Bernard-Henri Lévy on Wars and Anti-Nationalism: It’s Judaism, Stupid!

/22 Comments/in /by

levy

I cannot think of a Jew who has done more to promote “anti-Semitism” in recent years than Bernard-Henri Lévy. He seems to be completely unselfconscious and oblivious to what he is doing.

The latest example has been Lévy’s going on French radio to promote his most recent book, “on which [he] has been working for 20 years,” called L’Esprit du Judaïsme (The Spirit of Judaism). Lévy’s books don’t sell and are even mocked as inane and narcissistic in mainstream Anglo-American media. And yet, The Spirit of Judaism is already enjoying a cover story in L’Express magazine. L’Express incidentally has a circulation of almost half a million and incidentally is owned by his fellow Zionist and co-ethnic Patrick Drahi.

Enjoying systematic promotion in the mass media despite his evident nullity, Lévy has for years been the visible tip of the iceberg of the influence of ethnocentric Jewish networks in France. For many, he has been the spark to their awakening to the Jewish question.

Lévy has made a number of surreal tweets summarizing his talking points on the radio show — the usual warmongering and hypocritically anti-French-nationalist statements — followed by the hashtag #SpiritofJudaism to promote the book. He is thus openly suggesting, in a shockingly unselfconscious way, that his evil views derive from his Judaic ideology.

Hence Judaism is anti-nationalism (for non-Jews):

“It is universalism which I am defending in this book. #SpiritofJudaism”

Read more

L’Holocauste au Service de l’Immigration musulmane

/in /by

Original article: Using the Moral Capital of the Holocaust to Promote Muslim Migration

Article d’origine publié le 29 janvier 2016

Traduction: Blog Blanche Europe

Il était évident que la candidature de Donald Trump allait provoquer une avalanche d’hostilité médiatique, et nous avions déjà eu droit à de nombreuses comparaisons de Trump avec Hitler. Mais maintenant, à l’occasion de la Journée de Commémoration de l’Holocauste, ce sont les survivants de l’Holocauste qui s’en mêlent. Le chroniqueur Dana Milbank, du Washington Post, est un patriote juif qui a ses entrées dans les médias des élites. Philip Weiss écrivait à son sujet :

L’explication [de l’influence du Lobby pro-israélien] ne tient pas à une conspiration des donateurs financiers. Même si, naturellement, les donateurs sont importants. Le problème vient de la forte influence du sionisme au sein de l’establishment américain. Il y a une conviction sincère parmi les Juifs influents comme Dana Milbank, Alan Dershowitz, et Matt Dorf, que la création d’Israël représentait le salut des Juifs au terme de leur histoire européenne tragique, et que les Juifs américains sont des alliés à part entière qui rendent possible ce salut des Juifs. C’est une façon de voir sincère et profondément ancrée chez de nombreux Juifs, politiciens, journalistes, donateurs, dirigeants de think tanks, dont beaucoup sont des libéraux [NdT: c-à-d des gens de gauche].

Read more

Rape Jihad: Dark Days for Europe (Part 2 of 2)

/90 Comments/in , /by

Part 1

Part 2

refugees

“There is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That’s a 19th century idea and we are trying to transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multi-ethnic states.”  – Retired General Wesley Clark 

Here are a few disquieting facts and figures that tell their own tale.

Going on the available 2009 figures—the figures are far higher now in 2016—the total number of foreign citizens living in Europe is roughly 32 millions. More than half of these (16.8 million) live in three European countries: Germany, Spain and the UK. Germany comes out top of the list with 7.2 million, yet the out-of-touch Angela Merkel is happy to take in more, seemingly impervious to logic and facts. The horrific sexual assaults of over 600 German women in Cologne on New Year’s Eve has left Merkel seemingly unmoved. Spain is second in Europe’s Top of the Pops for foreign citizens flooding in, with 5.6 million immigrants, and the UK comes in third with just over 4 million. (See here)

LONDON, ‘THE CITY OF DREADFUL NIGHT’

As for the UK, London, the nation’s bustling capital city of 8.6 million people, contains only 44.9 percent White Britons. Another 14.9 percent here are classified as ‘Other Whites’, with large numbers from Poland, Hungary, Rumania and elsewhere. 44 per cent of Londoners are now Black or of some other non-White ethnic origin. Almost every face you see in Oxford Street, London, is non-White. Occasionally a white face will pop into view, a face generally looking flustered and alarmed. In 15 years’ time, by 2031, the number of foreigners is set to outnumber the native Brits in London. Read more

Rape Jihad: Dark Days for Europe (Part 1 of 2)

/76 Comments/in , , /by

PART 1

Consider these questions:

Do you help to solve the migrant rape crisis in Europe by eating pork, growing beards, and parading round the streets in miniskirts when you’re a man? Does it make sense to give “flirtation lessons” to the same migrants who are sexually assaulting European women in ever increasing numbers? Is it wise to help hostile migrants to “integrate” by giving them target-practice training, turning them into first-class snipers?

These are some of the more surrealistic aspects of the migrant rape crisis in Europe which I hope to cover in this 2-part essay.

MerkelLD

ANGELA MERKEL, dressed in a Muslim headscarf — the woman most often blamed for the migrant crisis in Europe

Consumed with Holocaust guilt and possessed by the demons of pathological altruism, German Chancellor Angela Merkel has handed over her country to the endless hordes of the Third World. “Let them come . . . we can look after them all,” she murmurs serenely, echoing the words of the altruists all over Europe bearing placards that scream: “REFUGEES WELCOME!”

Merkel is an interesting case history: the guilt-ridden, traumatized leader of a deeply traumatized nation. Her way of handling the migrant crisis in Germany is not so much a stupendous example of pathological altruism at work as a symbolic act of self-flagellation on behalf of the German people, all of them engaged in varying degrees of self-flagellation over the Holocaust.

“The culture of the Holocaust is destroying Germany, ” Brenton Sanderson notes in a thought-provoking 3-part article in the Occidental Observer. “Endlessly reinforced over decades by the intellectual and media elite, the notion that Germans and their descendants are responsible for “the single most evil event in human history” has had such a demoralizing effect that millions fully support Angela Merkel’s current attempt to destroy the ethnic basis of their nation.”

To understand  these words is to grasp the root cause of Germany’s suicidal approach to the migrant crisis. Letting Germany be destroyed, the entire ethnic basis of the nation expunged, can be seen for what it is: a collective act of atonement for the Holocaust. Read more

Review: Nietzsche’s Jewish Problem [Part Two of Two]

/80 Comments/in , /by
Friedrich-Nietzsche-und-Richard-Wagner

Nietzsche and Wagner

Go to Part One

Was Nietzsche bold or stupid? As stated above, I don’t think he quite fully grasped the scale of the ethnic conflict subtly playing out in Germany at that time, or the sheer power already enjoyed by Jews. For someone of his (then lowly) position, his 1872 lecture appears to me as a step too soon. Wagner had of course taken even further steps against Jewish influence — but the older man possessed significantly more stature and legitimacy. Nietzsche sent his lecture notes to Wagner on February 4, and the composer replied cautiously. Wagner, who was fully aware of the damage that could be wrought by Jews on lone targets like himself, responded: “I say to you: that’s the way it is. … But I am concerned about you, and wish with my entire heart that you don’t ruin yourself.” Cosima, Wagner’s wife, also wrote to Nietzsche expressing concern. Starting by citing Goethe (‘Everything significant is uncomfortable’), she said that his ‘boldness’ and ‘bluntness’ surprised her. In a later letter she makes her concerns more explicit, stating that she wanted him to take some “maternal” advice so that he should “avoid stirring up a hornet’s nest” :

Do you really understand me? Don’t mention the Jews, and especially not en passant; later, when you want to take up this gruesome fight, in the name of God, but not at the very outset, so that on your path you won’t have all this confusion and upheaval. I hope you don’t misunderstand me: you know that in the depths of my soul I agree with your utterance. But not now and not in this way.

According to Cosima’s diaries, Nietzsche was summoned to a meeting with her and Wagner on February 12 to discuss the lecture. We can only speculate at what precisely was said, but Nietzsche dropped the Jewish reference from the published version of his lecture and nothing similar to it would ever again appear in his speeches or published writings. He would continue to attack the evils of the press, newspapers, financial affairs, the stock exchange, modernity, urban life, and cosmopolitanism — but he would never again mention them in conjunction with Jews or Judaism. Holub argues that the episode taught Nietzsche that he should not mention the Jews by name and certainly not attack them in print. He would thereafter adopt the same ‘cultural code’ that many anti-Jewish intellectuals were forced to utilize as a means of fighting the culture war without being labelled ‘anti-Semitic.’ Read more

Review: Nietzsche’s Jewish Problem [Part One of Two]

/70 Comments/in , /by

 nietzsches-jewish-problem

‘Wagner himself asserts about Nietzsche that a flower could have come from this bulb. Now only the bulb remains, really a loathsome thing.’
Cosima Wagner, 1878.

Friedrich Nietzsche’s puzzling stance on Jews and Judaism has perplexed me for the better part of a decade, so I was intrigued and optimistic about Princeton University Press’s 2015 publication of Robert Holub’s Nietzsche’s Jewish Problem: Between Anti-Semitism and Anti-Judaism. Broadly speaking, I’m sympathetic to certain elements of Nietzsche’s philosophy, particularly its rejection of equality and the concept of the ‘will to power.’ However, I can’t say I ever came close to describing myself as a ‘Nietzschean’ in the same way that the late Jonathan Bowden was fond of doing. One of the reasons for my hesitation in claiming affinity with Nietzsche’s worldview was that I couldn’t escape the impression that its nihilism was often destructive ‘for the sake of it,’ a quality that has endeared it to the Left, past and present. Then there was Nietzsche’s, to my mind unforgivable, habit of lauding the Hebrew over the German. More importantly though, I couldn’t perceive any true coherence or solidity in Nietzsche’s writing beyond his celebrated aphorisms. Taken as a whole, the philosophy of Nietzsche was apt to strike me as too intentionally fluid; too deliberately open to interpretation. Nowhere was this non-committal stance more apparent than in Nietzsche’s sparse, vague, contradictory and often quite opportunistic references to Jews and Judaism.

As one might expect of a philosopher as enigmatic as Nietzsche, his work has been approached awkwardly and suspiciously by scholars and ideologues alike. His attitudes towards Jews, in particular, have been debated, discussed and fought over from the very beginning of his public career. Nowhere, and at no time, was a consensus ever reached. During the Third Reich he was both ‘recruited for the cause’ by some, and rejected outright by others. His foundational place in the National Socialist philosophical canon was thus never assured, primarily because of his nihilism, his hostility towards Nationalism, and his ambivalence regarding Jews. Confusion still reigns. Modern scholarship has been divided between those who condemn Nietzsche outright as a ‘racist’ reactionary and a proto-Fascist, and those who highlight his vocal opposition to political anti-Semitism as thus seek his social exoneration and academic rehabilitation. As noted above, elements of Nietzsche remain strongly attractive to the Left. Therefore, where total exoneration of anti-Semitism has been found difficult, blame for ‘corrupting’ Nietzsche and shaping him as an ‘anti-Semite’ has been attributed variously to his one-time guru, Richard Wagner, or his sister Elisabeth, who married Bernhard Förster, perhaps the leading figure in nineteenth-century political anti-Semitism. The result of these battles has not been a clarification of the historical record, but an ever-thickening web of biased interpretations, white-washing, and pseudo-history. Read more

Using the Moral Capital of the Holocaust to Promote Muslim Migration

/60 Comments/in , /by

It has always been obvious that Donald Trump’s candidacy would result in a barrage of hostile media, and there have already been numerous comparisons of Trump to Hitler. But now, coinciding with Holocaust Remembrance Day, we get Holocaust survivors chiming in. The Washington Post‘s Dana Milbank is a Jewish patriot with access to the elite media, of whom Philip Weiss wrote:

The answer [for why the Israel Lobby is so powerful] is not a conspiracy of donors. Though, yes, donors matter. The answer is the importance of Zionism inside the US establishment. It is the sincere belief among empowered Jews like Dana Milbank, Alan Dershowitz, and Matt Dorf that the establishment of Israel was the redemptive end point of a tragic European Jewish history, and that American Jews are equal partners in the fulfillment of that redemption. This is a sincere, core belief on the part of countless Jewish politicians, journalists, donors and thinktank officials, many of them liberals.

And, from Milbank’s perspective, in order to redeem that tragic Jewish history, it is important to derail Trump’s candidacy by invoking the “moral authority” of holocaust survivors. Milbank:

This year’s Holocaust remembrance comes at a time when Donald Trump, the front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination, retweets to his nearly 6 million followers a message from @WhiteGenocideTM based in “Jewmerica,” and a time when his nearest challenger, Ted Cruz, brandishes the endorsement of a minister who says Hitler was a “hunter” sent after the Jews by God. There has never been a more important time for Americans to heed the moral authority of the Holocaust survivors still among us. …

This refers to this retweet by Trump:

I guess Milbank’s idea is that by retweeting someone, you are also endorsing all of his ideas, and therefore Trump is evil. But let’s face it, it’s a funny tweet, and I rather doubt that Trump vetted @WhiteGenocide. Still, it’s encouraging that Trump did not just chuckle and move on when he saw that Twitter tag.

Read more