General

Southern Jews during the Civil Rights Era

/1 Comment/in /by

Editor’s note: In a recent blog (Jews and the Civil Rights Movement), I gave the standard account of Southern Jews gleaned from academic publications. Richard Thornbourn’s discussion is somewhat different because it is based on his personal experience and observations. It is therefore a valuable addition to our knowledge of Southern Jews during the Civil Rights era.

It was not unusual for small town Southern Jews to profess sympathy for segregation.

It would have been imprudent and financially suicidal for their courthouse square clothing stores for the Jews to have been overt in their hatred of White Christians and their civilization.

When I was a college student in the South, fairly often other students who came from small town Georgia argued in refutation to what I said about Jews—that the Jews in their home towns were not like “New York Jews” and caused no problems.

Several of these students as the years rolled by have come back into contact with me and updated this conversation. Read more

Ron Unz on Janet Mertz

/in /by

It is likely dawning on Ron Unz that writing a solid, well researched article that conflicts with Jewish interests is fraught with peril. If nothing else, there will be no end of carpings and criticisms — assuming it’s not completely ignored. The minimal goal in such attacks is to render the article in question “controversial” so that those who would disregard it have some citations on their side. Because it touches on Jewish interests, even sympathetic articles in the mainstream media would be likely to feel a need to cite both sides in the interests of “fairness.”

Unz’s most recent foray (“Meritocracy: Almost as Wrong as Larry Summers“) is a dissection of Prof. Janet Mertz. Unz acknowledges that Mertz’s more exhaustive analysis of lists of high-achieving may be slightly more accurate, but that her results in no way undermine his conclusions on the relative achievements by Non-Jewish Whites, Asians, and Jews; nor do they successfully challenge the collapse of Jewish academic distinction. But the high point is that Unz quite clearly sees the ethnic motivation behind Mertz’s critique:

Given that two of Prof. Mertz’s greatest areas of policy interest seem to be the relative rate of elite performance by gender and by ethnicity, I notice a curious mismatch in her analysis.

She notes the large over-representation of males in math achievement, and strenuously argues that this is merely an artificial byproduct of social conditioning or even unfair gender bias, which distorts the inherently near-equal abilities of males and females. Therefore, she advocates major policy changes to bring the numbers of men and women in elite mathematics into much closer equality.

Yet at exactly the same time, she seems perfectly comfortable with Jews being over-represented at elite academic institutions by perhaps 3,000% relative to non-Jewish whites, and totally disproportionate to their apparent academic ability.  I also suspect that she would be unwilling to endorse social policies aimed at bringing Jewish elite representation into much closer alignment with their 2% share of the national population.

Although I cannot explain this puzzling inconsistency in her logical positions, I can only note the curious coincidence that she herself happens to be a Jewish woman.

I assume the comment that such behavior is “puzzling” is tongue-in-cheek. Actually, it’s par for the course. As Andrew Joyce noted in the conclusion of his article on the apotheosis of Baruch Spinoza, “Jewish academics have a tendency not to behave like other academics but behave much more like ethnic activists in whatever field they are in, particularly in the social sciences, the humanities, and even in the natural sciences as they relate to issues of race and ethnicity.” We don’t expect ethnic activists to behave in a principled manner, and Mertz is no exception.

Unz’s comment also reinforces some of what we at TOO have maintained about Larry Summers (see Edmund Connelly’s “Jews and Money“. Unz writes:

I am hardly someone willing to defend Summers from a whole host of very serious and legitimate charges.  He seems to have played a major role in transmuting Harvard from a renowned university to an aggressive hedge fund, policies that subsequently brought my beloved alma mater to the very brink of bankruptcy during the 2008 financial crisis.  Under his presidency, Harvard paid out $26 million dollars to help settle international insider-trading charges against Andrei Shleifer, one of his closest personal friends, who avoided prison as a consequence.  And after such stellar financial and ethical achievements, he was naturally appointed as one of President Obama’s top economic advisors, a position from which he strongly supported the massive bailout of Wall Street and the rest of our elite financial services sector, while ignoring Main Street suffering.  Perhaps coincidentally, wealthy hedge funds had paid him many millions of dollars for providing a few hours a week of part-time consulting advice during the twelve months prior to his appointment.

 Once again, Unz is to be congratulated on a very daring commentary challenging the powers that be in the United States.

Dresden: Death from Above

/3 Comments/in , , /by

dresden

 

What follows below is the English translation of my speech in German which I was scheduled to deliver on February 13, 2013, around 7:00 PM in downtown Dresden. The commemoration of the Dresden February 13, 1945 victims was organized by “Aktionsbündnis gegen das Vergessen” (action committee against oblivion), NPD deputies and officials from the local state assembly in Dresden. There were 3,000 leftist antifa demonstrators. The city was under siege, cordoned off into sections by 4,000 riot policemen. The bulk of the nationalist participants, approximately 1,000, who had previously arrived at the central station, were split up and prevented from joining with our group at the original place of gathering. Toward 11:00 PM, when the event was practically over, the riot police did allow our small group of organizers and speakers to march past the barricades down to the central station. There were approximately 40 of us—mostly local NPD officials. On February 14, while still in Dresden, I provided more information as a guest on the Deanna Spingola’s RBN radio show: Hour 1, Hour 2.

Dresden gedenkt der Zerstoerung der Stadt vor 68 Jahren

Police separate groups of right-wing and left-wing demonstrators outside Dresden’s central train station.

Human Improvement by Terror Bombardment

Dresden is only one single symbol of the Allied crime, a symbol unwillingly discussed by establishment politicians. The destruction of Dresden and its casualties are trivialized in the mainstream historiography and depicted as “collateral damage in the fight against the absolute evil — fascism.” The problem, however, lies in the fact that there was not just one bombing of one Dresden, but also many bombings of countless other Dresdens in all corners of Germany and in all parts of Europe. The topography of death, marked by the antifascists, is a very problematic issue for their descendants, indeed. Read more

Putin’s view of Russia’s national future. Migration policy and residence registration

/in , /by

flag-imperski

This article was translated by Roman Frolov who also translated Artemov’s “Russians in Russia: A state within a state” for TOO. Frolov comments:

Igor Artemov is one of the oldest and the best reputed Russian  nationalist. His organization, the Russian All-National Union (RONS), was proscribed last year, and Artemov himself is on the run because he is wanted by the Federal Security Service for the ‘hate crime’ of writing that Russian Orthodoxy is the only true faith. In reality, they just wanted him out of political field, I guess because, as a politician, he is much more dangerous to the establishment than the other Russian Nationalist leaders.

Migration policy 

A month ago the President of Russian Federation (RF) Vladimir Putin signed the Concept of Migration Policy of Russian Federation covering the period from 2013 to 2025. The full text of this document is available on the official presidential site. As with any official document, it is verbose and not specific. Yet let’s try to analyze it and single out its essence.

These days, there are two types of peaceful (without war or other cataclysms) mass migration of peoples from one country to another. One is so-called economic migration; it is the movement of great numbers of people to other territories, from one state to another in search of employment, social security or generally better and safer life.

Another is repatriation — a return to historic Homeland of people who due to different reasons, usually beyond their control, became citizens or residents of other countries. Repatriation usually begins when living conditions in places of their current residence are no longer satisfactory in terms of material, spiritual or cultural well-being.  A repatriate is thus different from an economic migrant by having bonds of blood and culture with the ethnic core of the country he returns to. It is well known that after the dissolution of the USSR huge numbers of ethnic Russians and other indigenous peoples of Russia were cut from their motherland and unwillingly became citizens of other states. There were no less than 20 millions of such people in 1990. Around half of this number still lives outside Russia. Read more

The End of the World News, Feb. 12, 2013

/1 Comment/in /by

In its great days, the newsreaders for the World Service of the BBC would provide a summary of the major stories, then sign off the broadcasts in their perfect Brit accents, ‘And that’s the end of the world news.’ Subsequently, the BBC has gone multiculti in its accents, replaced the objective newsreaders with the personality style ‘anchors’ of the American media, and dropped the sign-off line. Therefore, TOO feels free to adopt it and indeed adapt it to the ‘End of the World’ News.

Here then is the summary for February 12, 2013.

Adios Republicanos

Tonight Sen. Marco Rubio (R. South Florida) will deliver the Republican response to Pres. Barack Hussein Obama’s State of the Union message — in both English & Spanish. This will be the first time either the State of the Union address or the response by the party not in the White House will be bilingual — and this time coming from a party, most of whose members want to make English the official language of our country.

rubio

The son of Cuban immigrants, Rubio is of fairer complexion than Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal who gave the response to Obama’s 2009 speech. (Of East Indian descent, Jindal’s speech came off as a failed audition for higher office.) Elected with the support of the conservative Tea Party faction, since taking office Rubio has, as they say, “grown.” Translation – he now supports more “moderate” policies and is a key player in the bipartisan “Gang of Eight” Senators who are preparing yet another watering down of U.S. immigration laws. Read more

Hagel s’aplatit sagement devant le Lobby pro-Israélien

/in /by

By Kevin MacDonald; Translated by Armor. English version here 

Les séances d’audition de Chuck Hagel au Sénat ont été d’une virulence incroyable, surtout quand il s’est fait interroger par John McCain, Lindsay Graham, and Ted Cruz. Graham et Cruz se sont montrés des soldats particulièrement zélés du Lobby pro-israélien. L’échange qui a le mieux démontré la force du Lobby a eu lieu quand Graham a demandé à Hagel de

“nommer une personne, qui selon vous, est intimidée par le Lobby pro-israélien qui oeuvre au Sénat des États-Unis.”

“Je ne sais pas,” a fini par concéder Hagel.

Graham a continué l’interrogatoire, demandant à Hagel de, “Nommer l’une des choses stupides que nous avons été poussés à faire sous la pression du Lobby juif ou pro-israélien ?”

“J’ai déjà déclaré que je regrettais cette terminologie,” a protesté Hagel.

“Mais vous aviez dit que le Lobby nous faisait faire des choses stupides,” a insisté Graham. “Vous ne pouvez pas nommer un seul sénateur qui soit intimidé, donnez-moi au moins un exemple de toutes les choses stupides qu’au Sénat, on est contraint de faire sous la pression.”

“Éh bien en fait, je ne peux pas vous donner d’exemple,” a admis Hagel.

Il est évident que Hagel s’est fait intimider. Il n’y avait pas moyen de lui arracher des noms. Et pourtant, il est bien connu que quiconque s’oppose activement au Lobby pro-israélien doit être prêt, lors de l’élection suivante, à voir son adversaire faire campagne avec des moyens financiers considérables. Mais surtout, Hagel n’aurait jamais eu l’audace de citer la guerre d’Irak comme pièce à conviction numéro 1, le meilleur exemple de “chose stupide” où le Sénat (y compris Hagel) a foncé tête baissée, à l’instigation du Lobby pro-israélien et des médias qui lui servent de porte-voix, ainsi que de ses agents au Pentagone (Wolfowitz, Feith, Shulsky ; voir ici, p. 40 et suivantes), qui fournissaient de faux renseignements au désespérément naïf Président Bush. On n’évoque pas de ce genre de choses en bonne compagnie. Read more

Comments policy

/1 Comment/in /by

I decided to curtail the comments section, at least temporarily. I did this after several people, whose opinion I respect, all suggested this change. The problem was that too many comments were getting through that did not reflect well on the site, and we couldn’t commit the resources to monitoring all of them. I apologize to those who were making intelligent, thoughtful comments, but there were too many trolls and others whose opinions were unwelcome.