Punims on Parade: Even Further Thoughts on Nasty Nathan Cofnas
Jews have good senses of humor. Particularly Jews from New York. That’s a famous stereotype about Jews. So far, the New York Jew Nathan Cofnas has shown little sign of living up to it. But he has indirectly provided me with one of the funniest moments of 2024. After seeing my article “The Power of Punim,” he tweeted that “The Occidental Observer (edited by Kevin MacDonald) published an entire article about my face.” The tweet itself is dishonest rather than funny, as is proved by the fact that Cofnas didn’t include a link to the article, only a censored screenshot.
Nathan Cofnas’ dishonest tweet
No, what was funny – very funny – was one of the responses to the tweet. A giant of genetic science felt Nathan’s pain and responded with virtuous solemnity: “This is grim antisemitism. Racism is awful in all its forms.” And who was that giant of genetics? None other than Dr Adam Rutherford. Yes, I was very amused to see the anti-woke Nathan Cofnas receive the support of the highly woke half-Indian Adam Rutherford (born 1975). And I was being sarcastic when I called Rutherford a giant of genetics. He isn’t, of course (see Steve Sailer’s “Occam’s Butterknife”). He’s a pygmy who thinks that “race as a scientific concept holds no water.” He fully supported the anti-scientific witch-hunt that drove a genuine giant of genetics, James Watson (born 1928), out of science and into poverty for stating the truth about low Black intelligence in 2007. According to Rutherford, Watson is “racist,” guilty of “hideous errors,” and “deserves to be shunned.” Pygmy Rutherford has also assailed another scientific giant, the Victorian polymath Francis Galton (1822-1911), for “racism.”
Cofnas’ conk at Cambridge
Like me, Galton was interested in the power of punim (punim is Yiddish for “face”). He once tried to create a “beauty map” of Britain by rating the looks of local women as he travelled around the country. He was insatiably curious and endlessly active in many fields, from mathematics to biology to meteorology to psychology. Unlike me, he had the brains to match his curiosity. I’m not a scientific giant like Galton or Watson. I’m not even a scientific pygmy like Rutherford. But it’s still very amusing to have Rutherford dismiss my article as “grim antisemitism” and “racism.” Not that Rutherford will have read “The Power of Punim” and seen the full context. Cofnas didn’t supply a link, after all. And he censored his screenshot of the article. I originally wrote this: “Is Cofnas’ selfie intended to proclaim ‘A Kike at Cambridge’? (Please note that I’m using the term ‘kike’ as an ironic Jew like Cofnas might use it, not to insult Cofnas.)” In the screenshot, my explanation in parenthesis is deleted after “the.” There seems little point in asking Nathan if he thinks this deletion was honest and fair. I asked him lots of questions in “The Power of Punim” and he hasn’t replied to any of them.
I also attempted to psychoanalyse Nathan in the article, suggesting that he is “one of the many Jews who feel resentment about White gentile beauty and concomitant distress at any discussion of Jewish ugliness.” His tweet seems to contain further evidence for this hypothesis. After misrepresenting the substance of my article, he went on to say: “Indeed, I wave my superior nose like a flag pole and proclaim, ‘A —- at Cambridge.’” Philosophers are trained in the careful use of language, but Cofnas was not using language carefully there. “Flag-pole” is not the right word. In that context, one’s nose is waved like a flag, not like a flag-pole. The flag is the highly visible part, not the pole. Was emotion interfering with Cofnas’ training in careful language? Perhaps. If it was, I hope I’m not going to trigger more emotion by discussing punims again. In “The Cult of Ugly,” I suggested that ugliness was characteristic of both leftists and Jews, and that this ugliness was related in some way to the harmful ideologies and ideas of leftists and Jews.
As Steve Sailer has often noted, antifa tend to be ugly (mugshots of Portland antifa from Twitter)
It’s interesting that nobody at the Occidental Observer or the Unz Review objected to my claim as it applied to leftists. For example, nobody produced any examples of good-looking leftists in attempted refutation. But there are good-looking leftists, of course, just as there are good-looking Jews. A good-looking leftist called Rosie Duffield (born 1971) has recently hit the headlines in Britain. She’s resigned from the Labour party, criticizing the prime minister Keir Starmer and other senior ministers for accepting lavish gifts from a publicity-shy Labour peer called Waheed Alli. She accurately said Starmer’s government is about “greed and power,” not about helping ordinary people. After her resignation, this good-looking leftist was interviewed on the BBC by the ugly leftist Laura Kuenssberg, who is Jewish (the double-s in “Kuenssberg” is correct). Here are Duffield’s and Kuenssberg’s punims side-by-side for comparison:
English Rosie, Jewish Laura: both leftist, but not both ugly (images from Kent Online and The Times)
Kuenssberg is characteristically ugly as both a Jew and a leftist; Duffield is uncharacteristically good-looking as a leftist. However, it’s interesting that, unlike ugly Kuenssberg, she isn’t a typical leftist. She was on the right of the Labour party and this isn’t the first time she’s been at odds with the Labour elite. Duffield is “gender critical” and doesn’t accept the lunacies of transgenderism. The Labour elite did not support her adequately as she received the usual threats of murder, mutilation and rape from the narcissistic and perverted men who have a sexual fetish about pretending to be women. And after she said that “only women have a cervix,” Keir Starmer was asked whether he agreed with this clear statement of biological reality. He didn’t. He said it was “something that shouldn’t be said” and was “not right.”
Sarah Champion, another good-looking leftist who broke from mainstream leftism (image from Infogalactic)
Another good-looking leftist in Labour has been at odds with the Labour elite too. Sarah Champion (born 1969), MP for Rotherham, broke the tradition established by her predecessor, the philosemitic Denis MacShane, and stood up for the White working-class. Rather than schmoozing Jews and ignoring non-White pathologies like MacShane, she accurately said that there is a serious problem of Pakistani Muslim men preying on White girls in Britain. The unattractive Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn promptly drove her out of the Shadow Cabinet. Both Duffield and Champion are good-looking. Both departed from mainstream leftism in some way. Is this a coincidence? I don’t think so.
Ugly leftist Jews Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis of The Newsagents podcast
Leftist Jew Emily Maitlis glares at racist goy Nigel Farage (see video at Twitter)
And I don’t think it’s a coincidence that two more prominent figures in the British media share three significant traits with Laura Kuenssberg at the BBC. Emily Maitlis and Jon Sopel used to work for the BBC too. Then they departed to run an independent podcast called The Newsagents. The podcast is strongly in favor of non-White immigration and deeply hostile to the anti-immigration politician Nigel Farage. Like Kuenssberg, Maitlis and Sopel are three things: leftist, Jewish, and ugly. I think these three things go together. Indeed, I think they have similar genetic roots. Dr Adam Rutherford would call that “grim antisemitism.” I’d call Rutherford a PC pygmy. That’s why his support for anti-woke Nathan Cofnas is so amusing. After all, Rutherford also supported the anti-scientific witch-hunt against James Watson. And for exactly the same reason: “Racism is awful in all its forms.” I hope Nathan Cofnas appreciates the irony of that. I certainly do.
On what planet is Sarah Champion ‘good-looking’?
^^Mega. Dittoes. She is as plain as pudding…
Never mind Rutherford, don’t forget Robert Wald Sussman, the worst “race-denier” of all. Different views from Vincent Sarich, Stanley Garn and John Entine. Not all Jewish scientists look particularly ugly, whatever they think about “race”. Not all Gentile scientists are particularly handsome (e.g. James Watson himself). Even Anthony Ludovici, who thought deformed people should be killed, denied an absolute 1-to-1 link between physical beauty and intellectual creativity. Not all brainy white people are beautiful. There are even some “blondes” who are actually dumb. What about Paul Gottfried, Ilana Mercer and Robert Nozick? What about traitors like Hiss, Philby and Maclean?
Too many exceptions disprove the “rule”.
Are you Jewish ? It seems that this article particularly hurts your feelings.
We replied to you numerous times and you continue to ignore our arguments
1 there is undoubtedly a Jewish or semitic widespread phenotype that is highly unpleasant. Sacha Baron Cohen as an exemple.
2 good looking Jews are always always the ones with the most European ancestry. So your exemples are fallacious.
3 for the physical beauty reflecting goodness and ugliness reflecting moral dysfunction, I agree that it is more difficult.
Ted Bundy comes to mind. But for the non whites, in general, their primitive features, often go with repugnant behavior.
@ Lady Strange
No, I’m not Jewish by race or religion. Nor am I a Zionist, Christian or Muslim. Just a white man with some education, common-sense and a critical disposition.
The fact that you consider your question relevant doesn’t offend or upset me, but tells me something about you.
Yes, I would agree about Sacha David Cohen (and David Baddiel), but not about Jerry Seinfeld, Jack Benny or Danny Kaye. I confess to a soft spot for Woody Allen’s “anti-Semitic” jokes; e.g. “They daren’t call it a ‘Jews’ Harp’ any longer – you know those people, they write letters”.
On criminality, I agree with Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer and earlier editions of the Baur, Fischer & Lenz about the different types and scale of offences committed by Jews and Gentiles. Jews generally avoid alcoholic inebriation except on Purimfest. But we do not put people in jail just because they are ugly or foreign-looking, and quite rightly so.
The statement “jews tend to be X” does not mean that “all jews are X” or that “all Whites are not X.” Finding exceptions to such rules doesn’t disprove them anymore than Yao Ming’s career disproved the rule that NBA players tend to be black.
The Synagogue of Satan appeals to deviants and freaks. They are allies against the normal and healthy. Physiognomy is real. You can judge a book by its cover. Always believe the opposite of what the conspiracy says. Like the fake jew, they always lie. Jealousy and envy are powerful motivations for hate. The underman always wants equality, since it will lift them up. The winners of the genetic lottery never want to be lowered to such a low standard. Racism is just an AntiWhite epithet. Those that use it are the losers of the world. Ethnocentrism and in group solidarity work and aid in survival. Your enemies use it themselves. Don’t do what the enemy says, but use whatever works well for you and your family and race.
The “synagogue of Satan” are NOT Jews (Revelation 3.9).
Physiognomy: would this rule out Gustave LeBon, Edouard Drumont, Houston Stewart Chamberlain, Adolf Eichmann?
What about Otto Weininger and Gilad Atzmon?
Thanks for writing about this very intriguing subject that is mostly lost on most.
I was at Bezerkeley during the Free Speech Movement (sounds quaint… these days) of 1964.
The ugliest jewess of maybe all time was Bettina Aptheker, the daughter of Herbert Aptheker, the Black history specialist. Other jews like Andrea Dworkin was a close second , and so on.
Bettina Aptheker cashed- in on the incest sweepstakes of the 1990s, etc. She turned in her poor Dad , Herbie, for molesting her as a child.
While I was innocent of the JQ at the time, I nevertheless noted the rancor of various jews around the FSM, as it was called then.
I was marginally in support of the FSM but very wisely stayed on course of getting my Masters degree since I would never get one in future I figured.
Berkeley Political Science department at the time was anti Soviet Union… Cold War liberalism/Realism, which was decidedly not leftist. The rads of the FSM I guess were of the Sociology dept. etc.
Times change. I dunno how left the Berkeley Political Science dept is these days.
However jews never change. It is genetic.
Joe Webb
Bettina Aptheker’s story, delivered long after the deaths of both of her parents, carries about as much evidentiary weight with me as Christine Blase-Ford’s specious “recovered memories” of an alleged assault by Judge Kavanaugh. The charges against Sandinista boss Daniel Ortega, by his daughter, seemed to have greater substance. We should apply more rigorous standards of verification for claims like these, so long after the fact.
When it comes to statesman-like good-looks I think Theodor Herzl would beat Timothy Walz.
Herbert Aptheker was on the CPUSA National Committee for over 30 years and made the DuBois legacy “his own” much as Walter Kaufmann did with Nietzsche. His molestation of his daughter was considered entirely plausible by people who knew them. Of course, the Jewish New Left was counter-balanced by the Jewish New Right, very long list of names on request, but one can start with the magazine “Encounter” (aka “Enkosher”).
We keep hearing for lifetimes.”….that it’s not all Jews” and that these *khazars* are the problem..not THE JEWS*. Wrong! For millenia Jews have excelled in extraordinary venal perversity .spectacularly satanic in group preference to a pathological degree..generation after generation THE JEWS excel in identity theft …..fraudsterism..hatred of All non Jews ….except for a time ..when they use..bilk..milk dry and or manipulate us…it’s Not just Khazars! It’s Not just Zionists! It’s not just Jewish hook nosed controligarch bankster s! It’s not just gay rabbis..it’s not just lesbian rabbi s it’s not just Rambam..the 2talmudsThe kabala ,Karl Marx .geinrich Yagoda. Bela Kuhn .or Jon pollard or Soros or Satanyahoo..geveer..Rothschild or America s unelected dictator Jared kushner…–..*It’s all. pernicious serpentine Jewish influence*There ….fixed it for you**
Cmon Allan, tell is how you really feel. Which is 100% accurate BTW