Roissy on Anti-Semitism

For those who aren’t in the know, Roissy is the most popular blogger in the “game” community. “Game” is the art of seducing girls. While there’s nothing inherently immoral about learning how to succeed with the ladies, the scene is predictably vulgar and often bilious toward women. This post about Roissy isn’t intended to be an implied endorsement of him in particular or “pick-up artists” in general.

From time to time, Roissy lapses from his main topic and offers his opinions on politics and culture, betraying his HBD-aware worldview. It’s unsurprising that he reads Steve Sailer, given that a serious study of the innate differences between genders leads down a slippery slope to studying the innate differences between populations. His most recent post, The Modern Definition of Anti-Semitism [cache], confirms that many of our ideas are gradually catching on with a wider audience.

He begins the post with the following definition of anti-Semitism:

Here is a practical definition of anti-Semitism: the belief by gentiles that Jews may be criticized like any other group.

That definitely works, though I’m still partial to Joe Sobran’s definition:

[A]n anti-Semite used to mean a man who hated Jews. Now it means a man who is hated by Jews.

Roissy acknowledges the established research on general intelligence…

Jews have the highest average IQ of all ethnic and racial groups. IQ is predominately hereditary in origin, and becomes more so with age.

As a quibble, I think it should be noted that those higher-than-average IQ scores are only among a specific subset of Jews, one which is a self-selected subset of a self-selected subset. Granted, it’s the subset that’s over here, but the comparison isn’t really apples-to-apples. I suspect that an elite subset of Europeans would compare favorably to their elite subset of Semites. And remember, there are more of us than them, so there are far more Europeans with any given high IQ than Jews.

He presents his own take on the Jewish Question…

Jews are one of the highest percentage (generic atheists might be higher) ideologically left wing groups of people. As such, and coupled with their higher average IQ, they wield disproportionate influence over the national political debate, and this influence trends toward pushing universalist and feel-gooder, anti-discrimination equalist public policy.

His logic is a bit loose, here. He takes it as a given that Jews are ideologically left-wing, without explaining why they would be left-wing or what left-wing even means. Do they push universalist and anti-discrimination public policy because they’re genetically predisposed to being “left wing”? Are they congenitally predisposed to help the downtrodden? A more factually-based explanation is that they do so because it’s good for the Jews to weaken the majority and its resistance to invasive populations.

He offers his own grand theory of Jewish power…

This does not necessarily mean there is a Jewish conspiracy to Balkanize America. What can seem like a conspiracy is often just your biased mental algorithm trying to make sense of unrelated forces buttressing an antagonistic goal.

There’s probably not a single conspiracy, but a web of discrete Jewish individuals and organizations “buttressing an antagonistic goal”. Why are they doing that? Roissy would have you believe it’s because they have this specious “liberal gene“. Fortunately for Jews, they appear to also have a “neocon gene” that masks the liberal gene’s phenotype in circumstances where it’s strategically useful for them to be right wing. And in Israel they have the well-known ethnic cleansing/apartheid gene (the one the media finds only in White people).

While he readily gulps down the latest pop psychology about political orientation being due to a single gene, he’s skeptical about “superficially plausible” group selection…

Similarly, group selection, while superficially plausible, does not have the weight of scientific evidence behind it like individual selection does. If you insist on fingering a conspiratorial motive, you’ll have to indict the numerically greater number of left-wing Brahmin WASPs who also gleefully push the one worlder boilerplate.

Which goes to show that he has no concept of cultural group selection. Scratch the tangential point that his link is to Ted Kennedy, a relic of a dying breed of Irish Catholics who were antagonistic toward WASPs. We certainly do have traitors among our own, though this phenomenon didn’t really take off until after Jews had become America’s most powerful oligarchy. Overlords will always be able to find useful idiots and opportunistic scoundrels to promote. If we’re to be indicted of anything, let it be of gullibility. We’re definitely not the first people and probably not the last people to fall for this shtick.

A group may advocate bad policies, but you can choose not to listen to them. Or are you accepting your powerlessness?

Yes, actually. We are powerless. We’ll remain powerless until we in the West can understand the problem, take ownership of it, and solve it. Roissy identifies the Jews as the vanguard of the very diversity and immigration campaigns that are destroying White America, but blames us for allowing it to happen, for allowing ourselves to lose the game. In a sense, he’s right, as our fate will depend on our will to fight for what belongs to us.

If Roissy’s not Jewish, then he’s a prime example of a discouraging phenomenon: White Americans who know the score, know what’s in store for us if we fail to act, and don’t care. I once assumed that to know was to care, but that’s far from the case. While he’s clearly the last person to have a spirit of stewardship or invest in the welfare of his community, he’s emblematic. Our struggle is about more than informing our people about what’s being taken from us; it’s about inspiring them to take it back.

Matt Parrott is the Executive Director of Hoosier Nation, Indiana’s leading traditional conservative advocacy group.