Featured Articles

Semitophobia

The greatest mass fear in the US is not Islamophobia. It’s not homophobia. It’s not even xenophobia. It’s Semitophobia. Fear of the Jewish Power Cabal. No other group comes close at provoking as much fear in almost the entirety of the population as Jews. Even the slightest suggestion that anyone is saying anything mildly questionable about Jews causes cold sweats, shortness of breath, hair to stand on end, muscles to clench, and all the other physical reactions that reveals the triggering of a psycho-social taboo. It’s actually a suppressed terror that amounts to a kind of paralysis.

So thoroughly has this fear reaction been implanted in the populace by means of Jewish Supremacist-owned and operated mass media, education curriculum, entertainment industries’ myth making apparatus, government propaganda, and other influences, that it is all but universal. Small pockets of people may express some ‘anti-semitism’ among themselves in private where it is relatively safe, but few dare publicly where they might be overheard. ‘Anti-semitism’ is almost thoroughly suppressed by Semitophobia.

Even plenty of Gentiles of Conservative, Liberal and of course Progressive orientation will express outrage and hate at anyone who vaguely criticizes Jews. These Gentiles are of course afraid of Jews themselves, but cover it with virtuous indignation and outrage. It’s safer that way.

A mere oblique question about the validity of the holocaust, such as that raised by Florida school principal William Latson in 2018 could lose a person his job, income, family, house, freedom (Alfred and Monika Schaefer) and sanity. Perhaps even his life. Pointing out that a particular Jew, such as Sheldon Adelson or Jeffrey Epstein, or a whole family of them such as the Sacklers behind the opiod epidemic, is responsible for causing enormous misery, cruelty and horror provokes a defensive reaction from certain Jews and their Gentile defenders of such righteous fury that fear can cause the critic to run for safety. Even pointing out the obvious atrocities the Israeli Likud Party government is inflicting on the helpless Palestinians in their Occupied Territories triggers outlashings of fury that would make a cornered bobcat proud.

It takes a strong character and profound courage to overcome Semitophobia and risk even the most gentle inquiry. Ilhan Omar as a freshman Muslim congresswoman spoke publicly about a ‘foreign lobby’ having inordinate influence on the Congress. Immediately everyone knew which Lobby she was talking about, and she was denounced as an ‘anti-semite’ and unjustly cruel on Jews and Israel, including by President Trump. Displaying more courage than most, though not sufficient for justice, she did not exactly apologize as most are forced to do, but diluted her statement by mentioning other lobbies that also have influence. This barely satisfied Jewish demands, and we have not heard any more complaints from Omar since.

In fact, perhaps no group in America is more Semitophobic than the US Congress. Such past examples as Gus Savage, James Trafficant and Cynthia Mckinney are more than enough to keep the others in line with Jewish demands. A more recent example is Iowa Republican Rep. Steve King, who has been denounced as an ‘anti-semite’ and ‘holocaust denier’, even though his main outrages against Jewish Supremacist power has been speaking up in favor of White people and Western civilization. King even went on a tour of holocaust sites in Poland sponsored by a Jewish group that educates US Congresspeople on seminal Jewish suffering, but King provoked outrage by also meeting with ‘actual fascists’ and asked them if the ‘Nazis’ or Soviets were worse. King lost his ability to attend Committees, but managed to retain his House seat in the last election.

Some analysis of the Jeffrey Epstein case suggests that he was collecting the worst kind of ‘dirt’ on politicians as a form of blackmail for the Israeli Mossad and Jewish power generally. Imagine the Semitophobia such grotesque material could evoke if a mainstream media figure was foolhardy enough to discuss it in public. Short of death threats, this kind of character assassination may evoke the strongest Semitophobia.

Sheldon Adelson donated at least $100 million to the Republican party for the 2016 election and more for the 2018 mid-terms. Semitophobia in this case is little more than fear that such massive funding will not go to certain candidates, but to their in-party opponents. In both parties, fear of losing Jewish funding is so breathless that candidates line up to attend the annual AIPAC meeting and express their avid support for Israel and Jews in America. The fact that this makes Omar, Savage, Trafficant, McKinney, King and relatively few others corrrect is not enough to overcome extreme Semitophobia. That takes more courage than most Congresspeople, and indeed most human beings, possess.

This year we see what appears to be a strange aversion to attending the AIPAC meeting by Democratic candidates for President, supposedly based on leftist denunciation of the policies of the right-wing government of Israel headed by PM Netanyahu, who will be a featured speaker at AIPAC, and the resistance of Israel to forming a two-state solution. It is more likely that campaign advisors realize American liberal voters have overcome a certain Semitophobia of their own, and candidates better make a show of complying. Most likely AIPAC has coordinated this ‘boycott’ of the lobby event with Democratic candidates, and wealthy Jews will certainly donate to presumptive nominee Joe Biden who is typical of old-line Democrats in his support for Israel.

Republicans have no problem with AIPAC and actually condemn Democrats as ‘anti-semitic’ for not attending. President Trump was particularly clear in calling them ‘anti-Jewish’.

In 2017, the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance produced a new five-hundred word definition of ‘anti-semitism’ with eleven examples, seven of them refering to Israel. Because of the fear of life being ruined should one be labeled an ‘anti-semite’ through making even the slightest violation of this definition, Semitophobia has most people in its clutches. To be called an ‘anti-semite’ is such a horrid fate for most that they simply will never risk it, even if they know in their minds and hearts that there are legitimate, fact-based critiques of Jewish power. Yet we are told by many Jewish sources that ‘anti-semitism’ is on the rise, and given various explanations why: Americans are increasingly discontent and looking for a weak vulnerable victim to dump it on—ironic to say the least; ‘White supremacism’ is on the rise, encouraged by the President; distorted perception of the Israel/Palestine ‘conflict’ (it is no ‘conflict’, but slow genocide) is provoking unjust criticisms and even BDS of poor Israel; and the like. The real reason for rising ‘anti-semitism’ is most likely the increasing knowledge of Jewish power and influence. Knowledge leads to outrage leads to overcoming fear and risking losses and hardship in asserting truth and justice.

The key leverage point is knowledge. Semitophobia is so acute on some online platforms such as Youtube, Facebook and Twitter that those risking ‘anti-semitism’ are using euphemisms in order to evade the thought police and avoid deplatforming, demonetization, prolonged bans and permanent banishment. We know from such heretical works as the US Lobby documentary produced by Al Jazeera, but distributed by Electronic Intifada, that Israel supporters are very well funded and diligent in hunting down ‘anti-semitism’ online and on campus using ruthless and dishonest tactics. Al Jazeera at first collapsed in Semitophobia and would not distribute the documentary (it since has posted it), but Electronic Intifada did. The more desperate one is when overwhelmed by Jewish Power, the easier it can be to overcome Semitophobia.

Two exemplars of different kinds who appear to be immune to Semitophobia (though I suspect it is partially appearances, no one is totally immune) are Pastor Charles Baldwin and tech entrepreneur and Jewish editor/producer of the Unz Review Ron Unz.

Baldwin  awakened from the hypnotic influence of the Scofield Bible supplement and strives to educate Evangelicals (Christian Zionists) about US politics and how the real Bible perceives Jews. He openly denounces Jewish power in America. He expresses his gratitude for this awakening, even though it has cost him many friends, much money and certain comforts and support in his life. Perhaps it is his faith in Jesus that helps him cope with Semitophobia.

I have never read in any of Ron Unz’s many essays in his American Pravda series of his gratitude for his awakening into these hidden mysteries of the Jewish Question. He says he has faced only few and mild inconveniences for his flagrant ‘anti-semitism’. He expresses mild astonishment that the ADL has not attacked him more fiercely, and speculates that to do so might only draw more attention to Unz’s powerful articles exposing such taboo topics of Jewish Power as the JFK assassination, the Leo Frank case and origins of the ADL, 911 as an Israeli job, the holocaust, the Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution, ‘anti-semitism’ as weaponization, and others. Possibly Unz is some form of controlled opposition, or is it better for Jewish Power to let him continue exposing it to a relatively small but growing audience rather than draw more attention to him with public attacks? It’s hard to see how Unz could be CO, but also hard to imagine Jewish Power letting him continue. The Unz Review has after all surpassed the iconic Nation magazine in popularity, largely due to Unz’s writings on the Jewish Question along with other authors he features. Unz certainly appears immune to Semitophobia in any case, given the taboo topics he writes about boldly. Does it help that he himself is Jewish?

Entire nations are subject to Semitophobia. It goes without saying that Germany is completely prostrate to Semitophobia, but in his book The Holocaust Industry, Jewish author Normal Finkelstein recounts how the nation of Switzerland was frightened into paying enormous reparations to ‘holocaust survivors’ for not trying hard enough to find the rightful recipients of Swiss bank accounts established before or during the war by Jews.

When the nation of Poland was targeted to pay holocaust reparations, it refused, and passed an amendment to a former law, making it illegal to say any German prisons in Poland were ‘Polish’. The Polish government had established an Institute for National Remembrance, and ‘imposed fines of up to three years in prison for those who denied or belittled German or Soviet crimes during the holocaust and subsequent Soviet invasion.‘ The 2018 amendment makes it illegal to attribute responsibility for or complicity during the holocaust to the Polish nation or state. This provoked fierce criticism and outrage, and Poland was subject to enormous Semitophobia. It resisted however and enacted its new law.

Iceland was not so staunch. It proposed a law making circumcision of minors illegal, subject to up to 6 years in prison, citing the UN convention on the rights of the child and an earlier Icelandic law outlawing female circumcision. Jewish Power around the world, including in the US Congress, expressed outrage, and indirectly threatened boycott of Iceland’s essential tourism industry among other threats, such as association with ‘anti-semites’ and ‘neo-nazis’. Even though the bill had strong support among most of Iceland’s 336,000 population, of which only an estimated 250 were Jews, and most likely would have passed otherwise, the government’s own judiciary committee advised against passage, and Iceland’s parliament dropped the bill, celebrated in Jewish media. Unfortunately but understandably, Iceland caved to Semitophobia.

Though more can be named, yet they are relatively few. All have faced hardships for overcoming Semitophobia and confronting Jewish Power. Many many more have also whose names will never be known. They suffer hardships in their own families, communities, work places, online and in real life. They feel Semitophobia, but do it anyway. These are also real heroes of our times. Courage does not mean acting without fear. It is feeling fear, and acting anyway. The Jewish Power Cabal may make examples of them, and the hypnotized masses Jew and Gentile alike may confront them, denounce them, defame and demonize them, impoverish them, dehome them, deplatform them, and even physically assault and imprison them for being cruel to innocent victim Jews, but they do it anyway. Semitophobia has been made strong in America and around the world today, but the human drive for truth and justice can be stronger. As the grotesque excesses of Jewish Power in America grow worse, so too does the will to overcome Semitophobia and stand up and speak out.

It is likely to manifest as righteous outrage. Certain Jews have provoked such outrage many times in history, and suffered the consequences of expulsion in Europe, and many times more world-wide. They seem never to have learned, but continue to think that if they can just oppress and deceive and degrade and frighten their perceived racial opponents enough, they will be safe. It should be said that this refers primarily to the Jewish Power Elite, and Not All Jews, but sometimes the distinction gets lost and innocent—or at least less criminal—Jews suffer. The Jewish Power Elite has frightened the majority of the Jewish people itself in order to control and use it (for which the holocaust story is their greatest tool today), but that is a topic for another essay. Many—no, most—Gentiles succumb to Semitophobia and don’t dare speak out.

In increasing numbers and quality, more are speaking out. It is inevitable. Some White Americans feel they must secure the existence of their people and a future for White children. More are learning that certain Jews are primarily to blame for this existential threat. Semitophobia could be a weak dam to hold back this flood as the weight of the waters accumulate. New laws ‘combatting anti-semitism’ and suppressing BDS might only make the outrage stronger. The two forces—Semitophobia and legitimate ‘anti-semitism’—are increasing in strength and driving more fiercely against each other. Something has to give.

Or the Jewish Power Cabal could win this time. Fear, apathy, nihilism, hedonism, delusion could prevent the natural race reaction needed to protect Whites from eventual eradication. Could Semitophobia suppress that natural reaction even as excesses of Jewish power escalate beyond even today’s absurd levels? Would White people in America remain afraid and unresponsive, paralyzed by Semitophobia, as ‘White supremacists’ are herded into American gulags? Would Americans remain docile, limp with Semitophobia as their Second Amemdment rights were stripped piecemeal over time? Or would they take up arms and fight a civil war to retain that right of self-protection? Will Americans allow George Soros to fund Antifa to the point that it is a mass rampage vandalizing whole cities and marching as lynch mobs against ‘White supremacists’, a neo-communist revolution destroying America, or will they ovecome Semitophobia to take back the streets and make them safe again for right-wing Whites who love their country and people? Will Americans ever stop the subversive filthy mind rot that pours out of Hollywood and the porn industry , or stay stuck in Semitophobia and let it continue until all the youth have pink and purple hair, big gulps full of meth, sex change operations, and lack even a single thought in the head or impulse in the heart for responsibility and decency?

Semitophobia is strong, but it can’t be that strong. Surely the Power Jews will go too far at some point, and White Gentiles in America will react. It has happened in Europe 109 times before. But so did Jewish Soviet Communism for almost 75 years of mass horror.

It may be either Semitophobia forever or America 110.

Let’s end on a lighter note. Do any readers remember when ‘racism’ was more culturally acceptable, and people made little harmless jokes about the different types of folks, in an unconscious process of maintaining their ethnic, cultural, religious and racial identity? I remember my father calling himself and other Italians he knew ‘Guineas’, a racial slur. He also referred to other racial groups and individuals by common racial slurs, even though he played basketball in the schoolyard with them. It wasn’t scandalous, it wasn’t evil, it was simply honest and it served a function of identity.

So let’s recall a harmless and useful joke from a more innocent honest time:

“An ‘anti-semite’ is someone who dislikes Jews more than is absolutely necessary.” (Source unknown. Possibly printed in Hungary in the 1960, and an original variant in the US in 1939)

If we don’t at least dislike such Jews as Epstein, Soros, Adelson, Netanyahu and many others, and say so, then we don’t deserve to preserve our people. Break though Semitophobia and join the rising tide of voices confronting Jewish power. It is the honorable and decent thing to do.

When Minorities Are Mighty: How Tiny Genetic Differences Can Have Huge Cultural Consequences

Which single invention has contributed most to our understanding of reality? Appropriately enough, it’s easy to overlook one of the best candidates: the microscope. It revealed whole new worlds existing not merely under our eyes, but actually within our eyes and every other organ of the body. The microscope taught humanity that the minute can be mighty. For example, we learnt that hitherto unsuspected organisms, invisible to the naked eye, had been shaping human history and evolution for countless millennia. Witness the Corona virus and the Black Death. Both the physical size and the genetic complexity of the virus are far less than those of human beings, but the virus is now re-shaping human history as the plague bacillus did in the Middle Ages.

Applied ambiguity

But that lesson of micro-might was apparently lost on the sociologists, anthropologists and other “experts” who drew up a statement on “The Race Question” issued by the United Nations in 1950:

From the biological standpoint, the species Homo sapiens is made up of a number of populations, each one of which differs from the others in the frequency of one or more genes. Such genes, responsible for the hereditary differences between men, are always few when compared to the whole genetic constitution of man and to the vast number of genes common to all human beings regardless of the population to which they belong. This means that the likenesses among men are far greater than their differences. (“The Race Question,” UNESCO, Paris, July 1950)

Ashley Montagu (born Israel Ehrenberg), chief writer of “The Race Question”

The statement is dishonest, because it exploits the ambiguity of the phrase “far greater.” Does the phrase mean “far more numerous” or “far more powerful”? The compilers of the statement, like the Jewish anthropologist Ashley Montagu (né Israel Ehrenberg), wanted to use the undoubted truth of the first meaning to imply the falsehood of the second meaning.

Humans, chimps and gorillas

Using that kind of dishonest reasoning, you could also say that the likenesses among primates — the group that contains humans, chimpanzees and gorillas — are “far greater” than their differences. Clearly, the genes that primates have in common far outnumber the genes responsible for anything unique to Homo sapiens. For example, only a tiny number of genes underlie the human faculty of language. And those genes seem to have appeared in an eye-blink of evolutionary time.

But that one small genetic difference outweighs the vast number of shared genes among primates. The tiny minority of genes-for-language had a decisive effect, turning one group into a new kind of creature — a creature that spoke and reasoned, and thereby cooperated in new and uniquely powerful ways. Language made us human. In time, you could say that it made us superhuman, allowing us to transcend death and distance with a form of magic called writing.

Eugenic processes at the center of Judaism

Writing is undoubtedly the most important invention in human history. Indeed, it created the very concept of “history.” But not all human “populations” have been exposed to the written word for the same length of time and to the same degree. Writing created a new cultural environment in which existing and emergent genes were favoured or disfavoured by natural selection. There is good evidence, for example, that some groups have acquired genetic adaptations for reading: see Peter Frost’s fascinating discussion of the Visual Word Form Area (VWFA), for example. Such “literacy” genes, as they might be called, would be a tiny fraction even of the tiny fraction of genes responsible for the faculty of language in the first place. But that fraction of a fraction might, again, have had decisive effects on human history.

After all, one obvious group for selection-by-literacy is Ashkenazi Jews, whose culture — and marriage prospects — centred for many centuries on the mastery of complicated texts like the Talmud and Torah. As Kevin MacDonald has noted: “success as a scholar was valuable because it allowed the scholar to contract a desirable marriage, often to a woman from a wealthy family. At the very center of Judaism, therefore, was a set of institutions that would reliably result in eugenic processes related to intelligence and resource acquisition ability.” I argued in “Gas-Bags Are Not Great” that the very fluent and prolific Christopher Hitchens was, in effect, a “reading, writing rabbi,” able to absorb and emit words at high speed thanks to his part-Ashkenazi ancestry and descent from generations of highly literate Ashkenazim.

Trotsky as Talmudist

And Hitchens himself said that his great hero Leon Trotsky ( Lev Bronshtein) “would have made a brilliant Talmudist.” So would Ashley Montagu, Morris Ginsberg and Claude Lévi-Strauss, who were three of the ten so-called experts who drew up the UN Statement on “The Race Question” quoted above. They were all Ashkenazi Jews, which is statistically anomalous even before you consider that Ashley Montagu was the dominant figure behind the Statement. If “the likenesses among men are far greater than their differences,” how is that the tiny minority of Ashkenazim can be represented so disproportionately among the ideologically influential? The likenesses should swamp the differences and Ashkenazim shouldn’t appear so often in situations like that.

In fact, of course, small differences — like genes for language — can have huge consequences. Small genetic differences underlie the higher average IQ and literacy of Ashkenazim, but those small genetic differences have given Ashkenazim huge advantages in cultural and ideological competition. But I’d also suggest that Ashkenazim enjoy small but decisive differences in genes for an ingroup-outgroup morality — or rather, for lack of any sense of moral obligation to non-Jews. It’s also statistically anomalous that world-historic fraudsters like Robert Maxwell and Bernie Madoff should be Ashkenazi. Not to mention prolific sex-criminals like Harvey Weinstein and Jeffrey Epstein.

 

Minority predators, majority prey

All four men were predators and among lower animals predation is an evolutionary strategy under genetic control. Why should predatory behaviour not also be genetically influenced or controlled among human beings? For example, psychopathy is what called an evolutionary stable strategy (ESS), in that it can exist and be advantageous at a certain low level in a population because psychopaths are not encountering other psychopaths often enough to be disadvantaged in their habitual predation and immorality.

Two Ashkenazi predators and possible psychopaths: Sir Philip Green and Harvey Weinstein

In other words, psychopaths have to be a minority to be successful. Does that have any genetic implications for racial minorities like Jews and Gypsies living among the White racial majorities of Europe? It may indeed have such implications, particularly if the minority in question evolves cultural taboos and punishments against predation on the in-group rather than the out-group. But Jews and Gypsies prey on the out-group in different ways suited to their vastly different levels of intelligence and literacy. Ashkenazim have had a culture centred on books; Gypsies have had a culture centred on low-level parasitism. And that Gypsy culture has produced another statistical anomaly: Tyson Fury, the current heavy-weight champion of the world, is a “self-proclaimed Gypsy King” and drawn from a tiny minority within Europe’s population, let alone the world’s.

Minority might: the “Gypsy King” Tyson Fury

And although Fury may be less Gypsy than Irish Traveller, the two groups have inter-bred and have similar cultures of fighting, philoprogenitiveness and contempt for education. Presumably they’ve evolved in similar ways, as fast-reproducing nomadic predators on a settled and genetically pacified out-group. Fury’s wife Paris wants their children to follow Gypsy tradition and leave school at the age of 11 as Fury himself did, and in early 2020 Fury faced accusations of fraud over a drug test. Criminality is another tradition among Gypsies and Travellers (see my discussion of the serial rapist Joseph McCann). But Fury seems to be of above-average intelligence even by White standards — he both out-fought and out-thought his “fearsome” Black opponent Deontay Wilder — and perhaps that explains his involvement in another kind of criminality. When the Guardian reported Fury’s victory over Wilder, the newspaper made sure to remind its readers of his previous record of crime-think: “In the past Fury has equated homosexuality and abortions with paedophilia, claimed ‘Zionist, Jewish people … own all the banks, all the papers, all the TV stations’ and ‘a woman’s best place is in the kitchen and on her back’.”

Public Enemy #1 among Jews

Fury might not know the word “hyperbole,” but he’s intelligent enough to know that he was using it when he made his claim about “Zionist, Jewish people.” Obviously, they don’t own “all” of the things he named. But they own a hugely disproportionate amount and exercise hugely disproportionate influence in media and finance. However, they don’t always use that influence in the best interests of the out-group. Interestingly, both Jews and Gypsies have contemptuous terms for the out-group: goyim and gorja, respectively. And while the Jewish fraudster Robert Maxwell (né Ján Ludvík Hyman Binyamin Hoch), who preyed on the goyish out-group, was buried with the highest of honours on Israel’s most sacred ground, the Jewish fraudster Freddy David, who preyed on the Ashkenazi in-group, has described himself as “Public Enemy #1 in the Jewish community” of London:

A financial adviser who stole £15 million from investors failed to attend court on Wednesday as his lawyer claimed he feared he would not be able to prepare kosher food for himself if he moved to a tougher jail. Freddy David, 51, used his good reputation within the Jewish community as managing director of HBFS Wealth Management to sell non-existent investment products to his clients.

David transferred his mother around £176,000 while under investigation and spent around £36,000 on gambling just a few days before he was finally arrested, Southwark Crown Court heard. He used part of an £80,000 investment from one victim to set up a restaurant called “Let’s Meat”, visit Greece and Israel and feed his gambling addiction.

After his arrest, David, who also paid his children’s private school fees with the cash, told police: “I am public enemy number one in the Jewish community and understandably so. I have very very few friends left and I understand why.” David stole a total of £14,545,594 from a total of 55 clients over ten years. (Fraudster who stole £15m from community fails to attend confiscation hearing over kosher food claim, The Jewish Chronicle, 26th February 2020 / 1st Adar 5780)

Freddy David, “Public Enemy #1” among Jews

Freddy David’s risible “kosher food claim” is also an example of the verbal slipperiness that may be familiar to anyone who has argued with an Ashkenazi Jew. And let’s return to another claim by Ashkenazi Jews: that “the likenesses among men are far greater than their differences.” Again, the claim is slippery, because it relies on the ambiguity of “far greater.” If you own a hundred quartz pebbles and I own ninety-five quartz pebbles and five diamonds, the likenesses between our assets are, in one sense, “far greater than the differences.” In another sense, the differences are far greater than the likenesses.

Artistic abortions

The huge genetic likenesses among humans are quartz. The tiny genetic differences are diamonds. And what price would you put on the tiny genetic differences that allow humans to speak and keep chimpanzees dumb? But sometimes humans are also unable to speak: there are laws and social sanctions against “hate” which stifle debate on the very topic of human differences. I’ve argued in articles like “Free Speech Must Die!” that Jews have played a central role in this kind of censorship. For Jews, “free speech” means speech that frees them to prey on the White majority and subvert that majority’s culture. And speaking of subversion (while I still can), here’s a final statistical anomaly:

Aliza Shvarts (born 1986) is an artist and writer who works in performance, video, and installation. Her art and writing explore queer and feminist understandings of reproduction and duration, and use these themes to affirm abjection, failure, and “decreation”. Simone Weil’s idea of decreation has been described as “a mystical passage from the created to the uncreated” and “a spiritual exercise of mystical passage: across a threshold, from created to uncreated”.

Shvarts’ 2008 performance Untitled [Senior Thesis], 2008 was the center of the so-called Yale student abortion art controversy, generating an international debate. The work explores ideas of fiction and doubt, and engages feminist inquiries into the medical, political, and legal frameworks of gender and reproduction. …

Over the course of nine months, Shvarts used donated sperm to inseminate herself as often as possible between the ninth and fifteenth days of her menstrual cycle. On the twenty-eighth day of her cycle, she took herbal medications meant to induce menses or miscarriage (although she never knew if she was pregnant). Shvarts intended to exhibit video of herself experiencing vaginal bleeding on four sides of a clear plastic cube, which would be wrapped with transparent plastic lined with samples of the discharged fluid. (See Aliza Shvarts and Yale student abortion art controversy at Infogalactic)

The pretentious and repulsive Aliza Shvarts

Like Bernie Madoff and Tyson Fury, Aliza Shvarts is what might be called a behavioural outlier. Madoff did something exceptionally greedy and dishonest; Fury did something exceptionally athletic and aggressive; Shvarts did something exceptionally pretentious and repulsive. But how can minorities regularly supply outliers like that if we’re all the same under the skin?

They can’t, but that doesn’t matter, because we aren’t. A minority of genes separates humans from other primates, and a minority of genes separates Jews or Gypsies from other humans. In both cases, the minority is mighty.

COVID-19 timeline

 

The story begins in the final days of 2019.

December 30

Li Wenliang, an ophthalmologist working at Wuhan Central Hospital, sends urgent messages on to colleagues in an online chat group, drawing attention to seven cases of pneumonia in Wuhan that he thought appeared similar to the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronavirus that emerged in China in 2002. He advised them to wear protective gear.

January 3

The Wuhan public security bureau summons Li and orders him to sign a document accusing him of “making false comments” and disturbing the social order. According to published reports, the document stated, “We solemnly warn you: If you keep being stubborn, with such impertinence, and continue this illegal activity, you will be brought to justice – is that understood? We hope you can calm down and reflect on your behavior.”

At least eight doctors are punished for spreading rumors about COVID-19.

January 20

After three weeks, China finally tells the world it had identified a new virus.

WHO tells the world that, according to Chinese scientists, the coronavirus is not contagious from human to human.

January 28

Nevertheless, the disease has been spreading exponentially in Wuhan. The outbreak has now sickened nearly 10,000 people and killed more than 200.  Trump considers a ban on travel from China to US.

January 30

Li diagnosed with COVID-19.

From his hospital bed he describes what had happened in a post on the popular microblogging site, Weibo, where he also posted a copy of the reprimand letter.

January 31

A few countries respond to the outbreak in Wuhan by imposing travel bans from China including the Philippines, the Bahamas, Mongolia, and Singapore.

The World Health Organization, (WHO) warns that travel bans are not effective at stemming the spread of a virus and recommends against any travel or trade restrictions in response to the outbreak.

“Although travel restrictions may intuitively seem like the right thing to do, this is not something that WHO usually recommends,” said Tarik Jašarević, a WHO spokesperson. “This is because of the social disruption they cause and the intensive use of resources required,” he added.

This is repeated throughout the US echo chamber by liberal mainstream news outlets who do not know or care of the complicity of the WHO director and the Chinese propaganda machine. “From a public health perspective, there is limited effectiveness. And then there are a host of other reasons why they can actually be counterproductive,” said Catherine Worsnop, at the University of Maryland.

February 1

Trump bans flights from China to the US

February 1–7

Li dies of COVID-19

Trump attacked relentlessly by the liberal media, first as a racist and xenophobe for banning flights from China, then for not doing enough to combat the spread of the virus.

February 7–29

Virus spreads rapidly around the world to 200 countries via air travel. Maps of individual countries show that outbreaks are concentrated around major international airports. In the US, this includes NYC, LA, Chicago, Detroit, Atlanta, Denver, etc.

Geneticists document that a single traveler from Wuhan to Seattle infected 39 Americans, who in turn infected several hundred others, who in turn …

March 3

Dr. Drew on Coronavirus: Hysterical ‘Press Needs to Shut Up,’

In two separate interviews, Dr. Drew Pinsky, M.D., said the liberal media are “over-reacting” to coronavirus, do not know how to report on it, and have created mass “hysteria.” The “press needs to shut up,” he said, adding that the measures taken by President Trump, the CDC, and Dr. Anthony Fauci are “appropriate” and should be heeded. The “right people” are combating this virus, he said, stressing that Dr. Fauci, the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, “will tell you what’s going on” and “when you need to worry.”

March 11

WHO finally declares Covid-19 a pandemic after insisting for the previous months that they no longer employ this term, all the while warning that travel bans are not effective at stemming the spread of the virus.

March 18

China expels American journalists while ramping up their propaganda campaign to call attention to their success in containing Covid-19. Criticizes US journalists for using the “racist” term “Chinese” virus. Floats conspiracy theory that the US military was responsible for planting the virus in Wuhan. Chinese propaganda echoed by liberal media.

(By this time there is ample evidence to believe that China practiced a two-pronged strategy consisting of 1) forbidding any domestic travel to other parts of China from the province where it originated, but 2) allowing it to spread outside China to other nations by insisting that any travel ban from China to other countries would be ineffective in mitigating the spread of the virus.)

March 20

Four to six weeks after Trump’s directive many countries follow by issuing their own respective travel restrictions. The European Union orders a month-long ban on nonessential travel to at least 26 countries in Europe. Meanwhile, Italy and Spain are on a country-wide lockdown.

After threats from Li’s widow for demonstrations and protests, China issues an official apology for trying to silence Li’s efforts to warn others about the appearance and spread of the virus several months earlier.

March 25

National Gallup poll shows:

Hospitals were ranked at the top of US institutions with 88% approval

Trump received a 60% approval rating for his handling of the coronavirus.

News media were ranked the worst, with only 44% approval.

Nunes suggests that 50% of Americans believe the opposite of what the media is telling them.

March 27

After a week delay, Trump signs 2 trillion dollar emergency relief bill to provide aid to the small businesses, hospitals, and unemployed Americans suffering from the impact of the coronavirus outbreak.

During the delay Pelosi packs the bill with billions of non-essential measures to subsidize Democrat controlled media outlets and two Washington, DC, universities, etc., using this phrase for each piece of pork added: “to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus”. For example, on page 127, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which produces PBS, is handed an additional $300,000,000 “to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus”. Of that amount, $50,000,000 “shall be used to support the public television system”.

Massive protests on the Jiujiang Yangtze River Bridge that joins the Hubei and Jiangxi provinces in Eastern China.  The capital city of Hubei province is Wuhan, ground zero for the coronavirus pandemic.

March 28

Two 1000-bed U.S. Navy hospital ships are deployed to coronavirus-plagued New York and Los Angeles to “comfort” people in those cities.

March 30

China reopens markets; still selling bats. etc. ““The markets have gone back to operating in exactly the same way as they did before coronavirus. The only difference is that security guards try to stop anyone taking pictures which would never have happened before.”

On Jews and Plagues: Adventures in Jewish Historiography

“The libel that Jews were continually plotting to poison the world had particularly tragic results during the Black Death of 1348–49.
Dennis Prager & Joseph Telushkin Why the Jews? The Reason for Antisemitism[1]

“There is no direct link between the massacres and the plague.”
Iris Ritzmann, “The Black Death as a cause of the massacres of Jews: A Myth of Medical History?”[2]

I’ve been fascinated in recent days by Jewish commentary on COVID-19, which ranges from paranoid conspiracy theories about white nationalists to blunt admissions of intense Jewish ethnocentrism. In the first instance, the FBI’s apparently permanent and unironic surveillance of teenage chat sites has resulted in a stern but ludicrous warning that “extreme right-wing groups in the US are telling their members to deliberately spread the deadly new coronavirus to police officers and Jewish people.” Aside from conjuring mental images of ultra-orthodox Jews being chased by coughing skinheads, the ADL has taken to shaking its begging bowl in regards to rumors that Jews created the novel coronavirus in order to sell vaccines and “take advantage of the markets collapse through insider trading.” This petri dish of paranoia coexists with awkward Jewish discussions of the fact that Jewish communities are ideal incubators of disease because, in the words of The Forward, “the density of Jewish social networks across all denominations is almost twice as thick as that of the average American.” Less than a year after New York’s orthodox Jewish communities became epicenters for a resurgence of measles, concerns are already growing that the same communities are going to be a devil’s playground for COVID-19, which has already claimed the lives of two ultra-orthodox Jews in London.

Both inspired and disgusted by this mixture of contemporary disease and paranoia, I thought I’d revisit some historiographical material I prepared several years ago that concerns the same themes. The following essay concerns the putative allegation that Jews caused the Black Death, Jewish apologetic narratives in historiography, and the broader role of myth in Jewish self-understanding.

Accusations of Accusations

Anyone confronting mainstream Jewish historiography for the first time is overwhelmed by the victim paradigm inherent in most scholarship, a key part of which is the idea that Jews have been irrationally scapegoated countless times over many centuries. I’ve previously described the victim paradigm:

Jewish historiography is saturated with allusions to the “unique” status of Jews, who have suffered a “unique” hatred at the hands of successive generations of Europeans. In essence, it is the notion that Jews stand alone in the world as the quintessential “blameless victim.” To allow for any sense of Jewish agency — any argument that Jews may have in some way contributed to anti-Jewish sentiment — is to harm the perpetuation of this paradigm. In this sense, the ‘victim paradigm’ also contributes heavily to the claim for Jewish uniqueness and, as Norman Finkelstein has pointed out, one can clearly see in many examples of Jewish historiography the tendency to focus not so much on the “suffering of Jews” but rather on the simple fact that “Jews suffered.”[3] As a result, the paradigm offers no place to non-Jewish suffering. … The omission of the Jewish contribution to the development of anti-Semitism (be it in a village setting or a national setting), leaves the spotlight burning all the more ferociously on the ‘aggressor.’ Within this context, the blameless victim is free to make the most ghastly accusations, basking in the assurance that his own role, and by extension his own character, is unimpeachable. The word of this untainted, unique, blameless victim is taken as fact — to doubt his account is to be in league with the ‘aggressor.’ 

Jewish historiography can be interpreted in some ways as little more than a catalog of “accusations of accusations,” to the extent that such works invariably explain historical European behavior, often exaggerated, by positing Europeans as acting on a number of irrational and fanatical beliefs about Jews. This is true of historiographical accounts of almost every historical outbreak of violence against Jews, in which Europeans are presented as indulging in pogroms because of religious fanaticism during the Crusades or putative panics about alleged Jewish ritual murder. Certain fringe elements of European folklore about Jews, such as the idea that male Jews menstruate or that Jews buried their dead with rocks so that they could throw them at Christ in the afterlife, are brought front and center in mainstream historiography and used to explain very complex situations that certainly require a more nuanced understanding.

Arguably, similar results are achieved in more contemporary history through a mainstream scholarship that argues that mass Jewish casualties during World War Two were the result of another alleged European fantasy—that of race science. The actual role of Jews in European society prior to the war can be discarded, and in fact largely has been discarded, in favor of an approach that attributes Jewish deaths to just another manifestation of European irrationality and fanaticism. As stated above, however, making the case that perhaps race science wasn’t irrational, or a fantasy, is tantamount to an admission to being in league with the ‘aggressor’ — something that few or no mainstream academics are willing to do.

The result is a body of historiography that implicitly, and sometimes explicitly, bases its argument on the idea that historical Europeans were profoundly ignorant and superstitious. Such perceptions, of course, live on in the Jewish mind, and one can only interpret aspects of Sacha Baron Cohen’s Borat (2006), especially its depictions of Eastern Europeans who believe that Jews hatch from eggs and can shape-shift into cockroaches (and can be persuaded to leave by having cash thrown at them), as a reinforcement of Jewish conceptions of their history. A scene depicting Cohen lying in bed, in terror at finding himself in the home of two old Jews, and clutching a cross and a fistful of cash, is intended as the ultimate parody of the historical Christian and his alleged fantasies about Jews — both religious and economic. We are encouraged to laugh alongside Jews at the apparent stupidity of our ancestors.

The Black Death in Jewish Historiography

One of the most oft-repeated of these putatively parody-worthy historical European “canards” is the idea that Jews in some way caused the Black Death (Great Bubonic Plague), an epidemiological disaster that claimed the lives of somewhere between 30% and 60% of the European population in the middle of the fourteenth century. In mainstream Jewish historiography, the most politically useful, and therefore most prominent, aspect of this particular “canard” is the notion that Jews caused the plague by poisoning the wells of Europeans. Thus we are encouraged to see such a belief as a variant on the “Blood Libel” that Jews perform ritual murder of Christians. Added to this basic framework are multiple allusions to Christian suspicions that Jews engaged in well-poisoning out of a desire to wipe out or subjugate Christians and pave the way for Jewish world domination. The underlying message of the focus on such beliefs is therefore the idea that historical Europeans were ignorant (scientifically and morally) and paranoid about Jews to the point of irrationality. Because significant numbers of Jews were set upon and killed during the years when the Black Death was active, such narratives about Europeans contain the additional message that Europeans are dangerous fantasists, and that Jews are their unfortunate and blameless victims.

The problem with historiography like this is that it’s yet another example of taking what were really just fringe beliefs and placing them as the primary motivation for complex and deep-rooted inter-ethnic hostility. The result is a wholesale condemnation of European society. For example, Robert Wistrich, now deceased, was a prominent producer of anti-European histories of anti-Semitism and claimed in one of his most famous works that “The Black Death which raged in Europe between 1347 and 1360 added yet another deadly accusation against the Jews — that of poisoning wells in order to wipe out Christians and establish their domination of the world. There is no doubt that the masses believed this charge.”[4] [emphasis added] The Israeli historian Mordechai Breuer (1918–2007) wrote in one of his seminal essays on “The Black Death and antisemitism” that “the destruction of the Jews in the days of the plague was associated with the well-poisoning libel … There is no doubt that the masses believed all the stories of the atrocities attributed to the Jews.”[5] [emphasis added] The similarity between these phrases, together with certain other textual “coincidences” have always suggested to me that Wistrich basically engaged in a quasi-plagiarism of the volume in which Breuer’s essay appeared (Antisemitism Through the Ages, 1988) for his own Antisemitism: The Longest Hatred, which appeared a few years later (1991). Regardless of such finer points, patterns of mutual reliance, often devoid of reference to verifiable contemporary primary material, are endemic in the Jewish writing of histories of antisemitism. Breuer simply had to assert that it was beyond doubt that “the masses” were beholden to irrational myths, and this was sufficient in itself for Wistrich to repeat.

Mutual referencing over time led to a situation in which the idea that Europeans irrationally blamed Jews for the Black Death is now ubiquitous. Frederic Cople Jaher writes that “Already deemed lethal foes of Christianity, Jews were blamed for causing the Plague by poisoning wells. … Another delusion about Jews that intensified at the time of the Black Death was the charge of a world Jewish conspiracy against Christianity.”[6] An entire chapter of Norman Cantor’s In the Wake of the Plague: The Black Death and the World It Made (2001) is devoted to an attempted deconstruction of claims of “The Jewish Conspiracy,” with Cantor arguing that Christians “made scapegoats of the Jews, charged them with spreading the plague by poisoning wells, and unleashed horrific pogroms on them.”[7] Mark Cohen has written that the Black Death “witnessed massive pogroms against the Jews, who were believed to have poisoned wells in an attempt to destroy Christian civilization.”[8] Perhaps the most savage character assassination of the European peoples, however, was carried out by the highly-incentivized non-Jewish historian Gavin Langmuir, who was for obvious reasons a firm favorite in the Jewish establishment. In his extravagantly-praised History, Religion, and Antisemitism (1990), Langmuir opined in relation to the Black Death that:

It would be hard to find a clearer example of irrational scapegoating. … By the late Middle Ages, in order to dispel doubts about their religion and themselves, many Christians were suppressing their capacity for rational empirical thought and irrationally attributing to the realities they denoted as “Jews” unobservable characteristics.[9]

But is any of this true?

The Myth of Irrational European Pogroms

Some of the most recent, cutting-edge historiography from non-Jewish academics continues to chip away at some of the Jewish-led consensus that formed between the 1960s and early 2000s.[10] For example, as the scholar Cordelia Hess has touched upon in her Berghahn-published The Absent Jews (2017), at least some of the historiographical accounts of anti-Jewish massacres alleged to have occurred during the Black Death are now acknowledged as being based on little more than hearsay, unreliable sources, misreadings of verifiable sources, and, to use Hess’s words, “no actual evidence of anti-Jewish pogroms.”[11] In fact, it has now been discovered that some alleged pogroms have been attributed to German towns where there had never been Jewish settlements.[12]

Of course, some violence against Jew did occur, and it occurred right across Europe. But was it motivated by “irrational” ideas about well-poisoning based on little more than fanatical religious bigotry? Contrary to the assertions of the Jewish academics named above, due to a scarcity of contemporary primary sources there is actually no definitive methodology for ascertaining how widespread certain beliefs were among “the masses” in this instance, and certainly nothing that would justify such claims as “there is no doubt the masses believed this charge.” What we do have are a relatively small number of accounts of attacks on Jews from contemporary chroniclers that paint a rather nuanced picture of what really occurred. Take, for example, the following extract from the records of the chronicler Conrad von Megenburg:

In many wells, bags filled with poison were found, and a countless number of Jews were massacred in the Rhineland, in Franconia, and in all the German countries. In truth, I do not know whether certain Jews had done this. Had it been thus, assuredly the evil would have been worse. But I know, on the other hand, that no German city had so many Jews as Vienna, and so many of them there succumbed to the plague that they were obliged to enlarge their cemetery greatly and to buy two more buildings. They would have been very stupid to poison themselves. … But I do not wish to whitewash the wickedness of the Jews.

What stands out here is von Megenburg’s scepticism. My own interpretation of the third sentence, assuming “the evil” to be the massacres and not the act of poisoning, is that if definitive proof had been found against certain Jews in regards to the bags of poison that had in fact been found in “many wells,” then the violence would “have been much worse,” and this would indicate the violence itself was at least not solely rooted in the accusation of well-poisoning, since some doubt was evidently present among those who carried out the killings. Alternately, if “the evil” being referred to was the act of poisoning, this account would suggest the author believed there was a possibility of two different events occurring — both a plague of undetermined cause, and a mass poisoning campaign orchestrated by Jews.[13] Whether Jews did or did not place bags of poison in European wells strikes me as entirely beside the point. If they did not, the question remains as to why someone would accuse them of it, or frame them for it, and Borat-like ignorance and religious hostility is simply insufficient to contextualize and explain this behavior. If some Jews did engage in the poisoning of wells, and we certainly know that it was not uncommon for medieval Jewish communities to possess their own private wells and water supply within their walled districts, this doesn’t detract from our current knowledge about the origins, nature, and spread of bubonic plague, and we would be left with certain other questions about the nature of this inter-ethnic hostility.

The question remaining is why some Jews were attacked and killed during the Black Death. Here, again, modern scholarship is reversing some of the received wisdoms of older Jewish historiography and casting doubt on some long-held assumptions. The German scholar Iris Ritzmann, for example, has argued that “there is no direct link between the massacres and the plague,” and has suggested that a much deeper undercurrent of socio-economic friction between Jews and Christians merely found expression during a time of heightened social anxiety. Ritzmann has gone as far as to argue that relations were so bad that massacres may have occurred even without the plague as a trigger event.[14] Mordechai Breuer concedes that “none of the traditional motifs” of religious anti-Semitism feature in the minutes of the interrogations of the Jews accused during the Black Death, adding “at most, they came up in connection with distant rumors about the matter.”[15] There were almost no attempts to convert the Jews, and Breuer further adds, quite contrary to some of his other assertions, that “the attackers had no intention whatever of forcing the Jews to change their faith and this was not the focus of what was happening.”

What, then, was happening?

Again, in contrast to his overall conclusion and blanket accusations against the historical European masses, Breuer is forced to concede in the middle of his own study that “an analysis of what occurred during the days of the plague indicates that social, economic, and political factors were of much greater import in fanning the flame of antisemitism than is generally understood.” Most of the aggressors during the Black Death were craftsmen and artisans who had been lent money by Jews “at usurious rates of interest.”[16] These craftsmen, essentially the middle class of their day, resented the formation of a mercantile alliance between the aristocracy and the merchant class that exploited their labor and suppressed the prices of their goods. Moreover, underpinning this alliance was a system of Jewish loans that upset the natural order they were used to. Rather predictably, anti-Jewish violence was ruthlessly suppressed by urban elites everywhere because these elites were tightly connected to Jewish finance. Documents still survive from Cologne, Freiburg, Basel, Heilbronn, Strasbourg, and Erfurt showing that city councils interpreted all anti-Jewish actions as a more general attack upon the elite status quo. Breuer comments that “by the beginning of 1349 it was clear that a number of city councils wished to suppress the popular uprising from fear that the mobs might oust them.” The European “masses” described in Jewish historiography were in fact divided into factions, each with its own particular interests, and genuine adherence to “irrational” notions of well-poisoning was of minimal import. The bottom line was that Jews were regarded as having a negative effect on the social, economic, and political fabric of the nation, and not without cause.

Conclusion

One wonders if, decades or centuries from now, Jewish historians will lament the persistence of antisemitism by explaining that Europeans once “irrationally” blamed the Jews for COVID-19. As evidence, perhaps they’ll point to some excerpts from 8chan and argue that this was the belief of “the masses.” Here I’m employing a caricature of sorts, but one not totally detached from precedent. Many decades of Jewish effort have gone into pushing the idea that our ancestors were unsophisticated Borat-like brutes who subjected the Jews to countless irrational massacres. And, although modern scholarship is chipping at the edges of this edifice, new discoveries and arguments remain far from the mainstream. One persists in seeking immunity to the contrivances of Jews and plagues.


[1] Prager, D. & Telushkin, J, Why the Jews? The Reason for Antisemitism (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2003), 85.

[2] Ritzmann I. [The Black Death as a cause of the massacres of Jews: A Myth of Medical History?] Medizin, Gesellschaft, und Geschichte : Jahrbuch des Instituts fur Geschichte der Medizin der Robert Bosch Stiftung. 1998 ;17:101-130.

[3] Finkelstein, N. ‘The Holocaust Industry,’ Index on Censorship, 29:2, 120-130, p.124

[4] Wistrich, R. Antisemitism: The Longest Hatred (London: Thames Methuen, 1991), 32

[5] Breuer, M. “The Black Death and antisemitism,” in Almog, S. 1988. Antisemitism through the ages. Oxford, England: Published for the Vidal Sassoon International Center for the Study of Antisemitism, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, by Pergamon Press, 140-1.

[6] Jaher, F. A Scapegoat in the New Wilderness: The Origins and Rise of Antisemitism in America (Harvard: Harvard University Press, 1994), 68.

[7] Cantor, N. In the Wake of the Plague: The Black Death and the World It Made (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2015), 152.

[8] Cohen, M. R. Under Crescent and Cross: The Jews in the Middle Ages (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), 169.

[9] Langmuir, G. I. (1990). History, Religion, and Antisemitism. Berkeley: University of California Press, 301-2.

[10] The work of the late John Doyle Klier on the mythic elements of the Russian pogroms is almost certainly without peer in this regard.

[11] Hess, C. The Absent Jews: Kurt Forstreuter and the Historiography of Medieval Prussia (New York: Berghahn, 2007, 204.

[12] Ibid.

[13] For a more contemporary parallel one might point to the post-war plot by Israelis to poison the German water supply that was only abandoned when it was disrupted by British authorities.

[14] Ritzmann I. [The Black Death as a cause of the massacres of Jews: A Myth of Medical History?] Medizin, Gesellschaft, und Geschichte : Jahrbuch des Instituts fur Geschichte der Medizin der Robert Bosch Stiftung. 1998 ;17:101-130.

[15] Breuer, “The Black Death and antisemitism,” 144.

[16] Ibid., 145.

Nietzsche (ᛣ 1900–2020): System Virtue-Signaling vs. the Great Replacement

Friederich Nietzsche (1844–1900) on his deathbed

To each his own Nietzsche. With this sentence one could start yet another discussion on this famous and famed thinker. Given the staggering number of works about him it is essential to raise the question: which Nietzsche should one read first? Should one read Nietzsche’s own prose first, or should one first read works by other authors who have written about him? And which work and by which author? The problem is all the more serious as there are no two works, no two authors among tens of thousands that are in agreement on the same interpretation of Nietzsche’s ideas. Of course, the same remark could be leveled against my own interpretations of Nietzsche. My understanding, interpretation and choice of words regarding Nietzsche’s thoughts may be different from those of other authors who claim to be his best interpreters. Consequently, I may be accused of using interpretations that may not be shared by Nietzsche or his countless interpreters.

What needs to be highlighted, however, is the link established by Nietzsche between Christian values ​​and their secular offshoots used now by the ruling class in the West as a legal and psychological basis for the arrival of non-European migrants into Europe. The System, through its sermons about human rights, whose ideological origins go back to early Christianity, is quite successful in destroying European peoples and cultures.

Aside from being an influential philosopher Nietzsche was also a philologist who understood well the subtleties of political language. Therefore, one should first single out some of his words and find out their conceptual equivalents in the French and in the English languages today, especially in the realm of higher education and high-level political rhetoric. One must keep in mind that his denunciations of Christian morality are contrasted with his praise of combative virtues of the old Greco-Roman “virtù” stripped of any modern “(moralinfreie Tugend) [i]. Nietzsche invented the word “moraline” in order to combat the excessive moralizing of the Church and the ruling class of this time. Strangely enough the word “moraline” is never used today in the modern German language, having also no adequate substitute in the English language. The great  German-American connoisseur and  translator of Nietzsche, H.L. Mencken translated “moralinfreie Tugend ” as “free of moral acid.” By contrast, modern French nationalists, when deriding the fake news of the modern System, often resort to the original German “moraline.” In the USA, however, this word could be substituted by its conceptual equivalent of  “virtue-signalling.”

When transposed into our own language Nietzsche’s words read like a harsh condemnation of the modern System with its invocations of words such as “humanity,” “peace” and “tolerance.” The goal of the System is to force citizens of European extraction to become prey to perpetual feelings of guilt. This is how Nietzsche predicted the modern unfolding of the System hundred and thirty years ago:

Almost everywhere in Europe today, there is a morbid over-sensitivity and susceptibility to pain, as well as an excessive amount of complaining and an increased tenderness that wants to dress itself up as something higher, using religion as well as bits and pieces of philosophy— there is a real cult of suffering. [ii]

In addition to his denunciation of Christian morality Nietzsche levels harsh criticism against Christian providentialism which manifests itself today in the gregarious spirit of mass democracy. Of course, the System needs to sugarcoat modern, secularized versions of Christian teachings in the mystique of human rights, in the myth of multiculturalism, in the decrees on race-mixing, and in the usage of politically correct verbiage. Pity for those who failed, for lowlifes, for criminals, including illegal Third World migrants in search of a better life in Europe, has become a mandatory vogue in political and media outlets. Professor Pierre Chassard, who could be ranked as first among French “New Right” interpreters of Nietzsche, defines Nietzsche’s criticism of Christian providentialism: “The wretched of the Earth, who are nailed to the cross, may be the only fortune tellers. Life misfits may be the elect of heaven. Only they are the good guys and others are the bad guys.”[iii] The list of self-engineered misfits could grow longer if one were to add numerous White politicians and academics burdened by self-hate and choosing therefore to become purveyors of the dogma of interchangeability of peoples, races, and genders. Such a self-hating behavior, of which Nietzsche was the first critic, is today the trademark of the System.

One could start with the expression “the great replacement.” This wording, coined by the writer Renaud Camus, is deemed unworthy by the System.[iv] Nonetheless, although Camus’ book is very useful, its title may be subject to misunderstanding. Instead of the expression “the great replacement,” one is tempted to use a more specific expression: “the great invasion.” However, even the term “invasion” harks back to the notion of the political of the previous centuries when its use was generally accompanied by an armed conflict—which is not the case for the time being with the floods of non-Europeans who are being adorned by the Western media with the sentimental title “refugees.” Understandably, the System and its scribes must avoid the usage of the terms “invasion” or “replacement,” preferring instead the romantic expressions such as “cultural enrichment” or “diversity”—terms which went global after having first appeared in the American language in the 80s of the previous century. Moreover, even if one were to agree on the label “invasion” when describing Afro-Asian migrants on their way to Europe, the choice of this word would take us far off into the field of polemology, a subject that can be tackled only in passing.

According to Nietzsche the moralization of politics leads to chaos which he labels with the word “democracy.” It is incumbent therefore upon his readers to study the effects of democracy peddled globally by the System if one was to grasp the incoming tide of chaos. To that effect it suffices to listen to the hypermoralistic language of the ruling class in order to realize that the true goal of their political experiments—dubbed “democracy” and “diversity”—is nothing else but a gigantic hoax. The outpouring of hypermoralistic narratives among Euro-American leaders, other than serving as a legal smokescreen for humanitarian actions on behalf of non-European migrants, also functions as a grand cover up for the repression against independent thinkers.

In Bismarck’s Germany at the end of the nineteenth century, Nietzsche did not need to confront mass migratory inflows of non-Europeans. Much earlier, however, he had grasped the origins and the global dynamics of the hypermoralistic mindset that had already taken root among politicians and intellectuals of his time—either in its liberal version or in its crypto-communist form. That early bourgeoning hypermoralistic endeavor, whose goal was the creation of the best of all worlds, or the shining communist futures, was bound to lead, a hundred years after Nietzsche’s death, to multicultural chaos observed today.

It is pointless to scorn migrants, the majority of whom are Muslim non-Europeans, without however deciphering moralistic, globalist, altruistic and ecumenical ideas that have been peddled around by the Church over the last two thousand years. It was Nietzsche’s merit to be the first to grasp that all our current political concepts, all abnormalities in the liberal system are just secular derivatives of Christian thought, “where(by) this morality is increasingly apparent in every political and social institution; the democratic movement is the heir to Christianity.”[v]

In the System today, which claims to be the best, any criticism of parliamentary democracy, or multiculturalism, let alone of miscegenation, is bound to enter the framework of the penal code or the demonology of its mainstream media executioners. While on the one hand the System prides itself on being tolerant, claiming to extend unrestricted voice even to its critics, while hiding behind the words of tolerance, diversity and humanism, on the other, it exerts total control of its population—a phenomenon hitherto unseen in the entire history of the West. From the point of view of modern languages, from the point of view of the notion of the political, the System is succeeding in reversing real European values and replacing them with surreal ones. Within the framework of these new moralizing and ecumenical values, described by Nietzsche and transposed now into the modern System, it can be expected that non-European masses entering Europe, will describe themselves as “poor refugees.” Incidentally, the term “refugees” is not of their choice; it is being bestowed on them by the System and its sycophant media.

This is how professor Alfred Baeumler, one of Nietzsche’s disciples in the first part of the twentieth century and later to become a high-ranking academic in National Socialist Germany, depicts the nihilistic message inherent in the language of liberal democracy in Europe between the two wars.

Nihilism, chaos, is the inevitable consequence of the belief in harmony without struggle, a belief in indiscriminate (gegensatzlos) order. True order only arises from the power relationship spawned by the will to power … . Only chaos is inhumane. The rule of tolerance and moral ideas, of reason and of compassion, in short of “humanity,” always leads to inhumanity. [vi]

*   *   *

Doubling down on his exotic Doppelganger

As a follow-up to such hypermoralistic endeavors conducted by the System one can observe its politicians being more and more inclined toward splitting their own selves — a process which they subsequently project on non-European migrants who are cherished now as the beacon of progress and innocence. Such a process of White self-denial is especially visible in Germany, a country which in 1945 was forced to remake its identity. As an illustration of German split-mindedness or “dopplengaegertum,” one could mention several authors of fantastic tales at the beginning of the nineteenth century who, by indirection, best predicted the fractured identity of Europeans and especially the German people two hundred years later. A good example is the famous horror story writer E. T. A. Hoffmann and his novella The Sand Man. [vii] The main character of his tale falls in love with a machine which resembles an attractive woman he had previously fabricated in his self-delusional mind. Toward the end of the tale the imaginary woman-automaton pushes the unfortunate hero to suicide. Today, we are witnessing a similar mechanical and suicidal fixation by great many German and European politicians, who, as a rule, must pretend to be enamored with fictitious and exotic Third World migrant imagery, and who are overjoyed at the thought of demolishing their own identity and replacing it with the newly borrowed make-believe Afro-Asian identity. This time around, however, men of the System are not only being themselves physically replaced by real Afro-Asian migrants; they themselves yearn to replace their original White identity by non-White surreal supra-identity.

One can provide some crass examples of such a mimetic Double while studying European politicians and their penitential pilgrimages to the holy places of world politics, namely Washington, Brussels and Tel Aviv. The Germans, however, must perform an  additional station of the cross by paying a penitential visit to Israel and recite a diplomatic chorus of mea culpa sermons. Two years ago, when German Chancellor Merkel visited Israel, she declared that “being aware of this responsibility (the Nazi crimes against the Jews, N.A.) is part of our national identity.”[viii] Without its Double, that is, without the forceful embrace of the Other, who was once either denied or colonized, the System and its do-gooders could not survive.

In the same vein, European politicians and intellectuals imagine themselves to be morally obliged to double down on their moralizing fervor on behalf of non-Europeans, assuming that they will thus better eliminate any external suspicion of their alleged neo-fascist or right-wing feelings, or better shed the label of their post-colonial crypto-nostalgia. Naturally, one could argue a lot about the benefits of this new doppelgangertum of European politicians, which has resulted in increased self-hatred, self-censorship and hypertrophy of false morals toward exotic strangers. Nietzsche grasped well this self-castrating mindset which has become today the main guideline of ​​the System.

With respect to this entire kind of priestly medication, the “guilty” kind, any word of criticism is too much. … One should at least be clear about the expression “be of use.” If by this one intends to express that such a system of treatment has improved man, then I will not contradict: I only add what “improve” means for me — the same as “tamed,” “ weakened,” “discouraged,” “sophisticated,” “pampered,” “emasculated” (hence always the same as injured).[ix]

The search for the mimicked Double, observed among Western rulers, has reached by now pathological proportions. EU politicians must double down on their benevolence towards Afro-Asian migrants in order to better rid themselves of possible charges of would-be anti-Semitism or of being guilt-free for their colonialist and racialist past. In the majority of cases, however, such mimetic behavior is the natural consequence of the Allied re-education since 1945, the aim of which was and still is the creation of new European species.

In this essay on Nietzsche one cannot dispense with the name of the German anthropologist Arnold Gehlen who wrote that “the hypertrophy of morality occurs when we accept each human being in his humaneness only, and provide him in this capacity with the highest rank of existence.”[x] Gehlen was perhaps the best connoisseur of Nietzsche during the cold war era, despite the fact that his analyses of the pathology of self-induced hypermoralism of German politicians had earned him lots of enemies on the Left and a great deal of ire among Frankfurt School reeducators. The moral hypertrophy of the early postwar System he describes is now being duplicated by European and US rulers and their “fake news” servicemen, both attempting to silence any voice of White dissent.

Neither is the Catholic Church and the papists the world over lagging behind. The most recent in the line of the moraline combat is Pope Francis with his sermons on the rights of immigrants and with his homilies that “migrants are the symbol of all those excluded from the globalized society .”[xi] When listening to Pope’s urbi and orbi, it is worth studying the reaction of would-be Afro-Asian migrants. Despite their modest IQ, they are not stupid. They know that they have powerful allies, not only in anti-fascist circles but also among the high Catholic clergy, both in the United States and in Europe.

Surely, George Soros and a host of left-leaning NGOs can be criticized for facilitating the flooding of the West by African and Asian migrants. However, the fact remains that African and Asian migrants follow only the unilateral welcoming calls from European politicians whose words had the prior blessing of the Pope and the high Catholic clergy. The latter is always diligent when mobilizing for migrants shelters or “sanctuary cities” – a gesture which only redoubles migrants’ appetite.[xii] In fact, the Church operates today as a sort of a counter-power vis-à-vis the actual legal power in place, which in any case is very lax with regard to migrants’ arrivals.

Beyond the moralizing phrases about the benefits of multiculturalism and miscegenation propagated by the System and the Church, the iron laws of biology and heredity cannot be ignored. In the years to come the states of the European Union will be exposed to multireligious and multiracial conflicts among and between new non-European migrants, conflicts of great magnitude and long duration. By their obsessive politics of self-denial, European countries, with Germany at the helm, will hardly be able to cope not just with the great replacement, but also with internal conflicts between diverse ingroups of non-European migrants themselves. Contrary to a wide misconception among EU leaders and many academics, racial intolerance and xenophobia is by no means the privilege of White nationalists. Racial pride and racial exclusiveness are by no means the monopoly of the White European stock. Low-level conflicts between and among nationals of Asian origin and nationals of sub-Saharan origin now residing in the West, will have a bright future. Worse, side by side with various moralizing social justice warriors and anti-fascist squads, the System won’t be able to persuade migrants to embrace the same liberal ukases, the same legal standards, the same scholastic tests, nor the same Western political concepts. Liberal rules and regulations, when forced upon non-White migrants, will always remain unacceptable to them. Thus, in the name of “diversity” the System keeps destroying not only the identity of European peoples, but also the identity of non-European newcomers.

Sooner or later multicultural states break up and terminate their trajectory in civil wars. Also, within the great replacement overhaul underway now, interracial wars among non-European migrants will be aggravated by large demographic changes. In addition, these hybrid civil wars looming large in the West now, will be accompanied by an increase in victimhood narratives by different tribes and ethnicities residing in Europe, each claiming, of course, the first place on the victimhood list. Mutual distrust, followed by the decline in civic solidarity and the dissolution of political order will become the order of the day. The hypermoralizing and masochistic antics of White politicians, among whom the German politicians are doing the surplus overbidding, are the logical outcome of the culture of guilt inherited from the fascist, colonial, Ustasha or National Socialist past. Following the incessant incantations by the System of “mea culpa, mea maxima culpa” – what would Nietzsche now say about our fatality? Long ago his answer was clear enough: ” There will come a day when my name will recall the memory of something formidable — a crisis the like of which has never been known on earth.”[xiii]

 


Notes

[i] Friedrich Nietzsche, The Antichrist (transl. Henry L Mencken) (LA: The Noontide Press: 1997) p. 43.

[ii] Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil (trans. Judith Norman), (Trinity University Press: 2002), p. 174.

https://www.holybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/Nietzsche-Beyond-Good-and-Evil.pdf

[iii] Pierre Chassard, La philosophie de l’histoire dans la philosophie de Nietzsche (Paris: éd. GRECE, 1975), p.78.

[iv] Renaud Camus, Le Grand Remplacement (Paris: éditions David Reinharc, 2011).

[v] Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, p. 90.

[vi] Alfred Baeumler, Nietzsche; der Philosoph und Politiker (Leipzig; Reclam, 1931), p. 72-73.

[vii] E.T.A.Hoffmann, The Sandman (Translated by C. Moncrieff). (Surey: Alma Classics, 2012). https://almabooks.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/The-Sandman-Excerpt.pdf

[viii] The Times of Israel, « Merkel : la mémoire des crimes nazis « inséparable » de l’identité allemande  ,” December 6, 2019. https://fr.timesofisrael.com/la-chanceliere-allemande-angela-merkel-a-auschwitz-pour-la-premiere-fois/

[ix] Friederich Nietzsche, On the Genealogy of Morality (Transl. Maudemarie Clark and Alan Swenson), Hackett Publishing Co. Inc., 1998) p. 109.

[x] Arnold Gehlen, Moral und Hypermoral (Frankfurt: Athenäum 1969), p. 143.

[xi] Le Monde, « Le pape François : « Les migrants sont le symbole de tous les exclus de la société globalisée » » July 8, 2019. https://www.lemonde.fr/afrique/article/2019/07/08/le-pape-francois-les-migrants-sont-le-symbole-de-tous-les-exclus-de-la-societe-globalisee_5486931_3212.html.

[xii] Cf. T. Sunic, « Non-White Migrants and the Catholic Church: The Politics of Penitence, » The Occidental Observer, April, 2017. https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2017/04/29/non-white-migrants-and-the-catholic-church-the-politics-of-penitence/

[xiii] Friedrich Nietzsche, Ecce Homo, “Why I am a Fatality” (Transl. A Ludovici), ( London: TN Foulis, 1911), p. 131. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/52190/52190-h/52190-h.htm#WHY_I_AM_A_FATALITY

The Coronavirus Silver Linings Playbook

Greetings fellow anthropoids! Having received the day’s talking points from CNN, I will dutifully refrain from calling the viral scourge of the globe “Chinese.” I do not know if it is appropriate to cite the origin of the saying/curse “May you live in interesting times,” so I will not, but interesting times these are, at least in some ways. In others it’s banality as usual. While the kabuki theater (more appropriately bukkake theater in these post-Jussie Smollett Days of the Rainbow) continues as Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders compete to see who can debase themselves more for their Island of Misfit Toys electorate, as one side tries to shove more visas[1] into any coronavirus relief package and the other abortions, as the UNHCR and IOM continued to greenlight the re-settling of “refugees” from coronavirus-stricken regions into what’s left of your neighborhood up until March 17th, it was business as usual. Keep those borders wider than Jussie Smollett’s…never mind.

In all seriousness, though, this epidemic has exposed just how fragile the neo-liberal globalist system is. Thousands have died, thousands more will die, and millions are out of work. The response, or more appropriately lack thereof, by our leaders shows exactly what they are willing to risk in order for the status quo to be maintained. Already, the UNHCR came out and admitted that there were at least ten confirmed coronavirus cases among “refugees” and asylum seekers in Germany, prompting nameless aid officials to worry that “this might undermine future support for taking refugees.” I should think so, but our support for this project has never been required. Things will resume as they were once the crisis is over.

Or will they?

Most of the ramifications of the virus are mere accelerations of what was on the horizon. It is a black swan event, but one which has been lurking for some time. This was inevitable in some fashion. Imagine if it had happened ten years down the line when 100% of our pharmaceuticals rather than 95% of ibuprofen, 70% of acetaminophen, and 80% of antibiotics are made in China. There’s one silver lining, and another is that regular people are seeing firsthand just how untenable the neo-liberal system is, and where the priorities of the ruling class truly are. Many probably did not realize just how suicidally-dependent we are on Chinese manufacturing. On some level, perhaps, but walk into any grocery store (hypothetically speaking, I hope you are all well-stocked up by now) and you will see the effects already. All things considered and with apologies to those affected, this is really just a ripple compared to what could have happened, or what may yet come.

Do you think the latest batch of gender-queer “refugees” from parts unknown[2] have appropriately prepared themselves for any kind of disruption with canned goods, extra toilet paper, bottled water, a bug-out bag, and the like? Or the rest of the wonderful “diversity” we are so enriched with? Hardly. Guess what happens next?

Ominously, several municipalities have discussed banning the sale of guns, ammunition, and gasoline in any container other than a vehicle gasoline tank. Mayor Deborah Frank Feinen of Champaign, Illinois, signatory of the Champaign-Urbana Chapter of Bend the Arc Jewish Action’s pledge to Reject White Nationalism, already granted herself these powers and others, powers including the ability to prohibit entry into and out of the city, direct the shut-off of water, gas, and power, and “take possession of private property and obtain full title to same.”

And what about when the State Department agrees to begin greenlighting more “refugees’” entry into the country on April 7th, as they’ve promised? Fuel to the fire? We obviously don’t have work or resources for millions of people already here, and there will continue to be less, so what’s going to happen next? And will these people be appropriately screened? Of course not. Officially the flow is temporarily stopped, but there are a number of end-arounds, ranging from just walking over the border to the refugee privatization aspect I discussed with the state of Maine.

Anyone still harboring any illusions about Donald Trump needs to read the following. He led off his March 19th press conference on the measures being taken to combat the spread of the coronavirus by celebrating the return of “New Hampshire man” Amer Fakhoury from Lebanon to receive medical care for his stage 4 lymphoma. It’s not like our medical professionals have other things to worry about, right? Oh, and by the way, Fakhoury collaborated with Israel during their occupation of southern Lebanon.

In late January and February, after assuring constituents that the coronavirus was nothing to worry about and after receiving a private briefing on the situation, Senators Richard Burr and Kelly Loeffler offloaded stocks at this crucial time, well before the current crisis point. Burr co-authored a piece for Fox News on February 7th stating that, “the United States today is better prepared than ever before to face emerging public health threats, like the coronavirus.” The kinds of stocks are especially damning, such as Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Burr’s dumping of $150,000 worth of shares of Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, which has lost two-thirds of its value, according to ProPublica, and $100,000 of shares of Extended Stay America. All told Burr is alleged to have sold off as much as $1.72 million in stocks. In addition to allegedly offloading stocks to the tune of up to $3.1 million, Loeffler or her husband Jeff Sprecher (Chairman of the New York Stock Exchange) also purchased stocks on February 7th for Citrix, a company that provides remote working software and technologies. Shortly after the January 24th full-Senate briefing, Dianne Feinstein, James Inhofe, and David Perdue all sold off large amounts of stock; Feinstein is alleged to have sold off up to $6 million in stocks from late January to mid-February. Perdue not only offloaded stocks in Caesars Entertainment but also loaded up on $245,000 in Pfizer stock.

So the government, on either side of the aisle, is genuinely an occupation government, depraved beyond all redemption and yes, we know this, but millions more are seeing it plain as day in the most obvious fashion imaginable. And the Dissident Right, led by the work of people like Tom Kawczynski and his incredible Coronavirus Central podcast, has been at the forefront of providing people with reliable unbiased information, which enhances our credibility immeasurably and is an obvious conduit to the truths we speak and write on other topics people have been so conditioned to ignore or even be afraid of. We could extend this on a much larger scale to the role Tucker Carlson is playing every night; no, he’s not Kevin MacDonald, Andrew Joyce, or Brenton Sanderson, but he is the most visible and accessible gateway to our ideas.

I won’t pretend the coronavirus is a good thing, but I am trying to find the silver linings in this situation. Obviously it would be preferable if one day there was a mass awakening to the decadent self-interest of our ruling class, of the subversion and dismantling of our country, but that was never and is never going to happen like some revelation. Perhaps this is the closest thing, and the conditions are such that we had better take advantage of it. There was always going to be collateral damage—just be safe and make sure that damage isn’t you, take care of your family and friends, and keep on fighting the good fight so one day we will never have to find ourselves in such a vulnerable position with criminally-negligent and downright hostile rulers like this again.


[1] In this instance, it would be the EB-5 “immigrant investor” visa; in 2014, more than 85% of the over 10,000 EB-5 visas issued were for Chinese nationals according to a study by real estate services firm Savills Studley. Under the Lindsey Graham proposed “addition,” the amount required for investment would be halved and the visas issued increased to 75,000 from around 10,000 per year.

[2] I use this as an example one, to continue the theme of sorts, but two, I have on good authority this is the latest golden ticket lie asylum-seekers and “refugees” have been coached-up to use, that of “fear of persecution for gender identity or sexuality.”

How COVID-19 Will Test the West

“If trouble comes when you least expect it, then maybe the thing to do is to always expect it.”
      Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Writing anything about COVID-19 at this moment is a daunting task since the situation is evolving so rapidly, and in so many different locations. Information contained in this piece could be thoroughly outpaced by transformative events by the time it reaches publication, or even by the time I finish up and click “save.” There is also a glut of information online right now, some of it reliable and fascinating, and some of it misleading and counterproductive. Everywhere there is a mixture of growing apprehension, clashing opinion, and outright confusion. If the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center’s interactive map is accurate, there are currently 284,566 cases of COVID-19 worldwide, a figure that is growing. The “true” number of infections, that includes asymptomatic carriers, will be much higher. Beginning on February 24th, an accelerating number of new transmissions emerged outside China, primarily in Italy which currently has over 47,021 cases. At time of writing, France and Germany are also experiencing rapid increases in affected persons, together totaling over 33,000 cases, and Spain is on the brink of a national lockdown with over 25,374. Almost every European country has now been affected, and COVID-19 is now spreading in the United States, Canada, South Africa, New Zealand, and Australia. How will it test the West?

Relations with China

Early speculation on COVID-19, especially in dissident circles, orbited conspiracy theories that the virus was engineered, and that it was either deployed by the United States or was an accidental leak from Wuhan’s Institute of Virology. In recent days, the former theory has been eagerly taken up by the Chinese themselves, with the added detail that COVID-19 may have been unleashed by visiting American soldiers during the Military World Games, which were staged in Wuhan in October 19-27, 2019. According to epidemiologist Michael Osterholm, in the course of a very interesting interview with Joe Rogan, it’s possible to date the origins of human COVID-19 through a process much like carbon dating, and scientists now have data suggesting COVID-19 became active in humans for the first time in mid-November 2019. Ron Unz has asked:

How would Americans react if 300 PRC officers had visited Chicago, and immediately afterwards, a deadly new plague broke out in that city, with a major risk of spreading throughout the country? Isn’t it also rather suspicious that Iran has been hit so hard? So the two countries in the world most subject to current American hostility just tend to be especially “unlucky.” It hit China just before Lunar New Year, the absolutely worst possible time, and the epicenter was Wuhan, a key transport hub. It really seems an *astonishing* coincidence that 300 American military servicemen had been visiting Wuhan just prior to the outbreak, at a peak of international tension.

Other than timing of course, there seems to be little or no evidence that this was a bioweapon attack. Most obviously, one would assume that any attempted bioweapon attack by the United States on China would be much more covert than what has been suggested (a deliberate release by a very public group of soldiers). Also, while we know that SARS-like viruses based on bat coronavirus can be developed in the lab, the genome of COVID-19 has also been examined countless times with the result that there are now over 300 papers on MedRXiv concerning the structure, nature, and origins of the virus. None of these papers have highlighted anything suggesting an artificial origin of any aspect of COVID-19.

Conspiracy theories on the origins of COVID-19 are of course a very convenient and useful tool for the Chinese government, because they deflect attention from the fact the outbreak can easily be attributed to bad government, and to Communism itself. I find the idea that the virus originated in a Wuhan “wild food” market to be utterly compelling (see this documentary by 60 Minutes Australia, and this short piece by Vox), and this has direct consequences for perceptions of Chinese Communism. The consumption of “exotic” foods is itself a legacy of the Great Chinese Famine 1959–1961, after which the government permitted private farming but failed to prevent the monopoly by big companies of the rearing of conventional livestock. The peasantry, priced out of the market, resorted in large numbers to the farming of wild animals, especially, in the initial stages, the farming of turtles. Since this curbed starvation to some extent, the government backed these initiatives, and then in 1988 made the encouragement of domestication and breeding of wildlife an explicit aspect of law. Wildlife farming became an industry overnight. Bears, snakes, rodents, lizards, and bats began to be mass-produced for human consumption, and sold in mass markets in many of the country’s largest cities. In these markets, multiple species, alive and dead, are stacked in cages on top of one another, with the animals soaked in cocktails of urine and excrement—each cage a petri dish for the development new diseases, especially respiratory diseases, with the potential to jump to humans from myriad mammals. Together with its failure to take decisive preventative action in January 2020, and absent conspiracy theory speculation, the origin tale of COVID-19 is ultimately an indictment of Chinese politics and culture.

How that indictment will impact relations between the West and China remains to be seen. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace have speculated that while mutual suspicion between the Chinese and the United States will remain high, the coronavirus outbreak will have no meaningful impact on trade between the two countries, and may in fact help de-escalate some prior economic tensions and involve the suspension of tariffs. In the longer term, however, COVID-19 has accelerated discussion about the need to become more independent from China in the production of goods. Several multinational corporations with supply chains based in China, having already considered diversifying their supply chains because of the U.S.-China trade war, are now likely to further their plans. Apple, for example, intends to move some manufacturing of its products (including AirPods and Apple Watches) to Taiwan due to the coronavirus. In Washington, members of Congress have used the outbreak to call for scaling back U.S. reliance on China, especially for prescription drugs, medical supplies, and other critical resources. Since Europe (Germany in particular) is the world’s largest manufacturer of drugs and medicines, we are likely to see a gradual decoupling of the United States from Chinese production, and a greater integration of European-American trade. Brexit Britain, until recently seen by the Chinese as having great potential for a lucrative trade and investment deal, may now present more of a cold house than previously thought. The EU, already resistant to increased Chinese economic influence, is also likely to dig its heels even deeper in the face of Chinese approaches. Some of the lasting challenges of COVID-19 will be how the West can distance itself from economic dependence on Chinese manufacturing, what impact this will have in both the shorter and longer term, and how the Chinese will respond.

Migrant Pressures

The first European outbreaks of COVID-19 fatefully coincided with an aggressive two-week operation by Turkey on its border with Greece, involving the movement of thousands of Syrian and African migrants. Beginning in late February, the Turkish government announced it would no longer stop migrants trying to reach Europe, and then drove thousands to the Greek border, live-streaming the process to encourage more to follow. The move was widely understood as an attempt to force European support for Turkey’s military campaign in northern Syria, and also as an attempt to extort more money from the EU. Although the effort now appears to have concluded with Turkey backtracking in the face of Greek resilience, Europe continues to have this metaphorical human “pistol” pressed to the side of its head.

COVID-19 is going to aggravate the broader migrant problem. Already the clamor is growing that migrant camps on Europe’s borders should be evacuated on health grounds, with the migrants permitted to enter Europe. Doctors Without Borders (MSF) have argued that unhygienic and cramped living conditions mean COVID-19 can spread very fast, and that social distancing and hand washing are more difficult. While Europe bans mass gatherings, it’s been said that people in these camps have nowhere to go. Even within European countries, the outbreak has been associated with calls for amnesties and the opening of migrant detention centers. In the UK, lawyers and campaigners have called for hundreds immigration centers detainees to be released “because of fears they will contract coronavirus while locked up.”

The problem with such calls is that they all appear to present COVID-19 as a deadly plague slaughtering all in its path, rather than as something that afflicts the most seriously ill among the old and infirm. As is well known, the average age of Europe’s would-be migrants, particularly those from Syria, is somewhere around the late 20s. Given the known progression of COVID-19 in people in this age category, calls to permit mass influxes of masses of migrants purely because of the outbreak is tantamount to calling for open borders because potential immigrants might otherwise catch the common cold. Such calls are likely to ride the crest of a media-induced wave of panic, however, and the resolve of the West to resist further migrant flows will indeed be tested by twisted forms of moral blackmail in the weeks and months to come.

Life and Death under Liberalism

As stated in my review of Don DeLillo’s White Noise (1985), we live in a decaying society  that is in terror of death, and pathologically so. This pathology is rooted in mistaken beliefs that our civilization is dying from, or could imminently die from, disease epidemics, climate catastrophes etc., in the midst of willful and ignorant abdication of a future (via self-hate and industrialized abortion) in favor of mass immigration, consumerism, and instant gratification. Just as one has to confront death in order to truly live (or to become “authentic” in Heidegger’s philosophy), our society is in constant flight from death and thus inevitably collapses into inauthentic decay. COVID-19, while not as lethal as media coverage would suggest, is a reminder of our mortality and human fragility and will necessarily have a jarring effect on a Western liberalism that has become increasingly distant from the confrontation with death.

Life under liberal finance capitalism is largely one of illusion, in which the prospect of real death is pushed far into the distance, both psychologically and culturally. Postmodern Western liberal culture is largely one of perpetual adolescence, in which the primary virtues are acting according to one’s individual will, identifying oneself in a hyper-individualistic manner, and expressing these identities via conspicuous consumption and behavior. We do not “live towards” Death, with a sense of purpose and a feeling that we are part of a much grander civilizational trajectory. We do not understand that Death has shaped our historical path, and that it hangs over us in ways that should direct our actions in the present.

COVID-19, regardless of current confusion over its true mortality rate, is a corrective to illusions that “progressive” Man has overcome Nature and can shape the world according to the human image, and without consequences. Certainly throughout my own lifetime, I’ve grown accustomed to assertions that life expectancy will continue to increase, and that there will be an endless supply of innovations and social projects that will make the mechanics of life easier and more productive. One increasingly expects that one will live a long life, mostly in very good health. Such a sense of security can breed all kinds of arrogance and fantasies, including the recent perverse luxury of the delusion that one can simply decide to be this or that gender. This new virus, however, presents the possibility, both in itself and its inevitable heirs, that Death is much closer than we ever thought, and that for all our technological advancement and self-congratulation, Nature need only tweak one molecule, so small our naked eyes could never perceive it, and the grave opens before us. The Age of Fantasy is confronted with the ultimate reality.

How the West responds to this realization will be a further cultural challenge. We have grown equally accustomed to the idea that we have “advanced” morally as a society, and that we have overcome some of the more “brutish” aspects of human existence that we perceive in the past. But in a world of apparently increasing plenty, such notions can be hard to test. It’s always easy for a man with a full stomach to condemn the actions of the starving. The conceit of the full-bellied West that it has overcome and surpassed itself and its past will now be tested. I, of course, arise from a political and philosophical tradition that insists there is no shame in the past. I see little or no place for morality in the struggle for survival. And I also see the cracks already forming in the Western conceit. This society that is against “hate” and prides itself on “coming together” is already struggling to stop people rioting over toilet paper and bottled water. If civil order breaks down, will the proud feminists be seeking their own resources, or hoping for a strong man to protect them? If the death toll does rise dramatically, and if curfews and lockdowns are imposed and intensified, I ask: How well will your beloved multicultural societies respond? If resources become scarce and tensions rise, who will you trust? These tests are coming.

Economic and Political Fallout

Just days ago, JPMorgan projected that a recession will hit the US and European economies by July, with US GDP to shrink by 2% in the first quarter and 3% in the second, and Eurozone GDP to contract by 1.8% and 3.3% over the same periods. Sudden cessation of economic activity through quarantines, event cancellations, social distancing, and the almost complete shutdown of the tourist industry will have both immediate and longer term consequences for national economies and broader trade patterns. The mass closing of schools will expose pre-existing weaknesses in a modern system that sees women funneled en masse into the work place while their children are left in day cares or schools. According to numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, more than 70 percent of American mothers with children under 18 work. Through the closing of schools alone, the impact of COVID-19 will almost certainly have the greatest impact on the role of women in the workplace since World War Two, with many forced to leave work and return to the home for an as yet undetermined amount of time. How this will impact the businesses or public entities employing these women remains to be seen, but it will undoubtedly cause significant difficulties and necessitate some level of infrastructural change.

The outbreak of COVID-19 is also projected to test Western healthcare provision to the limit. It’s been particularly interesting that the outbreak in Italy effectively broke the health system in Lombardy, widely regarded as one of the best in the world. Before the outbreak, it was remarked that:

The Lombardy healthcare system, characterised by quality and efficiency, is a model of reference both in Italy and worldwide. With the benefit of private partnerships in fact, it ensures its citizens and those who live in other regions or abroad have access to prime level health care with all the advantages of a public system. Lombardy has 56 University Departments of Medicine, 19 IRCCS (IRCCS means an institution devoted to excellence in clinical care and research) which represent 42% of the national total, 47 Institutes and 32 Research Centres. As a result, Lombardy and in particular Milan have always attracted the most renowned physicians in every field of expertise.

It took COVID-19 just four weeks to exhaust every hospital bed in Lombardy, force doctors out of retirement and medical students to graduate early, and provoke the creation of 500 triage tents outside hospitals nationwide. The different, and ever-politicized, healthcare systems of the United States and Great Britain are about to experience the most intensive test in their respective histories. One of the most outspoken figures from the medical profession on social media in recent days is Eugene Gu, who has made a point of attacking the profit-seeking nature of much of the American medical establishment. Gu has argued that American medicine is essentially a pyramid scheme that profits those at the top by artificially restricting the number of doctors produced by the system:

The medical school and residency system in the United States is completely broken compared to other countries. Now that we are in the middle of the coronavirus pandemic, we need to reflect upon an abusive system that hurts patients and seeks to make a few specialists filthy rich. Even before the coronavirus, we created a huge physician shortage by limiting spots in medical schools to inflate doctors’ salaries the same way De Beers fixes the diamond market. And we gutted primary care so that specialists like plastic surgeons and dermatologists can get rich. I took an oath to “first, do no harm.” I cannot just stand by and watch as the corrupt cesspool we call our American medical system fails our patients while a few doctors, insurance executives, and Big Pharma get filthy rich. Medicine should not be a for-profit industry.

Whether or not one agrees with Dr Gu’s perspective, the coming weeks and months will test both American for-profit medicine and Britain’s nationalized health system, and perhaps leave long term political legacies for both.

Political consequences will also inevitably result from the approaches of individual leaders to the crisis. Boris Johnson is risking his political future on a “herd immunity” strategy that is radically different from the course of action pursued by other leaders. It’s been criticized as involving the sacrifice of the older generation for a slightly prolonged period of economic normalcy and an entirely assumed future immunity among the young. Donald Trump, meanwhile, is quickly trying to move on from a highly dismissive initial response to the outbreak. In both cases, and throughout the West, moderately “conservative” populism based on the celebration of finance capitalism and token gestures on borders will be tested to the limit by increasing strains on all aspects of social, political, and economic life. Trump, in particular, has managed to squeeze a lot of political mileage out of the performance of the stock market. With stocks tumbling, and the American healthcare system pushed to the limit, it remains to be seen whether Trump’s drive to make gay sex legal in Africa will be enough to keep his voters happy.

In another return of the Real, of course, COVID-19 is doing more to close borders than any expression of political populism ever has. It was all well and good that “the world is a village” when this involved cheap and cheerful vacations, but all it took was a few houses in the throes of sickness for the rest of the villagers to wish there was somewhere they could escape to. The global village is in shutdown. All humans might be equally susceptible to this virus, but national borders, so often scorned until recently, now reveal they might have some uses after all – just one of them being the invaluable opportunity to seal and control a limited territory. How people grow accustomed to this renewed emphasis on border control may leave a lasting political legacy for the West also. In any case, we can only hope it will.

Conclusion

With events moving so quickly, I conclude with the oppressive sensation that I’ve written both too much and too little. The figures presented at the outset of this essay will be superfluous by the time this piece is published, but I do think some of the suggestions in the body will remain relevant for some time to come. I wish all our readers the best of luck and the best of health in the weeks and months to come. May globalism’s difficulty be the dissident’s opportunity.