Jews and the Left

Far Left Center for American Progress Hosts Netanyahu, Leader of the Israeli Ethnonationalist Right

/12 Comments/in , , /by

When Israeli PM Netanyahu visited the US at the invitation of then House Speaker John Boehner in March, the take-home message was that support for Israel had become a partisan issue, with strong Republican support and relatively weak, dwindling Democrat support. Indeed, the Democrats have an analogous split between the donor class and it base that we  see among the Republicans, but for different reasons.

The Democratic Party establishment and donor class are strongly supportive of the Jewish state and are seeking to find new ways to increase U.S. military aid for Israel following the Iran deal. But recent polling shows that support for Israel among rank-and-file Democrats has fallen by 10 points in one year. A Gallup poll released this year found that fewer than half of Democrats, 48 percent, report sympathizing more with Israelis than with Palestinians as it relates to the Middle East conflict, while 83 percent of Republicans sympathize more with Israel. (John Hudson, Foreign Policy: “Netanyahu Visit Sparks Internal Backlash at Powerhouse D.C. Think Tank“

The White Republican base is more supportive of Israel (at least partly because of a large, terribly misguided Evangelical component) and thus more in tune with the donors on that issue. But it is famously out of step with the donors on social issues—immigration, gay marriage, abortion, etc. On the other hand, the Democrat base is far less supportive of Israel than the donors but, as a coalition of the ascendant non-White majority, it is entirely in step with them on social issues.

The common denominator is that in both parties the donors are substantially Jewish, and these wealthy Jews are pursuing a Jewish diaspora strategy of favoring Israel and leftist stances on social issues.

So in his recent trip to the US, in addition to dunning the Obama administration for a hefty increase in military aid in return for the US not bombing Iran (at least until the Republicans are back in charge), Netanyahu was invited to give a speech at the Center for American Progress, a powerful left-wing lobbying group. The result was that Netanyahu, dedicated to ethnonationalist policies of apartheid and ethnic cleansing vis-á-vis the Palestinians and expelling African migrants in Israel, spoke at CAP which is dedicated to the dispossession of White America via immigration and multiculturalism in the name of universal human rights and empathy for the oppressed. There were some tensions, but in the end, the strength of the Israel Lobby on the left in the US was reaffirmed — and CAP bigwigs burnished their credentials for high-level positions in a putative Hillary Clinton administration. Read more

“Unrepentant Marxist” Eric Hobsbawm Still Celebrated as Britain’s Greatest Historian

/40 Comments/in , , /by

Hobsbawm

Marxist historian Eric Hobsbawm lamented, “To this day, I notice myself treating the memory and tradition of the USSR with indulgence and tenderness.”

I met up with a conservative former professor of mine, for a few rounds of drinks and some lively political conversation this past Thursday, as we do from time to time when he’s up north.

Although the good professor teaches Colonial History at a liberal British university and no doubt watches his P’s and Q’s around this particular former student, after several pints of ale and a few laughs, he’s typically quite forthright.

We touched on an array of topics over lunch, including Britain’s current immigration crisis, my ‘misguided decision’ to volunteer my services as spokesman for the British National Party, Nigel Farage’s being against maternity leave due to all the lasses he’s impregnated, and the All-Blacks incredible victory over the Aussies at last week’s Rugby World Cup Final.

As the third anniversary of Eric Hobsbawm’s death had just passed, I felt it befitting to introduce the man’s name into the conversation at some point.

After all, Marxist historian Hobsbawm had also read history at Cambridge, and in spite of his unrepentant Marxist views, is still widely regarded as Britain’s most influential historian.

“Were you aware that Eric Hobsbawm expired with almost two million quid to his name?” (1) I snickered, as I attempted to mop up wayward gravy with my third Yorkshire pudding.  Read more

Jill Soloway and the “Transgender” Agenda, Part 2

/65 Comments/in , , , /by

Part 1.

Promoting the idea of “gender fluidity”

The ideological glue that holds Jill Soloway’s Transparent together is the deconstruction of the whole concept of gender. What does it mean to be a man? What does it mean to be a woman? As one character in the show puts it, “We’re just a bunch of bodies, that’s it. No penis, no vagina, what does it matter?” According to Soloway, “The show questions the binary; trans people question the binary. Trans-ness demands that people live in the gray. The word ‘trans’ is about traveling the space between the binary. Judaism/feminism/trans politics — they can all really be woven together. Living at that ground zero place of otherness is inspiring to me.” Soloway is passionate about normalizing the concept of “gender fluidity”: Paste Magazine notes that: “In Transparent sexual identity loses its ‘statehood’ and becomes fluid, treated like an ongoing process with its own ebbs and flows.”

As Dr. Paul McHugh, the former psychiatrist-in-chief for Johns Hopkins Hospital, noted, the reality, as distinct from Soloway’s ideologically-driven fantasies, , is that far from being a normal healthy behavior, “transgenderism” is a “mental disorder” that merits treatment. Noting that changing sex is “biologically impossible,” McHugh observes that “people who undergo sex-reassignment surgery do not change from men to women or vice versa. Rather, they become feminized men or masculinized women. Claiming that this is civil-rights matter and encouraging surgical intervention is in reality to collaborate with and promote a mental disorder.” Read more

Stasi Roots of the German-Jewish “Anti-Racist” Left and Its Program of Destroying Ethnic Germany

/in , /by

For professional German “anti-racist” Anetta Kahane, last week was a very good week. For one of her many organisations is slated to lead the campaign to shut down opposition to the immigrant invasion on Facebook.

This clampdown on Facebook free speech is now one of the German government’s highest priorities following a meeting between between Angela Merkel and Mark Zuckerburg, and means that henceforth all criticism of the immigrant invasion will be severely curtailed. Such a vast initiative will need an army of loyal and trusted functionaries, and who better but Ms Kahane and her Network Against Nazis.  (“Netz gegen Nazis”) to show they mean business.  Just to make sure ordinary Germans get the message the government have charged the leader of the dissident PEGIDA movement for anti-immigrant comments he made on Facebook.

In the lucrative anti-racism sector, Anetta Kahane is without doubt a shrewd and far-seeing  operator. She recognised earlier than most that there were huge amounts of money to be had by re-packaging ordinary people’s concerns about immigration into “Neo-Nazi” scares, and she worked hard to ramp up this industry and turn it into the money-making machine that it is today.

Like so many Jewish leaders in Europe these days, Kahane is quite brazen in expressing her wish for the destruction of White Europe. “You have to really change the policy of immigration inside Europe. This is very important; you have to change the educational system and the self-understanding of the states. They are not only white anymore or only Swedish or only Portuguese or only German. They are multicultural places in the world.” Read more

Was Ed Miliband’s father a KGB stooge? (contd.)

/in , /by

With a year to go before the next British general election, the strategic brains behind an increasingly confident looking Labour Party are trying to tackle a matter of some delicacy — how are the British going to react to a Jewish Prime Minister? It is a tricky one because there is no disguising the fact that Ed Miliband is not only as Jewish as they come, but he has as much in common with the average Brit as a man from Mars.

The son of famous Marxist academic Ralph Miliband, he was born into a privileged and intellectual Hampstead milieu and has moved effortlessly via Oxford University and the London School of Economics to becoming a bag-carrier for senior politicians and then parachuted into the safe Labour seat of Doncaster north. A fairly normal trajectory then for a member of the increasingly hereditary political class and one that would have no doubt baffled the founders of  Labour Party in the coal pits of South Wales, the cotton mills of Lancashire and the shipyards of Clydeside.

Ed’s father Ralph was of Polish Jewish stock originally and arrived in Britain after fleeing Belgium in 1940 when the Germans invaded the Low Countries. Ralph worked as a lecturer at the LSE and became something of a fashionable academic fixture in the sixties New Left.

After Ralph’s son Ed became Labour leader, it was obviously decided that the matter of Jewishness had to be tackled head on, so once enough extended family Holocaust victims were discovered to make a suitable back story, Ed headed to Israel to meet his 84-year-old aunt, bond with Prime Minister Netanyahu and visit the Holocaust museum.

Benjamin Netanyahu and Ed Miliband

Benjamin Netanyahu and Ed Miliband

Read more

More on Ralph Miliband: A KGB Connection?

/in /by

From a correspondent:

In Britain the media row over whether an obscure, deceased Marxist academic Ralph Miliband was a loyal British patriot who loved his country, rumbles on (see Alex Kurtagic’s article, “Ralph Miliband was not unique”). It is important for two reasons. One is that the Daily Mail, the voice of middle England is very much at bay with the Guardian and BBC snapping at its heels over what it has printed about Miliband.

The second is that Ralph Miliband was the father of the current Labour leader Ed Miliband who may or may not have inherited his father’s radical attitudes. But in all the sound and fury of the Daily Mail row, one question remains unasked.

Who was “Lev” the mysterious Russian figure who moved in Ralph Miliband’s circle in the sixties and was willing to pay for information about NATO.

We are introduced to “Lev” in the autobiographical writings of David Horowitz who is now a prominent Neocon but was then part of the left wing Jewish Marxist academic milieu. Horowitz moved to London in the mid-sixties and was taken under the wing of Ralph Miliband when the two lived next door to each other in Hampstead. Read more

Jews and the Civil Rights Movement

/1 Comment/in /by

Occidental Dissent has an article on Solomon Blatt, a powerful Jewish politician in South Carolina who was a staunch proponent of segregation during the 1950s and 1960s (“The Strange Career of Solomon Blatt“). Interesting article, but it ends thus:

South Carolina’s desegregation shows that the existence of the Union, not Jewish influence, was the primary cause of the South’s racial and cultural decline.

This does not follow. One surely can’t argue that because one Jewish politician in one state opposed desegregation that Jews did not have a decisive influence on the Civil Rights movement in general. South Carolina by itself could not withstand the onslaught against desegregation given that the laws against segregation were national in application.

First, one Jew who fought for segregation etc. really doesn’t change the big picture. There is likely no issue on which 100% of Jews agree; indeed, it’s well-known that the great majority of Southern Jews accepted the Southern status quo. For example:

Jews in the South were typically reluctant participants in the Civil Rights movement. The Southern Jewish community was relatively small compared to the much larger Jewish population that immigrated from Eastern Europe between 1880 and 1924, and had relatively little national influence. Southern Jews immigrated in the 19th century mainly from Germany, and they tended toward political conservatism, at least compared to their Eastern European brethren. The general perception of northern Jews and southern blacks and whites was that southern Jews had adopted white attitudes on racial issues. Moreover, southern Jews adopted a low profile because southern whites often (correctly) blamed northern Jews as major instigators of the civil rights movement and because of the linkages among Jews, communism, and civil rights agitation during a period when both the NAACP and mainstream Jewish organizations were doing their best to minimize associations with communism. (Jews were the backbone of the Communist Party USA, and the CPUSA agitated on behalf of black causes. It was common for southerners to rail against Jews while exempting southern Jews from their accusations: “We have only the high-type Jew here, not like the kikes in New York.” Read more