Jewish Influence

Jews as a Necessary Condition

/2 Comments/in , /by

This video of John Mearsheimer (available also in our video archive) is a good discussion of how to conceptualize not only Jewish involvement in the Iraq war but Jewish influence generally.

The argument is that :

1. The neoconservatives were the main force behind the war.

2. The neoconservatives are a key component of the Israel Lobby, are “deeply committed to Israel,” and are involved in a variety of pro-Israel organizations such as the American Enterprise Institute and the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

3. Other components of the Israel Lobby, notably AIPAC, were also deeply involved. Read more

Bill Clinton: Pioneer in Courting Jewish Money

/3 Comments/in /by

The  Republican grovelfest continues to reverberate.  Philip Weiss compiles a few additions, including an editorial writer from the New York Times (“It’s hard to imagine a political spectacle more loathsome…”. ) The interesting thing is that Weiss includes a quote from David Frum’s book on GW Bush (The Right Man) noting the prominent role of Jews in making Bill Clinton’s wonderful career. This  includes Clinton “getting very rich rapidly” right after he left the presidency. (I recall that pretty much the first thing that Clinton did after leaving office was to give a speech to a Jewish audience in LA for $100,000—just a little thank you note, with the promise of much more to come.)

Sociopathy can be very lucrative, and the recent grovelfest shows that there is no shortage of White politicians willing to do anything for the fame and fortune of the presidency. All they have to do to climb onto the gravy train is to make it very clear that they care nothing about the future of their own people. Clinton’s statement to an audience at Portland State University in 1998 is classic:

Today, largely because of immigration, there is no majority race in Hawaii or Houston or New York City. Within five years, there will be no majority race in our largest state, California. In a little more than 50 years, there will be no majority race in the United States. No other nation in history has gone through demographic change of this magnitude in so short a time … [These immigrants] are energizing our culture and broadening our vision of the world. They are renewing our most basic values and reminding us all of what it truly means to be American.

And then there’s this quote from his 1997 State of the Union speech: “My fellow Americans, we must never, ever believe that our diversity is a weakness — it is our greatest strength.” If we believe strongly enough, it will come true, never mind the reality of ethnic conflict throughout human history.

Here’s David Frum:

Clinton can fairly be called the most philo-Semitic president in U.S. history. His closest friends and most trusted aides were Jews, his administration was crammed with Jewish appointees, both his nominees to the Supreme Court were Jewish—even his most famous girlfriend was Jewish. And Jews liked Clinton as much as he liked them. They appreciated his intellectuality and his social tolerance, his liberated wife, and his moderate liberalism. Jewish donors contributed generously to Clinton’s election campaigns; after he left office, some of those former donors helped him to grow very rich very rapidly.

Republicans Grovel before Sheldon’s Billions

/1 Comment/in , , /by

Usually the media downplays any hint that strongly identified Jews acting out of Jewish motives are able to influence American politics or anything else. But Sheldon Adelson’s conference of Republican hopefuls apparently was too obvious, especially in the wake of his donating around $100 million to Republicans in the 2012 election cycle (and “much more in 2016“).

So the LATimes made it official: Republicans who are serious about being nominated for president had better genuflect before Jewish money: “2016 Republican hopefuls hope to woo Jewish donors.”

The occasion was a meeting of the Republican Jewish Coalition in which Adelson was only one of many politically active Jewish billionaires. And what do Jewish billionaires care about?

During speeches Saturday, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, Ohio Gov. John Kasich and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie all addressed the key concerns of Adelson and many group members — the threat of a nuclear Iran, their desire to strengthen U.S. ties with Israel, and what they view as the waning prestige of the U.S. abroad. With varying degrees of deftness, the candidates each touched on their own ties to Israel and Jewish tradition.

Ah yes, the real issues facing America. I guess we are supposed to believe that, like every neocon who ever graced the op-ed pages of our elite media, these rich Jewish Republicans are absolutely certain that American interests are being served with their obsession about Israel. Read more

Alison Weir on the Early Days of the Israel Lobby

/3 Comments/in , , /by

In “Background traits for Jewish activism” I listed several traits of Jewish activist groups that make them so effective. They are all on display in Alison Weir’s excerpt from her book Against Our Better Judgment: How the US was Used to Create Israel. 

1. Jewish groups are well organized and lavishly funded. I probably shouldn’t have been surprised by the incredible scale of Zionist activism during the 1940s, both financially and in the scale of their outreach efforts. But it is truly remarkable. Weir describes the “gargantuan financial resources” available, amounting to $1.5 billion in today’s dollars. A big part of the effort was aimed at non-Jewish elites in business, labor, religion, and academia; pro-Zionist books by non-Jews were subsidized.

For example, at its beginning in 1945

[the American Zionist Emergency Council] booked Madison Square Garden, ordered advertisements, and mailed 250,000 announcements – the first day. By the second day they had organized demonstrations in 30 cities, a letter-writing campaign, and convinced 27 U.S. Senators to give speeches. Grassroots Zionist action groups were organized with more than 400 local committees under 76 state and regional branches. AZEC funded books, articles and academic studies; millions of pamphlets were distributed.

This top-down approach making alliances with sympathetic non-Jews is typical of Jewish efforts generally, as with the neoconservatives whose networks of think tanks and access to the media and the highest levels of government provide excellent career prospects for ambitious Jews and non-Jews alike. As a small minority, Jews must reach out to others and they are very effective at doing it. Read more

Reply to John Derbyshire

/3 Comments/in , /by

John Derbyshire discusses several reasons for why Whites have become such wimps, including a couple where he mentions me:

What needs explaining—what always needs explaining—is white ethnomasochism.”

We are not short of offered explanations. Most popular:

• It’s the Jews. The theory: Nursing an atavistic hatred of gentiles, and fearful of being the only noticeable minority in an otherwise homogenous society, Jews seek to demoralize and shatter gentile culture.

Occasional VDARE.com contributor Kevin MacDonald takes this line, drawing on evolutionary psychology to fortify his explanations.

It seems to me, though, that MacDonald just replaces something that’s difficult to explain with something that’s even more difficult to explain.

Britain’s population, for example, is only one percent Jewish on the most generous assumptions, perhaps less than 0.5 percent. Why do 99 percent allow themselves to be dictated to by one percent?Why are they such wimps? And we’re back where we started.

• It’s the Enlightenment. London University’s Eric Kaufmann is the fugleman here, arguing that the Enlightenment contained within itself a cosmopolitanism and moral universalism that eroded WASP hegemony from within. See Verdict: Suicide—Eric Kaufmann Replies To *Kevin MacDonald.

This I think gets a good piece of the truth. One driving force of the Enlightenment was curiosity, an open-minded interest in other peoples and ways of life. It’s not implausible that this could curdle into disdain for one’s own ethny. Why it actually did so when it did—in the second half of the 20th century—is less easy to understand, though I think Kaufmann does a fair job with the American case.

1. Invoking the Enlightenment to explain what happened in post-World War II America is obviously an inadequate explanation without a whole lot of additional analysis, so Derbyshire’s move is to simply follow Kaufmann without dealing with my objections. To make a convincing argument, he would have to reply to my objections to Kaufmann’s analysis, which can be found in  my reply to Kaufmann (appended at the end of Kaufmann’s critique). For example, I write that  “especially as elaborated in this section of the longer version of my review, …  Jewish intellectuals were in the driver’s seat by the 1940s, that they dominated the New York Intellectuals, and that they promoted [non-Jews] like Dewey who advanced ideas that were compatible with theirs.”

Of course, Derbyshire and I have been disagreeing about my basic statement on all this, my book The Culture of Critique, for quite a while, so I guess nothing has changed. Read more

The Sexual Subversion of America, Part 2 of 2

/69 Comments/in , /by

An edited abridgement of E. Michael Jones’ 2003 essay, Rabbi Dresner’s Dilemma: Torah v. Ethnos, presented with pictures and captions by Lasha Darkmoon

der sturmer

 Anti-Jewish cartoon from a German school book for children (c. 1935) alleging  the sexual exploitation of German women by Jewish men. 

8.  The sexually corrupted have now become the corrupters

The impression one gets by reading Rabbi Dresner’s book—Can Families Survive in Pagan America?—is that over the course of the twentieth century in America the Jews have suffered one of the greatest defeats in their history.

Dresner blames this defeat on assimilation, but the irony is that the Jews were corrupting America’s morals at the same time that they were undergoing moral corruption themselves by assimilating so successfully in America.

Assimilation means the adoption of pagan sexual mores of the sort that nearly destroyed the Israelites at the time of the Book of Kings. The Jews who came to America, who arrived from the Polish shtetls, arrived to find a ruling class more interested in Darwin than in Christ. They adopted the worst aspects of modernity and became both the corrupted and—because of their influence in the media—the corrupters simultaneously. Read more

Liberal Bias in Academia: The role of Jewish academics in the creation and maintenance of academic liberalism

/149 Comments/in , , , , , /by

A study to be published in September in Current Directions in Psychological Science, prominent peer-reviewed academic journal, goes beyond the well-known fact that the vast majority of social psychologists are on the left (“Survey shocker: Liberal profs admit they’d discriminate against conservatives in hiring, advancement“).

Psychologists Yoel Inbar and Joris Lammers, based at Tilburg University in the Netherlands, surveyed a roughly representative sample of academics and scholars in social psychology and found that “In decisions ranging from paper reviews to hiring, many social and personality psychologists admit that they would discriminate against openly conservative colleagues.” …

More than a third of the respondents said they would discriminate against the conservative candidate. One respondent wrote in that if department members “could figure out who was a conservative, they would be sure not to hire them.” …

Generally speaking, the more liberal the respondent, the more willingness to discriminate and, paradoxically, the higher the assumption that conservatives do not face a hostile climate in the academy. …

A 2007 report by sociologists Neil Gross and Solon Simmons found that 80 percent of psychology professors at elite and non-elite universities are Democrats. Other studies reveal that 5 percent to 7 percent of faculty openly identify as Republicans. By contrast, about 20 percent of the general population are liberal and 40 percent are conservative. …

[While much larger percentages of faculty are economic conservatives,] the widest divide occurs on social issues, the contested terrain in the culture wars shaking the academy. On these contentious issues, 90 percent identified as liberal and only 4 percent as conservative.

Of course, social psychologists by definition perform research on social issues—precisely the areas where they are overwhelmingly liberal. Don’t expect any race realist research on criminality or ethnic differences in aggressiveness to come out of mainstream social psychology. Read more