The Economic and Social Costs of Direct and Indirect Kleptoparasitism by Blacks and Jews

Nature might abhor a vacuum, but it apparently loves an analogy—at least of the genetic and behavioral kind. That is, no matter how much humans may wish to be above and separate from the workings of the rest of the animal kingdom, they are constantly acting in ways analogous to those creatures they so look down upon. And as academia adores an intellectual vacuum—at least with respect to areas of study that run contrary to its ideology du jour—it is unfortunately up to those such as us on the Dissident Right to fill that empty space with useful work showing the true state of reality.

In that spirit I wish today to point out that the nature of White flight is essentially a case of kleptoparasitism of Whites by Blacks and Jews, with the former engaging in it directly and the latter doing so indirectly through the former. In this way, the relationship between Blacks and Jews in the housing market is what you might call symbioparasitism: that is, a case of different parasites engaged in symbiotic behavior with regard to each other that allows both to parasitize their mutual White host more effectively (and in fact it might be argued that Blacks could not parasitize Whites at all without the Jews, though the opposite is not the case). To be clear, this is not always the case, and there are numerous instances of Jews engaging in parasitic or even predatory behavior toward Blacks (think of the crooked ghetto merchants and payday lenders for an example of the former, and the Jews who engaged in the transatlantic slave trade and slave auctions for the latter); however for today my focus is the effects of White flight on the housing market and how these bring about win-wins for both Blacks and Jews and just plain loss for Whites, at least in the short term.

I say short term because, as we shall see, the White flight induced by the parasites has had the effect, in parallel with the effects that internal parasites from the natural world have on their hosts, of making the economic and social fabric far weaker than it otherwise would be. And as I’ll show in part two of this essay, this is also and even more glaringly the case with regard to the ’08 financial crash, the buildup to it, and its immediate aftermath—an instance of parasitism (both klepto- and otherwise) on a grand scale if ever there were one.

So let’s start with some quick background: what kleptoparasitism is and how White flight is prompted by Blacks and (indirectly) Jews. Kleptoparasitism occurs when an animal rather than outright killing and eating another (predation) or feeding off of it slowly over time (parasitism — think a leech or tick) merely steals all or part of the host’s food and/or shelter. Many otherwise predatory animals, including many apex predators, engage in this behavior: the bald eagle is known to snag prey, especially fish, from other, smaller birds, while lions are equally adept at muscling smaller predators, e.g., cheetahs and (unless they can mob the lions to stop them) hyenas, out of their rightful kills. In the case of cheetahs, even vultures can sometimes klepto a meal from them.

Why? How could a few birds, each smaller than the cat, scare it out of a meal?

Because while the cheetah’s speed is unmatched, it is engineered for it at the cost of strength and any other competitive advantage, so if it sustains even a minor injury it can kiss that speed goodbye and will likely starve to death. In all cases of kleptoparasitism, the victim feels that the costs of fighting the kleptoparasite outweigh the benefits—as with animals, as with humans, and in both cases, the klepto gets to enjoy a greater meal or home than would ordinarily be available to him, period, or one which might be available but only with much greater effort.

Now apply this to Blacks. If you look at an all-Black neighborhood such as virtually all of those making up Detroit proper, you get such an uncannily clear picture of what a postapocalyptic world would look like that you literally have movies of that genre being filmed there. Given that most denizens of such neighborhoods are likely approaching pure sub-Saharan ancestry—and having gone to college in Detroit and driven through such neighborhoods daily (and surprisingly, survived!), I can attest to this from personal experience—it would be surprising if they did not share, generally speaking, the IQ levels and habits of unmixed African natives: think South Africa (average IQ 69[1]) with its once-great infrastructure crumbling slowly to nothing from lack of maintenance. The current state of the fallen last White refuge, such as men living in shanties on the flat land that had housed railroads until the tracks were stolen and melted down for scrap are likely what Detroit would eventually deteriorate to without the non-Black–funded welfare state maintaining it on life support. Needless to say, just as a bear would have virtually no chance of chasing down a fleeing White-tailed deer on its own, most of these people would have no chance on their own of affording—or maintaining, assuming they had the thought to do so—a pleasant middle-class dwelling. But just as the ponderous bear would be able to snatch part of a deer carcass from the wolves that were able to chase it down, so these Blacks have stumbled upon a strategy (one which many of them are likely not consciously aware of) of snatching such homes from Whites able to build and maintain them.

To explain the basic mechanism of Blacks’ kleptoparasitism, just cross-reference Black stereotypes with the genetic similarity theory of J. Philippe Rushton, et al.: basically a few Blacks (very often of mixed race, such as Obama) are able to afford a house in a nice neighborhood; though these first ones are usually not outright criminals, they usually either have or have a much higher tolerance for the Black mannerisms and behaviors that Whites find intolerable (think poor property maintenance, screaming-across-the-street rather than face-to-face conversations, conduct generally cruder and more confrontational than Whites’, etc.), and so while not necessarily acting this way themselves, usually they have friends or relatives over who act this way; this then drives the Whites immediately adjacent out and makes more and more houses in the neighborhood available to be sold to Blacks at reduced prices in a cascading effect that ends only when the neighborhood is either all Black or retains only the few non-Black residents too old and/or too poor to flee. Thus the dark-hued kleptos achieve their middle-class dream which almost invariably deteriorates into the nightmare of their former neighborhoods—which then causes the smarter and more competent Blacks to flee to Whiter locales, and thus the cycle begins all over again.

Why don’t Whites develop strategies to fight this—as hyenas learn to use overwhelming numbers to mob lions that try to steal from them? Well, that’s where Jews come in.

As I said above, the relationship between Blacks and Jews is somewhat complex overall, as there are times that Jews play the part of parasite or predator to Blacks, but there are other instances in which Jews acting as parasites of their host society form a symbiotic relationship with parasitizing Blacks, and the case of White flight is one of them. Basically, Jews enable Black kleptoparasitism and in the process benefit from it by disabling Whites’ means of fighting Black kleptos. The Jews’ ability to do this, in turn, relied and still relies heavily on 1) their influence within the court system and 2) their control of the media and its influence on culture. The first is what allowed them to overcome the primary legal mechanism stopping Black kleptoparasitism: housing covenants, the documents which would bind neighborhood residents together in agreement not to sell their homes to Blacks and sometimes other minorities as well. These would prevent Blacks from gaining a foothold into White neighborhoods and then using their general behavior to drive Whites out. Using their allies—some, such as the Black nationalist Marcus Garvey (who found their offices run almost entirely by Jews with a few Blacks in token positions) would call them puppets—in the NAACP, Jews brought legal action against housing covenants and in the late 1940s they succeeded, rendering them toothless. That Jews were the primary movers and shakers behind the movement which culminated in the famous Supreme Court case Shelley v. Kraemer which held that “although racially restrictive real estate covenants are not void, a court cannot enforce them because this would constitute state action under the Fourteenth Amendment”[2] can be seen even in Wikipedia’s completely politically correct take on the case:

The United States Solicitor General, Philip Perlman, who argued in this case that the restrictive covenants were unconstitutional, had previously in 1925 as the city solicitor of Baltimore acted to support the city government’s segregation efforts. The U.S. Office of the Solicitor General filed, for the first time in a civil rights case, an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief in support of the Shelleys. The Solicitor General’s brief filed on behalf of the United States government was written by four Jewish lawyers: Philip Elman, Oscar H. Davis, Hilbert P. Zarky, and Stanley M. Silverberg. However, the Solicitor General’s office chose to omit their names from the brief. Deputy Solicitor General Arnold Raum, who was also Jewish, stated that it was “bad enough that [Solicitor General Philip] Perlman’s name has to be there, to have one Jew’s name on it, but you have also put four more Jewish names on. That makes it look as if a bunch of Jewish lawyers in the Department of Justice put this out.”[3]

That Perlman was such a flip-flopping turncoat on the issue is hardly surprising, given Jews’ general tendency to play outsized roles on both sides of whatever racial or social conflicts they ferment or take part in, while benefitting themselves in all cases; in the case of White flight, this often did and still does involve Jewish use of Blacks as foot soldiers in their battles to acquire desirable real estate at artificially low prices. As Tobias Langdon pointed out in his essay “Bow Before Blackness: Non-Stop Black in Brave New Britain”:

After mass migration from the Caribbean began, a predatory Jewish landlord Peter Rachman (1919–62) made big profits in London by renting bad housing at high prices to Blacks who were unpopular as tenants because of their criminality, noise, and anti-social behavior. Indeed, Rachman used violent and noisy Blacks to drive White tenants out of houses he wanted to buy or convert into flats. Decades after Rachman’s heyday, another money-hungry Jew, Alex Langsam, is making more big profits from more non-White invaders. Langsam, who has been nicknamed the “Asylum King,” owns the sardonically named Britannia Hotels, which was “the worst hotel chain for ten years running, according to a survey conducted by consumer group Which” and which rakes in millions from government contracts for housing so-called “asylum seekers” from the corrupt, diseased, and violent Third World.[4]

Enoch Powell’s famous “Rivers of Blood” speech had made a similar observation fifty-five years earlier:

Eight years ago in a respectable street in Wolverhampton a house was sold to a Negro. Now only one White (a woman old-age pensioner) lives there. This is her story. She lost her husband and both her sons in the war. So she turned her seven-roomed house, her only asset, into a boarding house. She worked hard and did well, paid off her mortgage and began to put something by for her old age. Then the immigrants moved in. With growing fear, she saw one house after another taken over. The quiet street became a place of noise and confusion. Regretfully, her White tenants moved out. . . . Immigrant families have tried to rent rooms in her house, but she always refused. Her little store of money went, and after paying rates, she has less than £2 per week. . . . Immigrants have offered to buy her house — at a price which the prospective landlord would be able to recover from his tenants in weeks, or at most a few months. She is becoming afraid to go out. Windows are broken. She finds excreta pushed through her letter box. When she goes to the shops, she is followed by children, charming, wide-grinning piccaninnies. They cannot speak English, but one word they know. “Racialist,” they chant. When the new Race Relations Bill is passed, this woman is convinced she will go to prison. And is she so wrong? I begin to wonder.[5]

And as many of the writers on TOO have pointed out, Jews were virtually the entire driving force behind the push for hate crime legislation in the U.K. (to say nothing of elsewhere), eventually achieving their desire in the 1986 Public Order Act.

The cycle can even be artificially begun by what’s called blockbusting; more on which, below.

Having grown their Black golem to monstrous proportions and dismantled most of the strongest White-created barriers in its path, elite Jews then moved to unleash it and profit in every possible way from its path of destruction (rather like their Ukraine meddling, during which they funded Zelensky’s campaign plus the neo-Nazi Azov battalion then provoked Russia to war, all while making a mint via weapons sales by the U.S. military industrial complex, and now are preparing, via BlackRock and their other hedge funds, to profit from “rebuilding” it).

First of all, there was the case of William Levitt, the Jewish man often called “the father of suburbia” who became obscenely wealthy pushing mass production of housing in the suburbs to which Whites fled from the Blackening cities. Much is made of his alleged racism, with conventional historians’ main proof of it being his policy of building White-only neighborhoods, but this in all likelihood was done not from any hatred of Blacks or love of Whites but from purely strategic considerations: just as the Mongols knew that an enemy losing was far, far deadlier if it were trapped and forced to fight to the death, and so intentionally opened a phony path of escape (only to cut them down as they fled), so those in the banking sector (in which Jews were and are massively overrepresented) who would be financing Levitt’s building ventures and the loans of fleeing Whites must have known that if Whites knew that their new neighborhoods would be instantly open to those they fled from, they would stand and fight with everything they had; and given that Whites were still the overwhelming majority in the US at the time, in all likelihood they would have prevailed and put an end to the Jewish-Black klepto-alliance, if not pushed back even further against the Jews’ growing power. That they could put up a fight if they felt trapped was shown in 1966 in what became known as the “Chicago White People’s Uprising” in which homeowners forcibly stopped MLK, Jesse Jackson. and others from using their “open housing” protests to forcibly integrate their neighborhoods. While it had no measurable effect in the long run, it did show what Whites would do if provoked enough and felt themselves to have no easy exit (the “uprising” was mostly centered in poorer White neighborhoods which could not easily flee to suburbia). That occurred even before the housing battles that occurred later in 1966; Jews had never attempted to effectively end the suburban whitopias being built by Levitt et al. as they had with housing segregation and covenants. This is strong proof that they were interested in profit and power rather than “racial justice.”

And often they would not even wait for the process to occur naturally but speed it up in a process called blockbusting, described below by one of those ubiquitous Black online groups:

After intentionally placing an African American homeowner onto a block, speculators solicited White owners with tales of impending depreciation. Fearful residents often sold their homes to these speculators well below market value. As White residents began to flee in great numbers, other White residents sold their homes at even lower prices, thus further depressing housing prices in a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Middle class African Americans, who were otherwise denied access to previously all-White neighborhoods, were now offered admittance at artificially inflated prices set by the speculators.  A 1970 report released by a Baltimore group called “the Activists” concluded that the average markup in neighborhoods experiencing racial change ranged from 80% to 100% higher than in racially homogeneous areas and that these inflated prices comprised a “Black tax” imposed on African American would-be homebuyers.  Given the bleak housing options these buyers faced, many had no other choice and paid the inflated costs.

In keeping with the general intellectual caliber of such sites, much of the article’s argument is economically illiterate nonsense: Since refusing to sell homes to Blacks has been illegal for some time, if Blacks could truly afford to pay an 80% or higher markup on homes in White neighborhoods, they would have swarmed en masse without any real estate market crooks doing anything (or for that matter, they would have simply maintained the existing homes and therefore raised the general safety and home upkeep caliber in their own neighborhoods), therefore, the “racially homogeneous areas” the article uses as a base must be the run-down, crime-ridden Black neighborhoods in which a house that would be worth one-hundred grand in a decent location can be bought for twenty-thousand or less. Such stupidity aside however, the article does manage to convey the truth that there was a conscious push to drive Whites out of their former enclaves using Blacks as foot soldiers. Such discussions of blockbusting of course leave the real estate “speculators” as a shadowy, vague group, but given that these are the current top 8 US real estate investors (which, of course is no different than real estate speculators) . . .

1) Donald Bren (Jewish)

2) Stephen Ross (Jewish)

3) Sun Hongbin (Chinese)

4) Leonard Stern (Jewish)

5) Neil Bluhm (Jewish)

6) Igor Olenicoff (White, in a double sense, Russian)

7) Jeff Greene (Jewish)

8) Sam Zell (Jewish)

. . . and given the racial makeup of the renter class who took over when White homeowners fled (as Dr. Kevin MacDonald pointed out in “Jews Embarrassed by Jews: Slumlords—and Goldman Sachs,” Jews are horrifically overrepresented among big-city slumlords), it’s extremely unlikely that those mysterious speculators from the early days of White flight were all country club, WASP types. (And, of course, once the Blacks had the inner cities mostly to themselves the relationship switched from symbioparasitism to pure, one-sided parasitism as Jews took on the roles of slumlord, ghetto merchant, etc.)

Such was the near-total victory for the Jewish-Black kleptoparasite; but as I’ve said, it was a somewhat Pyrrhic one, as it greatly weakened the host nation at large—the wealth of which fed and continues to feed the parasites—and enervated its military might, which is all that’s standing between the State of Israel and a severe defeat by its Moslem neighbors.

Part of the weakening is socioeconomic: as Robert Putnam pointed out in his book Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, lack of social capital leads to both greater social tension and misery and economic inefficiency. And as a 2019 meta-analysis[6] found, “[There is] a statistically significant negative relationship between ethnic diversity and social trust across all [87] studies.” Hence, the society-wide loss of cohesion (which was, ironically, stronger during mandated separation) — combined with anti-discrimination laws and the workplace tensions and inefficiencies they inevitably lead to — weaken productivity and hence wealth generation across the board, to the detriment of all races.

Then there is the long-term genoeconomic weakening, which is even deadlier. We may sum this one up in a syllogism: A nation’s standard of living (leaving aside natural resources and wealth gained from borrowing or conquest) is dependent upon its capital per capita.

The amount of capital a nation can produce and use per capita is dependent on the percent of the population that’s of STEM-level IQ and has low enough time preference to generate good savings.

Whites have much lower average time preference and much higher average IQ than Blacks.

Therefore, the higher the ratio of Whites to Blacks in a nation (other things being equal), the higher its standard of living will be.

When you force Whites to spend all their money on fleeing from Blacks, you turn them from savers to borrowers; you also ensure that they’ll be able to afford to raise fewer children, meaning fewer STEM types in the future in both an absolute and relative sense—doubly so if you tax them in order to subsidize reproduction by the dumbest, most irresponsible Blacks.

Hence, why if you think the Jewish/Black kleptoparasitism racket is even a zero-sum game, you are unaware of what’s really going on.

(In part two of this series, I examine the events leading up to the ’08 market crash, the crash itself, and its aftermath from this angle. As we’ll see, the whole thing is best understood as a case of Jewish-Black-Mestizo kleptoparasitism on a grand scale.)

[1] 1. “IQ: Intelligence Quotient by Country,” Worlddata.info, accessed April 4, 2024, https://www.worlddata.info/iq-by-country.php.

[2] 1. “Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1 (1948),” Justia Law, accessed April 4, 2024, https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/334/1/.

[3] 1. “Shelley v. Kraemer,” Wikipedia, February 25, 2024, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelley_v._Kraemer.

[4] 1. Tobias Langdon, “Tobias Langdon,” The Occidental Observer, July 8, 2023, https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2023/07/08/bow-before-Blackness-non-stop-Black-in-brave-new-britain/.

[5] 1. Enoch Powell, “Wordpress,” Enoch Powell’s “Rivers of Blood” Speech, accessed April 4, 2024, https://anth1001.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/enoch-powell_speech.pdf.

[6] 1. Peter Thisted Dinesen, Merlin Schaeffer, and Kim Mannemar Sonderskov, (PDF) Ethnic Diversity and Social Trust: A Narrative and Meta-Analytical Review, accessed April 10, 2024, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335924797_Ethnic_Diversity_and_Social_Trust_A_Narrative_and_Meta-Analytical_Review.