Featured Articles

Chapter 23 of 200 Years Together: “Before the Six-Day War”

/in , /by

As noted in Chapter 22, Jews began to be purged from prominent positions in the government after World War II up to the time of Stalin’s death. Thereafter, things improved for the  Jews but deteriorated again. Chapter 23 has several familiar themes:

  • Jews continued to be overrepresented in all areas requiring education, but less so. For example, “if in 1936 the share of Jews among students was 7.5 times higher than that in the total population, then by 1960s it was only 2.7 times higher.
  • Jews continued to dominate some areas. Solzhenitsyn mentions the special role of Jews in Soviet psychiatry (e.g., Lifshitz and “his Jewish gang” at Kaluga Hospital) at a time when “healthy people” were being locked up in mental institutions. As is typical of his style, he notes a Jewish writer commenting that Russians were displacing Jews in the bureaucracy, but then points out that Russians were being displaced in the ethnic republics as well.
  • Solzhenitsyn also points to the special role of Jews in economic crimes, where quite often Jews formed the “vast majority” of these accused.
  • Jewish activists tended to exaggerate the plight of Jews. For example, Jews accused the government of enforcing the law on economic crimes in an anti-Jewish manner (“rampant anti-Semitism,” according to one writer). Solzhenitsyn pointing out that merely printing the names of defendants hardly counts as anti-Semitism: “to name them was equal to Jew-baiting.” The ethnic connections among defendants were typically ignored in the press.
  • Jewish power in the USSR was linked to their power in the West. When Jews were being accused of economic crimes, “the entire Western media interpreted this as a brutal campaign against Jews, the humiliation and isolation of the entire people; Bertrand Russell sent a letter of protest to Khrushchev and got a personal response from the Soviet leader.” This campaign was effective because the government became reluctant to prosecute Jewish economic criminals. The Western media continued to ignore issues like the millions of deaths during forced collectivization while “official Soviet anti-Semitism” came to be seen as a critical issue. Similarly, an article on the Jews who were murdered in 1937–1938 and 1948–1952 in a Jewish newspaper in France resulted in worldwide condemnation of the USSR among leftists.
  • Solzhenitsyn points to real conflicts behind anti-Jewish actions. For example, the 1956 Hungarian uprising had strong anti-Jewish overtones because of the prominent role of Jews in the Hungarian government. And when Russians sought to improve their social status, they came up against previously existing, well-entrenched Jewish elites.
  • Jews retained their powerful sense of being Jewish: “Jewish identity was never subdued during the entire Soviet period. In 1966 the official mouthpiece Sovetish Heymland claimed that ‘even assimilated Russian-speaking Jews still retain their unique character, distinct from that of any other segment of the population.’ Not to mention the Jews of Odessa, Kiev, and Kharkov, who “sometimes were even snooty about their Jewishness — to the extent that they did not want to befriend a goy.”
  • Jews who fancied themselves assimilated engaged in self-deception. He quotes a scientist who rejected “any nationalism” but then it dawned on him that all his friends were Jews. Even non-religious Jews defended the idea of “racial purity.” Other Jews, like Natan Sharansky, suddenly realized that they were very different from non-Jews, especially after the 1967 Six-Day War. “I suddenly realized an obvious difference between myself and non-Jews around me … a kind of a sense of the fundamental difference between my Jewish consciousness and the national consciousness of the Russians.”They then consciously realized what had only been implicit —that they had much stronger ties to the Jewish people as an international entity than to Russia and the Russians. Solzhenitsyn quotes a Jew: “The Jews felt free from obligations [to the Russians] at all sharp turns of Russian history,” and comments, “Fair enough. One can only hope for all Russian Jews to get such clarity and acknowledge this dilemma.”
  • Jewish consciousness became much stronger with the Six-Day War. “Israel has ascended in their minds and Soviet Jews awoke to their spiritual and consanguineous kinship [with Israel].” However, Israel’s victory was over Egypt, an ally of the USSR, so the result was a “thundering campaign against the “Judeo-Zionist-Fascism.” Amazingly, it included the charge that “because of the consistent pursuit of the ideology of racial supremacy and apartheid, Judaism turned out to be a very convenient religion for securing world dominance.” The effect was to spur large-scale Jewish emigration to Israel and the West.

[adrotate group=”1″]

A central message is the power of Jewish ethnocentrism. Yuri Slezkine and a host of Jewish activist organizations make much of the idea that Jewish Communists in the USSR had no Jewish identity at all, at least until WWII. (See my rebuttal here, p. 75ff.) To some extent Solzhenitsyn buys into this, since he charts an increasing sense of Jewish identity beginning with WWII and the Holocaust and culminating in the Six-Day War. But, as the example of the self-deceptive Jewish scientist shows, Jewish identity is pliable. Jews continued to associate with Jews, marry Jews, and participate in and benefit from Jewish ethnic networks during the entire period—as Solzhenitsyn shows elsewhere, e.g., in his chapter on the 1920s.  

Solzhenitsyn’s example of the Jewish scientist reminded me of the self-deception of Jewish radicals described in Ch. 3 of The Culture of Critique:

Most Jewish Communists wear their Jewishness very casually but experience it deeply. It is not a religious or even an institutional Jewishness for most; nevertheless, it is rooted in a subculture of identity, style, language, and social network. . . . In fact, this second-generation Jewishness was antiethnic and yet the height of ethnicity. The emperor believed that he was clothed in transethnic, American garb, but Gentiles saw the nuances and details of his naked ethnicity…. Evidence of the importance of ethnicity in general and Jewishness in particular permeates the available record. Many Communists, for example, state that they could never have married a spouse who was not a leftist. When Jews were asked if they could have married Gentiles, many hesitated, surprised by the question, and found it difficult to answer. Upon reflection, many concluded that they had always taken marriage to someone Jewish for granted. The alternative was never really considered, particularly among Jewish men. (Paul Lyons (1982). Philadelphia Communists, 1936–1956. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 73, 74)

Jewish self-deception is a critical feature of trying to understand Jewish behavior and the topic of a chapter in Separation and Its Discontents. Jews sincerely believed that they had no ethnic identity even though it was apparent to everyone else. The general point is that Jewish ethnocentrism creates a blindness to things that are completely obvious to neutral observers.

This is apparent in contrasting how Jews see their experience in the USSR with how Solzhenitsyn sees it. Jewish intellectuals and activists see the entire Soviet trajectory through ethnocentric blinders. They see Jews as a hapless persecuted minority under the Czar, then rising to well-deserved prosperity after the Revolution. Jewish communists at least until WWII completely lost their ethnic identity, so whatever they did as an elite during the most murderous regime in European history was only due to their being loyal, idealistic communists, not because they were by far the most numerous and most powerful component of a non-Russian ethnic coalition that viewed the traditional people and culture of Russia with murderous hostility. Whatever social status they attained was solely due to Jewish merit—completely unrelated to Jewish ethnic networking and completely unrelated to the active suppression and eradication of the previously existing elites and their descendants. It was only because of the Holocaust and completely irrational anti-Jewish attitudes after WWII that Jewish communists became disenchanted with the USSR and began to identify as Jews, culminating in their embrace of Zionism, particularly after the Six-Day War.

Solzhenitsyn paints a very different picture — a picture that is not only historically accurate but also reflecting the reasonable concerns of a Russian ethnic actor who feels that his people have been done a great injustice. During the Czarist period, Jews aggressively overreacted to reasonable policies of the government designed to protect the Slavic population — the basic duty of any governmentthat pretends to represent the interests of the ethnic majority (Chapter 5). Duringthe 1920s Jews became a hostile elite—Stalin’s “Willing Executioners” —entrenched in all the high ground of Soviet society — the public face of the most brutal regime in history, and provoking a great deal of hostility among the Russian people. Then, after Jews failed to do their fair share of front line fightingduring WWII despite the fact that it was a war against the most deadly anti-Jewish force in history, Russians seeking to improve their social status came up against previously existing, well-entrenched Jewish elites. The purges of Jews that followed were certainly far less violent than the purges of the pre-revolutionary elites during the 1920s and had much to recommend them from the standpoint of ethnic fairness. Nevertheless, even after these purges, Jews remained highly overrepresented in high-status positions requiring education. Jews, however, responded negatively to being removed from their virtual ethnic monopoly on heights of power. With the rise of Israel, they also rediscovered their connections to the international Jewish community and a great many bailed out of Soviet society completely because they were more loyal to the international Jewish community and its identification with Israel than they were to Russia and Russians.

Having been around the block a few times on issues like this where there is a self-serving Jewish consensus on their own history, I realize that communication is impossible. Jewish activist intellectuals and organizations will continue to present their side of the story and do everything they can to vilify or ignore any account that departs from their orthodoxy. As an evolutionist, I am not surprised. That’s what ethnic conflict is all about — just as deadly when it is conflict among intellectuals over interpretations of history as it is in mass murders of Russians and Ukrainians carried out in the name of international socialism.

Kevin MacDonald is editor of The Occidental Observer and a professor of psychology at California State University–Long Beach. Email him.

Perceived Humiliation Followed by Revenge

/1 Comment/in /by

When I was in college, for a year-and-a-half I lived in a studio apartment attached to an old two-story house, in which lived 11 or 12 girls. I got to know them quite well.

Some stayed there the entire time but some left and others arrived, so altogether I got to know maybe 15 girls. It was an eye-opening experience.

One night I was in the room of one of them, listening to her records (this was before CDs, obviously). She was 21 years old, very attractive, very curvaceous.

For some unknown reason she began to tell me about when she was 12 years old. She had been ostracized in the seventh grade, she told me. She showed me a picture.

She didn’t look bad, just a gawky 12-year-old with glasses. A little pudgy. The word “nerdy” occurred to me. All these things together were enough for her to be ostracized.

That summer, within three months, she blossomed. The baby fat melted, she got contacts, she got taller, she filled out. It was the proverbial case of the ugly duckling turning into a swan.

When she went back to school in the eighth grade, all of the kids who had ostracized her now wanted to be her friends. She ignored every one of them. She told me from that time forward she was never attracted to “what most women consider good-looking men” — the kind who had ostracized her.

I remembered that story because it made such a vivid impression on me. Years later, when I began to think about it, I realized what had happened to her. It was a case of humiliation followed by revenge. I never asked her, but I wouldn’t doubt that if some really good-looking guy asked her out she turned him down. Neither would I doubt that she enjoyed it.

I tried to put myself in her place. How would I feel? Rejected? Offended? Hurt feelings (whatever that means)? Anger, resentment? Self-pity? Perhaps. Humiliated? The desire for revenge? In some form, yes.

Humiliation followed by revenge is the story of Cain and Abel, except in that case it led to murder. In this girl’s case, being much milder than that of those two unfortunate brothers, it took the form of rejecting or completely ignoring the kind of guys who had humiliated her when she was 12 years old. She was doing to them what they did to her.

What happened to her for those several months in the seventh grade affected her for the rest of her life. You could use the word “trauma,” although I think it’s a bit strong. But there is an old saying, “Trauma demands repetition,” which is done in order to relive the trauma and make it turn out right. It might be why some people who have been (or think they have been) humiliated seek revenge over and over.

I mentioned this girl was nerdy at 12 but very good-looking at 13. That reminded me of the well-known movie, The Revenge of the Nerds. And what was it about? Humiliation followed by revenge (for that matter, the same goes for Animal House). That formula is an archetype that everyone, the world over, understands. You could probably show both those movies without any sound, and people wouldstill understand it.

I was also reminded of Stephen King’s first novel, Carrie, about a girl who gets revenge on her high school — and the entire town — by destroying both.

Then of course there is the classic revenge novel, one that has influenced so many writers — The Count of Monte Cristo, which, in my copy, is over 1300 pages devoted to vengeance.

[adrotate group=”1″]

I don’t see much difference, if any, between humiliation and shame — in both cases the sufferers perceive themselves as diminished. In the story of the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve (who, ominously, are Cain and Abel’s parents), are ashamed when they realize they are naked. And Cain is shamed and humiliated when God rejects his sacrifice and accepts Abel’s. 

Shame, humiliation…pretty much the same thing, then. They are apparently our earliest unpleasant feelings, and the cause of so much trouble in the world. In the story of Cain and Abel, those feelings are what bring murder into the world.

The psychiatrist James Gilligan, who studied murderers his entire career, one day realized what he was hearing from them, over and over, was the story of Cain and Abel. “I killed him because he dissed me,” he heard. It’s become a shorthand — “dissed.” And everyone knows what that word means: he disrespected and shamed me, so I got revenge by brutally battering or killing him.

Can there be a case of revenge that is not based on humiliation and being shamed? If revenge is not based on humiliation, then what else can it be based upon? I can’t think of any other reason.

“Humiliation followed by revenge” doesn’t have to be based on real humiliation. That is the problem. It can be based on perceived humiliations, perceived slights,even if they are non-existent. I suppose that’s the definition of paranoia: seeing attacks that are not there.

Perceiving humiliations that are not there is an excruciating problem in the United States, one that I believe is going to get worse, and could be fatal to this country,especially when dealing with ethnic groups.

How can an entire ethnic group be exploited and therefore humiliated? Individuals, yes, but entire groups? Every member, including ones who didn’t move to the United States until they were adults? The idea is preposterous.

Yet the prevailing multicultural paradigm today implies that people have an identity mainly as members of their ethnic groups, and not as individuals. Ethnic group status has become a legally recognized category. This means the institutionalization of the non-existent: group innocence and group guilt.

When people are legally judged as groups, I see no way around the belief in group guilt and group innocence. Because of human nature, if one group believes it has been humiliated, it is always going to blame that humiliation on another group. It will see itself as innocent and the other group as guilty.

The media as well as classes in many colleges — indeed in some high schools — have for some years been portraying White people (and especially White men) as a group as the cause of all the trouble in the world, which means that people are taught that Whites have been humiliating everyone else in the world who is not White. The result of all of this will be attempts at revenge from the resentful and paranoid who have been brainwashed into thinking White people are the cause of all their problems. (The theme of historical grudges held by non-White ethnic groups is a major theme of TOO.)

People’s first defense — projection — is to blame their problems on someone else. That’s one of the lessons of the story of the Garden of Eden: “The woman made me do it…the serpent made me do it.” Who has not heard from every small child, “You made me do it?” It’s your fault, not mine.

Coupled with the propaganda that non-White ethnic groups have been shamed and humiliated by White people (i.e., the West) is the attempt to disarm them and make them self-destruct by making them feel shame and guilt.

Guilt can lead to attempts at self-destruction. It may not be physical self-destruction, the way Arthur Dimmesdale branded himself in “The Scarlet Letter,” but it certainly can be attempts at psychological self-destruction.

Guilt is, in fact, self-hatred. If people are propagandized into believing they are the worst ethnic group in the world, and responsible for nearly every problem that exists, their guilt will make them attempt to debase and destroy themselves.

What we’ve got today are resentful ethnic groups, who believe they have been exploited and humiliated, and who have no guilt at all toward those they blame their problems on. The group that is taught to be guilty, if they internalize that guilt, will hate themselves and participate in their own destruction (see also here). It is a nifty little scheme.

White people are supposed to feel guilty and ashamed of themselves for their supposed sins against the world — as if every ethnic tribe hasn’t done horrible things to other tribes.

The Aztecs ripped the hearts out of hundreds of thousands of people who belonged to the tribes they conquered. American Indians used to bash out the brains of babies of other tribes on rocks. The Bolshevists of Russia killed 20 million Russian Christians, with a very large role played by Jews motivated by revenge against the old order. The Communists in China may have killed up to 50 million Chinese. How much worse can it get than those atrocities?

Once one group believes it has been humiliated and exploited, it is going to blame it on another group, then try to disarm that group by attacking it and trying to make the members feel shame and guilt. It’s happening today — witness insults about how Americans are “racists” if we don’t allow the U.S. to be inundated with illegal immigrants, or “prejudiced” if we don’t permit a mosque to be built near the WTC site.

What the aforementioned means is that it is sheer insanity to believe the United States can be a successful multicultural nation. Ethnic groups that believe they have been humiliated and abused are going to blame their problems on the White tribe — specifically White men — then try to disarm and then destroy them by trying to make them feel humiliation and guilt.

Leftism, at least extreme leftism, is predicated on the belief there is no human nature. Yet even leftists have to admit the existence of envy, since that is the one feeling leftism is dedicated to eradicating. So even leftists have to accept the irreducible minimum that human nature, if nothing else, is envious.

What goes along with the feeling of envying others? Feelings of humiliation. So we’re back to the desire for revenge, which painfully illustrates the fact that leftists don’t merely misunderstand human nature; they don’t understand it at all. That is one of the reasons they support multiculturalism. They are clueless as to where it will lead.

I believe “perceived humiliation followed by revenge” is a law of human nature, just as “You’re the cause of my problems” and “People who think they are guilty try to hurt themselves” are laws. I’d like to see them taught in the schools, but that’s not going to happen, not with public schools. I have no idea why they’re not taught in church, unless the churches are not doing their job. Which they’re not.

It’s up to individuals to teach themselves (autodidacts are the best-educated) and to teach their children, to arm them against the attacks they are going to subjected as soon as they start public school  — if you let them attend public school. (Personally, I consider public schools to be traumatizing children, not educating them.) And children are certainly going to be inundated with these attacks from the media.

I now know that when members of different ethnic groups attack White people not as individuals but as a group, these attacks are based on envy and fantasies about their entire ethnic group being shamed and humiliated, and are not attempts at fairness and justice, but instead attempts at revenge and therefore attempts at destruction.

Nietzsche well understood the ressentiment, or “life-envy” of those who feel themselves to be oppressed by others. He considered it to be at the root their desires to bring down their supposed oppressors.

These attempts to instill guilt and shame can only be done through propaganda — schools, commercials. TV, movies, magazines, and newspapers. It’s best to start when they’re kids. Get ‘em when they’re little and can be easily molded!

For me, and for others I know, it’s got to the point I’m very careful where I spend my money. Why should I fund my enemies?

As a friend of mine wrote me, “It’s getting to the point that I’m starting to feel the ol’ territorial defense mechanism kick in. It’s getting harder and harder not to notice that I (and others like me) are no longer included in most advertisements, that our only role in most popular entertainment is that of a buffoon or the ‘weak member that constantly needs getting rescued or the ‘evil criminal’ and that anything we do will have the credit taken by others or be ignored. It’s hard not to notice that ads now advertise jobs for ‘women and minorities’ only, and that loans/grants are given to, yes, ‘women and minority based…whatever’ and nothing else.”

People consumed with guilt don’t murder others — they murder themselves. Those who have convinced themselves they are oppressed and humiliated — they are the dangerous ones and the potential murderers. They attack, without guilt, and attempt to destroy, the people who have disarmed themselves through their false beliefs in their own shame and guilt.

What’s that old saying? “Forewarned is forearmed”? It’s true.

Bob Wallace (email him) has a degree in Mass Communications and is a former newspaper reporter and editor. He writes occasionally about economics and cultural issues.

Some recent news stories from up north

/in /by

The MV Sun Sea with 492 people on board.

This has been a crazy few weeks for Canada, where a number of ridiculous events worth discussing took place. Earlier this month, a ship with close to 500 Tamils on board entered Canadian waters to demand refugee status. This is yet another boat people story reminiscent of Jean Raspail’s novel The Camp of the Saints. Of course, if the past is any indication, they will eventually be granted refugee status or will disappear into Canada’s large Tamil community—the largest in the world outside Sri Lanka—and the flood will likely intensify. As a matter of fact, last October, another ship going by the charming name of Ocean Lady, brought 76 Sri Lankans to Vancouver. All have now been released and have applied for refugee status. None will likely be deported.

VDARE posted a good story on this new arrival while the mainstream media spitted its usual useless nonsense. Citing an “international expert on human smuggling”, the Globe and Mail, Canada’s leading newspaper, reported that  the country “has an obligation under international law to accept the vessel and process refugee applications” and that “calling them illegal immigrants is simply wrong. They are coming here to seek status . . . we have a process for refugee determination and they will go through it.”

The Tyee, a British Columbia-based journal, published an article literally called “Why Tamil Boat People Should Be Let into Canada”. The Globe and Mail, in another article, lectures Canadians with catch phrases like “apprehension about the sea-borne Other — a primal form of xenophobia — has led to some dark episodes in our history.” This emotional, guilt-ridden line of thinking accurately sums up the tone of the Canadian press on this story. It has repeated ad nauseam boat people stories from the first half the 20th century in which ships were forced to go home. The most often-repeated example was that of the St-Louis, a boat carrying Jewish refugees in 1939. Another one was the story of the Komagata Maru, a ship carrying Sikhs in 1914.

The National Post, Canada’s “conservative” paper, seems concerned with the safety of the migrants making the trip and with blaming the smugglers who “exploit” them. The Vancouver Sun was likewise troubled by the death of a single Tamil passenger (out of 492) during the trip—which lasted months—whiletelevision networks focused on the refugees’ human rights and health issues. The only kind mild criticism in mainstream media articles was the concern that some of the refugees could be linked to the Tamil Tigers, officially recognized as a “terrorist” organization — and implying that the other ones represent no danger at all! This is worthless criticism, as the political views of these aliens are irrelevant. The bottom line is that Canada’s demography is permanently altered.

As usual, the only common sense came at the very bottom of online articles, that is to say, postings from ordinary people exasperated by the ongoing invasion of their country.  

Another ridiculous story that recently hit Canada was the capture of suspected “terrorists.” It is too early to tell what this story is really about. However, much more shocking than the accusations of “terrorism”, is the fact that one of the suspects was a contestant on Canadian Idol—the local variation of American Idol. The following picture shows the lamentable state of the “multicultural” junk culture that brainwashes the Canadian populace. It is hard to imagine something more repulsive. The Youtube video is here.

Canadian Idol contender Khurram Syed Sher, now suspected of “terrorism”.

This Pakistani-born man also attended medical school in Canada. While the thought of being treated by someone like that in a Western hospital is rather disturbing, even more deplorable is that universities are now largely filled with such third-worlders. This happens at the expense of our own people, as when Whites do not fall victim to affirmative action for “protected groups,” they are often literally crowded out of graduate schools by unimaginable numbers of applicants from developing countries. It is a disastrous situation, in which our academic institutions — especially in technical disciplines — now largely serve the interests of non-White foreigners.

Of course the nonsense doesn’t stop here yet. A recent topic in the Canadian media was the publication of a “report” accusing the Montreal police of racial profiling because they arrest Blacks in disproportionate numbers. We know that this is a common trend in every country with a Black minority due their higher propensity to committing crimes. That doesn’t matter to silly journalists whoexcoriated the police with vitriolic pieces accusing them of systemic racism, discrimination and all the other childish clichés. Police “brutality” is a recurrent theme in the Canadian mainstream media. A recent outburst of accusations occurred in late June, when the police tried to contain the violent anarchists, far-left rioters and arsonists who caused much chaos and damage during the G-20 summit in Toronto. As we know, in these demonstrations those hooded thugs provoke and assault the police. They then accuse them of brutality when the latter try to keep order.

It is enlightening to see what Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper is doing in the meantime. Believe it or not, he is touring the Yukon and the rest of the Canadian north claiming that the country’s “Arctic sovereignty” is threatened! He tours the Arctic every year on the pretext that “For far too long, Canadian Governments have failed in their duty to rigorously enforce our sovereignty in the Arctic. […] As a result, foreign ships may have routinely sailed through our territory without permission. Any such voyage represents a potential threat to Canadians’ safety and security.”

This is not a joke. These quotes are taken from his first annual Arctic trip in August 2006. What he calls a “threat” are some trivial boundary disputes with Denmark near Greenland as well as minor navigation rights issues with Russia in certain parts of the Arctic Ocean. Adding to the insult, he even dubbed his 2010 Arctic tour “nation building”! According to the Toronto Star, he also said: “This is the frontier. This is the place that defines our country.”

Canada’s prime minister Stephen Harper taking an ATV ride in the tundra during his 2010 “Arctic sovereignty” tour.

Of course, any fair-minded person should understand that Canada is threatened by the wide-open immigration policy and the insane multicultural/human rights ideology that has turned its institutions against its majority. Canada has a per capita (legal) immigration rate twice as high as that of the United States. Of course the Canadian government is more concerned with extraditing a few “holocaust revisionists” than sending back boatloads of hundreds of non-White refugees. The former have even been called a “threat to national security” by the government while no one in polite society is allowed to regard the massive demographic transformation as a threat to national security, much less to national survival.

William Davis (email him) is a freelance writer.

The Subtleties of Jewish Humor

/31 Comments/in /by

In response to a recent article by Edmund Connelly on Jewish self-mockery, Kevin MacDonald had this to say: “The question is, what about media pieces that have an obvious anti-Jewish sub-text? Jews control the media, right? So why do we find clips like ‘Overcome stress by visualizing a greedy, hook-nosed race of creatures.’”

“The Jewish sub-text,” MacDonald points out, “is obvious to anyone with any knowledge of negative stereotypes of Jews. Connelly doesn’t really know the answer, and I don’t either. That’s why we are asking for suggestions.”

Having spent quite a lot of time pondering Jewish noses and negative stereotypes — I once devoted an entire essay to the subject  —  I hope I may be allowed to suggest an answer to this riddle.

It’s a case of Jewish irony. If you don’t get it, it’s not because you are irony deficient. This is not meant to be a criticism of your sense of humor, still less of your intelligence. No way! It’s just that you have failed to understand that an extremely subtle sense of irony is the hallmark of Jewish humor. It is so nuanced, so rarefied, that you are often not even aware it is irony. Jews get the joke, but the goyim usually don’t. They’re not meant to get it. That’s the whole point.

The apparent self-mockery of the Jew is actually an inverted way of patting himself on the back. Woody Allen and Sarah Silverman specialize in this sort of black humor. Jewish comics make a habit of poking fun at Jews and their supposed faults in order to convince us of the sheer absurdity of anti-Semitism.

Let me give you some examples.

A few years ago, when I was a schoolteacher, I set up a cartoon competition for the students in my class. One of the entries was sent in by a boy called Cohen with a chip on his shoulder 2000 years long. It was a picture depicting a massive billboard on a major motorway. It showed a hideous, bald-headed man who looked like he’d just stepped out of a Der Sturmer cartoon:  a monstrous beak of a nose, a bile green complexion, and a mouth coruscating with gold teeth. The caption read: “WARNING!!! WATCH OUT FOR ALIEN ABDUCTION!!! Green-eyed monsters, Martian ghouls, and men with funny hooked noses could come knocking on your door offering to sell you encyclopaedias!”

You see what I mean? This apparent self-mockery was actually a sneer at the goyim for being so out of touch with reality that they still—even after the Holocaust—didn’t seem to get the message that Jews are just like everyone else: a pretty harmless, well-meaning race that the rest of the world have ganged up against for some inexplicable reason.

Of course, if such a billboard as featured in Master Cohen’s cartoon should ever become an actual  billboard one day, a large number of irony-deficient Jews would scream “Anti-Semitism!” And an equally large chorus of irony-deficient goyim would undoubtedly join the same shrill choir.

But consider this: a large number of Jews who were in on the joke and who were NOT offended by the cartoon would also, at this point, raise tongue-in-cheek cries of “Anti-Semitism!” These are the pranksters. The incorrigible pisstakers. You see, it’s a huge mistake to assume that every Jew who complains of anti-Semitism is one big angry Jew. No, he’s often pretending to be angry. His rage is ersatz. He’s putting on the fury, secretly snickering up his sleeve that you should be so dumb as to take him seriously.

Incidentally, I gave Master Cohen first prize for his cartoon. I had no choice.  If I’d given him second prize, he would have complained of anti-Semitism!

You can’t win.

*          *          *

Now consider this cartoon by the famous British cartoonist Steve Bell depicting Ariel Sharon eating a baby. Ask yourself: would this cartoon have won a major competition in a politically correct country such as Britain if organized Jewry had been up in arms against it? Of course not. No, the Jews let it win for two reasons: (1) It proved that “free speech” was alive and kicking in Britain and that we actually live in an intensely anti-Semitic world in which Jews, ever the victims, are totally helpless to stop people saying bad things about them. (2) The cartoon, on another level, was also saying: How absurd that anyone should regard cuddly old Ariel as a “baby eater” when President George W Bush apparently thought the world of him. I mean, wasn’t this charismatic war hero, so adulated in Israel and Brooklyn, actually a “man of peace”?

It has to be asked: was Ariel Sharon upset or angry at Bell’s cartoon depicting him as a child-eating ghoul?  No, I am reliably informed that he was delighted. He was tickled pink. This reminds me of the story of French poet Charles Baudelaire who, in order to improve his image as a monster of depravity, began to circulate the story that he ate babies for breakfast.

The point about anti-Semitism is this: when people who are neutral to Jews — and that includes most people — are presented with gut-wrenchingly distasteful displays of anti-Semitism, the seed of philosemitism is sown in their hearts. Their first reaction is: How unfair this is to the Jews, how needlessly cruel.

Here lies the supreme paradox: Philosemitism can actually be manufactured through ironical and over-the-top displays of anti-Semitism. It’s all a part of social engineering.

*          *          *

A point worth bearing in mind is this: a Jew is permitted to tell an outrageous anti-Semitic joke that a non-Jew would be crucified for relating. Recently, National Security Adviser General James Jones gave a key note speech at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and started the ball rolling by telling a joke depicting Jews as greedy merchants. He clearly meant no harm. He probably thought it would be obvious to his audience that he was merely sending up the silly anti-Semitic “canard” that Jews were just a bunch of moneygrubbing Shylocks.

 “I’d like to begin with a story that I think is true,” General Jones begins, somewhat tactlessly.  “A Taliban militant gets lost and is wandering around the desert looking for water. He finally arrives at a store run by a Jew and asks for water. The Jewish vendor tells him he doesn’t have any water but can gladly sell him a tie. The Taliban, the jokes goes on, begins to curse and yell at the Jewish storeowner. The Jew, unmoved, offers the rude militant an idea.  Beyond the hill, there is a restaurant. They can sell you water. The Taliban keeps cursing and finally leaves toward the hill. An hour later he’s back at the tie store. He walks in and tells the merchant: ‘Your brother tells me I need a tie to get into the restaurant.’”

Frankly, I think that’s funny. And if a Jew starts grinding his teeth with rage at such an innocuous joke, there has to be something seriously wrong with him. But sure enough, the joke was condemned by Jewish groups everywhere. Abe Foxman thought it “inappropriate”, and  the  Jewish Forward thought it “insensitive”. (See also here).

I have an anti-Zionist Jewish friend who told me this hilarious joke, adding a few embroideries of his own. He found it on a Jewish website, filed under “Israeli humor”. (See here). It’s the best example of Jewish self-mockery I’ve come across. I retell the joke in my own words, more or less as my Jewish friend told it to me.

If General Jones had told this joke, he would have been hanged, drawn and quartered.

This Israeli Jew arrives at Ben Gurion airport with two large suitcases. His name is Baruch and he’s been living in the United States. The customs agent opens up the first case and finds it stuffed with dollar bills. “How come you have all this money?” he asks.

Baruch grins and taps his hooked nose.

“Listen, I’ll tell you one way you can make a huge fortune in America. You just go into a public washroom and you see a guy having a pee. All you have to do is grab hold of his penis and say, ‘If you don’t donate ten bucks to Israel — for illegal settlements — I’m gonna cut off your goddamn penis!’ It’s fantastic, the amount of money you can make for Israel!”

“Wow, that’s cool!” says the customs agent. “So what’s in your other case?

Baruch shakes his head sadly.

“You just won’t believe,” he sighs, “the number of people in America who refuse to support Israel.” 

Sex and the Jews: Letter to a Jewish Correspondent

/7 Comments/in /by

“What was forbidden is now permitted.” — Rabbi Samuel Dresner

A few months ago, I received an angry email from a young woman called Victoria. Having ticked me off severely for various things I’d said in an article — and after a further exchange of emotional letters — Victoria, who was half Jewish, told me she would no longer be writing to me. So I wrote her a valedictory note in which I took my leave of her with the friendly words, “Farewell, my dear Jewess!”

Silence ensued for several weeks. And then, to my surprise, I received another confrontational letter from Victoria informing me that she was writing to me again (a) “to correct certain misconceptions you have”, and (b) to tell me that writing to me was “pointless.”

I found this quite amusing. It’s not often I get letters listing all my shortcomings and telling me how pointless it is writing to me. It makes a change. Victoria had taken offense at the term ‘Jewess’.  “Referring to me as a ‘Jewess’ was very offensive and condescending,” she scolded, “because I am only part Jewish.…But I guess in your racist mind,  the fact that I am even part Jewish is enough of a reason for you to deny my humanity completely. Continuing any further correspondence with you is pointless.”

This is the letter I wrote Victoria in response to her final communication. I don’t usually write such long letters to my correspondents, complete with a scholarly apparatus of facts, figures, citations, embedded links and picture illustrations.  On this occasion, I decided to make an exception.

*          *          *

Dear Victoria,

Your condemnation of the word “Jewess” as anti-Semitic would be accepted, I think, as fair comment nowadays. I meant no offense, but in any case please accept my apologies.

You may not be aware of this, Victoria, but it’s a sad fact that because of severe economic hardships endured by Jews in past centuries, many Jewish girls were forced into a life of prostitution. In all the great European cities, a certain type of prostitute was always to be found: exotic and semi-Asiatic in appearance. She was Jewish, and she was very much in demand. The word “Jewess” therefore entered the language as a loose synonym for “Jewish prostitute”.

When Baudelaire writes a poem about a Parisian prostitute with whom he had just spent the night, he refers to her simply as a “Jewess”. That was enough to identify her as a prostitute. “Une nuit que j’étais près d’une affreuse Juive…” (“One night as I lay next to a frightful Jewess…”).

When Keats refers to Jewish prostitutes in an unpublished poetic fragment quoted in a private letter (1819), he doesn’t call them “prostitutes”. He just calls them “Jewesses”. Why? Because so many Jewesses were prostitutes that the two terms had virtually become interchangeable. “Nor in obscurèd purlieus would he seek / For curlèd Jewesses, with ankles neat, / Who, as they walk abroad, make tinkling with their feet.”  (See here.)

Keats is here referring to the typical Jewess with her “curly” ringlets. The tinkling ankle bells he mentions were often worn in past eras by prostitutes to signal their approach. Ever since Ancient India, such bells have been prostitute accessories.

*          *          *

You say you are “half Jewish”, Victoria, and that your family originally came from the Ukraine. Did you know that Odessa, the fourth largest city of Ukraine, was once a magnet for prostitute lovers from all over Europe? The city was famous for its sumptuous brothels, all supervised by Jewish madams who had formerly been prostitutes themselves. As for the girls working in those brothels, they were predominantly Jewish. Valued for their seductive charms, these joygirls were referred to simply as “Jewesses.”

Here is a pertinent  quote:

By the 1860s a French visitor to Odessa wrote that Jews there were responsible for a white slavery market in Russian women to Turkey. This is feasible, especially since we know that Jewish brothel-keepers were already in place at the other end in Constantinople. The 1889 census shows that Jewish women ran 30 of 36 licensed brothels in Kherson province, where Odessa was located. In 1908 the American consul there claimed that the whole business of prostitution is almost exclusively in the hands of Jews. Jewesses were prominent in the practice of prostitution. Thus, of 5127 licensed prostitutes in 1889, 1122 or 22 per cent were Jewish. (See here; Note: 22% is significantly high, given that Jews constituted only 4% of the Ukrainian population..

A Rabbi Rosenak of the German Union of Rabbis writes in 1902 that up to 50% of the prostitutes in his area were Jewish. He deplores the fact and considers it “inconceivable” that so many Jewish women should go astray.

Jewish prostitution flourished throughout the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Jewish procuresses ran the brothels, luring both Christian and Jewish girls into a life of prostitution. One Jewish madam was known as “Lucky Sarah”, so named because she was lucky enough to have founded the lucrative Hungarian export trade in girls. Hungarian girls were considered sexy. They had those dark, long-lashed eyes and exotic high cheek bones that so many men find attractive. In short, the Jewish look one finds enshrined in Hollywood’s first femme fatale, also known as “the Vamp”:

Theda Bara (born  Theodosia Goodman, 1885–1955), Jewish silent screen actress famous for her femme fatale roles. Note the corkscrew curls mentioned earlier by Keats (“curled Jewesses”). The  classic Hollywood femme fatale, Wikipedia tells us, was “often foreign … of an indeterminate Eastern European or Asian ancestry.”

Equally well-known to the Jewish Underworld of the time was Sarah Grossman, another Jewish procuress nicknamed “The Turk” because of the number of girls she had tricked into a life of prostitution in Constantinople. Two major sex emporiums were the industrial towns of Czernowitz and Lemberg. Here countless girls were enticed into a life of sex slavery. In 1892 a famous mass trial of twenty-seven procurers was held in Lemberg.  All the defendants were Jewish. The trial received so much attention, we are told, that it marked “a high water point for the anti-Semites.”

“A major device of the procurers was a Jewish ceremony referred to as the stillah chuppah. This included a religious wedding ceremony which had no civil validity. The soon-to-be abducted female would be misled into believing that she was married with the rights of a wife, only to discover later that her legal rights were nil. Innumerable Jewesses found themselves tossed into brothels by this device.”  (See here).

You see what is happening here, Victoria?  Vast numbers of innocent Jewish girls were tricked into a life of prostitution by their fellow Jews. It was their own race who tricked them and sold them down the river. It reminds me of the Jewish rabbis who tricked Norman Finkelstein’s mother out of her fair share of Holocaust reparations.

[adrotate group=”1″]

These are the facts, Victoria. They are the truth. Resist the truth if you want, but truth will prevail in the end. Rather than dismiss me as an “anti-Semite” for drawing the obvious conclusions from these well-known historical data, you should come to terms with the fact that most ordinary Jews are the dupes and victims of organized Jewry. It’s not these ordinary Jews I criticize or condemn, it’s their rabbinical and ideological controllers: the Puppet Masters, or the “Masters of Discourse,” to use Israel Shamir’s apt phrase.

It’s not the sheep, it’s the Bad Shepherds, who are the problem.

*          *          *

No class of men appears to be quite as sex-obsessed as the Orthodox Jews and the rabbinate. If you compare the religious texts of the various world religions, you will find that all of them — with the single exception of Judaism — maintain a high moral tone throughout. They don’t keep harping on aboutbreasts and penises, prostitutes and semen. Judaism does.

Consider this inflammatory passage from the Hebrew English Bible, enough to bring a blush to any maidenly cheek:

There she lusted after her lovers whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses. So you longed for the lewdness of your youth when in Egypt your bosom was caressed and your young breasts fondled. (Ezekiel 23: 20-21).

The number of Victorian damsels who must have swooned away over that passage is probably beyond computation.

Turn to the Babylonian Talmud and you will find yourself suddenly transported into a hothouse world of indelicate anecdotes dealing specifically with prostitutes and their rabbinical (or yeshiva student) clients. There are so many of these stories in the Talmud that a special name had to be invented for them:aggadah. Though these instructive anecdotes touch on all conceivable topics, usually with a rabbi as the central figure, sex often looms large. It can certainly be argued that Judaism is more obsessed with sex than any other world religion. (Scroll down to “Contents”, here.)

One such story starts like this: “They said of Rabbi Elazar ben Dordia that he did not leave one prostitute in the world that he did not come to. One time he heard that there was a certain prostitute in a town by the sea who took a purse of dinars for her price.  He took a purse of dinars and went and crossed seven rivers to reach her…” (Tractate Avodah Zara 17a). Another story begins: “There was once a man who heard that there was a prostitute in a town by the sea who took four hundred gold coins as her price.  He sent to her four hundred gold coins and set a time to come to her.  When his time came, he went. She said ‘Let him come in’.  When he entered, she sat naked on the top bed…etc. etc. ”  (Tractate Menachot, 44a)

The Talmud is full of such stories about rabbis and their students paying visits to prostitutes. Since the word “pornography” literally means “writing about prostitutes,” the Talmud is perhaps the only religious classic that could be described — in a literal sense — as pornographic.

We read in the Talmud of Rahab the harlot, for example, first mentioned in the book of Joshua. One of the most bewitching  femmes  fatales of antiquity, on a par with Helen of Troy and the fabulous Corinthian courtesan Lais mentioned by Demosthenes, the beautiful Rahab first began to sell her body at the age of ten.”There was no prince or ruler who had not slept with Rahab the prostitute,” the Talmud informs us breathlessly. (Tractate Zavachim  116b).

The rabbis, being the religious rulers of the day, were among the first to enjoy this nubile nymphette’s favors. Pedophilia? Yes, the Talmud is full of it. We are told of this Jewish Lolita: “They [the rabbis] allow her an honored place in Jewish tradition….Her past as a harlot is not held against her, and is almost entirely forgotten once she converts to Judaism.” (See here).

Nothing changes. Plus ça change. Pedophilia is okay, it seems, if you happen to be a Jewish rabbi or Roman Polanski — but not if you’re a Catholic priest.

 Pedophilia is not the only sexual perversion to which the Talmud appears to be tolerant. There is also voyeurism. An interesting anecdote relates how Kahane, a yeshiva student, hides under his rabbi’s bed and eavesdrops on him making love to his wife. He is discovered there and severely reprimanded by his teacher who orders him to leave the room at once. The student refuses. “No, I won’t!” he says. “For this is Torah, and I must learn!”

The rabbi is forced to take this into consideration. Spying on people having sex is arguably okay if your motive for doing so is a passion for the Higher Knowledge. (See  The Passionate Talmud, Introduction, p. 1).

Another section of the Talmud deals with bestiality. Widows are advised not to keep dogs. Why?  “Because”, one is told, “there’s some suspicion about what a woman who’s already tasted the pleasures of the flesh might do with her pet.”

I am not exaggerating when I say that the Talmud’s obsession with sex is unique among world religions. Amazingly, it has to be the only religious text in the world to discuss and compare the penis size of its most venerated sages.  (See  The Passionate Talmud, Introduction, p. 1).

Ex-President George W Bush on his way to Talmud class

*          *          *

Fast forward to the 21st century and we find that the contemporary rabbinate can hardly be cited as models of sexual restraint.

Turn from the Talmud to Ilana Hammerman’s  In Foreign Parts: Trafficking in Women in Israel and you will read harrowing accounts of Israel’s contemporary sex-service industry. Innocent young girls, many of them underage, are kidnapped in Russia and Eastern Europe and forced into a life of prostitution in Tel Aviv. Locked up without food, subject to threats and violence by their Jewish pimps, these wretched girls are sometimes expected to sleep with up to sixty customers a day. Their most assiduous clients, sporting black hats and bushy beards, are “religious” Orthodox Jews taking a sabbatical from their wives.

Here is the kind of eye-popping revelation we come across in Hammerman’s shocking book:

I had a very famous rabbi who would come and order a girl to have sex with him in the doggie position, and would ask her to bark,” a former brothel owner testified at a [Knesset] parliamentary committee. One of the working women, presented as a devout Christian, expresses an aversion to her religious clients: “They had a big black hat and under it [another] little black hat and they were real perverts. (See here).

According to a CNN report in 1998, Israel now has the highest per capita consumption of prostitute services in the world. One million visits are paid to prostitutes each month, making brothel hopping one of the nation’s most popular pastimes. Thousands of women are  abducted annually — mostly from Russia, Ukraine, Moldavia, Uzbekistan and China  —  and sold into sex slavery in Israel. “The situation,” Jewish author David Weinberg wrote in a 1998 article about prostitution in Israel, entitled Not So Holy Land, “is enough to make you cry in despair — or vomit from shame.”

*          *          *

Jews certainly have sex on the brain.

“I’m such a sex machine,” Radio talk show host Howard Stern boasts. “I could take a piece of wood and turn it into something erotic.”

Woody Allen, loyal supporter of pedophile Roman Polanski, was accused by his estranged wife Mia Farrow of sexually abusing their 7-year-old daughter Dylan. Woody is best known today for his brilliant witticism: “Don’t knock masturbation. It’s sex with someone I love.”

Hope Weissman, a Jewish professor at Wesleyan university in Connecticut, was the first to give a course on pornography in which her students were expected to “study” the most obscene pornographic magazines and witness a striptease performance by (Jewish) porn star Annie Sprinkle which may have included her famous routine of letting people peer up her vagina with a flashlight.

In  2001, Jewish professor Peter Singer put in a good word for bestiality at Princeton university, suggesting in an essay called Heavy Petting that one might like to get it on with a dog. Again in 2001, a Jewish community in England made big news when three strippers were invited to perform sexually explicit acts in a synagogue, possibly with the resident rabbi in full attendance.

In 1998, Israeli commentator Jonathan Rosenblum, noting that a CNN documentary had revealed that Israel now had the highest rate of prostitution in the world, had this to say: “Once again anti-Semites portray us as sexual libertines and perverts to undermine our moral authority. Today we cheerfully admit the charges.” (See here).

Of one thing we can be reasonably certain: any society that attracts large numbers of Jews can expect within a few years to enter a spiral of decadence. Moral anarchy sets in. Sexual promiscuity throws open its Pandora’s box of evils. We saw it in Weimar Germany. We see it gathering pace in America today. We see it above all in Israel, a society of fanatical settlers and rabid right-wing rabbis: a country surely doomed to implode from within, sooner or later, under the pressure of its own moral and military excesses.

I cannot help feeling that a great storm is brewing and that only a military coup or revolution can now save America. Save it from what?  From the spiritual cancer that is consuming it from within, and from the foreign wars into which it is being lured — Afghanistan, Iraq, and soon perhaps Iran — on behalf of another nation and its indefatigable agents in America.

Unless a miracle soon occurs and some charismatic leader comes to our rescue, an unimaginably bleak future surely awaits us: a future in which the only consolations left to us will be mindless entertainment, drugs, alcohol, sexual intoxication — and suicide.

Sincere best wishes, Victoria, and good luck to you in the days of terror and tribulation that lie ahead.

Lasha Darkmoon

Armageddon (see here and here)

Dr Lasha Darkmoon (email her) is an academic, age 32, with higher degrees in Classics. She is also a published poet and translator whose verse can be sampled here. “Lasha Darkmoon” is a pen name.

Ludwig Klages on Judaism, Christianity and Paganism (Excerpts and Aphorisms)

/in /by

Translated and edited by Joseph D. Pryce

Ludwig Klages

Ludwig Klages (1872–1956) was a prominent German philosopher associated with the intellectual movement known as ‘vitalism’ (Biozentrismus).  He seems to have been a solitary child, but he developed an intense friendship with a Jewish classmate named Theodor Lessing, who would himself go on to achieve fame as the theorist of “Jewish Self-Hatred,” a concept whose origins Lessing would later trace back to passionate discussions that he had had with Klages during their boyhood rambles on the windswept moors and beaches of their Lower Saxony home.  Shortly after the NSDAP seized power at the beginning of 1933, one of Klages’s disciples established the Arbeitskreises für biozentrisches Forschung (Working Group for Research on Vitalism). From 1938 onwards, when Reichsleiter Dr. Alfred Rosenberg delivered a bitter attack on Klages and his school in his inaugural address to the summer semester at the University of Halle, the official party spokesmen explicitly and repeatedly condemned Klages and his friends as enemies of the National Socialist Weltanschauung. Yet many prominent NS officials and many influential German academics in the Third Reich and after WWII had a very high opinion of Klages’ work.

The following material is derived from two sources:

Hans Eggert Schroder’s book: Ludwig Klages, Die Geschichte Seines Lebens (Ludwig Klages: The Story of His Life) (Bonn: 1966,1992), hereafter GL

Ludwig Klages’ book Rhythmen und Runen (Rhythms and Runes)(1944), hereafter RR.

The quotations from RR ‘disappeared’ after the WWII in subsequent German editions.

*           *           *

Mankind and Race

We must draw a sharp distinction between the man who sees the world as divided between the “human” and the “non-human,” and the man who is most profoundly struck by the obvious racial groupings of mankind (Nietzsche’s “masters”). The bridge that connects us to the Cosmos does not originate in “man,” but in race. (RR, 245)

Sin and the Pagan World

The idea of “sin” was quite alien to the pagan world. The ancient pagans knew the gods’ hatred as well as their revenge, but they never heard of punishment for “sin.” The ancient philosophers did understand something of the “good,” but when they employed this expression, they were certainly not endorsing the concept of the “sinless.” Quite the contrary: they were actually speaking of the pursuit of every type of excellence. (RR, 317)

The True Master of Secret Societies

In the forefront of our secret societies, we have the Rosicrucians, the Illuminati, the Freemasons, the “Odd Fellows,” and B’nai B’rith. The educated classes are provided with such recent varieties as … the Einstein cult and Freudianism. For half-educated fools we have H. P. Blavatsky, Anny Besant, Rudolf Steiner, and Krishnamurti. For the poor in spirit, there’s the Christian Science of Mrs. Eddy, the Oxford Movement, and biblical fundamentalism. All of these groups, along with innumerable lesser organizations, are humanitarianism’s masks. Jewry is the center from which they are ruled. (GL, 1345)

Christianity and Wakefulness

Even in the garden of olives Christ begged his disciples to remain awake by his side. The saints indicate by their sleeplessness that nothing can harm them. Christianity is the war against sleep and dreaming, two states for which a reviving elemental life will always be yearning. Against the activity of astral wakefulness, elemental life places consummation and the pagan feeling for fate. True pagans regard sleeplessness as the most monstrous conceivable evil. In addition, the wakefulness of the Christian manifests a slavish impulse: the lurking wariness and prudence of submissive souls. (RR, 253)

From A Letter Re: “Anti-Semitism”

I’ve never endorsed the claim that the Nazi Bonzes [big-wigs] belonged to a superior race. However, I must also add that I have consistently refused to accept the claim of a certain other race to be the “chosen people.” The arrogance is identical in both cases, but with this significant distinction: after waging war against mankind for more than three thousand years, Jewry has finally achieved total victory over all of the nations of the earth.

Therefore, I will have nothing to do with the contemporary kowtowing on the part of almost the entire civilized world before the haters of all mankind (Tacitus spoke of Christians, but he certainly meant the Jews, as will be obvious to every alert reader of his works). I despise all this kowtowing to the Jews as an utterly mendacious tactical ploy. (GL, 1350)

The Prophecy of a Jewish Friend

I might easily fill ten pages…with anecdotes concerning the life of Richard Perls. He was born a Jew, but he eventually abandoned Judaism, a religion that he had come to hate. One year before his death, which occurred, to the best of my recollection, in 1897, he said to me: “Herr Klages, the ancient world was destroyed by Judaism, just as the modern world is about to be!” When I voiced my skepticism as to the accuracy of his prophecy…he merely responded: “Just wait—you will live to see my prophecy fulfilled!” (GL, 196)

The Great Deceiver

To the Jew, everything human is a sham. One might even say that the Jewish face is nothing but a mask. The Jew is not a liar: he is the lie itself. From this vantage point, we can say that the Jew is not a man. … He lives the pseudo-life of a ghoul whose fortunes are linked to Yahweh-Moloch. He employs deception as the weapon with which he will exterminate mankind. The Jew is the very incarnation of the unearthly power of destruction. (RR, 330)

How Yahweh Expresses Himself

Yahweh’s medium of expression is the gesture. The meaning of all of his gestures, so far as they actually possess any metaphysical significance, can be interpreted as an ever-deeper subjugation of one principle at the hands of an ever-loftier one: consecration, blessing, etc., on the one side, and repentance, contrition, and adoration on the other. Semitic religiosity is restricted to adoring worshipper and the adored deity. When this religiosity attaches itself solely to the personal, the emblem of worship becomes the individual person. Only the Semitic religions bow to the “One God.” In adoration, the believer achieves the non-rational form of ego-consciousness. Pagan rationality glides right past the god to the ego; in the Semitic “service of God,” however, the transcendental “One” brings destruction to the world of “appearances.” Apollo is, so to speak, an ethically developed Dionysus; he works on the soil of blood-thinning. Yahweh is the all-devouring nothingness; he works on the soil of blood-poisoning. (RR, 321)

The Cult of the Christ

It is impossible to conceive of a more fatal blindness than that of the cult instigated by this Jewish sectarian and his apostles and camp followers. Torn from the bonds of nature and the past, man must now direct his gaze at the wasteland known as the “future”; into that desert he stares, paralyzed by dread of the vengeful Jew-God. And before this insane masquerade of the “kingdom come,” the “last judgment,” and “eternal punishment” can be consummated, the true heroes and the real gods must first be made to grovel before the cross! (RR, 285)

Joseph Pryce (email him) is a writer, poet and translator. He is the author of the collection of mystical poems Mansions of Irkalla. Mr. Pryce wasborn in Brooklyn and studied for the Roman Catholic priesthood for three years (Redemptorist Order) and then attended Brooklyn College. He says for himself; “I was a musician for many years and recorded several CDs, but literature has always been my first love (especially poetry). I live with my wife, 30,000 books, and a dog and four cats on Long Island.” His translation of the German philosopher Ludwig Klages’ work will be published shortly.

Goodbye, America! (Part 2)

/4 Comments/in /by

In the near future, America will have a White minority.

We, the nominally Christian masses of European ancestry, will be surrounded by a sea of strange faces. All these polyglot multitudes, who have been teleported into America — and mainly because of Jewish influence against the will of its White majority — are now pitted against us. They are likely to be our new enemies. They have been shoehorned into America for one purpose only: to make life tough for us. They compete with us for vanishing jobs and diminishing resources, and inevitably they will obtain political power that they will use against us.  

The Multicultural Menagerie

One of the many “benefits” of multiculturalism is that loyalty issues come to the fore. Exhibit A for this is the notorious Jonathan Pollard spy case.

Jonathan Pollard, one in a long line of Jewish American spies. (See here). The total number of Jewish spies convicted or expelled from the US exceeds the number of spies from all other ethnic groups. As Jews make up only 2% of the American population and blacks 14%, there ought to be seven times as many black spies. In fact, there are none.

Requests for Pollard’s release from Jewish sources have been endless — Yitzhak Rabin (1995), Benjamin Netanyahu (2002), Ehud Olmert (2008). But Pollard remains safely behind bars, as if to show us that the old dog still wags its tail. Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz expresses his anger thus: “As an American and as a Jew, I hereby express my outrage at Jonathan Pollard’s sentence of life imprisonment for the heinous crime he flagrantly committed.”

Sorry, that’s a misquote! It should be:  “…for the crime to which he pleads guilty.” (Pleading guilty to a crime, in Dershowitz’s bizarre Alice-in-Wonderland world, is clearly tantamount to being innocent or at least getting a soft sentence.)

It gives me no pleasure to point out that Israel’s present Prime Minister, the thuggish ‘Bibi’ Netanyahu, resorted to moral blackmail in 1998 at the Wye River Conference in order to secure Pollard’s release. “If we signed an agreement with Arafat, I expected a pardon for Pollard,” he said. Quid pro quo, you see. If you give us Pollard, we’ll give you the promise of peace.

“Once we squeeze all we can out of the United States it can dry up and blow away,” the same Netanyahu reportedly told Pollard, upon exiting Pollard’s prison cell after a friendly social call in 2002. This quote, which is cited all over the Internet, is the sort of thing that, even if inaccurate, reflects the reality that Israel and its Lobby in the US are exploiting American blood and treasure on behalf of Israel.

This is the man who refuses to desist from his ongoing dispossession of Palestine, while at the same time expecting American largesse in exchange for his intransigence — and more American lives, needless to say, lost in foreign wars fought for Israel.

It’s only in America, it seems, that the piper seems unable to call the tune. Another quote:

Netanyahu: “Watch it, boy, don’t dare speak to me like that! WE JEWS CONTROL AMERICA!  Ever heard of the Samson Option?”

Okay, he didn’t say that! But it’s what he could have said in a parallel universe. It’s what he  might well have said in this universe, if he was speaking his real thoughts.

Even American Vice-Presidents, Zionist lackeys though they be, visit Israel only to get spat upon. How do they react to their ritual humiliation at the hands of their Jewish masters?  As the spit lands on their faces, they ask if it’s raining.

“It’s good to be home!” VP Joe Biden gushes, arriving in Israel on an official visit. “The U.S. has no better friend than Israel! Progress occurs in the Middle East when everyone knows there is simply no space between the United States and Israel!”

Stick a tail on this guy and he’d win first prize in a poodle competition.

As if to emphasize the point of Israeli muscularity, Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld invokes the dreaded Samson option.”We possess several hundred atomic warheads,” he reminds us ominously, “and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets of our air force.”

Europe, watch out.

Meanwhile, in America, the Jews have never had it so good. In 2009, 35% of the richest men in America were Jews. This 2% of the population who are the wealthiest group in America and now comprise 25% of Ivy League undergraduates and 40% of Harvard alumni, are indeed voluble in their never-ending complaints about their victimhood. America’s 400 richest men, according to a report in the New York Times (March 23, 2009), own as much as 22% of the nation’s total wealth, and around 140 of these multibillionaires are Jews.

“Ah, how sweet it is to be Jewish at the end of this 20th century,” Alain Finkielkraut wrote in Le Monde in 1998. “We are no longer history’s accused, but its darlings. The spirit of the times loves, honors, and defends us, watches over our interests; it even needs our imprimatur. Journalists draw up ruthless indictments against the Nazis and their modern collaborators. Churches repent. States do penance.”

White America smiling … but not for long

You are this young couple. Here’s what happens to you. This is your fate:

You are kidnapped by four Blacks, three men and a woman, while out on a date. For the next twenty-four hours, you are subjected to systematic torture. Both of you are gang-raped. You, the young woman, are forced to watch your boyfriend being sodomized by three black men, one after the other. What does the black woman do? She stands in the background, watching, a kitchen knife in her hand, waiting to cut off your sweetheart’s penis. This happens. Maybe they all take turns to saw off your darling’s penis. It’s your turn now, White Lady. Let’s see your tits, Bitch! Hey man, pass me that knife! Yes, White Lady, it’s TIME FOR YOUR BREASTS TO BE CUT OFF! They rape you first. They make you drink cleaning fluid. And then they hack off your breasts. Finally, they strangle you to death.

No point going on. Both bodies are found dumped on waste ground later, riddled with bullets.

This happened in January, 2007, near Knoxville, Tennessee, to Christopher Newsom (23) and his girlfriend Channon Christian (21)  This whole grisly affair of Black-on-White violence was carefully covered up by the mainstream media.  Who owns the media? Don’t even ask!

“The details of the crimes were considered so horrific,” we are told, “that the authorities would not release accounts to the news media for fear of putting Blacks in a bad light and upsetting race relations. The facts emerged only when some enterprising reporters checked documents filed in federal court.”

This case is exceptional only for its psychopathic brutality.  Thousands of other cases occur in which Black-on-White rapes without murder feature, as well as countless cases of unprovoked beatings and verbal abuse of Whites.

Sarah Kreager, 26, suffered broken facial bones and other injuries after she was punched, kicked and dragged off a bus one Tuesday afternoon in January, 2009, by nine black students. Her boyfriend was also severely beaten up. There had been no provocation.

Apart from perfunctory local coverage with no mention of race, these crimes, almost without exception, go unreported by the media. (See here).

These are grounds for despair. Our new elites are of course behind this — we all know that now — deliberately fomenting racial hatred, while portraying White Americans as the underlying cause of that hatred.

Here’s an eerie picture of a future dystopia, the unimaginably grim America that awaits us:

Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch’entrate! — Abandon hope, all ye who enter here! (Dante’s Inferno)

It’s time to discuss despair. Despair in general. Let’s talk about our despair.

Creating  Despair

Who began the Great Despair? Probably Darwin, without meaning to do so. It’s perhaps worth pointing out that the happiest and most optimistic poem ever written was penned a mere eighteen years before the Darwinian bombshell of 1859.  Here it is. Savor it slowly. It was never to be like this again:

The year’s at the spring
And day’s at the morn.
Morning’s at seven,
The hill-side’s dew-pearled,
The lark’s on the wing,
The snail’s on the thorn,
God’s in his Heaven —
All’s right with the world!

— Robert Browning, Pippa Passes, 1841

With the publication of Darwin’s Origin of Species, the mood was to change abruptly. A black cloud settled over the human psyche. Nietzsche was to cry out in anguish, “GOD IS DEAD!” And then, eight years after Darwin’s deathblow, came these — the noblest and most heartrending lines in the English language:

Ah, love, let us be true

To one another! for the world, which seems

To lie before us like a land of dreams,

So various, so beautiful, so new,

Hath really neither joy, nor love, nor light,

Nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain;

And we are here as on a darkling plain

Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,

Where ignorant armies clash by night.

— Matthew Arnold, Dover Beach, 1867.

“God is dead…”

This is what Thomas Huxley, Darwin’s best friend, had to say after The Origin of Species hit the world like a screaming comet on 24 November 1859:

I know of no study which is so utterly saddening as that of the evolution of humanity. Man emerges with the marks of his lowly origin strong upon him. He is a brute, only more intelligent than other brutes, a blind prey to impulses, a victim to endless illusions which make his mental existence a burden and fill his life with barren toil and battle.

In other words: you might as well blow your brains out!

Charles Darwin (1809–1882): “Man still bears in his bodily frame the indelible stamp of his lowly origin. … What a book a Devil’s Chaplain might write on the clumsy, wasteful, blundering low and horribly cruel works of nature. … I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent and omnipotent God would have designedly created parasitic wasps with the express intention of their feeding within the living bodies of Caterpillars…I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent and omnipotent God would have designedly created that a cat should play with mice.”

No God, no morality: anything goes.

Life is no longer worth living in a world without God. Nietzsche knew this. Even as he pronounced God dead, he anguished: “Formula of my happiness: a Yes, a No, a straight line, a goal.”

In other words: faith, certitude, meaning, purpose. These were the vital ingredients that were needed to make life endurable and invest it with dignity. Dostoevsky felt the same way. For him, nihilism was the ultimate nightmare. The problem was neatly summarized for him in the famous phrase he put into Ivan Karamazov’s mouth: “If God is dead, everything is permitted.”

Having concluded that God was dead, the philosophers of the Frankfurt School naturally believed that all was henceforth permissible. This followed from the premise that God was dead. It could not be avoided. If all was permissible, then the rape and murder of a little child was permissible. Ivan Karamazov was quick to point this out. Torture was permissible. There was no point obeying the Ten Commandments, let alone international law. Why bother?  “For if there’s no God,” Ivan Karamazov argued, “there’s no such thing as virtue — and no need for it.”

“DO WHAT THOU WILT” becomes the only law.

Today, at this very moment in New York City, a Muslim detainee is being tortured. He is being tortured in violation of international law, the American Constitution, and every ethical principle we hold most dear. This man has no criminal record and has not even been put on trial.

Why be good when evil’s easier? There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.

 

“DO WHAT THOU WILT shall be the whole of the law.”  — Aleister Crowley (1875–1947), English Satanist, also known as “the Great Beast”. The Frankfurters would have been tickled pink by his next remark: “I was in the death struggle with self. God and Satan fought for my soul those three long hours. God conquered.  Now I have only one doubt left — which of the twain was God?

Freud and the Frankfurt School intellectuals — by all accounts a Jewish sect — now set out to manipulate this godless world out of bitter spite and despair. Racked with existential angst and hatred against Europeans and their culture, they created a culture of despair.

To destroy Western civilization now became their clearly articulated aim. “Who will save us from Western civilization?” Georg Lukács, one of the founders of the Frankfurt School, asked rhetorically. He began the “rescue operation” himself, convinced that the best way to do this was to create “a culture of pessimism” and “a world abandoned by God.” (Evangelizing despair.)

Georg Lukács (1885–1971): “I want a culture of pessimism…a world abandoned by God”

It was of vital importance to these spiritually deracinated Jews — with a chip on their shoulders two thousand years long — to launch a blitzkrieg of cultural iconoclasm against the Western countries that had harbored them for centuries and done their utmost to assimilate them. They saw Christianity as their main enemy and set out to destroy it: to undermine the family, to turn parent against child, to blur the lines between good and evil, to promote sexual promiscuity and moral relativism — in short, to strip man of his dignity and reduce him to the level of a beast.

A key component of the culture of despair and nihilism  was sex. Western mores on sexuality  — mores that had the effect of building strong families and providing a safe, loving environment for children — became a prime target of these revolutionaries. Solace and salvation henceforth lay in a hedonistic creed of sexuality.

It was Freud who said, “Sexual morality — as society in its extreme form, the American, defines it — is contemptible. I advocate an incomparably freer sexual life.” (See here.) Other Jewish intellectuals — notably Herbert Marcuse and Wilhelm Reich along with a phalanx of supporters in the media and the universities — marched in lockstep behind Papa Sigmund and spread the message to the masses: salvation through sex.

Freud: “Sexual morality … is contemptible. I advocate an incomparably freer sexual life.”

This cultural nihilism also spread to politics. Appointing himself mankind’s chief  evangelist for moral anarchy, Frankfurt School luminary Walter Benjamin announced blandly: “To organize pessimism means nothing other than to expel the moral metaphor from politics.”

This sentence needs deconstruction. I understand it thus. Fussy distinctions between good and evil should be removed from the realm of politics. If you can get away with flouting international law, as Israel does, then by all means do so. If you want to torture people, as the American government obviously does, don’t let moral scruples stand in your way. DO WHAT THOU WILT.

Following policies like this can be extremely effective, if only for this reason: The human psyche cannot bear to exist in a world in which such vile abominations are freely practised. Result?  Existential dissonance. Despair. The culture of pessimism and nihilism.

Walter Benjamin did well to map out a strategy of systematic despair creation. His own ideas got to him, working for him only too well. He committed suicide — hoist by his own petard.

I have said this before. Let me say it again. This is how the song goes:

Let’s create a culture of pessimism!  Let’s make western civilization stink! Let’s create a godless world and drive people to despair! Let’s corrupt society’s values and make life impossible! In short, LET’S CREATE HELL ON EARTH! To undermine. To corrupt. To create discord. To drive crazy. To destroy.

Verbs to remember.

Dostoevsky:  If God is dead, everything is permitted! Homo homini lupus — man is a wolf to man.

The Frankfurt School intellectual, with his philosophy of iconoclastic chaos creation, is Dostoevsky’s Ivan Karamazov in the flesh.

Here he is:

I hasten to give back my entrance ticket to heaven! As I’m an honest man, I give it back right away! It’s not God I don’t accept, Alyosha — only I most respectfully return him the entrance ticket.

Sigmund Freud: “If only Americans knew, we are bringing them the plague!”

We are in the last days of a dying civilization. The writing is on the wall. Unless a miracle now occurs, we are history.

Dr. Lasha Darkmoon (email her) is an academic, age 31, with higher degrees in classics.  A published poet and translator, she is also a political  activist with a special interest in Middle Eastern affairs. ‘Lasha Darkmoon’ is a pen name.