Featured Articles

Jewish Intelligence

Editor’s note: This was originally posted on August 19, 2007 on my website, before TOO was established. I re-post it here to encourage comments and because it remains relevant given continuing interest in Jewish IQ—e.g., Richard Lynn’s The Chosen People: A Study of Jewish Intelligence and Achievement (Whitefish, MT: Washington Summit Publishers, 2011). Lynn finds that the average IQ for Ashkenazi Jews is 110, for Sephardic Jews 98-99, Oriental Jews 91, and Falasha Jews (a largely African group genetically) < 70. Lynn’s book will be reviewed by F. Roger Devlin in the Summer issue of The Occidental Quarterly (see also “Are Jews Smarter“). The focus on IQ in this article does not imply that ethnic networking is unimportant, for example, in admission to elite universities. Thus taking Richard Lynn’s estimates of Ashkenazi Jewish IQ and correcting for the greater numbers of European Whites in America, the ratio of non-Jewish Whites to Jews should be around 7 to 1 (IQ >130) or  4.5 to 1 (IQ > 145). Instead, the ratio of non-Jewish Whites to Jews is around 1 to 1 or less. There is also presumptive ethnic networking at work in particular niches, such as Hollywood and other forms of media where Jews are represented far beyond anything predicted by IQ  (see, e.g., Edmund Connelly’s work and this recent blog on Jewish networking in literature and art). As noted often in TOO, the problem is not that Jews are an elite. The problem is that they have a long track record as a hostile elite —hostile to the people and the culture of the West.

Jewish intelligence has become a hot topic following the publication of a paper by Greg Cochran and Henry Harpending in The Journal of Biological Science. Charles Murray weighed in with an article in Commentary (“Jewish Genius”, April, 2007). Murray’s theory is quite a bit like the one I published in my 1994 book, A People That Shall Dwell Alone (Ch. 7). I discussed eugenic events such as the Babylonian exile in which the elite Israelites were relocated to Babylon and refused to intermarry with those left behind when they returned (as graphically recounted in the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah). I also described a great deal of discrimination against the illiterate in the ancient world, with the effect that such people were excluded from the Jewish community. Marriage to such a person was especially abhorrent. And I recounted the history of Jewish education and Jewish idealization of the scholar, including especially the practice of wealthy Jews marrying their daughters to scholars and providing them with business opportunities. Because wealth was correlated with reproductive success in traditional societies, this had the effect of eugenic selection for intelligence. All of these practices originated in the ancient world and are well attested among both Ashkenazi and Sephardic populations in later centuries. Read more

Heinrich Heine: German Lyric Poet and Jewish Political Agitator

A hundred years before Adolf Hitler assumed power an event occurred in Germany that was a harbinger of worse things to come in the relations between Germans and Jews. It was the German reaction to the “Young Germany” movement led by several young Jews whose aim it was to introduce certain liberal social reforms, including greater opportunities for Jews in all aspects of German society. In the course of their campaign, the participants said and did things that German authorities and large segments of the population found insulting and offensive. At the center of the movement and considered by many the personification of the Jewish mentality and nature was world-famous poet Heinrich Heine.

Heine was a sorely conflicted man. While still young he quickly rose to be recognized as Germany’s greatest Romantic poet after Goethe. Because of the beauty and subject matter of his poetry, he was thought to be a man who loved his homeland, especially the Rheinland region, but by middle age he had morphed into a bitter, sarcastic critic,  hostile to almost everything and everyone he had previously loved or admired. In the absence of any other known cause, his life and personality, even his health, seem to have been wrecked by a psychological clash between his genetic makeup, essentially his core Jewish nature, and the culture of the world in which he lived. In his Faust, Goethe had the appropriate line to describe the condition: “Two souls dwell in my breast, alas, forever warring with each other.”

Born in 1797 to ethnically Jewish parents who lived comfortably but modestly in Duesseldorf, young Harry Heine, as he was so named, entered life in an essentially Roman Catholic city whose Jewish residents, but only a minority of the German majority, had welcomed the liberal reforms introduced by Napoleon. Harry’s parents put the poet-to-be in a German kindergarten at age four while concurrently instructing him in Jewish traditions at home and making available additional instruction in the Jewish religion in a private school. Harry attended the local Lyceum in a Franciscan cloister run and taught by Catholic priests, often Jesuits. Discipline was strict— designed to provide useful subjects of Napoleon. Read more

Promoting Israel in the world of literature: A tale of Jewish ethnic networking

I was looking over Brenton Sanderson’s TOO article on Mark Rothko (“Mark Rothko, Abstract Expressionism, and the Decline of Western Art“). For Rothko, an artist without any of the skills that are traditionally associated with being a professional artist,  it was all about Jewish networking.

Towards the end of 1943, all of the ethnic networking finally began to bear tangible fruit for Rothko. He befriended Peggy Guggenheim, “the most voracious patroness of American avant-garde art”, who had migrated to New York in 1941. Guggenheim’s artistic consultant, Howard Putzel, “convinced her to show Rothko in her Art of This Century gallery, where she had opened in 1942, during the low point of the war.” In January 1945, Guggenheim decided to put on Rothko’s first one-man exhibition at her gallery. In 1948 Rothko invited a coterie of mainly Jewish friends and acquaintances to view his new ‘multiforms’. The [very influential] art critic and historian Harold Rosenberg “remembers finding these works “fantastic,” and called his experience “the most impressive visit to an artist” in his life.”

This is actually quite remarkable. It would be one thing if Rothko was aspiring to be a leading rabbi or the head honcho at the ADL. But he was aspiring to fame and fortune as an historically important artist in the Western canon. He achieved his goal. One of his paintings recently sold for $87 million.

$87 million Rothko

Read more

The Menace of the New “McCarthyism”

On June 25, the Huffington Post “reported” that a Cambridge University academic “responsible for mentoring students” has “come under pressure” to resign his position. Guess which allegations resulted in Martin Sewell, a supervisor in the Faculty of Economics at Cambridge University, coming under intense scrutiny:

(a) Rapist
(b) Pedophile
(c) Serial killer
(d) Flash-mob thief
(e) Cannibalistic predator
(f) Racist, sexist, “pro-Hitler” eugenicist

If you guessed (f), you are correct! Critics are horrified that Sewell, an accomplished academic and incisive observer of human differences, has bucked the forces of political correctness and some how remains gainfully employed.

Sewell, a 43-year-old native of Reading, has posted summaries of “taxonomies of race,” which include notable (hint: notorious) sources: John R. Baker’s Race, a landmark study published in 1974 by Oxford University Press; Michael Levin’s seminal work Why Race Matters; Herrnstein and Murray’s bestseller The Bell Curve; Arthur Jensen’s The g Factor; Frank Salter’s On Genetic Interests; Richard Lynn’s Race Differences in Intelligence; and Kevin MacDonald’s A People That Shall Dwell Alone.Sewell’s Website postings have driven his adversaries raving mad. Surely a “responsible” mentor of students should know better than to risk one’s academic position by favorably citing such radioactive literature on race and ethnicity. Acknowledging that race is a valid scientific taxonomy and that race differences are natural biological realities will generate accusations of “racist” faster than Heidi Beirich can inhale a tray of donuts. After all, “responsible” mentors know better!

"Hideous Heidi" loves to get people blacklisted and fired.

The fact that an academic with Sewell’s laudable record is under such scrutiny speaks volumes as to the nature of the infraction. From whence does this “pressure” come?
Left-wing critics have worked tirelessly over decades to make it dangerous to espouse such views—positions that are now rendered career-sacking offenses. How this has come about is worth closer scrutiny.

Read more

Natural Born Citizen? Obama and the Fourth American Revolution, Part Two

The Sovereign People as Higher Law-Making Authority

For decades now, progressive constitutional scholars such as Professor Bruce Ackerman have long urged the Supreme Court to recognize the higher law-making voice of the sovereign people.  Obama’s second term will provide the Court with the ideal opportunity to do just that; indeed, his entire life story reads as if it had been crafted as a hypothetical problem in a constitutional law examination on the natural born citizenship issue.

If the sovereign people decide that issue in Obama’s favour, the already threadbare claim that the American republic is a historic nation grounded in the shared blood, language, and culture of a homogeneous people will have lost its sole constitutional mooring.

Once the citizenship status of the President no longer matters, it is difficult to see how immigration patriots can object to the future extension of the political and civil rights now associated with citizenship to all immigrants, legal or illegal.

Birthers fear that Obama’s successful re-election amounts to a constitutional amendment by stealth.  Many portray Obama’s putative Presidency as a criminal conspiracy.

But the campaign to re-elect Obama is much more than an undercover conspiracy to deceive the American people. Read more

Natural Born Citizen? Obama and the Fourth American Revolution, Part 1


Old-stock Americans need to understand the metapolitical significance of the Presidential election in 2012.  On a strict reading of the Constitution (i.e., in accordance with the “original intent” of the framers and as described more fully below), there can be little doubt that Barack Hussein Obama has never been eligible to the Office of President.

During the 2008 election campaign neither the GOP candidate Senator John McCain—whose own eligibility had been questioned as a consequence of his birth in Panama—nor the globalist mainstream media had the incentive or inclination to compel candidate Obama—so obviously a progressive and cosmopolitan   citizen of the world—to establish that he is a natural born American citizen as required by Article II, section I of the Constitution.

But such negligent disregard for foundational constitutional norms is no longer surprising among political, corporate, and legal elites in the United States.  Already in the early Eighties, when I was a graduate student at Harvard Law School, such formalistic constraints were being reduced to fossilized irrelevance.  Decades of legal realism combined with the nascent critical legal studies movement to foster the legal amnesia implicit in the progressive ideal of the “living constitution.”

Three decades on, bien pensant contempt for “originalism” is even more deeply entrenched upon the commanding heights of the Constitutional Republic.  We can be sure, therefore, that the apparently “unconstitutional” re-election of putative President Obama will not be a story of politics as usual.  It will mark instead yet another momentous turning point in American constitutional history; namely, the inauguration of the Fourth (Transnational) Republic. Read more

Johan Galtung on Jews

Johan Galtung

Johan Galtung is a prominent Norwegian academic, the founder of the field of peace studies and author of more than 100 books and more than 1000 scholarly papers. He has also been officially labeled an anti-Semite as a result of recent statements, at least some of which are sensible.

Galtung believes that historical anti-Semitism is based at least partly on Jewish behavior: On the rise of anti-Jewish attitudes in Germany during the 1920s,  he says that it was “not unproblematic that Jews had key niches in a society humiliated by defeat at Versailles.”

He distinguishes between predicting anti-Jewish behavior and justifying it: “In no way, absolutely no way, does this justify the atrocities. But it created anti-Semitism that could have been predicted.” In the same way, he argues that medieval pogroms were motivated by the role of Jews in usury: “The Jews played a role in demanding payment from indebted peasants.”

This of course violates the dogma that all anti-Jewish attitudes and behavior are completely irrational—the result of things like Christian religious ideology or individual psychopathology—rather than reality-based conflicts of interest. In the modern world, Galtung claims that “the Jews control U.S. media, and divert for the sake of Israel.”

“Six Jewish companies control 96% of the media,” wrote Galtung. He included the names of journalists, publishers, TV networks, and movie studios, that he claims are controlled by Jews. Media mogul Rupert Murdoch was also included on the list. “He’s not Jewish, but many of the people under him are,” wrote Galtung, in reference to Murdoch. “Many of them are fanatically pro-Israel,” he pointed out. Immediately following these claims, Galtung wrote that “seventy percent of the professors at the 20 most important American universities are Jewish.” Galtung bases his doctrine on an article written by William Luther Pierce, founder of the “National Alliance,” a white supremacist organization.

In a later article defending his position, Galtung provides some great quotes, as from Ruth Wisse of Harvard: “to young Jewish journalists, that they should not ‘see themselves as seekers after wisdom and truth, but as part of the Israeli Defense Forces’ (13/02/12).”

The  issue of the loyalty of American Jews is a canard?? Read more