Featured Articles

Julius Evola on Race

Growing interest in English speaking countries for the Italian philosopher Julius Evola may be a sign of the revival of the awesome cultural legacy of the Western civilization (see here and here). This legacy is awkwardly termed the “traditional –revolutionary – elitist – anti-egalitarian – postmodern thought.” But why not simply call it classical thought?

The advantage of Evola, in contrast to many modern scholars of the same calibre, may be his staggering erudition that goes well beyond the narrow study of race. Evola was just as much at ease writing thick volumes about religion, language and sexuality as writing about legal issues related to international politics, or depicting decadence of the liberal system. His shortcomings are, viewed from the American academic perspective, that his prose is often not focused enough and his narrative often embraces too many topics at once. Evola was not a self-proclaimed “expert” on race — yet his erudition made him compose several impressive books on race from angles that are sorely missing among modern sociobiologists and race experts. Therefore, Evola’s works on race must be always put in a lager perspective.

In this short survey of Evola’s position on race I am using the hard cover of the French translation of Indirizzi per una educazione razziale (1941) (Eléments pour une éduction raciale, 1984) and the more expanded Sintesi di dottrina della razza (1941), (“Synthesis of the racial doctrine”), translated into German by the author himself and by Annemarie Rasch and published in Germany in 1943. To my knowledge these two books are not available in English translation. His and Rasch’s excellent German translation of Sintesi had received (in my view an awkward and unnecessary) ‘political’ title; Grundrisse der faschistischen Rassenlehre (“Outlines of the fascist racial doctrine”) and is available on line.

Race of the Body vs. Race of the Spirit

Evola writes that race represents a crucial element in the life of all humans. However, while acknowledging the clear-cut physical and biological markers of each race, he stresses over and over again the paramount importance of the spiritual and internal aspects of race — two points that are decisive for genuine racial awareness of the White man. Without full comprehension of these constituent racial parts — i.e., the “race of the soul” and the “race of the spirit” — no racial awareness is possible. Evola is adamantly opposed to conceptualizing race from a purely biological, mechanistic and Darwinian perspective. He sees that approach as dangerously reductionist, leading to unnecessary political and intellectual infighting.

Diverse causes have contributed until now to the fact that racism has become the object of propaganda entrusted to incompetent people, to individuals who are waking up any day now as racists and anti-Semites and whose simple sloganeering has replaced serious principles and information. (Eléments pour une éduction raciale, p. 15)

Evola freely uses the term ‘racism’ (razzismo) and ‘racist’ (razzista). This was quite understandable in his epoch given that these words in Europe in the early thirties of the 20th century had a very neutral meaning with no dreaded symbols of the absolute evil ascribed to them today. The same can be said of the word ‘fascism’ and even ‘totalitarianism’ —  words which Evola uses in a normative manner when depicting an organic and holistic society designed for the future of the Western civilization. For Evola, the sense of racial awareness is more a spiritual endeavor and less a form of biological typology.

And in this respect, we need to repeat it; we are dealing here with a formation of a mentality, a sensibility, and not with intellectual schemes or classifications for natural science manuals. (Eléments p. 16)

For Evola, being White is not just a matter of good looks and high IQ, or for that matter something that needs to be sported in public. Racial awareness implies a sense of mysticism combined with the knowledge of one’s family lineage as well as a spiritual effort to delve into the White man’s primordial and mythical times. This is a task, which in the age of liberal chaos, must be entrusted only to élites completely detached from any material or pecuniary temptation.

Thus, racism invigorates and renders tangible the concept of tradition; it  makes the individual get used to observing in our ancestors not just a series of the more or less illustrious “dead,” but rather the expression of something still alive in ourselves and to which we are tied in our interior.  We are the carriers of a heritage that has been transmitted to us and that we need to transmit  – and in this spirit it is something going beyond time, something indicating,  what we called elsewhere, ‘the eternal race.’ (Eléments, p.31)

In other words race is at a same time a heritage and a collective substrate. Irrespective of the fact that it expresses itself among all people, it is only among few that it attains its perfect realization and it is precisely there that the action and the significance of the individual and the personality can assert themselves. (Eléments, p.34)

Evola offers the same views in his more expanded Sintesi (Grundrisse), albeit by using a somewhat different wording. Racial awareness for Evola requires moral courage and impeccable character and not just physical prowess. It is questionable to what extent many White racists today, in a self-proclaimed “movement” of theirs, with their silly paraphernalia on public display, are capable of such a mental exercise.

Race means superiority, wholeness, decisiveness in life. There are common people and there are people “of race”. Regardless of which social status they belong to, these people form an aristocracy(Grundrisse, p.17).

In this particular regard, the racial doctrine rejects the doctrine of the environment, known to be an accessory to liberalism, to the idea of humanity and to Marxism. These false doctrines have picked up on the theory of the environment in order to defend the dogma of fundamental equality of all people. (Grundrisse, p. 17)

And further Evola writes:

Our position, when we claim that race exists as much in the body as in the spirit, goes beyond these two points of view. Race is a profound force manifesting itself in the realm of the body (race of the body) as in the realm of the spirit (race of the interior, race of the sprit).  In its full meaning the purity of race occurs when these two manifestations coincide; in other words, when the race of the body matches the race of the spirit and when it is capable of serving the most adequate organ of expression. (p.48)

Racial-Spiritual Involution and the present Dark Ages

Evola is aware of the dangerous dichotomy between the race of the spirit and the race of the body that may occur within the same race — or, as we call it, within the same ingroup. This tragic phenomenon occurs as a result of selecting the wrong mates, miscegenation, and genetic flaws going back into the White man’s primordial times. Modern social decadence also fosters racial chaos. Evola argues that very often the “race of the body” may be perfectly pure, with the “race of the spirit” being already tainted or destroyed. This results in a cognitive clash between a distorted perception of objective reality vs. subjective reality, and which sooner or later leads to strife or civil war.

[adrotate group=”1″]

Evola harbors no illusions about master race; he advocates racial hygiene, always emphasizing the spiritual aspect of the race first. On a practical level, regarding modern White nationalists, Evola’s words are important insofar as they represent a harsh indictment of the endless bickering, petty sectarianism and petty jealousy seen so often among Whites. A White nationalist may be endowed with a perfect race of the body, but his racial spirit may be dangerously mongrelized.

Studying racial psychology is a crucial task for all White racialists — an endeavor in which Evola was greatly influenced by the German racial scholar and his contemporary Franz Ludwig Clauss.

Furthermore, a special circumstance must be singled out, confirming the already stated fact that races that have best biologically preserved the Nordic type are inwardly sometimes in a higher degree of regression than other races of the same family. Some Nordic nations — especially the Anglo-Saxons — are those in which the tradition-conditioned normal relationship between the sexes has been turned upside down. The so-called emancipation of woman — which in reality only means the mutilation and degradation of woman — has actually started out among these nations and has been most widespread among them, whereas this relationship still retains something of a tradition-based view among other nations, regardless of it its bourgeois or its conventional echo.(Grundrisse p. 84).

Evola is well aware of the complexity of understanding race as well as our still meager knowledge of the topic. He is well aware that race cannot be just the subject of biologists, but also of paleontologists, psycho-anthropologists and mystics, such as the French mystic René Guenon, whom he knew well and whom he often quotes.

Following in Evola’s footsteps we may raise a haunting question. Why individuals of the same White race, i.e. of the same White in-group frequently do not understand each other? Why is it that the most murderous wars have occurred within the same race, i.e. within the same White ingroup, despite the fact that the European ingroup is more or less biologically bonded together by mutual blood ties?  One must always keep in mind that the bloodiest wars in the 20th century occurred not between two racially opposed out-groups, but often within the same White ingroup. The level of violence between Whites and Whites during the American civil war, the savagery of the intra-White civil war in Spain from 1936 to 1939,  the degree of mutual hatred amidst White Europeans during WWII, and not least the recent intra-White barbarity of the Yugoslav conflict, are often incomprehensible for a member of the non-European outgroup. This remains an issue that needs to be urgently addressed by all sociobiologists. It must be pondered by all White nationalist activists all over the world.

There are actually too many cases of people who are somatically of the same race, of the same tribe, indeed who are fathers and sons of the same blood in the strict sense of the word and, yet who cannot “understand” each other. A demarcation line separates their souls; their way of feeling and judging is different and their common race of the body cannot do much about it, nor their common blood.  The impossibility of mutual understanding lies therefore on the level of supra-biology (“überbiologische Ebene”). Mutual understanding and hence real togetherness, as well as deeper unity, are only possible where the common “race of the soul” and the “spirit” coexist. (Grundrisse, 89)

In order to understand his political and moral predicament, the White man must therefore delve into myths of his prehistory and look for his faults. For Evola, we are all victims of rationalism, Enlightenment and positivistic sciences that keep us imprisoned in a straitjacket of “either-or,” always in search for causal and rational explanations. Only by grasping the supraracial (superraza) meaning of ancient European myths and by using them as role models, can we come to terms with the contemporary racial chaos of the modern system.

It is absolutely crucial to grasp the living significance of such a change of perspectives inherent to racist conceptions; the superior does not derive from the inferior. In the mystery of our blood, in the depth of our most abysmal of our being, resides the ineffaceable heredity of our primordial times. This is not heredity of brutality of bestial and savage instincts gone astray, as argued by psychoanalysis, and which, as one may logically conclude, derive from “evolutionism” or Darwinism. This heredity of origins, this heredity which comes from the deepest depth of times is theheredity of the light. (Eléments 72–73)

Briefly, Evola rejects the widespread idea that we have evolved from exotic African monkeys, as the standard theory of evolution goes, and which is still widely accepted by modern scientists. He believes that we have now become the tainted progeny of the mythical Hyperborean race, which has significantly racially deteriorated over the eons and which has been adrift both in time and space. Amidst the ruins of the modern world, gripped by perversion and decadence, Evola suggest for new political elites the two crucial criteria, “the character and the form of the spirit, much more than intelligence.” As a racial mystic, Evola warns:

Because the concept of the world can be much more precise with a man without instruction than with a writer; it can be more solid with a soldier, or a peasant loyal to his land, than with a bourgeois intellectual, professor, or a journalist. (quoted in Alain de Benoist’s, Vude droite, 1977, p. 435)

We could only add that the best cultural weapons for our White “super-race” are our common  Indo-Aryan myths, our sagas, our will to power — and our inexorable sense of the tragic.

Tom Sunic (http://www.tomsunic.info; http://doctorsunic.netfirms.com) is author, translator, former US professor in political science and a member of the Board of Directors of the American Third Position. His new book, Postmortem Report: Cultural Examinations from Postmodernity, prefaced by Kevin MacDonald, has just been released. Email him

James Angleton and Ezra Pound

For it is not the wolf or any of the other beasts that would join the contest in any noble danger, but rather a good man. — Aristotle,Politics, Book IIX.

Before James Angleton became an institution at the CIA as czar of the counterintelligence staff from 1954 to 1975, he was friends with the poet Ezra Pound. Both men sacrificed themselves in an attempt to save their country from plutocrats. Pound did this by speaking his mind, while Angleton sold his conscience for “the greater good.”

Angleton first met Pound in Rapallo, Italy in 1938.  Ezra was often visited by famous or aspiring artists. Then a young man, Angleton photographed Pound at the meeting. Mary Barnard reminisces that these portraits were among the poet’s favorites.

TIME Pound portrait, attributed to J. J. Augleton but likely to be by J. J. Angleton

What was a young American doing in Italy in the 1930s? Angleton was born in Boise, Idaho. His father Hugh was a self-made man working for the National Cash Register company. Hugh had married a Mexican lady in a small border town while serving as a cavalry officer under General Pershing. (Hence James’ middle name “Jesus”.) (See Tom Mangold, Cold Warrior: James Jesus Angleton — CIA’s Master Spy Hunter,)

Hugh Angleton made his fortune by developing NCR’s Italian branch during the 1930s. Italy had been transformed under Mussolini’s rule and Hugh seems to have had sympathies with the leader’s policies. Yet, during WWII he joined the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) presumably to supply information on Italy. By 1943 he had shifted to training recruits, and he distanced himself from espionage after 1945.

His father’s work meant James Angleton enjoyed a cosmopolitan lifestyle. Apart from exploring the expatriate scene in Italy, in 1933 he entered Malvern College (an elite British boarding school) and went on to Yale University in 1937. He developed a taste for poetry, which in the pre-war years was as glamorous as rock musicians are today.

Angleton maintained his relationship with Pound at Yale. He also tapped into some of his father’s contacts from the OSS. In the words of E. E. Cummings to Ezra: “Jim Angleton has been seemingly got hold of by an intelligent prof & apparently begins to begin to realize that comp mil ser [compulsory military service] might give the former a respite from personal responsibility. … maybe he’s developing.”

The “prof” was Norman Holmes Pearson. Later during WWII, Pearson would run the OSS’s X-2 counterintelligence division in London. But in 1937 the professor was already famous for his anthology of English literature which Pound recommended to his young daughter Mary. (See James J. Willhelm, Ezra Pound: The Tragic Years, 1925-1972.)

Pearson was a man at the heart of the pre-war literary world. Under the professor’s wing, Angleton would launch his most successful publication: Furioso. Angleton’s ebullient wife Cicely recalls that Pound described her husband as “one of the most important hopes of literary magazines in the United States.” This is high praise — Pound had left the US in 1908 because of the dearth of opportunity for writers.

1939 Letter to Jim Angleton from Pound, discussing content of proposed journal. Beinecke Library, Yale University.

First Copy of Furioso, Summer 1939

The first volume of Furioso (Summer 1939) is a nexus of history: Writers who would be promoted by the new establishment wrote alongside those old-fashioned enough to criticize the Washington regime. Archibald MacLeishwould be made the head of the Library of Congress by FDR and would help the CIA coordinate its fact-finding there. William Carlos Williams a college friend of Pound, would write for The New Republic and become a mentor to Charles Olson. Whereas,  E. E. Cummings would have a fecund career without obvious Washington patronage. The root of the political tension was described in Pound’s contribution Introductory Text-Book, which is among the most succinct explanations of Pound’s views: A free nation has control of its own currency and this is what the Founding Fathers intended for America.

The following is the text of Pound’s contribution to the first copy of Furioso, Summer 1939.

Introductory Text-Book [In Four Chapters]

  1. “All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise, not from defects in their constitution or confederation, not from want of honor and virtue, so much as from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit, and circulation.” – John Adams.
  2. “… and if the national bills issued, be bottomed (as is indispensable) on pledges of specific taxes for their redemption within certain and moderate epochs, and be of proper denominations for circulation, no interest on them would be necessary or just, because they would answer to every one of the purposes of the metallic money withdrawn and replaced by them.” – Thomas Jefferson (1816, letter to Crawford).
  3. “… and gave to the people of this Republic THE GREATEST BLESSING THEY EVER HAD — THEIR OWN PAPER TO PAY THEIR OWN DEBTS.” – Abraham Lincoln.
  4. “The Congress shall have power: To coin money, regulate the value thereof and of foreign coin, and to fix the standards of weights and measures.”

Constitution of the United States, Article I Legislative Department, Section 8, pp.5. Done in the convention by the unanimous consent of the States, 7th September, 1787, and of the Independence of the United States the twelfth. In witness whereof we have hereunto subscribed our names. George Washington. President and Deputy from Virginia.

NOTE.

The abrogation of this last mentioned power derives from the ignorance mentioned in my first quotation. Of the three preceding citations, Lincoln’s has become the text of Willis Overholser’s recent “History of Money in the U.S.,” the first citation was taken as opening text by Jerry Voorhis in his speech in the House of Representatives, June 6, 1938, and the passage from Jefferson is the nucleus of my “Jefferson and/or Mussolini.”

Douglas’ proposals are a sub-head under the main idea in Lincoln’s sentence, Gesell’s [Silvio Gesell] “invention” is a special case under Jefferson’s general law. I have done my best to make simple summaries and clear definitions in various books and pamphlets, and recommend as introductory study, apart from C. H. Douglas’ “Economic Democracy” and Gesell’s “Natural Economic Order,” Chris. Hollis’ “Two Nations,” McNair Wilson’s “Promise to Pay,” Larranaga’s “Gold, Glut and Government” and M. Butchart’s compendium of three centuries thought, that is an anthology of what has been said, in “Money.” (Originally published by Nott).

Rapallo, Italy.

Ezra Pound.

These are the ideas that brought Pound 12 years in St. Elizabeth’s Hospital. Angleton deserves a lot of credit for publishing them in 1939.

Furioso has double significance. Pound returned to the US briefly in 1939 in order to dissuade influential Americans from letting us enter another war. He tried to get an audience with hawkish President Roosevelt, but ended up talking with senators, congressmen and literary personalities. Pound’s trip to visit Angleton at Yale allowed him to publish his ideas in the US —  a paper ambassador that could still speak once he had gone.

After Yale, life moved quickly for James Angleton. He married Cicely, tried a stint at Harvard Law and was eventually recruited for X-2 by Prof. Pearson in 1943.

Angleton ran X-2’s Italian desk, which meant he would scour local sources for information about enemy spies. Pound’s Italian broadcasts would have certainly come to his attention. These radio readings contained the same views that Angleton had published at Yale four years previously and were the immediate cause of Pound’s persecution.

What Pound said cut close to the bone for financiers and their minions like Franklin Delano. Biographer David Martin claims Angleton visited Pound while he was being held in Genoa. If this is true, it seems to be the last time they met. Pound would be imprisoned without trial for over a decade.

American Cages at Pisa

Angleton’s job in Italy involved ferreting out enemy informants and developing a spy network for the Americans. He worked with mafioso figures to do this and was part of re-instituting the corruption that Mussolini’s regime had got under control. Biographers of Angleton describe him as a polished anglophile who by day ran American mobsters over Italy looking for Fascists; and read Pound in the dark of night.  (See Ezio Costanzo, The Mafia and the Allies: Sicily 1943 and the Return of the Mafia.)

This must have been a tortured time for Angleton. The “liberation” of Italy had dubious results and the government he served was persecuting a poet he respected. Angleton must have rationalized the situation to himself: bad methods would serve America’s greater good.

Angleton had some sort of breakdown in 1947. He had abandoned pregnant Cicely to work in Italy in ’43, but returned to her parents’ home in January 1948 to recuperate for six months. In July James was called back to Washington to work in the newly-formed CIA’s counterintelligence division — despite deep depression. His 25-year career in DC would not be glamorous.

Tom Mangold, another of Angleton’s biographers, quotes a “Last Will and Testament” that Cicely Angleton says her husband wrote at this time:

“Life has been good to me and I have not been so good to my friends,” he [Angleton] confessed. He further requested that “a bottle of good spirits” be given to Ezra Pound, e e cummings, and other poet friends from Furioso days.”

One bottle wouldn’t have helped much. In 1947 Pound had been captive in St. Elizabeth’s for a year under the care of OSS contractor Dr. Winfred Overholser. But Angleton had not lost faith in “the greater good.”

Angleton’s new job with the Agency required him to root out communist spies inherited from the “Oh So Social” days of the OSS. CIA and MI6 intelligence on the Soviet Union was very poor after the war, while the Soviets seemed to be able to penetrate Western agencies easily: Kim Philby was the crowning example. (See David C. Martin, Wilderness of Mirrors: Intrigue, Deception, and the Secrets that Destroyed Two of the Cold War’s Most Important Agents.)

Angleton was less effective in his new role: His career relied on patronage from Allen Welsh Dulles and Richard Helms. James saw the potential for communist infiltration everywhere and this hindered the Agency’s ability to recruit Soviet defectors. Many historians have come to the conclusion that Angleton’s paranoia — and a total lack of oversight from his superiors — undermined the Agency’s ability to counter the Soviet threat.

Angleton’s obstructive behavior stemmed from his obsession with Soviet strategy. He focused on researching things like Bolshevik “black ops” which particularly irked some of his colleagues in the Soviet Department. His trust of Anatoliy Golitsyn, a very clever Soviet defector, sent CIA, MI6 and French counterintelligence services into tailspin. However Angleton wasn’t squeezed out until 1974, ostensibly because he was investigating people in the civil rights and anti-Vietnam War movements. (This operation was called MH-CHAOS.)

While Angleton struggled during his first decade at the Agency, Pound’s case became a cause célèbre  for American literati. Former Furioso contributors like William Carlos Williams and Reed Whittemore lambasted Pound in the pages of The New Republic — which seems to have been a premiere literary outlet for writers close to CIA leadership. Archibald MacLeish even had the gall to ask “What happened to American literature?” from its tony pages. [1]

Angleton was forced out of the Agency in 1974. Throughout the 1950s and early 1960s the CIA had been surreptitiously testing drugs on Army personnel and college students, funding the Frankfurt School’s re-emergence in Germany and the US, and pushing the anti-Stalin socialist scene around the world. [2] To borrow Ezra’s words — the Agency was “pseudo-pink.”

Angleton may not have appreciated what he was taking on when he joined the counterintelligence division of the CIA — though a peak at Dulles‘ business contacts would have summoned ghosts from Rapallo. Personal failings aside, James Angleton wanted to save his country from international socialism. Both he and Ezra tried.

Carolina Hartley (email her) is a student of aesthetics and social history, though not from the orthodox perspective.

[1] Books & Comment: Changes in the Weather, Archibald MacLeish. The New Republic, July 2, 1956.

[2] To read more about these programs, see: Search for the Manchurian Candidate: CIA and Mind Control, John Marks. The Dialectical Imagination, by Martin Jay and The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters, Francis Stonor Saunders.

William Colby fired Angleton in 1974. Both protégés of Richard Helms, they had disagreements since the 1950s when Colby supported working with the non-Stalinist left in Italy. Angleton thought that such collaboration was dangerous. Colby probably leaked Angleton’s involvement in CHAOS to Seymour Hersh to facilitate Angleton’s removal. Angleton’s replacement, George Kalaris, wanted out of the role after only two years- but not before he had burned many of Angleton’s files.

James Howard Kunstler Worries about Jewish Behavior

I’ve written before that I get a kick out of the writing of blogger and author James Howard Kunstler. And I love to observe how he twists and turns worrying that the goyim his fellow Jews are mocking and fleecing will finally wake up and take a swat at their tormentors.

A week ago, April 19th, he really let his fears of the goyim show, so much so that I began a blog about it. As things do, a few days led to a week and now we have another Kunstler blog. And he continues to sweat about “the white trash elements” that are catching on to what slick city Jews are doing to America.

For instance, he reported last week that a fellow named Litowitz ran a scam that defrauded, among others, the Thrivent Financial for Lutherans Foundation. I’ll let readers work out the ethnic trappings of that story for themselves.

Now, here’s what I really like. First, Kunstler will outline an obvious problem:

How is it not a racket to deliberately and systematically construct investments designed to fail so you can collect what amounts to insurance against them — and then to sell those financial instruments to customers without telling them that these investments were engineered to blow up? At the very least it amounts to a failure to disclose material information, which is the basis for distinguishing illegality. More to the point, it almost certainly amounts to prosecutable criminal fraud and insider trading.

Then he’ll allude to the presence of so many of his fellow Jews involved in the schemes, someone like former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, who then went on to head Citicorp, which lost 70% of its value under Rubin. As a consequence, Kunstler reports, Mr. Rubin was paid $17 million in 2008 and received $33 million in stock options.

This week his column may be even more revealing. He builds his tale on a phrase uttered by then-President George W. Bush, “This sucker could go down.” Kunstler parses the meaning of the phrase, concluding that it means the whole schmeer, this “rather creaky vessel we call modern civilization.”

And he again points the blame at the Jews (well, it’s mostly Jews): “a banking system that is running a hostage-and-ransom racket on civilization.”

Allow Kunstler to expand in his own words:

This sucker is going down because the train of bankruptcies underway has a remorseless self-reinforcing power to provoke more and more bankruptcies at every stop along the line as every promise to pay is welshed on. The mortgages will not be paid and securities will not pay their investors and the banks will choke on the bad paper promises in their vaults and the pension funds will not pay their beneficiaries and the states and counties and municipalities will go broke and not pay their employees and creditors, and the federal government will not be able to “print” new money in sufficient quantities fast enough to compensate for all the money not being paid up-and-down the line… and one morning we will wake up and discover that all those promises to pay were sham promises based on no productive activity whatsoever… and that will be a sad day. Perhaps the Dow Jones Industrial Average will hit 35,000 on that day.

And make no mistake; Kunstler knows it is members of his Tribe, whom he blandly and ineffectually tries to attack: “How come no political figure of any stripe has called for the resignation of Summers, Rubin, Gensler and other Goldman Sachs ‘sleepers’ infesting high levels of government.”

Next, according to script, he turns his wary eye on the victims of all these high-level scams, and he describes those victims in his typical disdainful way:

Animosities brewing as they are among the white trash elements of the country, I just hope this sucker doesn’t resolve into an ugly bout of attempted ethnic cleansing. Certainly Obama’s racial make-up has inspired a revival of the Ku Klux spirit around the NASCAR ovals. I’m sincerely worried that the misdeeds of people name Blankfein, Rubin, and Madoff could provoke a red-white-and-blue pogrom.

Ah yes,  the infamous “cornporn Nazis” of Kunstler’s overactive imagination. And he’s right to bring up ethnic cleansing, except that he’s doing the typical Jewish tactic of projecting Jewish intentions and actions onto the actual victims. As in the Communist Soviet Union, it is ethnic White Christians who are enduring the attempted ethnic cleansing. Honestly, how many American Jews have even been physically smacked around because they are Jews? Meanwhile, the Whites who built the country are being dispossessed by massive non-White immigration and other tactics.

Still, I give Kunstler credit for consistently bringing up Jewish roles in this earth-shattering financial meltdown. It’s far more than we get from the dying Mainstream Media.

For instance, the other day I read in my newspaper a review of a new book about the collapse of Lehman Brothers. In vain did I search for even a code word about Jews. Nothing. Yet everyone even remotely connected to Wall Street knows that Lehman was a venerable old Jewish firm.

Connie Bruck and James B. Stewart wrote about Lehman’s role in the financial shenanigans of the 1980s in The Predators’ Ball and Den of Thieves, respectively. Jewish issues were always just below the surface, especially because Michael Milken was the central figure. In that case,

the mere mention of Milken and his cronies with all those Jewish names was enough to ignite a major uproar complete with accusations of anti-Semitism. Jewish activist Alan Dershowitz [who is now defending Goldman Sachs: “‘fraud’ is such a generic, vague accusation”] was center stage, even purchasing a full page ad in the New York Times (at a cost of $450,000) and ads in three other newspapers.

To get an idea of  how innocuous the references to Jews were during the Milken scandal, the following is the offending paragraph from a review of James B. Stewart’s Den of Thieves by Michael M. Thomas in the New York Times Book Review:

James B. Stewart . . . charts the way through a virtual solar system of peculation, past planets large and small, from a metaphorical Mercury representing the penny-ante takings of Dennis B. Levine’s small fry, past the middling ($10 million in inside-trading profits) Mars of Mr. Levine himself, along the multiple rings of Saturn — Ivan F. Boesky, his confederate Martin A. Siegel of Kidder, Peabody, and Mr. Siegel’s confederate Robert Freeman of Goldman, Sachs — and finally back to great Jupiter: Michael R. Milken, the greedy billion-dollar junk-bond kingdom in which some of the nation’s greatest names in industry and finance would find themselves entrapped and corrupted.

The lesson is that reviewers shouldn’t even mention Jewish names when writing about financial scandals.

The book mentioned above about Lehman Brothers is The Devil’s Casino: Friendship, Betrayal, and the High-Stakes Games Played Inside Lehman Brothers by Vicky Ward Wiley. For what it’s worth, the reviewer used a pseudonym. And as I said, there was no allusion to Jewish ethnicity, unless this opinion by the reviewer counts: “It’s tempting to conclude that what we’re dealing with here is not a cadre of crafty, evil wizards, but simply a bunch of petty, vicious schmucks.” Does that count as exposing Jewish involvement?

I don’t plan on reading these books. I did my homework in the 80s and 90s on this topic, so now it is the turn of others. Thus, I hope readers can let us know what is and isn’t useful in these new books. Kunstler will give us some hints, but it’s up to us to do the real work.

Edmund Connelly (email him) is a freelance writer, academic, and expert on the cinema arts. He has previously written for The Occidental Quarterly.

Bookmark and Share

Goodbye, America! (Part 1)

Kevin MacDonald’s review of Wilhelm Marr’s pamphlet, Der Sieg des Judenthums über das Germanenthum, 1879, (“The Victory of Judaism over Germanism”), is a fascinating compendium of pessimistic quotations in which German political pundit Marr concludes gloomily that there was no hope left for Germany. It was finished — yes, as early as the 1870s. The Jews, he lamented, were simply too formidable a foe. Marr’s pamphlet ends with these chilling words:

Let us accept the inescapable, since we cannot change it. Its name is: FINIS GERMANIAE — the end of Germany!

I confess I had no idea the outlook was so bleak in Germany as early as 1879. (Marr’s pamphlet has recently been translated into English and is now available in pdf format).  I had been under the false impression that the notion of Jewish domination came much later — after the publication of the Protocols (1903) and the Russian Revolution (1917).

We have seen it all happen though. Germany was brought to its knees, exactly as Marr predicted. Its cadaver now lies rotting.

Exactly a year ago, the state of Israel demanded from Germany a further 1 billion Euros ($1.4 billion) in Holocaust reparations for its endlessly traumatized Jewish survivors. Sixty-five years after World War II, the grim extortion racket continues unabated.

The subject that interests me — and which should be of vital importance to Americans undergoing an almost identical trauma at the hands of organized Jewry today — is the question: to what extent was Germany in the days before Hitler’s rise to power a dress rehearsal for what we are witnessing in America right now? What are the parallels?  Is it time to write America’s obituary?

Is it time to say, FINIS AMERICAE — the end of America?

Here is a pertinent, relatively modern quotation which will serve as a useful coda to the doomladen citations from Marr. Read it carefully. It will not only hammer home the points made by Marr several decades earlier, it will also provide the reader with a sharp reminder of the parallel situation in which America finds itself today.

With one significant difference: America is in a far worse condition.

Wilhelm Marr (1819–1904) and his controversial pamphlet of 1879, predicting the end of Germany — sixty-six years before Germany’s catastrophic defeat in World War II in 1945.

Historian Sir Arthur Bryant summarizes Jewish power in pre-1933 Germany:

It was the Jews with their international affiliations and their hereditary flair for finance who were best able to seize such opportunities…They did so with such effect that, even in November 1938, after five years of anti-Semitic legislation and persecution, they still owned, according to the Times correspondent in Berlin, something like a third of the real property in the Reich [my emphasis]. Most of it came into their hands during the inflation… But to those who had lost their all, this bewildering transfer seemed a monstrous injustice. After prolonged sufferings they had now been deprived of their last possessions. They saw them pass into the hands of strangers, many of whom had not shared their sacrifices and who cared little or nothing for their national standards and traditions…

The Jews obtained a wonderful ascendancy in politics, business and the learned professions [in spite of constituting] less than one percent of the population [my emphasis]… The banks, including the Reichsbank and the big private banks, were practically controlled by them. So were the publishing trade, the cinema, the theatres and a large part of the press — all the normal means, in fact, by which public opinion in a civilized country is formed… The largest newspaper combine in the country with a daily circulation of four millions was a Jewish monopoly…

Every year it became harder and harder for a gentile to gain or keep a foothold in any privileged occupation [my emphasis]. … At this time it was not the ‘Aryans’ who exercised racial discrimination. It was a discrimination that operated without violence. It was exercised by a minority against a majority. There was no persecution, only elimination. … It was the contrast between the wealth enjoyed — and lavishly displayed — by aliens of cosmopolitan tastes, and the poverty and misery of native Germans, that has made anti-Semitism so dangerous and ugly a force in the new Europe. Beggars on horseback are seldom popular, least of all with those whom they have just thrown out of the saddle. Sir Arthur Bryant, Unfinished Victory (1940) (slightly edited for brevity)

Throughout history, Christianity, and especially the Catholic Church, has been a countervailing force against organized Jewry — against a “stiff-necked” people who, while claiming spotless innocence and invariably framing their detractors as irrational and pathological haters, have nevertheless been expelled from no fewer than 109 locations since the year AD250.

[adrotate group=”1″]

Why has contemporary Christianity failed so abysmally to stand up to the encroachments of organized Jewry and its influence?

This is a question I will attempt to answer now.

The Christian Zionists and organized Jewry: fools conned by knaves

Despite its history as the only Western institution that has been able at times to resist Jewish power, the Catholic Church, of which I am a hopelessly dysfunctional practising member, has proved to be an acute disappointment. It has been thoroughly subverted from within and without. It offers neither guidance nor leadership. So forget the Catholics—a spent force. 

One is also forced to conclude that there is little hope that American Protestants could come to the rescue. Their infatuated legions — particularly the 60 million Christian Zionists who constitute the most influential group among them — are in many ways as rabid as the fanatical Jews who seem to have infected them with their zealotry, egging them on to find solace in eschatological ecstasies and millenarian mumbojumbo.

Life is indeed so empty and sterile for these wretched lumpengoyim that the only thing that excites their sluggish sensitivities is the prospect of Armageddon and the thought of universal and catastrophic death — the quicker the better.

Whipped into a frenzy of religious fervor by the Grahams and the Robertsons, the Falwells and the Hagees, the Lindseys and the La Hayes, these Christian Zionists have become imitation Jews almost indistinguishable from Vladimir Jabotinski and Baruch Goldstein. They believe in a Greater Israel — entailing further conquests of Arab Land — and in the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians. They have “adopted” illegal settlements and they directly finance the bulldozing of Palestinian homes, the uprooting of olive trees, and the daily oppression of the rightful owners of the Holy Land. They pray every Sunday in their vast soulless churches for the destruction of Iran. And if push came to shove, they would gladly give their blessings to genocide — and call it “the will of God.”

John Hagee, founder of Christians United for Israel: “Fifty million evangelical Christians unite with five million American Jews, standing together on behalf of Israel….The man or nation that lifts a voice or hand against Israel invites the wrath of God.”

There are now 80,000 fundamentalist pastors and clergy preaching their message of madness to these ill-educated Christian masses — in many ways as gullible and gormless as medieval peasants.  The pernicious views of their “pastors” are disseminated by 1000 local Christian radio stations as well as 100 Christian TV stations. See here.

Consider the unimaginable war crimes committed by the state of Israel just over a year ago in Gaza. The world saw it happen. Judge Goldstone saw it happen. His meticulously documented report makes it abundantly clear that Israel is a criminal nation and that its politicians and generals are steeped in criminality.

Yet here is Grace Halsell: “Every act taken by Israel is orchestrated by God, and should be condoned, supported, and even praised by the rest of us.”

When I first read this, I couldn’t believe my eyes. Was this woman crazy? Where had she been since 1948? Hadn’t she heard of the Goldstone Report? Did she have no inkling of Israeli war crimes: of Deir Yassin (1948), the Lavon affair (1954), the Sabra and Shatila war crimes (1982), Qana (17 villages wiped out 1996), the Jenin massacre (2002), the Lebanon and Egyptian terrorist attacks and the atrocities in Iraq from 1990 to the present time, the horrific Gaza invasion of 2009? Had she never heard of the King David Hotel bombing of the British? Had she never heard of the Hebron Mosque massacre by Baruch Goldstein? Had she never heard of the sneak attack on the USS Liberty? Had she never heard of American state secrets sold to the Soviets and Chinese?  Had she never heard of white phosphorus and cluster bombs and DIME weapons that slice babies’ bodies in half?

I need not have worried.

Halsell, I was relieved to learn, was being ironic. She opposed Zionism as much as I did — as any sane and reasonable person would.

Why Contemporary America is far worse off than pre-National Socialist Germany

I have been accused of needless defeatism by some of my anti-Zionist colleagues. America is far from dead, they assure me. It’s alive and kicking. It’s just a matter of time before good patriotic Americans rise from their slumber, reclaim lost ground, and take back their country.

I wish I could feel as sanguine about America’s prospects as these optimists do.

I should like to convince you that the problems facing Germany were far less formidable than the problems facing any potential American rescuer today.

One of the serious negative factors facing America today — a problem the Germans never had — is the existence of vast numbers of Christian Zionists in their midst.

Germany of course had to cope with organized Jewry, a group working from within to undermine the foundations of German society. But one scourge Germany did not have, and which America has, is this scourge of a non-Jewish enemy within: the 60 million Christian Zionists acting in cahoots with organized Jewry to oppose the interests of their own people.

America’s Christian Zionists, it would seem, are their own worst enemy — blithely planning their own demise without knowing it.

So here is Problem Number One for those of you who dream that America could once again become the self-conscious ethnic possession of people of European ancestry:  What are you going to do with these 60 million White American renegades who have joined forces with the Enemy? Who are as Jewish as Ariel Sharon or Abe Foxman. Who are hand in glove with AIPAC. Who think ADL means ‘Advanced Divine Leadership’.

How are you going to fit these thoroughly Judaized allies of organized Jewry into your White Homeland?

It cannot be done. So you have a big problem.

Israel and its Jewish-American Double Agents

Another big problem America needs to solve that Germany did not have to cope with is the state of Israel and its powerful lobby in America. Germany did not have Israel hanging round its neck like an albatross. The Germans were not induced to fight wars on behalf of a foreign country. They didn’t invade other countries in order to make the world safe for Israel.

“Since September 11, 2001, the Israeli state, Zionists inside the US government, and the entire leadership of the Major American Jewish Organizations, have been entirely devoted to pushing the US into Middle East wars on behalf of Israel.” — James Petras, see here.

“Today the Jews rule this world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them.” — Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad of Malaysia, in a speech to the Tenth Islamic Summit Conference at Putrajaya, Malaysia, October 16, 2003.

Almost 5,000 U.S. military personnel have now been sacrificed for Israel in Iraq. These are the “officially acknowledged” figures. The real figures have been put at between 50,000 and 70,000 and are now probably higher. (See here and here.) The number of seriously injured soldiers are perhaps ten times the number of the dead. Meanwhile, the number of Iraqis slaughtered amount to 1.3 million, with four times as many driven into neighboring countries as homeless refugees. The cost to the American taxpayer is (to date) $980 billion, with a total cost of $3 trillion projected if and when the mindless carnage is ever complete. See here.

I think that even the enemies of Zionism before 1948 failed to appreciate the extent to which organized Jewry would maximize its power once it had acquired its own headquarters and homeland — complete with its own military arsenal and espionage facilities. Archimedes provides a hint in his famous quote on the lever, often loosely translated as: “Give me a place to stand and I will move the world.” The Jews now have “a place to stand” — and they certainly are “moving the world.”

The Germans, in addition, did not have a powerful Jewish Lobby holding the entire German government to ransom. German politicians, unlike American ones, were not on Israel’s payroll via campaign contributions from AIPAC and its fabulously rich Jewish supporters. These political donations or “reward money” are bribes in all but name.

Apart from the carrot, there is of course the stick, wielded to good effect by organized Jewry against all American critics of Israel. “Their willing use of force, money and media slander,” James Petras points out, “intimidates any and all critics, including dissident politicians, media, journalists and professors.”

In pre-WW2 Germany, the Mossad did not exist. No Mossad was around to monitor the Internet activities of German politicians to see what financial or sexual shenanigans they were up to. Today, in America, it is reasonable to assume that there is constant surveillance of American politicians by Mossad — if not by AIPAC, the ADL, and their various affiliates. Indeed, the ADL famously settled a spy case that yielded documents with 10,000 names and 600 organizations thought to be insufficiently slavish toward Israel. Legal filings from the case showed that an ADL agent had a floor plan and a key for the office of Alex Odeh, a murdered Arab American leader.

It follows that the potential for blackmailing American politicians (by Israel’s agents) must today be enormous. Sibel Edmonds asks rhetorically, “Are American politicians being blackmailed? Is grass green?” Her answer:  “Of course the blackmail scenario is possible; in fact, highly possible.”

Seven crucial points need to be hammered home.  They show that America is now in a critical situation from which nothing can save it. Nothing except a military coup or violent revolution.

1. Germany did not have to cope with 60 million Christians Zionists collaborating with the goals of organized Jewry; America does.

2. Germany did not have the state of Israel to finance, nor did it have to fight Israel’s wars; America does.

3. Germany’s population of Jews was relatively small compared to America’s: less than 1% of 80 million (roughly 522,000 Jews in 1933) compared to contemporary America’s 2% + of 309 million (over 6 million Jews).

4. Since Israel had yet to be founded, Germany did not have the problem of dual citizens whose primary allegiance is to a foreign country.

5. Although there were Jewish activist organizations in Weimar Germany, they had not achieved the power and influence of the Jewish ethnic infrastructure in the US. Organizations like AIPAC, the ADL, the SPLC, the American Jewish Committee, and the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations (to name a few) are lavishly funded and influential in all areas of American life, including law enforcement, foreign policy, and all things multicultural.

6. Jews have also erected the Holocaust Industry as a powerful guilt machine for White Americans. Traditional American culture has been substantially replaced by the culture of the Holocaust and various other non-White victimhoods, endlessly played out in the movies, television shows, and in the schools, all the way from kindergarten through the university.

7.  Above all, Germany was never threatened with multiculturalism. Promoting multiculturalism has been the focus not only of various influential Jewish intellectual movements, it has also been the most important goal of the  organized Jewish community, especially since World War II. Multiculturalism is a deadly weapon against Western civilization — a WMD of truly devastating lethality that in the long run will destroy Christianity, traditional moral values, and traditional nationalist cultures in North America, Europe, and Australia. It will also result in the dispossession and disempowerment of the White race.

Conclusion: the situation facing America is a grim one. An epidemic of escalating severity threatens us all. In the course of time, this epidemic of evil is likely to infect Eurasia and spread to other parts of the world.

The future looks unimaginably bleak.

End of Part I. Go to Part II.

Bishop Richard Williamson: Holocaust Denial and Jewish Influence on the Catholic Church

Bishop Richard Williamson

On April 16th, 2010, Bishop Richard Williamson, is scheduled to go on trial in Regensburg, Germany for the hate crime of Holocaust denial. While Bishop Williamson had expressed doubts about the Holocaust since the late 1980’s it was not until November, 2008, during comments he made on a Swedish television interview that he was charged with the crime of Holocaust denial. Because he refused to pay the fine of $16,000 he has been ordered to stand trial. If he decides to go to Germany, he can be convicted for the crime of “Volksverhetzung,” (incitement of hatred for a people), as was Ernst Zündel.

Bishop Williamson is a member of the Society of St. Pius X, a traditionalist order founded in 1970 in protest to the liberalizing effects of Vatican II. The SSPX has sought to preserve the timeless beliefs and practices of the Catholic Church amidst the alterations to belief and ritual that were introduced in the middle of the last century by Vatican II.  The Society has 510 priests working in 31 countries, and 2 million members. Bishop Williamson, British born and Cambridge educated, is one of four bishops consecrated in 1988 by SSPX founder, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. He is an academic, fluent in French, German, and Spanish. Until he was appointed rector of the South American seminary in La Reja, Argentina, in 2003, he was rector of the North American seminary in Winona, Minnesota for many years. Because of his statements on the Holocaust, he has been relieved of his position and silenced by the Church.

If you are non-Jewish and are of European descent, then you are affiliated with the Catholic Church. No matter what your current beliefs, your family, at least for a thousand years, until the Reformation, was Catholic. The Catholic Church unified, and civilized your ancestors and permitted the art, science, economy, and morality of Europe to flourish.  In addition to protecting their souls, the Catholic Church defended your ancestors from non-European aliens:  from invading Moslems, and from Jewish influence on culture. In the U.S., Catholicism is still the largest single religious denomination with 70 million believers. In Western Europe the number is 211,466 million, 55% of the population. However, instead of guarding its members, as it did in the past, the Church has now joined their historic adversary.

In his book, Separation and its DiscontentsToward an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism, Kevin MacDonald devotes considerable space(short version) to an analysis of the Catholic Church’s relationship with the Jews, beginning in Roman times and continuing to the National Socialist era. He shows that early anti-Semitism by the Church Fathers was a defensive response to Jewish economic domination and enslavement of non-Jews in the 4th century.

Catholic institutional anti-Semitism, he implies, grew out of both theology and ethnic conflict. The Church asserted as doctrine that by rejecting Jesus as the Messiah, the Jews had rejected God and had forfeited their status as God’s Chosen People. The official Church doctrine was that Jews should be tolerated in a subservient, powerless role because of their usefulness as testimony to the truth of Christianity.

By adopting this theology, the Church had erected a powerful theological rationale for protecting and civilizing the European peoples. The traditionalist view is that these definitive beliefs about Jews cannot be altered. They are forever part of Church dogma. It would therefore not be surprising to find that traditionalist Catholics like Bishop Williamson may have negative attitudes about Jews or about Jewish influence on the Catholic Church since World War II.

Wearing a dog collar and flanked by police, Bishop Williamson was escorted out of Heathrow Airport following his flight from Argentina in February, 2009.

The reason that the fundamental, dogmatic teachings of the Church did not change over time is because the Catholic Church believed them to be Divine Revelation. However, directives and writings of the Council of Vatican II (1962–65) often contradict the eternal teachings of the Church. Especially problematic are those publications re-defining the Church’s position toward the Jews.

Before Vatican II, the Catholic doctrine was that the Scriptures were infallible because they were dictated by the Holy Ghost  Beginning in the 19th Century,however, the interpretive method of “historicism” began to apply new criteria to the study of the sacred texts. In interpreting Scripture, historicism took into account archeology, the natural sciences, and contemporary social and psychological theories that proposed to explain the behavior of society and individuals.  One of the theologians who defended the relativistic method of istoricism at Vatican II was Josef Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI.

In 2001, the Pontifical Biblical Commission (PBC), an official part of the Congregation for the Faith in the Vatican, published the bookThe Hebrew People and its Holy Scriptures in the Christian Bible. The book succinctly describes the radical changes in the Church’s position toward the Jews during and after Vatican II.  Cardinal Ratzinger was the president of the PBC. Everything in the book, therefore, was written under his personal direction. His Prefacerepresents an extra seal of endorsement and support.

Pope Benedict II under shadow of menorah at the Cologne Synagogue, Aug 18, 2005

The introduction to The Hebrew People and its Holy Scriptures in the Christian Bible defends the idea that because of the imprisonment and death of so many Jews in the Nazi concentration camps in WW II, it is essential to re-examine the spiritual relations between Christians and Jews.  The book’s aim is to “advance the dialogue between Christians and Jews” by interpreting the Bible in a relativistic manner pleasing to Jewish sensibilities.

The result is a new conception for relations of the Church with the Jews. Actually, with respect to the Jews, a new perspective had already been suggested by the Austrian Catholic theologian, Johann Baptist Metz. (Incidentally, Father Metz was considered a “Catholic spokesman” for the Frankfurt School.) Not only did he assume the relativism and the deconstructive methods of the Frankfurt School, he also placed the Holocaust, using the synonym “Auschwitz,” into the center of history. According to Metz, Scripture required reinterpretation and revitalization after the Holocaust. This coincides with the thinking of the Pontifical Biblical Commission.

Benedict XVI receives a framed scroll for Israel chief rabbis on May, 12, 2009 at the center for the Jewish Heritage in Jerusalem

The Pontifical Biblical Commission denies both the Old and New Testament as sources of Revelation. “The change caused by the extermination of the Jews has stimulated all the Churches to completely re-think their relations with Judaism and, as a consequence, to reconsider their interpretation of the Hebrew Bible, the Old Testament. Some have asked themselves whether Christians should repent for their appropriation of the Hebrew Bible and a (Christian) interpretation that no Jew could accept. Should Christians, then, read the Bible with the Hebrews in order to respect its Jewish origin?” (pp 54-5) Should the events of World War II change the bi-millennial interpretation of the Church about Revelation? One would think that what was true before the catastrophe would remain true afterward.  But the answer of the PBC is implicitly in the affirmative: Jews are to be the final authority in Biblical interpretation.

Not only do the authors of, The Hebrew People and its Holy Scriptures In The Christian Church, give Jews the final authority on Biblical interpretation, they make a number of assertions totally at odds with traditional Catholic teaching. They allege that the present-day Jewish religion is the true heir of the divine promise of the Old Testament. For example, the Pontifical Biblical Commission states, “Far from replacing Israel, the [Catholic] Church remains in solidarity with it.” (p. 152).

The Catholic Church has always taught that according to Revelation, the Old Covenant was revoked with the coming of Christ, and that the true heir of the Old Covenant is the Catholic Church.

Elio Toaff, chief Rabbi of Rome, welcoming Pope John Paul II to a service at the Roman Synagogue, 1986

In advancing this thesis, the PBC does not distinguish between what is religion and what is race in Judaism. Instead it tries to make the Hebrew people, in the racial sense, coincide with the elect people, in the religious sense. If the Old Covenant is still valid, then it is a small step to the conclusion that the Holocaust was a heinous crime against God’s Chosen.

In addition to corrupting the Catholic teaching about the Old and New Covenant, the PBC has perverted Catholic teaching regarding the crime of Deicide.  It is perennial Catholic teaching that the guilt and the penalty of certain crimes against God are, by their very nature, transferred to future generations — for example, Original Sin and the sin of the Tower if Babel. Such also was the sin of Deicide. The traditional teaching of the Church was that the guilt and the punishment demanded by justice for the murder of Jesus were assumed voluntarily by the Jews and were laid upon their future generations. This was the constant interpretation of the Catholic Church until Vatican Council II.

The PBC, however, offers an opinion which is the very opposite of this Catholic teaching. That is, it alleges that the Gospels were not written objectively and cannot be considered a part of Divine Revelation. Accordingly there was no crime of Deicide, no such crime was committed by the Jews as a people, and the guilt and punishment of that crime did not fall upon the future generations of the Jews. So keen are they to seek the pardon and approval of Jews that relativist Catholic theologians seem ready to accept the notion of Deicide not by, but of the Jews.  The religion of the Holocaust is spreading from the Synagogue to the Cathedral.  And Holocaust denial is its gravest sin.

John Paul II at the Western Wall in Jerusalem, March, 2000

The reflections and actions of John Paul II and Benedict XVI concerning the Jews are condemned by the binding words of the Third Ecumenical Lateran Council, (1179), which pronounced an anathema on those who, preferring the Jews to the Christians, would receive the testimony of Jews against Christians and not that of Christians against Jews.

Speaking about Bishop Richard Williamson, His Holiness, Bishop of Rome and Vicar of Jesus Christ, Successor of St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles, Pope Benedict XVI stated in U.S. News and World Report, February 12, 2009:

“The hatred and contempt for men, women and children that was manifested in the Shoah was a crime against God and against humanity,” Benedict told the visiting leaders, using the Hebrew term for the Holocaust. “This should be clear to everyone, especially to those standing in the tradition of the Holy Scriptures.”

“It is beyond question that any denial or minimization of this terrible crime is intolerable and altogether unacceptable,” he said during the meeting in the Vatican’s Apostolic Palace.

Jewish leaders applauded his comments, saying the crisis with the church that had been sparked by Bishop Richard Williamson’s comments was over.

Abraham Foxman, a Holocaust survivor and the national director of the Anti-Defamation League, said the Vatican should excommunicate Williamson again because of his remarks.

Further reading:

By Atila Sinke Guimaraes:

In the Murky Waters of Vatican II, 1997

Animus Delendi I, 2000

Animus Delendi, II, 2002

Will He Find the Faith, 2007?

The Biblical Commission on the Jews: Changes in Doctrine and the New Anathema, 2003

By Bro. Michael Dimond and Bro. Peter Dimond:

The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II, undated)

Trudie Pert is a pen name.  Email her.

The Dissolution of the Family among Non-Elite Whites: Review of “Red Families v. Blue Families” by Naomi Cahn and June Carbone

I heard Naomi Cahn and June Carbone talk about their book, Red Families v. Blue Families: Legal Polarization and the Creation of Culture (Oxford, 2010), on Commie Radio Pacifica, so you can be sure there is a “progressive” message. As summarized in their op-ed in the Christian Science Monitor, the idea is that families in Blue State America are thriving, while families in Red State America are failing because they are too hung up on old fashioned ideas like sexual abstinence.

There is an obvious dishonesty in this approach because it completely ignores race in the analysis in an effort to pin the blame on traditional sexual beliefs and customs. Blacks and Latinos who live in urban areas and in very Blue States exhibit high rates of teenage pregnancy, non-marriage, and dropping out of the education process — much higher than Whites in Red State America.

So what they are really trying to explain is variation in family patterns among White people. And there they have a point. Red State White America is in a crisis. (Indeed, it’s no accident that Red State America is where most of the much-commented-on White anger is coming from.) The data they are summarizing really relate to some of the correlates of education which are in turn linked to IQ. But we have known at least since The Bell Curve that higher IQ people not only are more likely to go further in the  educational system, they are more likely to have stable marriages, they don’t have babies outside of marriage, and they begin child bearing later. These people are more likely to live in large urban and suburban areas where there are jobs for educated people.

The Whites in non-urban Red State America have a lot to be angry about. The present economic crisis is just the most recent disaster in the long pattern of dispossession of Whites who are less educated. Good jobs in the private sector have pretty much evaporated — the unions are gone and the jobs have been shipped overseas. These people see their communities invaded by racial and cultural aliens, many of them illegal, making a middle class life impossible. They see themselves losing political power to the coalition of minorities and elite Whites that has become the Democratic Party.

As The Bell Curve emphasized, since World War II the cognitive elite are pulling away from the rest of America. Hard economic times only make it worse.

And hard times are always difficult on families. As Cahn and Carbone note, “the latest studies show that as the economy has gone south, teen and nonmarital births and abortions have all increased. … Employment figures also demonstrate that male employment has fallen even further than female employment, making youthful weddings that much riskier.”

In evolutionary terms, the high-investment style of reproduction becomes non-viable as men are unable to provide for their families. Women start having babies sooner and don’t expect to receive support from males over a long period of time, especially where welfare programs are available.

Being on the left, however, C & C use this opportunity to propose that the real culprit is traditional family values. If we could just get rid of those Bible Belt ideas, all would be well:

Missing from this debate is recognition of the bankruptcy of traditionalist family values as policy for the postindustrial era. …

In the United States, states that emphasize abstinence-only education, limit public subsidies of contraception, restrict access to abortion – and, yes, oppose gay marriage – have higher teen birth and divorce rates.

Yet the failure of the family values movement simply produces another round of moral panic and calls for more draconian restrictions.

Their solution combines typical leftist utopianism with a very real program of lowering the birth rate of people with traditional values.

The solution? As we outline in great detail in our book “Red Families v. Blue Families,” there are three critical steps we can take: (1) promote access to contraception – within marriage as well as outside it; (2) develop a greater ability to combine not only work and family, but family and education; and (3) make sure the next generation stays in school, learns the skills to be employed, and cultivates values that can adapt to the future.

This is a nice distillation of the bizarre idea that all Americans have the potential to be college graduates with lots of skills suitable for a post-industrial economy. IQ never enters the equation. But this utopian future is just not going to happen. A far better program would be to provide better economic opportunities for White people, especially White males, whose prospects have been blunted by the present regime.

The fact is that traditional sexual attitudes worked perfectly well in the West to produce a very adaptive culture of high-investment parenting combined with individualist social institutions. C & C attempt to tar traditional values with the stigma of Muslim and African societies where female virtue is prized: “We are entirely sympathetic with those inclined to lock up their daughters from puberty until marriage, but we do recognize that the societies abroad most insistent on policing women’s virtue are locked into cycles of poverty.”

But there is no reason to suppose that the problem with Muslim and African societies is policing the sexual behavior of women. Other traits of these cultures are far more likely culprits,  including low average IQ and social institutions like cousin marriage and clan-based social and political systems.

The reality is that social support for high-investment parenting has always been a critical feature of Western social structure until the sexual revolution of the 1960s. Since then, all of the markers of family stability have headed south  — including divorce rates and births out of wedlock for all races and ethnic groups. (Nevertheless, there are very large differences between races and ethnic groups in conformity with Rushton’s lifespan theory of race differences.)

But this relative lack of social support for marriage has had very different effects depending on traits like IQ. For example, a well-known study in behavior genetics shows that the heritability of age of first sexual intercourse increased dramatically after the sexual revolution of the 1960s. In other words, after the social supports for traditional sexuality disappeared, genetic influences became more important. Before the sexual revolution, traditional sexual mores applied to everyone. After the revolution, genes mattered more. People with higher IQ were able to produce stable families and marriages, but lower IQ people were less prone to doing so, and these trends have been exacerbated by the current economic climate. Hence the Red State/Blue State dichotomy among White people observed by C & C.

And this brings me to thinking about Jews and particularly Jewish influence on sexual culture. In their book, C & C note that Jews tend to exhibit  the Blue State pattern— an unsurprising result given Jewish IQ patterns. A theme of Chapter 4 of The Culture of Critique is that the psychoanalytic assault on traditional Western sexual culture had a disparate impact on different IQ groups and benefited Jews:

Jews suffer to a lesser extent than [non-Jews] from the erosion of cultural supports for high-investment parenting, and Jews benefit by the decline in religious belief among [non-Jews]. As [Norman] Podhoretz (1995, 30) notes, it is in fact the case that Jewish intellectuals, Jewish organizations like the AJCongress, and Jewish-dominated organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union … have ridiculed Christian religious beliefs, attempted to undermine the public strength of Christianity, and have led the fight for unrestricted pornography. The evidence of this chapter indicates that psychoanalysis as a Jewish-dominated intellectual movement is a central component of this war on [non-Jewish] cultural supports for high-investment parenting. …

Although other factors are undoubtedly involved, it is remarkable that the increasing trend toward low-investment parenting in the United States largely coincides with the triumph of the psychoanalytic and radical critiques of American culture represented by the political and cultural success of the counter-cultural movement of the 1960s.

I then go into the academic version of the ideas presented here, especially the greater importance of social controls and traditional religious beliefs for people on the left side of the Bell Curve. (See here, in the  Conclusion).

There is nothing wrong with traditional Western sexual codes. C & C are trying to rationalize the destruction of the last vestiges of that culture by noting that people with traditional religious ideas on sexuality increasingly behave in ways that are contrary to those beliefs. But the problem is not the traditional culture. Rather it is the economic dispossession of non-elite Whites combined with a media culture that glorifies expressive individualism and uninhibited sexuality (i.e., drugs, sex, and Rock ‘n’ Roll) — a media culture that, in my view, was critically shaped by the Jewish intellectual movements reviewed in The  Culture of Critique.

Bookmark and Share

Take the Money and Run: Jewish White Collar Criminals Welcomed by the Jewish Community

We Westerners really do live in a Jewish world. Jewish control of the media is undeniable, as I’ve written about for years. One area that remains under-treated is the one most people still associate with Jews—and not always kindly: financial matters. Whether a Jewish group evolutionary strategy is responsible for their outsized success with money, whether it is because Jews are “the synagogue of Satan,” as St. John’s gospel famously quoted Jesus as saying, or whether it is some other factor, at the end of the day Jewish temporal power comes down to money. And Jews have a lot of it.

I wrote about this in February in my blog Jews & Money. That has a lot of good background information, so I recommend that readers have a look.

Today I’ll expand on that theme, adding a few updates.

Let’s start with Rolling Stones reporter Matt Taibbi’s excellent introduction to his essay The Great American Bubble Machine:

The first thing you need to know about Goldman Sachs is that it’s everywhere. The world’s most powerful investment bank is a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money.

Taibbi knows how to turn a phrase, as he shows elsewhere in his writing on the economic crisis we’re facing:

It’s over — we’re officially, royally fucked. No empire can survive being rendered a permanent laughingstock, which is what happened as of a few weeks ago, when the buffoons who have been running things in this country finally went one step too far.

Folks, I have to insist: An awful lot of this massive theft and fraud has been done by Jews. And now that Jewish control is so pervasive, Jews can openly joke about their perfidy—and get away with it. Consider this skit from the heavily Jewish program Saturday Night Live. The skit makes fun of the prominent role Jews played in the financial meltdown, spoofing Herbert and Marion Sandler, Congressman Barney Frank, and even George Soros. Here’s the unadulterated original version. It’s a keeper.

Consider now the recent European crisis centered on Greece. The venerableNew York Times, in the article “Wall St. Helped to Mask Debt Fueling Europe’s Crisis, as much as confirms this Jewish role in the destabilization of Greece, including how Greece’s future airport revenue and lottery proceeds were squandered in order to keep current spending off the books.

As worries over Greece rattle world markets, records and interviews show that with Wall Street’s help, the nation engaged in a decade-long effort to skirt European debt limits. One deal created byGoldman Sachs helped obscure billions in debt from the budget overseers in Brussels. . . .

The bankers, led by Goldman’s president, Gary D. Cohn, held out a financing instrument that would have pushed debt from Greece’s health care system far into the future, much as when strapped homeowners take out second mortgages to pay off their credit cards.

Financial crime is deeply embedded in Jewish culture. M. Raphael Johnson wrote an expose of the Judeo-Russian Mafia based on Robert I. Friedman’s book Red Mafiya: How the Russian Mob Has Invaded America. Friedman stated that the entire “Russian” mafia is Jewish, without exception. Johnson also reported that

Friedman is also not afraid to admit that Jewish organizations throughout the world, led by the Anti-Defamation League, are the beneficiaries of largesse coming from organized crime, and that the organizations in question are aware of it. In other words, Jewish organized crime is considered an acceptable part of Jewish life, and that Jewish organizations have actually lobbied law enforcement to stop investigations into this phenomenon, almost always with success.”

Sadly, Friedman died young from a rare “tropical disease.”

I’m also happy to see that renegade scholar E. Michael Jones, author of the 1,200-page The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History, is now at work on a new book about Jews and Capitalism. He has excerpted parts of the book in the February and March issues of his journalCulture Wars.

The basis of his March essay is a new book by Josh Kosman called The Buyout of America: How Private Equity Will Cause the Next Great Credit Crisis. There Kosman tells us that “the rapacious leveraged-buyout kings of the 1980s were still around. They had just adopted a new name, now calling themselves private-equity investors.” And their tactics remain the same. Just like Taibbi’s metaphor of the great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money,” leveraged buyout “artists” and private-equity (PE) investors suck the money and lifeblood out of otherwise healthy companies.

Jones and Kosman describe the process: PE investors buy a company, starve them of cash and human capital to generate short-term profits, then use the profits as a basis to borrow more money. The new loans are then piled on top of the original debt taken on to finance the LBO. All this new money is then used to issue a big fat dividend for the PE folks so that the money from the loans goes straight into their pockets.

Now they have moved into acquiring hospitals and nursing homes. Companies and health-care organizations so acquired by PE end up with “crippling debt, loss of reputation, the lay-off of skilled workers, and in many cases bankruptcy.” PE is “another word for looting. The companies which got taken over were plundered for their resources.”

Employing his skills as a historian, Jones notes the obvious fact that “the history of Jewish predatory lending practices, [is] something which antedates the leveraged buy-outs of the ‘80s by centuries.” He then argues that “The concentration of the nation’s wealth in the hands of a few avaricious Jews has led to corruption of both discourse and culture, which is subsidized to serve the Mammonites that feed it.”

The ancient Jewish practice of usury will be the death of the American economy as well. Usury, Jones claims, “knows no limits. It has no telos. It grows like cancer and only stops growing when it brings about the death of its host.” America (and parts of Europe) are approaching that end, for economic activity bereft of morality “becomes usurious, which is to say, cancerous, which is to say bound to bring about the death of the national economy which is its host organism.”

Again, Jones, Kosman and I are not talking about anything new. It’s long been a stereotype of Western folklore that Jews are deceitful, particularly when it comes to money. Now they seem not to bother with strenuous efforts to disguise it — although explicit assertions that these patterns have anything to do with Jewishness will be met with an outpouring of outrage and charges of anti-Semitism by the ADL. Over the previous few decades, they’ve pushed the envelope, and — I hope to even their own surprise — we goyim have barely reacted. Is their well-known contempt for us deserved, then?

There may well be contempt, but prudently there is also wariness of the riled goy. Observers have long noted that Jews are exquisitely sensitive to the mood of the far larger non-Jewish masses that surround them. There is no doubt that Jews have developed a fine-tuned radar for when things might turn sour.

Kevin MacDonald just wrote about this with respect to Jewish NYTimescolumnist Frank Rich. No doubt mindful of the prominent role his fellow tribe members have been playing in the financial crisis, in the placement of the first non-White in the White House, and in the more general multicultural program of White dispossession, Rich fears the “mass hysteria” that might reasonably accompany such a dispossession.  Rich wrote the following about soon-to-be minority Whites:

If Obama’s first legislative priority had been immigration or financial reform or climate change, we would have seen the same trajectory [of White rage]. The conjunction of a black president and a female speaker of the House — topped off by a wise Latina on the Supreme Court and a powerful gay Congressional committee chairman — would sow fears of disenfranchisement among a dwindling and threatened minority in the country no matter what policies were in play.

Rich’s sharing of Jewish thinking is useful, but the fact is Rich is a grouch. Far more fun to read is blogger James Howard Kunstler, who more and more in his weekly Monday blogs has been showing his own hysteria about what might happen should the fleeced goyim ever wake up.

In his recent blog Our Turn?, he begins with a familiar Jewish obsession:

Nations go crazy. It’s terrifying when it happens, especially to a major nation with the ability to project its craziness outward. We look back on the psychotic break of Germany in 1933 and still wonder how the then-best-educated population in Europe could fall under the sway of a sociopathic political program. We behold the carnage and devastation left in the wake of that episode, and decades later you still can do little more than shake your head in bewilderment.

Kunstler is talking about “a genuine descent into madness, with the very high probability of persecution, violence, murder, and mayhem — all more or less sponsored by various authorities and institutions.”

Working himself up into a lather, he continues, “One day soon, somebody with a gun or an explosive device, someone with a very sketchy sense-of-self, and perhaps a recent record of personal failure and humiliation, is going to sacrifice himself to become the Tea Party’s first martyr by shooting up a shopping mall in some blue district.”

Readers of Kunstler’s blogs will know of his fear and contempt for Americans who do not live in big cities and who are not reflexively liberal in their politics. These are the infamous “cornporn Nazis” of Kunstler’s nightmares. “The guerilla forces of the radical right will not know whether they are fighting for WalMart, or the Financial Services arm of General Electric, or against abortions, or for bigger and better freeways, or the rights of thoracic surgeons to drive families into bankruptcy, or against the idea of climate change, or evolution, or Jews-in-the-media, or their neighbors having something they feel envious about.”

In other words, in Kunstler’s views, these people are idiots, but they are dangerous idiots. As I say, there is some perverse fun to be had in reading Kunstler’s description of us Whites in flyover America, people who strive “so desperately to turn the United States into a high-definition Jesus tele-theocracy of Perpetual NASCAR.” The contempt is palpable.

What is to be done? Kunstler, like many other Jews, would like to see the heavy hand of state employed. “I hope Mr. Obama can discipline these maniacs. I would like to see him start by instructing his attorney general to look into the connection between Republican officials (including staff members) and the threats of violence and murder that were made last week around the country.”

Oh, I see it’s already started — sort of. CNN has been reporting on a “Christian warriors” militia that was supposedly on the verge of starting a massacre of Michigan law enforcement officials. Judging by the faces CNN is showing, Kunstler and other haters of “cornporn Nazis” are going to have a public relations field day.

You might want to take a look at the equipment employed by the state of Michigan—NOT the military—to respond to this threat. More and more, our civilian police forces resemble the military—and they’re not shy about aggressively attacking citizens either — Sam Francis’s anarcho-tyranny in action.

In any case, we need more scholarly treatments of Jews and money, something along the lines of Kevin MacDonald’s Culture of Critique applied to the financial world. It could show how Jewish economic behavior is a deeply ingrained aspect of Judaism as group strategy. It could further explore how economic behavior is related to activism in the media, politics, the legal system, academia, etc. As it stands now, that mountain of money in Jewish hands is at the disposal of a hostile elite (see here, and here . . . and here) that fears and mostly dislikes us— people like Frank Rich, William Howard Kunstler, and thousands of other antsy Jews like them. What will happen to us if such Jews feel so at risk that they preemptively seek to neutralize the “threatening” ones among us?

In Homo Americanus, as I’ve noted numerous times, Croatian savant Tomislav Sunic envisions such a scenario for any group in America that might be targeted: “Thus, in order for the proper functioning of future Americanized society, the removal of millions of surplus citizens must become a social and possibly also an ecological necessity.” In his VDARE review Stalin’s Willing Executioners?, MacDonald made a similar observation, identifying what sectors might be targeted “and therefore worthy of mass murder by the American counterparts of the Jewish elite in the Soviet Union — the ones who journeyed to Ellis Island instead of Moscow.” They are the European-derived Whites populating vast areas of the American nation, particularly in the so-called “red states.”

The noose is tightening around our necks. We’ve all seen it — hundreds of examples of the “anarcho-tyranny” that Sam Francis described. A prank at a Wal-Mart asking black shoppers to leave sends the mass media into moral panic mode and the police are fast to react. Yet Blacks murdering Whites is not news. Thugs close down a perfectly legal conference by the White Nationalist group American Renaissance by making death threats against hotel workers, and the police, the FBI and the mainstream media are uninterested.

Some readers might smirk when viewing mug shots of the Christian militia group “Hutaree” above or photos of the trailer homes in which they live, but these things have a way of escalating.  It is we Whites, worried about our rapid dispossession, who should be anxious, not the well-remunerated Jews who are the dynamic force of our hostile elite.  Truly we live in an inverted world.

Edmund Connelly (email him) is a freelance writer, academic, and expert on the cinema arts. He has previously written for The Occidental Quarterly.