby remains in the driver’s seat because of its financial clout, but surely at some point, wiser heads will see that neoconservative foreign policy centered around wokeness and the interests of Israel is an ongoing disaster. Nevertheless, the U.S. political system runs on money, and there is no evidence that Jewish financial clout—~75% of Democrat money and ~ 50% of Republican money—is diminishing.

77 replies
  1. francis goumain
    francis goumain says:

    The problem is not the dollar but the race.
    The rest of the world had a natural respect for the whites,
    Now, there no reason for a South-African to be afraid by the current head of the Pentagone.

  2. Hitmarck
    Hitmarck says:

    Unlike Israel the Nazis had the excuse of being the first with industrial scale crimes. (which itself is pretty dumb moral qualifier, given there was a severe lack of industrial scale pre Industrialization)
    As part of a moral people this makes me question other weird moral peoples morals and indeed see clearer and clearer the morals being the rope at the goys nosering which the Jews lead their cattle along with through the opinions arena.

  3. Space Cowboy
    Space Cowboy says:

    “What Israel is doing is the direct opposite of the Wokeness promoted by the left in the U.S.” Yeah, it can be characterized as “throwing sand in the eyes” and “lulling the dumb goyim to sleep”. This monetary policy practiced since historical times by Jews through usury and interest bondage contains the same psycholgical mechanism as the gradual land theft in Palestine, but also the Shoah guilt cult with which the Jews morally blackmail the White Race to the point of self-sacrifice and self-denial.

    It is always about robbing something from the goyim, but in the least dramatic, least sensational way possible, and always with demonstratively benevolent intent, as a fig leaf, so to speak. The devil sneaks in on silent soles. The salami tactic. Always just a morsel until the soup is spooned out. The bleating flock of sheep, which has chosen the Jew as its butcher, may always be led just one unnoticed step toward the abyss until they finally can no longer turn back and race like lemmings to their doom.

    Ultimately, the entire entertainment industry controlled by Jews (not to speak of pornography and “virtuality”) is a single distraction through illusion. As it is already written in the “unholy writings” of the Jews: One must sell to the goyim their shameful betrayal, their loss and defeat as cleverly as possible under brazen label fraud even as victory and profit. Chuzpah denotes the specific ability to impudently lie reality into the opposite and to play others off against each other (e.g. by warmongering).

    Now, as it does with regular repetition, the house of cards of the Jewish Monopoly scam money is collapsing.

    One should not believe, however, that there is no intention behind it! A kind of controlled demolition. Like a vampire, which had to get along meanwhile without blood, the dollar is also a worthless paper tiger, which promises something, which it does not keep. Therefore, the Jews intend to replace the white Americans, ruined by them and hollowed out internally, i.e. deprived of any core, by shifting their activities to countries and markets rich in raw materials, in order to compensate for their imminent loss.

    Of course, these are all pure “antisemitic conspiracy theories”, which were as unfounded centuries ago as they are today and in all future! “After Medina came the Jew, Manasseh Lopes,” Anstey wrote. “Then came Samson Gideon and the Goldsmids – Abraham and Benjamin. They were succeeded by the Rothschilds.”

    • Space Cowboy
      Space Cowboy says:

      An ancient oriental (Semitic) custom: when the landscape has been grazed and the resident population (the host people) has been skimmed, the caravan moves on to a hitherto still fertile stretch of land.

      What these circumcised “knights of universality” necessarily bring with them is their ineradicable sense of smell (nasal extent) for advantage and their incomprehensibly tricky trader mentality.

      • Birhan Dargey
        Birhan Dargey says:

        EXACTLY…this is seems similar to 1930s USA Depression. The American usefulness has ran its course. WHO wins the most IF: the American Economy collapses/banking/financial crisis. The biggest most powerful investors walked away with all their fortunes intact. The banks wiped out their debts, and the working middle classes must stay to scrap a living and there is no other alternative, nowhere to go, no way to do it, .The only option is to try it again..They will have to come up with a new narrative, new civic (national) creature, they will pray to their gods, they will cry, blame others, blame themselves.. and out of the rubble a new nation/s new territorial configurations, perhaps along ethnic/racial/religious/linguistics will rebirth into being. They will eventually forget their pains and traumas and their losses The OLD culprits JEWS will return with new faces/new names/ new toys new Holocaust Stories and the old cycle will repeat again..The victims will be forgotten and the criminals JEWS will become HEROES..WE owe them reparations, for our dark crimes committed against the chosen people of God.

    • Dr M
      Dr M says:

      Very well written and thoughtful response – thanks. You’ve obviously done your homework.

      The “good news”, if any, is that we are not the first group to be plagued with the treachery of the Tribe, starting with Moses in 1600 BC. Seems like everybody in history has money problems at some point and may need to turn to the Tribe as a last resort – which rarely ends well. Queen Victoria didn’t have the $100M ($ 1.5 B today) to build the Suez canal so she had to turn to the Rothschilds to build it – at usurious rates.

      Whenever, the Tribe looks at any situation, they always ask the same two questions “Can I make any money here?” and “Is it good for the Jews?”. They then wonder why people hate them.

      I have given up worrying about this situation on a daily basis – it’s simply too stressful and depressing. My solution? Try to live my life on a positive basis – the Golden Rule – in dealing with others. . and not getting into debt. Sadly, money/bribes/threats have always plagued and ruled the world and the Tribe has used these to motivate and rule people. If there is a Satan then these people are surely a physical manifestation of him. Even so, I really believe that positivity will eventually win over negativity.

      As Margaret Mead once said – “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed, citizens can change the world. … indeed it is the only thing that ever has”.

      So, gently and persistently, teach others about the Tribe’s rule of the media/TV/ ads, finance, education/universities and government . . . and hopefully their eyes will eventually awaken to this danger. Again, never underestimate the power of motivated individuals.

      • Space Cowboy
        Space Cowboy says:

        Thank you very much for your appreciative words and your very wise comment, which I can fully endorse.

      • Space Cowboy
        Space Cowboy says:

        @Dr M

        PS: Your website is very sympathetic and speaks of a person who has not only recognized the principles of life, but has internalized them to his advantage. And since you want to help not only yourself but also others, you have made your search for wisdom your profession. You are someone who can be recommended to best friends and loved ones without hesitation. I take my hat off to your (in the best sense) rich life filled with meaning.

        • Dr M
          Dr M says:

          Thanks for the kind words and yes my goal/profession now (at age 73) is the search for timeless
          wisdom that can help people deal with all the negativity in the world today (JQ and otherwise). Our cause will never be lost until we ourselves give up. Thankfully we have the TOO community to assure us that we’re alone in our concerns.

        • Dr M
          Dr M says:

          PS – you can support my work by getting my book (on Amzn – “The Good News File – Hope For A Modern World”) and sharing it with others – especially new graduates who will need guidance going forward in their lives. Thanks.

          • Flo
            Flo says:

            I popped over to Amazon to take a peek, expecting to find a poorly edited, self-published pile of nonsense. Not so! after reading a sample I added it to my “books” wishlist for my next order.

      • Space Cowboy
        Space Cowboy says:

        An additional aggravating problem occurs in our “atomized” world, dear Doctor: that knowledge today is no longer passed on collectively and intergenerationally, in order to develop further in an evolutionary and organic way, as it was the case before the “Jewish emancipation”, but only acquired induvidually through personal commitment.

        Until an individual today begins to recognize the connections between social phenomena, racial differences and the “JQ”, his life is practically already almost expired. Paradisiacal conditions of stupidity amongst the goyim prevail on this planet at the moment – observed from the “strictly Jewish perspective”!

        But this is not enough for their insatiable greed to drive the cultural-moral decay among the goyim despised by them abysmally as “cattle”, they fire it constantly with still more abstruse demands and methods. We shall put the dream of a species-appropriate collective way of life, to which we all have a natural right, out of our minds, they command.

        • Lady Strange
          Lady Strange says:

          We must stop taking their displayed megalomania seriously, they have a deep sense of inferiority on the contrary.

          • Space Cowboy
            Space Cowboy says:

            That’s it, we serve their pathological narcissism. They only “stand out” because everyone else kneels. No one dares to say “Away with you!” when they are in our ears again with their endless self-pity.

            It takes at least two participants to start the cycle of abuse. If one of the two drops out of the game, the other hangs in the air in an absurd way and is catapulted into the last league of world events.

        • Heimdall in Africa
          Heimdall in Africa says:

          Slightly OT : personally I find it so sad very few parents pass down ANY knowledge to their children (not only WN, race & JQ). Just totally leave it up to schools. It’s like in a firm, when it loses institutional knowledge. Such a waste. And then the kids repeat same mistakes or have to learn everything themselves. Happened to me.
          Parents need to step up.

          • Space Cowboy
            Space Cowboy says:

            There you say a true word. However, all hairs fall out in shock when one experiences today’s parents who themselves share at most the maturity level of their own offspring. In my opinion, there should be an institution for character and intellectual aptitude and suitability testing of a protruding parenthood.

    • K M Landis
      K M Landis says:

      Good analysis. You’re right about “the house of cards of Jewish Monopoly scam money.” The Jews have slaughtered other races throughout history, as they boast about in the Old Testament. In Bolshevik Russia from 1918 to 1940, they killed millions of Whites. And now Jews promote The Great Replacement, which is the ultimate genocide of the White race. There’s no need for Germans (or Whites in general) to feel any guilt. Jews never have.

      • Space Cowboy
        Space Cowboy says:

        Thank you for your words of appreciation. There is nothing to add to your statement. Except perhaps that the Jews will never voluntarily let their pseudo-moral rule over the souls of the Whites be taken from their hairy claws, as long as their hubris once again flies around their ears like a kettle under pressure. For under the lid they keep closed, it is rumbling and fermenting most violently.

  4. ariadna
    ariadna says:

    “United States, which has at times engaged in an idealistic foreign policy aimed at furthering the cause of human rights in other countries. …”

    I cannot think of a single instance when the US did not use the cover of “human rights” to further interests that were not ‘idealistic” at all but strictly in the servivce of the two P’s: power and plunder.

    “…prominent Jewish neocons (Jennifer Rubin, David Frum, Mark Levin, Jonah Goldberg) and their gentile allies (Rick Wilson, David French, Adam Kinzinger, etc.)”

    I don’t know about French but I find it suspicious in the case of Kinzinger that wikipedia, which always gives the mother’s maiden name, only lists his mother as “Betty Jo.” Also, nowhere I looked on the internet could I find his mother’s maiden name. A well-kept secret. Why?

  5. John
    John says:

    Our children are our future, which is why it is pure evil to pass on our homeland to them as minorities. Not to mention the violence that will rain on them.

  6. Evangelos Aragiannis
    Evangelos Aragiannis says:

    Even AIPAC stands against Likud’s reforms. So, it’s not about the reforms per se but rather the attempt on Likud’s part to reach out to the Eurasian alliance.
    If Israel is left to the antics of the american-jewish diaspora they are doomed anyway. Their best bet at maintaining a State would be to side with the rising Russia/China dominated world. That would mean that they would have to reconsider the Palestinian issue and relations with Iran. I think the Likud have considered that, too. It’s existential for them, at this point. Btw, the diaspora is all but doomed, along with the rest of the “West”.

    • Jean Dark
      Jean Dark says:

      @ Evangelos Aragiannis
      An alliance against our western peoples composed of the Chinese, Russians, Iranians AND Jews?
      No thanks.

      • Evangelos Aragiannis
        Evangelos Aragiannis says:

        I don’t think they will be allowed anything more than to exist as a State.
        The diaspora is all but doomed anyway.

  7. todd hupp
    todd hupp says:

    An excellent article by Professor MacDonald.
    Very lucid points.

    Biden: “Trans shape our American soul.” – per the largely Jewish Progressive USA Psychiatric establishment.

    • K M Landis
      K M Landis says:

      Globalist Jews promote transsexualism, pedophilia, and all the required hormone blockers and other pervert-drugs. It makes them money, and it destroys the host society.

  8. Carey M
    Carey M says:

    American Christians’ support of Israel surpasses by far their support of Christians in that region and beyond.

    It’s a disgrace.

    Conservative Christian Evangelicals are especially blameworthy, especially as they claim (falsely) to be the best Christians.

    The supposedly “Christian” GOP is also a disgrace.

    The GOP and Democrats have been bought off by Jews and Israel.

    Senator Rand Paul: You know all this. So why don’t you speak out? You haven’t been bought out, too, have you?

    • Pierre de Craon
      Pierre de Craon says:

      There has never been anything distinctively Christian about the GOP. The party used to be rather more discreet in its contempt for Christians than it now is, but as there is no longer any penalty in American politics for hypocrisy, why bother pretending?

  9. Pierre de Craon
    Pierre de Craon says:

    I suggest, with respect, that Kevin is exhibiting misplaced optimism in indicating (or seeming to indicate) that growing “popular” unrest with the plainly bloodthirsty character of the present power-mad Israeli government will work to the detriment of Jewish power here in the USA. This is a totalitarian state, as Putin correctly notes, and there is good reason to think that the Jews who run it will use lethal force to maintain their supremacy. After all, whether the issue is trannyism, child mutilation, or world rule, opposition to the Jewish agenda constitutes bigotry, and the condign punishment for bigotry is death.

    On a bizarrely related note, V-DARE—a long-time ally of TOO in the matter of white identity, interests, and culture—has published a series of worshipfully pro-Netanyahu articles wherein the recent rulings of Israeli courts, rulings referred to in passing in Kevin’s article, are attacked as kritarchic. Given that the greater the chaos in Israel, the better it is for all who suffer under the Jews’ yoke, one is left to wonder whether Peter Brimelow has “redefined” his principles or lost his wits.

    • Peter
      Peter says:

      This website (TOO) is unique for its in-depth articles on history and culture and the forces that have shaped both, as well as for its highly educated authors, who inform the reader of things a student would never learn in a university. It is unique in that it discusses the people behind the power of the world, and that includes Jews. For the last 150 years, perhaps a little longer, Jewish influence grew greatly in Europe and later in the US, and you can’t have an accurate discussion of recent history without Jews, and VDARE omits Jews from the discussion. Maybe it’s because Peter Brimelow is British. They appear to often be fond of Jews.

      It’s unfortunate that a few wealthy Americans (Bill Gates, Donald Trump, and the Koch brothers) are not motivated to fund and start a new university that would feature writers from this website as its professors. I think such a university could become a top university.

      • Terry Bull
        Terry Bull says:

        The people of Britain are not overly fond of Jews, as books by Anthony Julius, Dan Cohn-Sherbok, Harry Defries, and many others have complained; see also notably, Robert Wistrich. “Antisemitism embedded in British culture,” JCPA, June 11, 2008, online. However, there is a fairly amiable mutual relationship today with many “ordinary Jews” and an affection for some like the late film-director/gourmet anti-PC Michael Winner & his hilarious “Hymie Joke Book”.
        The history of Jews in the UK and the US has been different, and so have the Jews. What is noticeable however, since Thatcher and especially Blair, has been the incremental power of the Zionist lobby linking our two hitherto Anglo-Saxon and Christian countries with Israel, with increasing impacts on military links and Holocaust Propaganda. Critics as varied as Peter Oborne, David Miller, Stephen Sizer and Tony Greenstein have met with Establishment hostility.

    • Terry Bull
      Terry Bull says:

      @ Pierre de Craon, worshipper of (((Jesus))) and the (((Mother of God))).
      People can change their mind, without being accused of losing their wits and other personal failings you prefer to dish out. Brimelow has done more for white survival than your lordly insults.
      The government of Israel is no more or less “totalitarian” than the government of Russia.
      Netanyahu, like some of his predecessors, is a corrupt thug, and it would be nice to know what really happened at his successive meetings with his Muscovite counterpart, who welcomed his return to power in December 2022.

      • Pierre de Craon
        Pierre de Craon says:

        You appear to be saying, Ned, that you prefer plebeian insults to lordly ones. Is that about right?

        As for Peter Brimelow, he will, I’m sure, be delighted to know that you are now protecting him from criticism under at least one of your identities.

        • Terry Bull
          Terry Bull says:

          @ Pierre de Craon (pseud)
          No, not so, Monsieur Petit Malin.
          I don’t suppose Brimelow would care what you think, even if he came across your diatribes, and certainly wouldn’t be as disturbed as you should be from the (((man))) who said you should love your enemies, turn the other cheek, and risk eternal punishment for insults like yours (((Matthew 25.22b))).

  10. Amarillo
    Amarillo says:

    Trump’s family has married Jews, and he is very pro-Israel. Everyone knows that.

    Sadly, Trump has also turned pro-LGBTQ.

    He held a big pro-LGBTQ party at Mar-a-lago last December. It’s all over the Web, but Trump supporters have largely repressed the news.

    From that article:

    Former President Donald Trump addressed an audience gathered at his Mar-a-Lago club and estate in Palm Beach, Florida, on Dec. 15 for the Log Cabin Republicans’ Spirit of Lincoln gala, the conservative LGBT group’s flagship event.

    “We are fighting for the gay community, and we are fighting and fighting hard,” Trump said.

    “Last night, we had over 450 LGBT conservatives and our straight allies join us for another amazing Spirit of Lincoln gala,” Log Cabin Republicans President Charles Moran told the Washington Blade.

  11. K M Landis
    K M Landis says:

    As this article explains, the worldwide correlation of forces has shifted decisively against the USA and its jewish-pervert regime. Only US client-states support it. Wherever Jews have gained control, decadence and decline have followed, from Ancient Egypt to modern Ukraine. I wish Russia complete success in liberating all of Ukraine from Jewish control.

  12. Cathy Santori
    Cathy Santori says:

    The Jews are a stupid stubborn people. They are destroying whites all over the west, while whites have been the Jew’s golem to fight Muslims in the ME.
    And now, because the stupid Jews hate Russia, they have caused the Russians to team with China, and the BRIC nations are trying to work around the dollar.
    So….the stupid Jews are not only destroying white people, but they are destroying the dollar, the currency of white American people.
    All I can say is, wait until white people figure this out.
    I would not want to be a Jew when this moment transpires.

    • Lady Strange
      Lady Strange says:

      They are the epitome of the unintelligent parasite, they are actively destroying the most gratifying host they have ever found in their entire history. This confirms my own opinion about them: that they behave irrationally, guided by their hateful envy and dreadful fear of whites.

    • Carolyn Yeager
      Carolyn Yeager says:

      If white people haven’t figured this out by now, they’re never going to.
      White people can see what Jews did to Germany and figure it out from there, but White people prefer hating Germans to hating Jews.
      Who is irrational?

      • J.M
        J.M says:

        @Carolyn Yeager

        “If white people haven’t figured this out by now, they’re never going to.
        White people can see what Jews did to Germany and figure it out from there, but White people prefer hating Germans to hating Jews.
        Who is irrational?”

        I agree. I think that the masses are motivated by the material conditions of their existence, not ideological/ethnic questions, no matter how fundamentally the former is determined by the latter. Only in relatively small communities might there be an exception to this.

        I don’t think that (even) the German people when they elected the NSDAP were motivated by any profound feelings toward or knowledge of the behaviour the Jews. I’d say that that only came later when the German government had control of the mass dissemination of propaganda. Even then it wasn’t ‘overdone’, in the sense that e.g. only a tiny proportion of the German mass media’s output was about the Jews, except when under extreme provocation (like assassinations and boycotts). Correct me if I’m wrong, but only THREE of the over 100 feature films featured the Jews. Most of the newspaper, wireless and newsreel output was about contemporary issues as they related to the position of Germany. Just like any other nation. albeit in Germany’s case, under siege.

        I think this view (when appropriately qualified) is accurate (from

        ‘By the 1930s, the party’s main focus shifted to antisemitic and anti-Marxist themes.[13] The party had little popular support until the Great Depression, where worsening living standards and vast unemployment drove Germans into political extremism.[10]’

        Paraphrasing this: the party projected opposition to the ravages of Finance Capital, the grave injustices of the Versailles Treaty (also attacked in its fundamentals by the COMINTERN), the excessive immigration from the East, the reunification of racial Germans in one state, opposition to the strife caused by strikes by Communist and Social Democratic organisations in their bid for total power…and so on ALL regarded by Jewish organisations as simply ‘Antisemitic’.

        In their extensively used “25-point program”, there is no over-emphasis on the Jews, but on practical solutions to real political-economic problems. After all, they were appealing to a whole people, not a small number of ideologues.

        For other readers, here is the ’25 point program’:

        BTW, I believe that the liberation of a people is the business of the people themselves and that most Western patriots would be brought to tears if the German people rose up against the criminal puppets who rule over them on behalf of the New World Order of Global Finance Capital.

        • Carolyn Yeager
          Carolyn Yeager says:

          Thanks, JM. I fully agree with you. The over-emphasis on the antisemitism in the Third Reich was created by it’s enemies at the time, which certainly included the Jews but was more truly said to be the MARXISTS. The US and it’s Jewish president, FDR, were very friendly with the Marxists all over Europe, and in Communist Russia – the Soviet Union.
          Since Britain under Churchill wanted war with Germany for economic reasons, Churchill kow-towed with the U.S. in it’s foreign policy in exchange for it’s joining Churchill’s war. France the same.
          The propaganda about NS Jew-hate was ramped up to extreme levels. Please read this amazing article about how Britain’s propaganda was created out of nothing: Even the Church of England was involved! So much for the *Christian influence* which some here bring up, but that has always been more pro-Establishment than pro-Jesus. I mean, the churches have even changed and misapplied Jesus’ words in order to support their political requirements & loyalties.
          No one is clean.
          The German National Socialists were the cleanest of all, both then and now. And you’re right that the people don’t much care, since those who do usually suffer the most for it.

          • JM
            JM says:

            @Carolyn Yeager

            “The propaganda about NS Jew-hate was ramped up to extreme levels. Please read this amazing article about how Britain’s propaganda was created out of nothing:”

            I think this raises at least two important issues:

            1) the motive/s for this ‘ramping up’ of ‘Jew-hatre’ residing in a) the warlike interests of those who owned the British and nascent American Empires; b) Zionists setting the stage for their own nationalist ambitions.

            2) probably most importantly: the interests of international Finance Capital – using “Jewish suffering” as a cover and buffer for its own warlike interests in the light of the NS economic policy by-passing it.

            This latter was extremely dangerous in the Depression because all governments were being asked to keep up the repayments to the bankers and drive their working and middle classes into impoverishment rather than seeking what many wished, a moratorium on debt repayment till better times allowed its resumption.

            This was precisely what was happening in Australia at that time with deep splits occurring in the Labor Party over it and one state government being thrown out of office by the King’s representative for pursuing policies related to it. This foreshadowed the Post War election of 1949 which was fought by that party on a policy of nationalisation of all the banks.

            Thanks for the reference. I’ll certainly read it.

        • B. Rockford
          B. Rockford says:

          @ JM
          Hitler said that the masses are interested only in “bread and circuses”, and Himmler complained that every German knew a “good” Jew. Kershaw’s analysis of public opinion and dissent is better than his two-part biography of “that man” despite their apt titles, “Hubris” & “Nemesis”.
          Otherwise a gifted statesman and amiable personality, Hitler had the quasi-religious belief that the Jews were a collection of biological parasites and criminals; in peace they had to be imprisoned e.g. in Madagascar or Siberia, in wartime, rooted out and worked to death (as explained to Horthy).
          Some crazy contributors to TOO seem to have a similar view.

          • J.M
            J.M says:

            @B. Rockford

            ” Hitler had the quasi-religious belief that the Jews were a collection of biological parasites and criminals; in peace they had to be imprisoned e.g. in Madagascar or Siberia, in wartime, rooted out and worked to death (as explained to Horthy).”

            It’s the systematic practice that counts, not the angry casual remark, perhaps over dinner (the source for the remark made to Horthy?).

            On the former, the documentation of the strong collaboration between the Jewish leaders and the NS’s over the re-settlement of Jews is extensive (Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement: The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine; Lenni Brenner 51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration with the Nazis; Bryan Mark Rigg, Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers and so on).

            Add to this the political character of Zionist Jews at that time, particularly in Poland where Polish Jewish “Fascist” party in the 1930’s that modelled itself on the German National Socialists, not the (“milder”) Italian Fascists and we can easily imagine the depth of the collaboration. Nearly all Jews voted for it even though the Communist Party was led by Jews. There are class as well as ethnic explanations for this. It’s very rooted in the social position of the Jewish people.

            On the above, see the book Chapter: William Zukerman (1934) The Menace of Jewish Fascism here:


            Not just this

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            So, three out-of-context words from Hitler (made when?) and a couple from Himmler — that’s the extent of your attempt to persuade us that British writer Ian Kershaw is right in concluding Hitler “had the QUASI-RELIGIOUS belief that the Jews were a collection of biological parasites and criminals” who needed to be imprisoned … OR “rooted out and worked to death (as explained to Horthy).” Gosh, I didn’t read what Hitler said to Horthy that way!

            How about you present your ideas on this subject in more detail, and explain how they make Hitler a “crazy” person. I mean to say that the kind of comment you’ve made is just a cheap shot. You should try to do better.

  13. Peter
    Peter says:

    Excellent article.

    I have been watching the financial advisor and economist Peter Schiff’s podcast’s for years. I think he is very knowledgeable and what he says goes well with what I think. He says the financial calamity (my word) has begun.
    The dollar, which rose against all the currencies of the world since the last financial crisis ended, will have a severe fall against the other currencies of the world, and since the US now imports so many things, inflation will go way up. He also says a large percentage of Americans have little or no savings and their lives will be very hard. He says these hard times will last for years. The US dollar could lose its position as the reserve currency which will make things even harder. This appears to have begun, with Russia, China and others using their own currencies for trade and dropping the dollar.

  14. Junghans
    Junghans says:

    An incisive article. Now that the tide is turning against Israel and its occupied Western power base, the really big question is: where, when & how are they going to lash out in desperation?
    Like cornered predators, full of hubris and conceit, they are likely to make another rash move.

  15. Bobby
    Bobby says:

    Thanks Kevin for the fine writing and very informative article.

    There was a video going around on Gab sometime ago that showed a black, middle-aged man carrying on about the Jews and what they do to the black community. At the end of his speech he proclaims; “it’s really all of the races against the Jews”. I would say that is pretty much it.

    I know that a multipolar world would hurt the U.S., and its citizens financially, but at least there would be some chance of righting the ship, not much, but some. I’d rather have that than a unipolar world. Because if it’s a unipolar world, we certainly know who will be in charge and that would not be in any way beneficial to us white folks.

  16. Gerry
    Gerry says:

    It’s amazing how at the end of the second world war and especially the creation of the A Bomb some of the most highly educated academics and political leaders were scrambling for a One World Government as the only solution to preventing the end of the human race. To that end they created the United Nations and so many other NGO’s all hopeful for a new world of peace and love between nations. But it all rested on guess what? A political leader with the ability of a god almost to unite mankind. Here are some of the quotes by a hero of mine Dr. Willard Cantelon:

    “The only escape from total destruction of civilization will be a world government, or we will perish in a war of the atom.”1
    —Harold Urey

    “In the field of atomic energy, there must be set up a world power.”2
    —Robert J. Oppenheimer

    “World government has become inevitable.”3
    —Arthur Compton Cantelon

    “One World Government is in the making. whether we like it or not, we are moving toward a one-world government.”4
    —Dr. Ralph Barton Perry of Harvard

    “Either we will find a way to establish world government, or we will perish in a war of the atom.”5
    —Raymond Swing to Albert Einstein

    “The secret of the bomb should be committed to a world government, and the USA should immediately announce its readiness to give it to a world government.”6
    —Albert Einstein

    “Sovereignty must go, that means also the interests which sovereignty protects must be recognized as outmoded in character and dangerous in operation.”7
    —Professor Laski of Oxford

    “We shall have a world government whether or not we like it. The only question is, whether world government will be achieved by conquest or consent.”8
    —James Warburg, February 17, 1950 before the U.S. Senate

    “It is necessary to discover a head capable of directing it, endowed with an intelligence surpassing the most elevated human level.”9
    —H.G. Wells

    “Let that man be a military man or a layman, it matters not.”10
    —Paul Henry Spaak, first president of the Council of Europe, planner of the European Common Market, president of the United Nations General Assembly, and one-time Secretary-General of NATO

    “Strong, one-man civilian control of America’s giant military establishment is vital to the nation’s wellbeing. The concentration of authority is inevitable.”11
    —Roswell Gilpatrick, Deputy Secretary of Defence

    lol, if there is one thing about politics that drives me around the bend it is this idea that we need to vote for a leader to make decisions for tens of millions of people. lol it reminds me of Moses and Jethro. For one man to take it upon himself to lead tens of thousands or even millions in the eyes of Jethro was quite stupid. So “it was Jethro who encouraged Moses to appoint others to share in the burden of ministry to the nation Israel by allowing others to help in the judgment of smaller matters coming before him.”

    I don’t get it why the human race looks to finding one man to be supreme head of us all. Thats quite a burden and really quite insulting for the rest of us because what our own fathers and mothers are to stupid or ignorant to judge? In the multitude of counselors there is safety the scriptures teach Proverbs 11:14 but we are to content ourselves with a Trudeau or a Trump or Biden lol? We do this even in religion by appointing one man, a Pope, to rule?

    Wow, these men of yesterday if they could see this desire to once again go down the road where kingdom will rise against kingdom and nation against nation how horrified they would be to see the failure of it all. The UN a failure, international banking a failure, etc etc? It’s not going to end well that is for sure. Some last words from Dr. Cantelon accordingly:

    “I sat in Brussels in March, 1972, with my friend, Dave Oliver, who had devoted 28 yeras of his life to tirelessly working with the Atomin Energy Commision. In recalling the first atomic bomb dropped on hiroshima on August , 194, we were impressed that it was the voice signal of the U. S. President, Harry Truman, that released that bomb from the B29 that flew over Hiroshima on the memorable day. with knowledge of that amazing incident, we turned in the prophetic Scriptures to the prophecies of St. John in the book of Revelation. Here the prophet not only spoke of a one world government , cancelling the old monetary currencies of the past abnd establishing a new number system , the prophet also spoke of a world leader, having the aauthority over the military power of the world, and declared

    “Power was given to him ovver all kindreds, and tongues, and antions [and he adds], he mnaketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men. rev 13:7 13}

    If a man became head of a world government and possessed such power, surely it would be greater than what any man in history had ever possessed before him.

    What would happen if such power was invested in a man who should a maniac like Adolph Hitler? Was there such a danger? Of course there was,m and most soberminded leaders of government realized it. But man seemed to be caugh5t between two undesirable alternatives. the old paths behind him pointed back to Hiroshima, Nagaski, and 50 million dead from WW2. The other path offerred forfeiture of rights by individuals and nations being pushed daily neaere to a form of world government.
    Greenville Clarke said,
    Perhaps it may take a few nuclear bombs and several million deaths.
    and Joseph Clarke added,

    The people will follow when the leaders tell them there is no alternative.
    close quote

    Ah, the Russians their alternative was to turn back to what? A rebirth of their Orthodox Faith and Church. That I’m afraid is what the Oligarchs fear most of all. There are no Christian Zionists among them!!!!!!!!!!!

    • B. Rockford
      B. Rockford says:

      @ Gerry
      Wells should not be included in this list. He had no wish to put the Jews in charge. His idea of a mobile (Anglo-European) airforce that could prevent conflicts was not evil, just impractical.

  17. Aiden Lake
    Aiden Lake says:

    A nation needs agreed laws and considerable cultural homogeneity to survive.
    Hitler said that Jews could not create a national state of their own because of their differences.
    Jews have often said that disagreement is their weakness and admitted that only an external and existential threat unites them; today they unite around the Their “Holocaust” rather Their “God”, as someone put it, “ha-Shoah not ha-Shem”.
    Add the fatal element of ethnic as well as ideological diversity: Ashkenazim, Sephardim, Mizrahim. And: “The root of the judicial reform crisis is the ‘four tribes of Israel,” Professor Sir Vernon Bogdanor, Jewish Chronicle, March 31, who includes the Arabs,

  18. A. T. G. Robinson
    A. T. G. Robinson says:

    As usual, KMac is better informed and a lot wiser than some of the Jew-mad ravers he allows on his blogsite.
    The world is indeed politically multipolar, not unipolar aka “Jewnipolar”. The general sea-change in predominant Jewish views from Communism to Zionism, from Judaism to Atheism, and from endogamy to intermarriage, has recently seen a withdrawal of support for Wokism and its Left-Muslim alliance: Colin Shindler, Zoe Strimpel, David Bernstein, David Abulafia.
    Of course, the nationalism of other peoples is still seen as dangerous racism, whereas opposition to Israeli nationalism is seen as dangerous antisemitism. Zionism was racism yesterday, and anti-Zionism is racism is today. “You gotta believe it!” (Groucho Marx).
    However, I prefer to have some Jews in opposition to Replacement, rather than to welcome Global South immigrants because they annoy other Jews. I also think it possible to stick up for Palestinians without compromising western interests.
    History like life itself is multipolar.

  19. B. Rockford
    B. Rockford says:

    There are different “antisemitisms”. In the case of Hitler, he rolled them together, though without the eccentricity of Rosenberg, the mythology of Himmler, or the scurrility of Streicher. The contribution of Goebbels is critically reported by David Irving’s biography. Hitler’s speeches, broadcasts, writings and conversations are on indelible record. Even language used in “Mein Kampf” of a decisive world war by the Aryan against the Jew was significant, but his prophecy of annihilating Jewry in Europe cannot simply be euphemised away by Butz and others. It is quite true that the Nazis co-operated with some Zionists in getting Jews out of Germany and into the rival British sphere of interest, but the war made a difference and in Hitler’s official interview with Horthy he admitted that Jews would either be shot or made to work until they succumbed. “Eye for an eye.” The movie “Der ewige Jude” does not need explicitly to spell out in detail the fate of the Jewish rats, whatever exceptions nay have been made for a few individuals [Lukacs] and Mischlinge in the armed forces [Rigg].
    Having said that, even the original orthodox account of the Final Solution shows that there was no “industrial planning” of mass-gassing, but allegedly an ad hoc local use of a pesticide as an alternative to mass-shooting. The writing up of this patchy genocide by exaggeration, embellishment and fiction has become a tool of Zionist propaganda to maintain internal unity by memorial and external support by sympathy. Even Yad Vashem has remarked that most collected oral histories are unreliable.
    More needs to be said on all this, elsewhere, but we surely can agree that both murder and falsehood are wrong, the former however usually far worse than the latter?

    • Carolyn Yeager
      Carolyn Yeager says:

      QUOTE: “There are different “antisemitisms”. In the case of Hitler, he rolled them together, though without the eccentricity of Rosenberg, the mythology of Himmler, or the scurrility of Streicher. The contribution of Goebbels is critically reported by David Irving’s biography. Hitler’s speeches, broadcasts, writings and conversations are on indelible record. Even language used in “Mein Kampf” of a decisive world war by the Aryan against the Jew was significant, but his prophecy of annihilating Jewry in Europe cannot simply be euphemised away by Butz and others.”

      You’re saying nothing here but meaningless generalizations, showily worded. And you are wrong. The only way to get to the truth is to stick to specifics that can be proved or not.

      “in Hitler’s official interview with Horthy he admitted that Jews would either be shot or made to work until they succumbed. “Eye for an eye.” The movie “Der ewige Jude” does not need explicitly to spell out in detail the fate of the Jewish rats, whatever exceptions may have been made for a few individuals [Lukacs] and Mischlinge in the armed forces [Rigg].”

      Nonsense. Hitler never ‘admitted’ such a thing. Pure speculation on your part. You avoid any specifics and even say they’re not necessary. I think Rockford must be a pen name.

      “we surely can agree that both murder and falsehood are wrong, the former however usually far worse than the latter?”

      Now you’re implying that the Germans murdered while the Jews have only lied about it.
      Instead of saying, as you do, that “More needs to be said on all this,” we can say enough has been said already (75 years on and a whole library of research/literature), and we only need to read a sufficient amount of it and consider it seriously. No generalizing. No speculating.

      • Brian Rockford
        Brian Rockford says:

        @Carolyn Yeager
        More than a few Jews were killed by Nazis and their allies.
        More than a few Holocaust stories are fictitious.
        Nothing surprising about such facts, which can be held simultaneously in a normal, well-informed brain.
        My full response to your comments has not appeared, but let me deal with one; ex uno disce omnes. Metapedia refers to the exchange between Hitler and Horthy in April 1943 when the latter asked about the fate of Jews deported to the camps, but quotes only the spin Arthur Butz puts on the answer. The interpreter’s later claim to have left the room was probably made to avoid the charge of criminal accessory.
        ” Poland should have been an object lesson to Horthy, Hitler argued…. Jews who refused to work there were shot; those who could not work just wasted away [verkommen]. Jews must be treated like tuberculosis bacilli, he said, using his favourite analogy. Was that so cruel when one considered that even innocent creatures [of nature] like hares and deer had to be put down to prevent their doing damage? Why preserve a bestial species whose ambition was to inflict Bolshevism on us all?” – David Irving, “Hitler’s War” (1977) p.509.

        • Carolyn Yeager
          Carolyn Yeager says:

          “My full response to your comments has not appeared, but let me deal with one … Metapedia refers to …”

          “So here’s my partial answer to you: You are quoting David Irving, not Hitler. DI is not infallible, anymore that is Ian Kershaw or Arthur Butz. You may be aware that I am quite critical of Irving on certain grounds, not all. At any rate, your quote is selective and, as well as being second-and-third-hand, doesn’t include the whole purport and context of the discussion between Horthy and Hitler. You rely on innuendo.

          • Brian Rockford
            Brian Rockford says:

            My other documented response to you and Barbara, on e.g. the comparison between Hitler and the three Allied war criminals, was not printed.
            The chronological context of Polish opposition presented by Irving is misleading, but the relevant quotation from Hitler is neither innuendo nor paraphrase, but an accurate transcription of Schmidt’s minutes produced at Nuremberg. I think your hero-worship of Hitler stops you from an objective assessment of his faults.

          • Pierre de Craon
            Pierre de Craon says:

            The attack is coming under many names but from a single person, Carolyn. Note the stylistic similarities that reveal a single presence behind Rockford, Bull, and Lake. And the core similarity is pretence.

          • Brian Rockford
            Brian Rockford says:

            With moderator patience, please feel free to quote the original passage in full from the Hitler-Horthy-Ribbentrop meeting on-the-spot minutes, and add your own interpretation.
            For the record, I regard Hitler, Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt as ruthless and ultimately responsible for the deaths of innocent people, whatever the relative statistics, as occurs in war. Stalin outdid them all, in peacetime as well. You can make what you will of comparisons
            between the 1939-41 Russo-German Pact leaders by Timothy Snyder
            Richard Overy and Ernst Nolte, among others, but your mind is set in “a granite foundation” (to quote a famous statesman),

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            Reply to Brian Rockford: April 7 at 2:20 pm and April 8 at 6:22 am :
            “I think your hero-worship of Hitler stops you from an objective assessment of his faults.”
            “…but your mind is set in “a granite foundation” (to quote a famous statesman),”

            This is not an argument. This is what is used when you don’t have an argument, when what you’re presenting is unable to carry your position over the finish line, so you inject the personal attack of “Hitler-worship.” I’ve heard it from many others for the same reason you’re using it. But it’s not true. I have yet to hear from you a single factual reference that A. Hitler ever said, in words or writing, to anyone, that his solution to Germany’s Jewish Problem was to exterminate, kill, murder or put to death as many Jews as possible, by whatever means possible. Nor have you provided any “documented” evidence that such a thing happened under Hitler’s rule. Stray comments from various people that COULD p o s s i b l y imply such a thing is what you offer. And those are mostly partial statements meant to deceive.

            So you resort to the tired old fallback that all the WWII leaders were “ruthless and ultimately responsible for the deaths of innocent people, whatever the relative statistics” … but somehow only Hitler is guilty of full-fledged genocide of an entire race of people because of irrational antisemitism. Only Hitler is the most evil person who ever lived.

            BTW, “an *objective* assessment of (Hitler’s) faults” is in the eyes of the beholder. You demand it must find Hitler guilty, but that is not necessarily so in the bigger picture. He was reacting to the Versailles Treaty, which the other nations should have been sensitive to, but were not. He was not thought to be guilty by his own people, except for the Marxist-sympathizers and Christian-Zionists of his day.

            I don’t see you reacting to comments/posts about Stalin, Churchill or FDR the way you do and did quickly to JM, correcting his positive words about Hitler and the NSDAP. Basically, I’d say you don’t want to disturb the status quo, and are a defender of it while trying to appear neutral.

            “My other documented response to you and Barbara, on e.g. the comparison between Hitler and the three Allied war criminals, was not printed.”

            Why not? because it was a long, downloaded tract or article? Can’t use your own words?

            ” the relevant quotation from Hitler is neither innuendo nor paraphrase”

            But it wasn’t complete either. Give the complete transcript for both days (16th and 17th) or don’t mention it at all.

        • Carolyn Yeager
          Carolyn Yeager says:

          What Metapedia writes about the Hitler-Horthy meeting on 16th April, 1943:

          Quote from: “Meeting with Miklós Horthy”
          “On 16 April 1943, also at a meeting with Horthy, Hitler is STATED TO HAVE STATED THAT JEWS SHOULD BE PLACED IN CONCENTRATION CAMPS but “If there was talk of murdering the Jews, then he (the Führer) must point out that only one person murdered, namely the Jew who started wars and who by his influence gave the wars their anti-civilian, anti-women and anti-children character.”[22]

          Hitler was NOT saying to “murder the Jews” but only “pointing out” that to “any who talk of murdering Jews” it should be said that it is not Germans who murder but Jews who murder by starting wars that kill Germans & Europeans, and especially target the destruction of civilians, women and children.

          Is that clear enough?

        • Carolyn Yeager
          Carolyn Yeager says:

          Here’s something else you missed from the Metapedia page:

          David Irving has stated that “On June 9, 1977, I planted Hitler’s personal adjutant Richard Schulze-Kossens (you can see him in the background at the Kremlin signing of the Ribbentrop-Stalin pact in August 1939) in the London audience of the live David Frost Programme, and invited this former S.S. colonel, when I was challenged on this point, to stand and tell the multi-million television audience just that: that from 1942-1944 he had been charged by Hitler to attend every single conference, even the most secret ones alone with Heinrich Himmler, and that not once had any extermination of the Jews been discussed or even mentioned in these conclaves.”[29]

          Irving also stated that “Every one of Hitler’s private staff was closely interrogated on precisely this issue by Americans and British after the war, and all of them stated independently of each other that at Hitler’s headquarters, in his secret circle, there was never even the slightest hint or mention of anything untoward happening to the Jews in the east or in the concentration camps. I have the interrogation reports.”[29]

          • Brian Rockford
            Brian Rockford says:

            As a lifelong admirer of Germans, and especially their science, music and military skill, I am not ungrateful for this reference, but “nothing untoward” is stretching it a bit. I have no desire to think ill of them or even to deny several positive aspects of Hitler’s personality and civil achievement, at any rate until 1938.
            Readers of German who wish to consult the Horthy passage in dispute will find it in Andreas Hillgruber’s “Staatsmaenner und Diplomaten bei Hitler”.

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            “As a lifelong admirer of Germans, and especially their science, music and military skill […] at any rate until 1938.”

            Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, I’ve heard this so many times. It does not impress me.

            “… never even the slightest hint or mention of anything untoward happening to the Jews” is stretching it a bit.”

            I’m sure by “untoward” he meant “deliberate harm.”

            “Readers of German who wish to consult the Horthy passage in dispute will find it in Andreas Hillgruber’s “Staatsmaenner und Diplomaten bei Hitler”.”

            It’s not available. I suggest you copy and paste it here, in German, and those of us who wish to can translate it. Otherwise, this is a useless gesture.

            We seem only to be left with David Irving’s account in “Hitler’s War”, NOT IDEAL. This is the key portion:
            (April 16, 1943) “Horthy apologetically noted that he had done all he decently could against the Jews: “But they can hardly be murdered or otherwise eliminated,” he protested. Hitler reassured him: “THERE IS NO NEED FOR THAT.” But just as in Slovakia, they ought to be isolated in remote camps where they could no longer infect the healthy body of the public; or they could be put to work in the mines, for example. He himself did not mind being temporarily excoriated for his Jewish policies, if they brought him tranquility. Horthy left unconvinced.

            This goes against what you have previously tried to present from David Irving.

  20. Brian Rockford
    Brian Rockford says:

    Further “debate” with Carolyn Yaeger is a waste of effort, because she is insulting and intransigent.
    I depart with an Abschied, from Martin Bormann’s June 1941 Order to Gauleiters : “National Socialist and Christian conceptions are incompatible” (IMT, XXV, 075-D). More open minds can find documentary support in e.g. Klaus Scholder, “Requiem for Hitler” (2012) & Richard Weikart, “Hitler’s Ethic” (2009)

    • Pierre de Craon
      Pierre de Craon says:

      … she is insulting and intransigent.

      In other words, she kicked your butt up and down the block. Poor Ned!

Comments are closed.