Why Are Jews So Influential?

/40 Comments/in , /by

Jewish populations have always had enormous effects on the societies in which they reside because of several qualities that are central to the Jewish group evolutionary strategy and likely have been under genetic selection in Ashkenazi Jewish groups: First and foremost, Jews are ethnocentric and able to cooperate in highly organized, cohesive, and effective groups. Also important is high intelligence, including the usefulness of intelligence in attaining wealth, prominence in the media, and eminence in the academic world and the legal profession. I will also discuss two other qualities that have received less attention: psychological intensity and aggressiveness, and finally mention the Jewish guru phenomenon.

The four background traits of ethnocentrism, intelligence and wealth, psychological intensity, aggressiveness, along with strong charismatic leadership result in Jews being able to produce formidable, effective groups—groups able to have powerful, transformative effects on the peoples they live among. In the post-Enlightenment world, these traits influence the academic world and the world of mainstream and elite media, thus amplifying Jewish effectiveness compared with traditional societies. However, even before the Enlightenment Jews have repeatedly become an elite and powerful group in societies in which they reside in sufficient numbers.

It is remarkable that Jews, usually as a tiny minority, have been central to a long list of historical events. Jews were much on the mind of the Church Fathers in the fourth century during the formative years of Christian dominance in the West. Indeed, I have proposed that the powerful anti-Jewish attitudes and legislation of the fourth-century Church must be understood as a defensive reaction against Jewish economic power and enslavement of non-Jews.[1] Jews who had nominally converted to Christianity but maintained their ethnic ties in marriage and commerce were the focus of the 250-year Inquisition in Spain, Portugal, and the Spanish colonies in the New World. Fundamentally, the Inquisition should be seen as a defensive reaction to the economic and political domination of these “New Christians.”[2]

Nineteenth-century critics of Jews typically complained about Jewish influence in the media and Jewish wealth that often made traditional Western aristocratic elites subservient to them, and, like Richard Wagner, they complained about Jewish influence on culture.[3] Jews have also been central to all the important events of the twentieth century. Jews were a necessary component of the Bolshevik revolution that created the Soviet Union and willing participants of horrendous mass murders of its early decades, and they remained an elite group in the Soviet Union until well after World War II.[4] They were a central focus of National Socialism in Germany, in part because of the Jewish role in Bolshevism, and they have been prime movers of the post-1965 cultural and multicultural/multiethnic revolution in the United States, including the encouragement of massive non-White immigration to countries of European origin.[5] In the contemporary world, organized American Jewish lobbying groups and deeply committed neoconservative Jews in the Bush administration and the media had a critical role in fomenting wars that benefit Israel, and now neocon Jews in the Biden administration have established the all-out support for Ukraine against Russia and  Israel against Hamas. Right now the ADL is leading the campaign to expunge social media of ideas they don’t like, particularly on X (Twitter), and Jewish billionaires are blacklisting students and withholding funds from universities if they don’t express enthusiastic support for Israel.[6] Indeed, I would say that we are once again witnessing an incredible display of Jewish power in the U.S.

How can such a tiny minority have such huge effects on the history of the West? I will not discuss the role of Western individualism in facilitating Jewish influence.[7] We tend to see people as individuals, as in the ideology of colorblind meritocracy so common among mainstream conservatives.

Jews are Ethnocentric

Elsewhere I have argued that Jewish ethnocentrism can be traced back to their Middle Eastern origins.[8] Traditional Jewish culture has a number of features identifying Jews with the ancestral cultures of the area. The most important of these is that Jews and other Middle Eastern cultures evolved under circumstances that favored large groups dominated by males.[9] These groups were basically extended families with high levels of endogamy (i.e., marriage within the kinship group) and consanguineous marriage (i.e., marriage to blood relatives), including the uncle-niece marriage sanctioned in the Old Testament. These features are exactly the opposite of Western European tendencies.

Whereas Western societies tend toward individualism, the basic Jewish cultural form is collectivism, in which there is a strong sense of group identity and group boundaries, and moral particularism represented by the phrase “Is it good for the Jews.” In Jewish religious writings, non-Jews had no moral standing and could be exploited at will as long as doing so didn’t harm the entire group. Middle Eastern societies are characterized by anthropologists as “segmentary societies” organized into relatively impermeable, kinship-based groups.[10] Group boundaries are often reinforced through external markers such as hair style or clothing, as Jews have often done throughout their history. Different groups settle in different areas where they retain their homogeneity alongside other homogeneous groups, as illustrated by the following account from Carleton Coon:

There the ideal was to emphasize not the uniformity of the citizens of a country as a whole but a uniformity within each special segment, and the greatest possible contrast between segments. The members of each ethnic unit feel the need to identify themselves by some configuration of symbols. If by virtue of their history they possess some racial peculiarity, this they will enhance by special haircuts and the like; in any case they will wear distinctive garments and behave in a distinctive fashion.[11]

Jews are at the extreme of this Middle Eastern tendency toward collectivism and ethnocentrism. I give many examples of Jewish ethnocentrism in my trilogy on Judaism—perhaps most notably ethnic networking that was so important to The Culture of Critique—and have argued in several places that Jewish ethnocentrism is biologically based.[12]

A good start for thinking about Jewish ethnocentrism is the work of Israel Shahak, most notably his co-authored Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel.[13] Present-day fundamentalists attempt to re-create the life of Jewish communities before the Enlightenment (i.e., prior to about 1750). During this period the great majority of Jews believed in the Kabbala—the Jewish mystical tradition. Influential Jewish scholars like Gershom Scholem ignored the obvious racialist, exclusivist material in the Kabbalistic literature by using words like “men,” “human beings,” and “cosmic” to suggest the Kabbala has a universalist message. The actual texts say salvation is only for Jews, while non-Jews have “Satanic souls.”[14]

The ethnocentrism apparent in such statements was not only the norm in traditional Jewish society, but remains a powerful current of contemporary Jewish fundamentalism, with important implications for Israeli politics. For example, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, describing the difference between Jews and non-Jews:

We do not have a case of profound change in which a person is merely on a superior level. Rather we have a case of…a totally different species…. The body of a Jewish person is of a totally different quality from the body of [members] of all nations of the world…. The difference of the inner quality [of the body]…is so great that the bodies would be considered as completely different species. This is the reason why the Talmud states that there is an halachic difference in attitude about the bodies of non-Jews [as opposed to the bodies of Jews]: “their bodies are in vain”…. An even greater difference exists in regard to the soul. Two contrary types of soul exist, a non-Jewish soul comes from three satanic spheres, while the Jewish soul stems from holiness.[15]

These people and secular ethono-nationalists who have basically the same ideas are firmly in charge in Israel, leading to a long series of protests by liberal Jews in Israel and the US. There are a million more examples but in the interests of brevity I’ll leave it at that. Even a prominent Israel apologist like Thomas Friedman of the NYTimes recently wrote that the present government as a “far-right coalition of Jewish supremacists and ultra-Orthodox Jews.” But AIPAC still dominates Congress and the Executive branch, so there won’t be any changes soon.

From Mondoweiss:

When Rep. Jayapal called Israel a racist state in July, Democrats and Republicans leaped on her in a political feeding frenzy. They fell over each other to cash in on the defense of Israel, a state whose racism is not just obvious but a point of pride for many in its government. They immediately and overwhelmingly passed a resolution stating that “the State of Israel is not a racist or apartheid state.” Jayapal, of course, voted with the majority. The nine who voted against were all progressives who are atop the list of AIPAC’s most hated. It breezed through the Senate by unanimous consent.  Jayapal, of course, voted with the majority. The nine who voted against were all progressives who are atop the list of AIPAC’s most hated. It breezed through the Senate by unanimous consent.

Similar overwhelming support for Israel in the Gaza war passed the House of Representatives and it was unanimous in the Senate. Republicans and conservatives generally are especially supportive of Israel.

Same with conservative media. I am not sure why this is. Part of it is probably because a significant portion of their audiences are evangelicals who think Israel’s success will inaugurate the Second Coming of Jesus and the end times. It may also be their desire to gain legitimacy in a cultural environment that is completely dominated by the left which accuses anyone to the right of Mitt Romney of being a raving Nazi.

Ethnocentrism is responsive to particular environmental triggers, what evolutionists term “facultative mechanisms,” that is, mechanisms that can be triggered by external circumstances such as perceived threat. The phenomenon of a siege mentality has been mentality noted by many authors as typical of Jewish culture throughout history (see A People That Shall Dwell Alone, Ch. 7, pp. 218–219).

A permanent sense of imminent threat appears to be common among Jews. Writing on the clinical profile of Jewish families, Herz and Rosen (1982)[17] note that for Jewish families a “sense of persecution (or its imminence) is part of a cultural heritage and is usually assumed with pride. Suffering is even a form of sharing with one’s fellow-Jews. It binds Jews with their heritage–with the suffering of Jews throughout history.” Zborowski and Herzog (1952, 153)[18] note that the homes of wealthy Jews in traditional Eastern European shtetl communities sometimes had secret passages for use in times of anti-Semitic pogroms, and that their existence was “part of the imagery of the children who played around them, just as the half-effaced memory was part of every Jew’s mental equipment.” 

A good example is how American Jews reacted to the 1967 war. Silberman notes that around the time of the 1967 Arab/Israeli war, many Jews could identify with the statement of Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel that “I had not known how Jewish I was.”[19] Silberman comments that “This was the response, not of some newcomer to Judaism or casual devotee but of the man whom many, myself included, consider the greatest Jewish spiritual leader of our time.” Many others made the same surprising discovery about themselves: Arthur Hertzberg wrote that “the immediate reaction of American Jewry to the crisis was far more intense and widespread than anyone could have foreseen. Many Jews would never have believed that grave danger to Israel could dominate their thoughts and emotions to the exclusion of everything else.”[20]

The current war in Gaza is no exception. Haredim, who usually avoid military service in order to devote their lives to study, are enlisting in the IDF and J Street, the liberal Zionist lobby is issuing context-free condemnations of Hamas. It’s the same with the Jewish faculty at my former university — liberals all and oblivious to the role of Israeli behavior in producing Palestinian hatred, but horrified that someone would tear down a poster of a Jewish hostage posted in a university building and trumpeting calls for free speech. (Where have they been in condemning the ADL’s pivotal role in censoring free speech on social media? Somehow I don’t think it’s an accident that I and a couple of my brothers-in-arms have been banned from X after Musk took over and is doing his best to avoid the wrath of the powers that be.)  There are still voices like Jewish Voice of Peace and Mondoweiss that have long condemned Israeli policies toward the Palestinians, but they are definitely do not represent the vast majority of the power and money of the Jewish community in America.

This evolved response to external threat is often manipulated by Jewish authorities attempting to inculcate a stronger sense of group identification—for example, the messages of ever-increasing threat of anti-Semitism promulgated by the ADL — accompanied by pleas for donations.

Bar-Tal et al. (1992) note that 

not surprisingly, Siege Mentality is related to Ethnocentrism. The belief that the world has negative intentions towards the group indicates its evil, malice, and aggressiveness. In this context, the group not only feels victimized and self-righteous, but also superior to the out-group.[21]

Jews Are Intelligent (and Wealthy)

The vast majority of American Jews are Ashkenazi Jews. This is a very intelligent group, with an average IQ of approximately 111 with a particular strength in verbal IQ. Since verbal IQ is the best predictor of occupational success and upward mobility in contemporary societies, it is not surprising that Jews are an elite group in the United States. Intelligence, as well as the other traits discussed here, were likely under genetic selection in traditional Ashkenazi societies because scholars were given marriages to the daughters of wealthy Jews and good business opportunities. Wealth and reproductive success were strongly linked at least prior to the nineteenth century.

Nevertheless, because of the demographic differences between Jews and White Americans, there are many more White Americans at any level of IQ required for upward mobility and leadership positions in American society. For example, at IQ of 140, there are five times as many White Americans as Jews. IQ is thus an insufficient explanation for Jewish influence.

Intelligence and ethnic networking are important for academic success, and in Chapters two and five of The Culture of Critique I showed that Jews and Jewish organizations led the intellectual effort to deny the importance of racial and ethnic differences in human affairs and to pathologize any sense of White identity or White interests. The Jewish role in creating the intellectual context of the 1965 immigration law relied on the success of the Boasian movement in anthropology in shaping academic views on race by dominating the American Anthropological Association since the 1920s. For example, historian of anthropology Gelya Frank noted “in message and purpose, [Boas’s anthropology] was an explicitly antiracist science.” This subverted the strong sense of race and racial interests that were prominent trends in academia and the mainstream media. Science is that lingua franca of the West, so the prestige of the Boasians was critical for their success.

Intelligence is also linked to wealth. Based on past results, Jews are probably around 35% of the wealthiest Americans, and that translates into a well-funded infrastructure of Jewish causes, from neocon think tanks to AIPAC to the ADL and political campaigns where the Democrat Party is basically funded by wealthy Jews and the Republican Jewish Coalition probably provides 40% of GOP donations aimed at supporting Israel and moving the GOP to the left on social issues. ADL Assets in 2021 were listed at $238,000,000; $62,000,000 in contributions. The national ADL, like the ACLU, the SPLC, the NAACP, and other so-called civil rights groups, is now merely a tax-exempt cadre of the Democratic Party and has gone all in on anti-White critical race theory, gender insanity, and opposition to any talk about the Great Replacement, claiming that the very idea is racist and anti-Semitic (while stating that Israel must retain its Jewish majority by controlling immigration and preventing Palestinians on the West Bank from voting). The ADL is a very prominent player in the censorship regime that pervades the left in the West. Right now the ADL is leading an aggressive campaign to expunge social media of ideas they don’t like, most famously on X (Twitter) so that Elon Musk is routinely labeled an anti-Semite in Jewish media and any mention of George Soros’s influence or calling out globalism is anti-Semitic. Because of their elite connections they have been able to pressure advertisers on Twitter, so that ad revenue is down 40% from pre-Musk days.

Intelligence is also evident in Jewish activism. Jews and Jewish organizations organized, led, funded, and performed most of the work of the most important anti-restrictionist organizations active from 1945–1965 and are still prominently involved. Jewish activism is like a full court press in basketball: intense pressure from every possible angle. But in addition to the intensity, Jewish efforts are very well organized, well-funded, and backed up by sophisticated, scholarly intellectual defenses. Intelligence and organization are also apparent in Jewish lobbying on behalf of Israel. Over thirty years ago US Defense Department official, noted that, “On all kinds of foreign policy issues the American people just don’t make their voices heard. Jewish groups are the exceptions. They are prepared, superbly briefed. They have their act together. It is hard for bureaucrats not to respond.”[22] At the time there was concern that the State Department remained a bastion of old school WASPs. Not a problem any longer, with neocons Anthony Blinken, Victoria Nuland, and Wendy Sherman firmly in charge of State.

Conscientiousness and Emotional Intensity

In Chapter 7 of my 1994 book on Judaism, I highlighted two personality traits of Jews, conscientiousness and emotional intensity. Both are heritable and quite likely under selection in traditional Jewish communities. Conscientiousness, which involves attention to detail, neatness, orderliness, striving for achievement, persistence toward goals in the face of difficulty, and the ability to focus attention and delay gratification is, along with IQ, linked to upward mobility. Social conscientiousness appears to be a sort of “don’t let down the group” trait, originally proposed by Darwin (1871) as the basis of group allegiance. Individuals high on this trait would be expected to feel intense guilt for having failed to fulfill their obligations to the group. Moreover, given the importance of conformity to group norms for Judaism, it would be expected that individuals who were low on this trait would be disproportionately inclined to abandon Judaism, while successful Jews who were the pillars of the community and thus epitomized the group ethic of Judaism would be disproportionately likely to be high on group conformity—and also likely to be reproductively successful in traditional societies. The result is that there would be strong selection pressures toward high levels of social conscientiousness within the Jewish community.

Conscientiousness was strongly emphasized in Jewish socialization. Thus, a child reared in a traditional Jewish home would have been socialized to continually monitor his/her behavior to ensure compliance with a vast number of restrictions—the vast number of commandments of the Ashkenazi religious writing. These are exactly the sorts of environmental influences expected to strengthen the conscientiousness system, what I call “system-specific environmental influences.”

Jews also tend to be high on the personality trait of affect intensity; i.e., they are prone to intense emotional experience of both positive and negative emotions.[23] Individuals high on affect intensity have more complex social networks and more complex lives, including multiple and even conflicting goals. They are prone to fast and frequent mood changes and lead varied and variable emotional lives. Clinically, affect intensity is related to cyclothymia (i. e., alternate periods of elation and depression), bipolar affective disorder (i.e., manic‑depressive psychosis), neurotic symptoms, and somatic complaints (nervousness, feeling uneasy, shortness of breath).

The common perception of Jewish and gentile psychiatric workers from the late nineteenth century until at least the end of the 1920s was that compared to gentiles, Ashkenazi Jews (and especially male Jews), had relatively sensitive, highly reactive nervous systems, thus making them more prone to the diagnoses of hysteria, manic‑depression, and neurasthenia (Gershon & Liebowitz 1975; Gilman 1993 92ff) and depression (men only). Gershon and Liebowitz note that 45 percent of 22 patients had bipolar affective disorder—about the same as in an Iraqi population—compared to 19 percent in a study of northern European populations. Within Israel, they cite an Israeli study (in Hebrew) that found that affective disorders were “much more prevalent” among Ashkenazi Jews than Sephardic Jews.[24] And a “preliminary” study found significantly more patients with affective psychoses and fewer with schizophrenia than among the non-Jews.[25] A study from 2000 found that in a sample of Israelis with bipolar disorder, the manic phase was “much more common in Israeli bipolar patients” than European and American populations (55 percent of the patients have illnesses characterized primarily by manias, 28 percent have approximately equal numbers of manias and depressions, and 17% suffer predominantly from depressions, but with no difference between Ashkenazi and Sephardic populations).[26]

I emphasize here that affect intensity is also linked to creativity and the manic phase of bipolar affective disorder which seems to be more common among Jews.[27] During episodes of mania the person has a grandiose self-image (“I am brilliant and can save the world if only people would listen to me”), goal-directed activity like obsessively working on a project all night, excessive involvement in pleasurable activity like buying sprees and sexual gratification, and racing thoughts which of course the manic person thinks are brilliant. The depressive part is just the opposite. But a lot of people may be high on emotionality but not meet the criteria for psychopathology. It’s easy to see that people moderately high on positive emotionality—hypomanic or normal but close to the manic range—would be high achievers; they would work persistently toward goals, and they would be very self-confident and with high self-esteem. Such people gravitate to leadership positions in whatever organization they are in. And it’s easy to see that they would become gurus, establishing a devoted following, like charismatic rabbis in traditional Jewish communities—Jewish gurus like Freud, Boas, Trotsky, etc. discussed in Culture of Critique.

For example, Albert Lindemann notes that many of Trotsky’s personality traits are stereotypically Jewish:

 If one accepts that anti-Semitism was most potently driven by anxiety and fear, as distinguished from contempt, then the extent to which Trotsky became a source of preoccupation for anti-Semites is significant. Here, too, Johnson’s [i.e., Paul John, author of A History of the Jews] words are suggestive: He writes of Trotsky’s “demonic power”—the same term, revealingly, used repeatedly by others in referring to Zinoviev’s oratory or Uritsky’s ruthlessness [Zinoviev and Uritsky were two other prominent early Bolsheviks]. Trotsky’s boundless self-confidence, his notorious arrogance, and sense of superiority were other traits often associated with Jews. Fantasies there were about Trotsky and other Bolsheviks, but there were also realities around which the fantasies grew. (Albert Lindemann, Esau’s Tears Modern Anti-Semitism and the Rise of the Jews (Cambridge University Press, 1997, 448)

The Trotskyist movement was a heavily Jewish milieu and much loved by my radical Jewish acquaintances in college. A prominent Trotskyist Max Shachtman

attracted young Jewish disciples—the familiar rabbi-disciple model of Jewish intellectual movements (here, p. 17–18): “Youngsters around Shachtman made little effort to hide their New York background or intellectual skills and tastes. Years later they could still hear Shachtman’s voice in one another’s speeches.”[28] To a much greater extent than the Communist Party U.S.A, which was much larger and was committed to following the Soviet line, the Trotskyists survived as a small group centered around charismatic leaders like Shachtman, who paid homage to the famous Trotsky. In the Jewish milieu of the movement, Shachtman was much admired as a speaker because of his ability in debate and in polemics. He became the quintessential Hasidic guru—the leader of a close, psychologically intense group: “He would hug and kiss [his followers]. He would pinch both their cheeks, hard, in a habit that some felt blended sadism and affection.”[29]

Another example is Leo Strauss, a cult figure for neocons and the quintessential rabbinical guru, with devoted disciples such as Allan Bloom. Gertrude Himmelfarb (1974, 61) noted: “There are many excellent teachers. They have students. Strauss had disciples.”[30] And Levine: “This group has the trappings of a cult. After all, there is a secret teaching and the extreme seriousness of those who are ‘initiates.’”[31] Strauss relished his role as a guru to worshiping disciples, once writing of “the love of the mature philosopher for the puppies of his race, by whom he wants to be loved in turn.”[32]

The psychoanalyst Fritz Wittels noted long ago: “The faithful disciples [of Freud] regard one another’s books as of no account. They recognize no authority but Freud’s; they rarely read or quote one another. When they quote it is from the Master, that they may give the pure milk of the word.”[33]

Affect intensity influences the tone and intensity of Jewish activism. Among Jews there is a critical mass that is intensely committed to Jewish causes—a sort of 24/7, “pull out all the stops” commitment that produces instant, massive responses on Jewish issues. Jewish activism has a relentless, never-say-die quality. This intensity goes hand in hand with the “slippery slope” style of arguing: Jewish activism is an intense response because even the most trivial manifestation of anti-Jewish attitudes or behavior is seen as inevitably leading to mass murder of Jews if allowed to continue.

In my 1994 book I noted the historical pattern of a paranoid, siege mentality and desire for revenge that pervaded traditional Jewish communities. Interviews with New Left Jewish radicals revealed that many had destructive fantasies in which the revolution would result in “humiliation, dispossession, imprisonment or execution of the oppressors”[34] combined with the belief in their own omnipotence and their ability to create a non-oppressive social order—clearly indicating high self-confidence and self-esteem. The trend is towards low self-criticism and what amounts to psychopathic levels of high self-esteem.

Jews Are Aggressive

Much of the previous is also about Jewish aggressiveness. Jews have always behaved aggressively toward those they have lived among, and they have been perceived as aggressive by their critics. Being aggressive and “pushy” is part of the stereotype of Jews in Western societies. Unfortunately, there is a dearth of scientific studies on this aspect of Jewish personality, but Hans Eysenck, renowned for his research on personality and Phil Rushton’s inspiration on race differences, claims that Jews are indeed rated more aggressive by people who know them well.

In early twentieth-century America, the sociologist Edward A. Ross commented on a greater tendency among Jewish immigrants to maximize their advantage in all transactions, ranging from Jewish students badgering teachers for higher grades poor Jews attempting to get more than the usual charitable allotment. “No other immigrants are so noisy, pushing and disdainful of the rights of others as the Hebrews.”

The authorities complain that the East European Hebrews feel no reverence for law as such and are willing to break any ordinance they find in their way…. The insurance companies scan a Jewish fire risk more closely than any other [Jewish lightening]. Credit men say the Jewish merchant is often “slippery” and will “fail” in order to get rid of his debts. For lying the immigrant has a very bad reputation. In the North End of Boston “the readiness of the Jews to commit perjury has passed into a proverb.”

Albert Lindemann in his Esau’s Tears noted the same about Jewish perjury in Czarist Russia.

These characteristics have at times been noted by Jews themselves. In a survey commissioned by the American Jewish Committee’s study of the Jews of Baltimore in 1962, “two-thirds of the respondents admitted to believing that other Jews are pushy, hostile, vulgar, materialistic, and the cause of anti-Semitism. And those were only the ones who were willing to admit it.”[1]

[1] Yaffe 1968, 73. Yaffe embeds this comment in a discussion of self-hating Jews—implying that Jews are simply accepting stereotypes that are the fantasies of bigoted non-Jews.

Jews were unique as an American immigrant group in their hostility toward American Christian culture and in their energetic, aggressive efforts to change that culture. From the perspective of Henry Ford’s The International Jew, the United States had imported around 3.5 million mainly Yiddish-speaking, intensely ethnocentric Jewish immigrants over the previous forty years. In that very short period and long prior to achieving anything like the power they obtained after World War II and the 1960s counter-cultural revolution, Jews had had enormous effect on American society, particularly in their attempts to remove expressions of Christianity from public life beginning with an attempt in 1899–1900 to remove the word “Christian” from the Virginia Bill of Rights. Ford’s outlet, the Dearborn Independent stated “The Jews’ determination to wipe out of public life every sign of the predominant Christian character of the US is the only active form of religious intolerance in the country today.”

A prototypical example of Jewish aggressiveness toward American culture has been Jewish advocacy of liberal immigration policies which have had a transformative effect on the US. As noted in Culture of Critique:

In undertaking to sway immigration policy in a liberal direction, Jewish spokespersons and organizations demonstrated a degree of energy unsurpassed by any other interested pressure group. Immigration had constituted a prime object of concern for practically every major Jewish defense and community relations organization. Over the years, their spokespersons had assiduously attended congressional hearings, and the Jewish effort was of the utmost importance in establishing and financing such non-sectarian groups as the National Liberal Immigration League and the Citizens Committee for Displaced Persons.

The epitome of Jewish aggression is their long crusade as a tiny minority to alter the ethnic balance of the U.S. in order to prevent the sort of mass movement that occurred in Germany in the 1930s. There are many such statements by Jewish activists, but the most recent one I have found is from  Boston Globe writer S. I. Rosenbaum who claimed in 2019 that the main lesson of “the Holocaust” is “that white supremacy could turn on us at any moment,” and that the strategy of appealing to the White majority “has never worked for us. It didn’t protect us in Spain, or England, or France, or Germany. There’s no reason to think it will work now.” The central question of Jewish political engagement in Western societies, she insisted, is “how we survive as a minority population,” where the one great advantage American Jewry enjoys is that “unlike other places where ethno-nationalism has flourished, the U.S. is fast approaching a plurality of minorities.” Presiding over a coalition of non-Whites groups to actively oppose White interests is the new Jewish ethno-political imperative: “If Jews are going to survive in the future, we will have to stand with people of color for our mutual benefit.”

In their 2023 book Anglophobia Harry Richardson and Frank Salter note that Jewish organizations have taken a leadership role in promoting multiculturalism and immigration in Australia, for example by making alliances with more poorly organized, less motivated ethnic groups. This leadership phenomenon also occurs in the US, where Jewish organizations have made alliances with a wide variety of non-White ethnic activist organizations.

Charges of anti-Semitism and guilt over the Holocaust are not the only instruments of Jewish aggressiveness. Jewish groups intimidate their enemies by a variety of means. People who oppose policies on Israel advocated by Jewish activist organizations have been fired and blacklisted from their jobs, harassed with letters, subjected to intrusive surveillance, and threatened with death. Although there is a great deal of self-censorship in the media on Israel as a result of the major role of Jews in the ownership and production of the media, gaps in this armor are aggressively closed. Paul Findley noted over 30 years ago that there are “threats to editors and advertising departments, orchestrated boycotts, slanders, campaigns of character assassination, and personal vendettas”[35]—a phenomenon that, as noted above, is ongoing.

Conclusion

The current situation in the United States is the result of an awesome deployment of Jewish power and influence. One must contemplate the fact that American Jews have managed to maintain unquestioned support for Israel since the 1967 war despite Israel’s seizing land and engaging in a brutal occupation of the Palestinians in the occupied territories—an apartheid occupation that will most likely end with expulsion or complete subjugation and degradation of the Palestinians. During this same period Jewish organizations in America have been a principal force—in my view the main force—for erecting a state dedicated to suppressing ethnic identification among Europeans, for encouraging massive multi-ethnic immigration into the US, and for erecting a legal system and cultural ideology that is obsessively sensitive to the complaints and interests of ethnic minorities: the culture of the Holocaust. All this is done without a whisper of double standards in the aboveground media.

The American Jewish community is well organized and lavishly funded. It has achieved a great deal of power, and it has been successful in achieving its interests. One of the great myths often promulgated by Jewish apologists is that Jews have no consensus and therefore cannot wield any real power. Yet there is in fact a great deal of consensus on broad Jewish issues, particularly in the areas of Israel and the welfare of other foreign Jewries, immigration and refugee policy, church-state separation, abortion rights, and civil liberties. Massive changes in public policy on these issues, beginning with the counter-cultural revolution of the 1960s, coincide with the period of increasing Jewish power and influence in the United States. Indeed, one is hard-pressed to find any significant area where public policy conflicts with the attitudes of mainstream Jewish organizations.

[1] Kevin MacDonald, Separation and Its Discontents, Ch. 3.

[2] Ibid, Ch. 4.

[3] Kevin MacDonald, “Historical Writing on Judaism and Anti-Semitism; Review of Classic Essays on the Jewish Question, 1850–1945, edited by Thomas Dalton,” The Occidental Quarterly 23, no, 2 (Spring, 2023): 85–112.

[4] Kevin MacDonald, “Stalin’s Willing Executioners: Jews as a Hostile Elite in the USSR. Review of Yuri Slezkine’s The Jewish Century.  Princeton University Press. The Occidental Quarterly, 5(3), 65-100.

[5] Kevin MacDonald, The Culture of Critique.

[6] https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2023/10/29/at-the-end-of-the-day-its-all-about-the-benjamins/

[7] Kevin MacDonald, Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition.

[8] A People that Shall Dwell Alone, ch. 8; The Culture of Critique, Preface.

[9] Burton et al. 1996.

[10] E.g., Coon 1958, 153; Eickelman 1981, 157–74.

[11] Coon 1958, 153.

[12] A People That Shall Dwell Alone, ch. 8; Separation and its Discontents, ch. 1.

[13] Shahak and Mezvinsky 1999.

[14] Shahak and Mezvinsky 1999, 58.

[15] In Shahak and Mezvinsky 1999, 59–60.

[16]

[17] Herz, F. M., & E. J. Rosen (1982). Jewish families. In Ethnicity and Family Therapy, ed. M. McGoldrick, J. K. Pearce, & J. Giordano. New York: The Guilford Press.

[18] Zborowski, M., & E. Herzog (1952). Life Is with People: The Jewish Little-Town of Eastern Europe. New York: International Universities Press.

[19] In Charles Silberman (1985). A Certain People: American Jews and Their Lives Today. New York: Summit Books, 184; emphasis in original.

[20] Hertzberg, A. (1979). Being Jewish in America. New York: Schocken Books, 210.

[21] Daniel Bar-Tal, Dikla Antebi, “Beliefs about Negative Intentions of the World: A Study of the Israeli Siege Mentality,” Political Psychology, 13, no. 4 (December, 1992), 633–645, 643.

[22] Kevin MacDonald, “Background Traits for Jewish Activism,” The Occidental Quarterly 3, no. 2 (Summer 2003(, 5–38.

[23] Larsen, R. J., & Diener, E. (1992). Problems and promises with the circumplex model of emotion. Review of Personality and Social Psychology, 13, 25–59.

[24] Kalman, G., Maoz, B., & Yaffe, R. (1970). Demographic survey of an open psychiatric hospital. Briut Ziburi (Public Health), Jerusalem 13, 67, 1970 (in Hebrew).

[25] Cooklin, R., Ravindran, A., & Carney, M. (1983). The patterns of mental disorder in Jewish and non-Jewish admissions to a district general hospital psychiatric unit: Is manic-depressive illness a typically Jewish disorder? Psychological Medicine, 13(1), 209-212. doi:10.1017/S0033291700050236

[26] Y. Osher, Y. Yaroslavsky, R. El-Rom, & R. H. Belmaker, (2000). Predominant Polarity of Bipolar Patients in Israel. Biological Psychiatry 1, 187–189, 187.

[27] Tucker, D. M., K. Vanatta, & J. Rothlind (1990). Arousal and activation systems and primitive adaptive controls on cognitive priming. In Psychological and Biological Approaches to Emotion, ed. S. L. Stein, B. Leventhal, & T. Trabasso. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

[28] Drucker, P. (1994). Max Shachtman and His Left: A Socialist’s Odyssey through the “American Century” (Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press International), 43.

[29] Ibid.

[30] Himmelfarb, M. (1974). On Leo Strauss, Commentary 58 (August), 60–66.

[31] Levine, D. L. (1994). “Without malice but with forethought,” in Kenneth L. Deutsch & Walter Nicgorski (eds.), Leo Strauss: Political Philosopher and Jewish Thinker. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc, 354.

[32] Ibid.

[33] Wittels, F. (1924). Sigmund Freud: His Personality, His Teaching, & His School, trans. E. and C. Paul. (London: George Allen & Unwin), 143.

[34] Cohen, P. S. (1980). Jewish Radicals and Radical Jews. London: Academic Press, 1980, 208).

[35] Findley, P. 1989. They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israel’s Lobby, 2nd ed. Chicago: Lawrence Hill Books, 296.

Precious Jews, Worthless Whites: How Murder, Torture, and Rape Only Matter in Far-Off Israel

/20 Comments/in /by

Here are two stories from modern London. A pair of Blacks are found guilty of torturing and murdering an elderly White woman, who was almost certainly raped by one of the Blacks before the murder. At the same time, a pair of Blacks are filmed ripping down posters of kidnapped Jews. Can you guess which pair of Blacks have generated more anguished commentary and hand-wringing about the moral degradation of 21st-century Britain?

Compare pairs: Torturers and murderers versus poster-rippers

Well, you won’t need to guess: it was the poster-rippers, of course, not the murderers and torturers. In fact, the murderers and torturers have generated no anguished commentary and hand-wringing at all. Why should they? The vibrant Caribbean couple Xyaire Howard and Chelsea Grant committed their horrendous crimes against a White. No respectable person cares about non-Whites committing horrendous crimes against Whites. Torture? Murder? Rape? Yawn. But ripping down posters of kidnapped Jews? Now that’s serious. So is sticking an image of a paraglider to one’s clothing while attending a pro-Palestine rally. The pair of non-Whites who did that have also generated copious commentary and handwringing in the British media.

White victim of Black depravity

They were celebrating Hamas terrorism, you see. During the Hamas attacks against Israel, some terrorists descended on a music festival in paragliders to torture, murder, and rape Jews. And those are very serious crimes when they’re committed against Jews in far-off Israel. But not when they’re committed against an elderly White woman right here in Britain:

Susan Hawkey, yet another White victim of Black depravity

Sickening CCTV footage shows how a depraved murderer and his girlfriend went on a shopping spree with bank cards stolen from a wealthy pensioner that he had tied up and killed in her own home. Xyaire Howard, 23, and his girlfriend Chelsea Grant, 28, had robbed Susan Hawkey, 71, in the street and then continued to prey on her in her own home. Howard bound Mrs Hawkey with tape and his shoelaces and forced her to reveal her PIN number.

Mrs Hawkey was then strangled to death with another shoelace. Howard left the body to rot under a duvet on her living room floor and the couple spent the next three weeks emptying £13,000 from her bank account.

Ms Hawkey lived alone and was often seen shuffling to the shops near her home in Aylesbury Road, Neasden, in her red duffel coat and Ugg boots, often pulling her shopping trolley behind her. … Ms Hawkey’s body was discovered on September 26 when a concerned neighbour noticed she had not put her bins out.

Police found Ms Hawkey lying on a sofa underneath a duvet. She had been bound, blindfolded with tape and still had a shoelace around her neck. “All of her lower clothing, that is her trousers and underwear had been removed – all she was wearing was a top and that top had been cut down the front,” said [the prosecutor Annabel Darlow]. …

“A used condom was found which contained Mr Howard’s semen and cellular material from Ms Grant – and that was found in the same room as her body together with an opened condom wrapper which bore Mr Howard’s finger prints. The ligature around Ms Hawkey’s neck had been tightened with sufficient force to break one of the bones in her neck. She was strangled by one of these defendants in an attack motivated purely by greed and self interest.” … The couple had been living in various addresses and were often thrown out for not paying the rent before they moved into a flat at Pit House, in Press Road in Neasden, two minutes away from where Ms Hawkey lived.

After seeing her in the street on her way to the convenience store they realised she would be “an ideal victim.” Grant first mugged her on July 27 last year, wrenching her bag from her shoulder. A few weeks later on August 22 the couple knocked her to the ground near her home. On both occasions Ms Hawkey’s bank card was taken and Howard was able find out her balance because after the second mugging he bragged to a contact on Instagram: “Yo I copped a card bro. 16k is on this ting.”

A used condom containing traces of Howard’s semen and DNA from both Grant and the victim was found next to the body. Grant claimed her DNA was on the condom because they had sex regularly and her boyfriend never showered. Ms Hawkey’s body was found with her trousers and underwear removed. It was suggested during the trial that cannabis addict Howard may have had sex with Ms Hawkey before he strangled her to death. Howard admitted tying her up with tape but claimed he left her alive and well. His barrister suggested flies settling on the corpse may have transferred Ms Hawkey’s DNA to the condom. … (Sickening CCTV shows murderer and his girlfriend on shopping spree with bank cards stolen from pensioner, 71, he had tied up and killed in her own home, The Daily Mail, 24th October 2023)

That is a truly horrible story, but the Daily Mail was being euphemistic about the full horror. When it said “Howard may have had sex with Ms Hawkey,” it meant “Howard almost certainly raped Ms Hawkey.” How else do you explain her DNA on the condom and the way she was found naked from the waist down? Well, Howard’s barrister had an explanation for the DNA: “flies settling on the corpse may have transferred Ms Hawkey’s DNA to the condom.” That is at once the most ridiculous and most repulsive legal argument I’ve ever seen. The Daily Mail was also euphemistic when it said that Howard “forced [Susan Hawkey] to reveal her PIN number.” It means that Howard tortured or terrorized her into revealing her PIN.

Ugly, stupid, and depraved

As you’d expect, the BBC did not mention the used condom or the “fly defense” in its fleeting coverage of the murder. It also referred to Howard as a “Neasden robber.” In fact, he and his girlfriend are from the island of St Vincent in the Caribbean. They’re prime exemplars of how Blacks excel at committing crimes that are both exceptionally depraved and exceptionally stupid. The police didn’t need the skills of Sherlock Holmes to crack this case. What was Howard thinking when he left a used condom at the scene of the murder he’d just committed? Well, to look at his exceptionally ugly and stupid-looking punim, I doubt that he was thinking at all. Like countless other Black criminals, he was just impulsively following his depraved instincts.

Ugly, stupid, and depraved: the Black murderer Xyaire Howard

But no-one in the mainstream media will point that out. In fact, leftists think it’s far worse for Whites to speak the truth about Black criminality than it is for Blacks to commit horrendous crimes against Whites. All orthodox leftists will be far more disgusted by a race-realist like me than by a Black criminal like Xyaire Howard. In fact, they won’t be disgusted by Black criminals like Howard at all. Howard didn’t commit his crimes against anyone who matters, so leftists simply don’t care. But no-one in the mainstream will condemn them for it. Indifference to White suffering is no offense.

Silence about similarity

But what about leftist indifference to Jewish suffering? That’s regarded as a very serious offence by many in the mainstream. For example, the hamster-wheels at Spiked Online have been humming furiously as Furedi’s fanatical freedom-fighters vie with each other to express “outrage at the sight of pro-Hamas demonstrations on the streets of European and American cities.” Yes, the devoted followers of the Jewish sociologist Frank Furedi might have abandoned overt Trotskyism, but their Trotskyist love of self-righteous posturing is as strong as ever. For example, this is Tom Slater, the Spiked editor, condemning the “disgusting bigotry of the poster-rippers”:

When you see a poster about a missing person, do you feel an overwhelming urge to tear it down? When you are confronted with the victims of a racist pogrom, do you think to yourself ‘ah, stop going on about it already’, and start telling everyone nearby to stop their blubbing?

Of course you don’t. Because you’re not a monster. But on the streets of London over the past two weeks an alarming number of people have been carrying on exactly like this, in response to a poster campaign aimed at highlighting the plight of the 200 predominantly Jewish Israelis who have been kidnapped by Hamas.

Jewish and Israeli activists have been putting posters up across central London and other cities. Each one bears the name and photo of an innocent man, woman or child who was taken by the anti-Semitic terrorists of Hamas two Saturdays ago. The aim seems to be to ensure that the world doesn’t forget about these missing civilians, whose devastated families currently fear the worst.

A humanistic, heartfelt initiative, you might think. Not according to the string of people who have been filmed ripping the posters off walls, defacing them and lecturing the Jewish activists who put them up about the supposed evils of Israel, in a series of sickeningly similar encounters that have now gone viral on social media. (The disgusting bigotry of the poster-rippers, Spiked Online, 20th October 2023)

“Sickeningly similar,” says Slater. He doesn’t, of course, mention one highly significant similarity in the poster-rippers: that almost all of these “disgusting bigots” have been non-White. Slater stayed quiet about that because he doesn’t want to face the truth: that Spiked and other friends of Israel are wailing about problems created by their own thoroughly Jewish ideology. Decade after decade, they and their Jewish friends have supported and celebrated Third-World migration into the West. Now they’re complaining about the inevitable consequences. Back in 2015, Brendan O’Neill, another of Furedi’s fanatical freedom-fighters, was talking like this about the same kind of people as he is now condemning:

Let them in: We shouldn’t demonise or infantilise African migrants. We should welcome them. … We shouldn’t pity these migrants; we should admire them, for using guile, gumption and perseverance to come here. They’re precisely the kind of people sluggish Europe needs more of, an antidote to our students who can’t even clap without having a mental breakdown and our new generation who think that being told to ‘get on your bike’ to look for a job is tantamount to abuse. Let’s relax the borders and let them in to try their luck in our countries and see how they fare. If we do that, we’ll put the traffickers out of business, end the deaths in the Mediterranean, and, more importantly, do our part to enable the aspirations of human beings who have committed no crime other than wanting to realise their potential in our towns, our cities, alongside us. (Let Them In, Spiked Online, 21st April 2015)

Well, large numbers of those admirably guileful and persevering migrants are certainly realising their potential now. They’re attending “pro-Hamas demonstrations” and ripping down posters of kidnapped Jews. Does Brendan still admire them for it? Alas, he doesn’t. Like Tom Slater, he’s written copiously in condemnation of the demonstrations and poster-ripping. But he hasn’t written a word about the torture and murder of Susan Hawkey by two depraved Blacks. The message from the pro-Israel mainstream is clear: Britain must protect its precious Jews and continue to ignore its worthless Whites.

Kiev Will Be Taken in Just Two More Weeks. … This Time For Sure!

/12 Comments/in /by
Time for yet another Slavlands Civil War recap
My last major recap was in March of this year.

Many events have occurred since then, but the overall situation has not changed much. Kiev + Washington continue to dictate the pace of this war and Moscow continues losing slowly and with as much face-saving grace as possible given the circumstances. Even saying this though is enough to provoke cries of consternation from both sides of the shill divide. This is because both sides have active, well-paid propagandists on the payroll who work around the clock to distort the truth of this war on account of the unflattering picture it paints of the political leadership of all parties concerned.

I liken this situation to both the USSR and the USSA’s insistence on promoting more-or-less the same narrative about the causes of and the conduct of the losing side during WWII. Perhaps a less controversial observation to make is the similarity of both countries’ recent responses to COVID — both Russia and the West did forced lockdowns, forced vaxes, and brutally shut down or even arrested opposition to the WEF agenda.

So, with all that in mind, we have the same situation unfolding with the ongoing “Two Week Special Policing Action Against Nazis in Brotherly Socialist Ukraine.” Both sides are lying and seem content to only combat the other side’s lies within a pre-arranged framework. Both sides refuse to disclose the truth behind the reasons for the war, how it is being conducted and what the inevitable outcome will look like. The reason for this is simple: both “sides” are conning and killing the peasants that they lord over. They are nothing more than rival gangs, not serious ideological or even geopolitical opponents.

Despite this, slowly but surely, people are gradually starting to realize that they’ve been lied to in some way.

The average person believes that finding the truth is a simple matter of choosing one side to listen to and believe in. Usually, they use ideology as a shorthand for deciding what side to believe in. So, if they are invested in the Human Rights Freedom Love Democracy agenda, they side with Ukraine out of ideological solidarity. If they are Christians, they side with Russia because they believe that Yahweh will punish the West for the sin of sodomy. Nationalists are largely split because, on the one hand, Ukraine pays lip-service to nationalism but clearly serves the interests of ZOG, while on the other hand, Russia claims to be at war with the concept of nationalism even though they rely heavily on Russian nationalists to fight this war, of course. Regardless, having picked a team, it is then a simple matter of uncritically repeating the pre-chewed narratives provided by the state media of that side while accusing the other side of being “Nazis” in the generic postmodern sense by which the word has come to signify “people I don’t like” and nothing more.

Among Western audiences and commentators, the war has become a classic squabble issue, with both Conservatives and Liberals projecting their own domestic debates onto Russian and Ukraine respectively. This makes any kind of sober debate absolutely impossible. Furthermore, the commentators and bloggers have no reason to encourage a sober view of the situation when they are making so much money selling hysteria of one kind or another to their captive, infantile audiences. One side claims that this is a war against Theocratic-Authoritarian-Fascism and the other side claims that it is a war against Globalist-Satanic-Nazism. Neither side will accurately characterize their enemies and what they stand for, but that is to be expected, of course. However, neither side is even willing to accurately characterize their own sides’ position on politics or ideology or even state their goals with this war, at least, clearly and honestly. This strikes me as unprecedented, frankly, at least in the sheer scale of the obfuscation.

To their credit, many Western dissidents do indeed understand the nature of their own occupation governments at the very least. Numerous bloggers and populist internet-activists have spent the last 10 years (or more) intensively sharing information about the Trotskyist/Zionist/Neocon takeover of the West. I’ve done my small part in this effort and have served a tour in the info-trenches as well, so I have nothing but respect for the bravery of people who have risked it all to speak the truth to power and to waken as many of their countrymen’s eyes to the truth as possible. However, few Westerners understand the nature of the Russian government or the other governments of the FSU, and this applies to the thought-leaders in the dissident sphere as well. By and large, Westerners simply know that their own Western governments are up to no good at home and want to destroy Russia for some reason abroad. They then fill in the blanks using the “enemy-of-my-enemy is-my-friend” heuristic and, helped along by pre-prepared propaganda narratives, they come to believe that the Kremlin is everything that their own occupation governments are not. That means that, by necessity, the Kremlin must be patriotic, Christian, conservative, fair, just, prosperous and so on — all thanks to Putin’s brilliant judo-chess statesmanship and the divine guidance of Jesus Christ, of course.

Sadly, nothing could be further from the case.

To understand the United States though, one needs to understand at least the last century of political developments and gradual Zionist takeover. There are entire websites dedicated to unearthing the true political history of the USSA and yet the vast majority of people still don’t “get it”. To understand who rules Russia and to what end, a similar in-depth analysis is necessary, of course, but nowadays, when we need it most, this is drowned out by bellicose idiots beating the war drums and declaring that the Kremlin simply stands for everything good against everything bad and that nuance is a form of treachery and sabotage. All the old truisms and axioms like, “truth is the first casualty in war” and “patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels” and “war is a racket” or, the best and truest one by far, “war is the Jews’ harvest” have been totally forgotten in the excitement.

As we approach the two year mark of the Special Military Operation to de-militarize and de-nazify the Ukraine, more and more peasants are waking up to the fact that they have been conned into another hoax, yet again.

The So-Called Neo-Nazi Government in Kiev

If we take the Ukrainian side, we find that a) there is hardly a single Ukrainian in the so-called Ukrainian government, which makes it almost impossible to believe that this is a war for Ukrainian self-identity. How is it that this self-identity is so strong that it demands a war be fought for it’s self-assertion against the Russian occupation and yet, at the same time, so weak that no one notices that Ukraine is not ruled by Ukrainians? Furthermore b) Ukraine does not recognize the democratic will of large swathes of the population and routinely arrests and shuts down opposition to the ruling spook- + oligarch-run state. Actually, come to think of it, this makes Ukraine not all that different from the West, which does seem to buttress Kiev’s pretensions to claiming membership as a part of the modern Western political project. Finally, c) Ukraine doesn’t give a damn about territorial integrity as evidenced by the fact that Poroshenko offered Donbass to Moscow 8 years ago and also by the fact that Ukraine’s Western allies spend huge amounts of resources lecturing Westerners about how borders are an antiquated, out-dated and racist institution that ought to be outlawed.

The contradictions at the heart of the Ukrainian political project are so self-evident and so glaring that it almost feels like it is unnecessary to harp on and on about them at this point.

But the major Z-personalities studiously refuse to notice or point out the very Jewish nature of the ruling elite. No, instead, they focus in on the former prison gangs and soccer hoodlums and gangsters-for-hire being used as cannon fodder by Kiev in the East. With this method, they can label Kiev as “Nazi” even though no Nazis or nationalists or Ukrainians have any power in Ukraine and the same rootless cosmopolitans who rule the West are the ones sending tens of thousands of Slavic peasants to their deaths. Moscow keeps mum about the true nature of the Kiev government as well. Simple-minded partisans do not understand that the Kremlin, by keeping silent about it and instead blaming the Ukrainian people for the regime, is not only exacerbating the division among the Slavic peoples, but also actively covering up the identity of the perpetrators of this horrendous civil war.

As an aside, as I have written about extensively before, most of the Azovites are Russian-speakers and the movement used to be pan-Slavist and based in Khakov (Kharkiv), a Russian-speaking eastern city of Ukraine on the border of Russia.

But this is all pointless at this point, frankly.

I am fairly convinced that most Liberals, i.e., believers in the dominant narrative of our times, are not pathological altruists or bleeding heart ideologues, but actually brutal Nietzschean power-maximizers who side with the globalist political project exactly because it has the most money, the most guns, and the most power at its disposal. It is a philosophical point, I suppose, but because I assume that promoters and believers of political orthodoxy only ever listen to the establishment narrative, I don’t think there is any point in trying to convince them to think outside of the box on this. Furthermore, I haven’t seen any results from the standard Con Inc. approach of whining about the Liberals’ various hypocrisies and the logical fallacies at the heart of their confusing and contradictory, but consistently destructive, political platform.

The So-Called Army of Christ in Moscow

Surprisingly, the Russian MFA and members of the Presidential Administration often fall back on this same approach. Hardly a day goes by without the Kremlin whining about how the West is being hypocritical or not playing fair. When it comes time to justify the Kremlin’s numerous failures among neighboring states — the recent uncontested surrender of Nagorno-Karabakh to Azerbaijan and the provocative killing of Russian officers comes to mind — Putin starts whining that he was duped by his esteemed Western colleagues, as if on cue. Either that, or Peskov or Zakharova sniff and declare that they are too moral to pursue Russia’s best interests and would rather lose gracefully than cede the moral high ground to the Satano-Nazis. It is little wonder then that so many Christian, conservative Republican voters sympathize with the Kremlin! Just think, they hear the exact same rhetoric from their own party and wear their political, cultural, economic and theological dhimmitude as a badge of pride!

If anything, it is the right that is the altruistic, moralizing, losing side — naively believing that debate and peaceful exchange of ideas (and goods and services) between implacable ideological enemies can solve all of society’s problems. Unless of course the topic of Israel comes up — their problems can only be solved by genociding the Jews’ racial enemies, of course. With all this in mind — including the total lack of curiosity or intellectual integrity or perhaps emotional maturity in the body politic — it is hardly a surprise that so few are capable of accurately describing the events occurring on the battlefield.

The Bizarre Battlefield in Ukraine

At last we come to it: the battlefield analysis. I think I included such a long preamble because there is so little to say about the actual war being fought in the trenches right now. Internet bloggers used to draw huge attack vector arrows on maps of Ukraine like the much-anticipated Operation Trident Storm which was supposed to be a decapitation strike on Kiev launched by Wagner from Belarus and cleverly masked by a fake mutiny. Remember that? Sadly, the great bloggers have been reduced to providing cutting-edge analysis on hills in and around Avdiivka, an rusted out village/town in Donbass’ rustbelt or have given up entirely and copied the example of their esteemed NAFO colleagues and switched to providing commentary on Palestine instead.

The executive summary: Russia has essentially been fighting to hold on to whatever gains they were able to take in the initial weeks of the war since last fall. The battle lines haven’t budged since the last successful UAF counter-offensive took Kherson without a fight.

Back in February, I predicted that it would be Kiev going on the offensive next and in a big way. I was not surprised to see that the ZAnon analysts continued to promote the narrative that Russia was on the cusp of a push to take back Kiev, but I was surprised that so many people were still falling for the disinfo. It seemed so obvious that Moscow has adopted a defensive military strategy and was desperately seeking some sort of diplomatic solution with NATO. With all this in mind, it was clear that there would be no more large Russian offensives anywhere. To do that would require new armies, more equipment and a new group of political leaders. Barring this, there was no way that Russia would go on the offensive again when they were so obviously outnumbered and outspent by NATO + Kiev. Lo and behold, the great Russian spring offensive to de-nazify Ukraine once and for all failed to materialize. So too did the great Russian summer offensive. And so too will the great Russian fall and winter offensives.

It is Kiev that dictates the pacing of this war and has so since last summer.

This summer, we had a large UAF offensive kick off just as many “doomer” analysts on the Russian side correctly predicted. Many, including myself, were surprised that Russia chose to stay and fight, and the counter-offensive fizzled out only several weeks into the attack. The previous two retreats seemed to be a blueprint used by Shoigu and the plan of the MoD up to that point had been to seemingly give Kiev every single advantage possible to make things as hard as possible for the Russian troops. But this time, despite the hasty defenses and the fact that the UAF vastly outnumbered the Russians, the soldiers held, with the offensive foundering before a single breakthrough occurred or any reserves were even committed.

Long story short: the behavior of the UAF was baffling and still has yet to be adequately explained by the most vocal “analysts” on either side.

For their part, American intelligence reached out to the Western media to vent soon after it was clear that no great breakthrough would occur to complain about how unruly the UAF was and how unwilling the officers were to accept NATO’s brilliant tactics and direction. The truth of the failed offensive is almost certainly more complicated and possibly far more sinister than this non-explanation. The Russian side eagerly lapped it up though, because they got to poke fun at the Ukrainians on account of their American allies calling them brainless savages.

But let us examine some of the bizarre tactics used by the UAF for ourselves.

Tanks thrown at minefields despite adequate minesweeper vehicles being provided by NATO countries expressly for this purpose and areas where there were no minefields open to attack that would have surely been revealed by American SIGINT as on previous occasions. The lack of air defense rendered massed tank and carrier columns sitting ducks for Russian aviation, which had hitherto been largely ineffective in the war. Finally, we had a very bizarre and timely dam explosion that effectively rendered the southern push impossible on account of the flooding that ensued. Zelensky blamed Putin and Putin said it was an accident and we are left asking, “who benefits” and forced to narrow it down to either a NATO black ops (reason unknown) or Russia preventing the southern push that would have probably overrun their overstretched, undermanned lines.

Even the fact that the counter-offensive was launched when it made little sense from a strategic perspective and, in retrospect even less sense now. Time has always been on Kiev’s side since the clock started ticking following the launch of the disastrous initial SMO. Kiev’s entire strategy up to that point had been to trade lives and ground for time to prepare and arm and to secure more NATO support. This is not even debated at this point; it is taken for granted by the people who claimed that Ukraine would never get NATO tanks, or all that money, or long-range missiles or F-16s or whatever else is in the cards next. So, why did Kiev rush into the counter-offensive when they weren’t ready yet? If anything, we can see that the UAF’s top general, Zaluzhny, who proved himself to be several orders of magnitude more competent than the fake generals of the Russian military, did all he could to pump the brakes on the counter-offensive. He was initially joined in this effort by Zelensky himself. With each passing week, Ukraine trained more and more men and received more and more weapons and supplies. Russia, in contrast, was refusing to mobilize more men and was already running low on shells and tanks as the last of the Soviet stockpiles ran low, and they continued to throw away men and equipment away in suicidal, catastrophic attacks like the ill-fated assault on Ugledar.

Stranger still, the Teixeira leaks informed us that American intelligence knew that Ukrainian air defense would become depleted by May. The attack was then launched without air defense in June and for once, Russian air power came into play and punished the UAF accordingly. Why did Washington insist on this attack without at least sending more Patriot missile systems first? ZAnon analysts claim that Washington didn’t send Patriots over because Patriots don’t work at all, which frankly seems like more frothing, fist-pumping propaganda. Finally, why not just wait for the inevitable approval of F-16s to Ukraine and the pilots being trained in secret to be deployed? Crickets!

And yet, despite the accuracy of the leaks, both sides denied their authenticity immediately and stuck to the story despite the subsequent developments.

For the Western side, the reasoning behind their denial is clear. But why is Moscow working with Washington again to promote yet another easily debunked lie about the inauthenticity of the documents? If they were fake, why was the young soldier arrested by what looked to be a SWAT team at his father’s home? Well, it could be related to the fact that American intelligence revealed that Washington knew ahead of time where Shoigu’s MoD would fire its missiles. Instead of addressing the new information and taking steps to rectify it, nothing was done at all. It is not even a secret at this point that Shoigu’s strikes on FSB-designated targets always miss. At the time of this writing, Shoigu fired off a few more salvoes that hit nobody of any note, again. Sure, they can hit the transformers, or burn down the Neo-Nazi grain silos in Odessa that are cutting into Patrushev Jrs grain deal profits, but no one of any senior rank has ever died from these punitive strikes.

They are done as part of a PR strategy, not for any military reason!

They are done to make it seem like the Kremlin is serious and enforces its red lines when they really roll over every single time and spend more time and resources convincing their own supporters that they didn’t! Even the Russian propaganda claims that General Zaluzhny had been decapitated turned out to be blatant disinformation, although the goal of this psy-op remains muddled to this day; to discredit the Russian cause, no doubt, which is what all of this ham-fisted, reality-denying lying does, eventually. Once again, we don’t know whether or not this is simply incompetence, or a competent counter-intelligence operation, or a professional courtesy extended from Russia’s spook community to their once esteemed Western colleagues.

But the reason for why strikes on Kiev’s leadership are non-existent could be as simple as because Putin promised Tel-Aviv that Zelensky would be off-limits and no doubt his team of Jews had that protection extended to them as well. After all, Zelensky’s cabinet and administration is now slightly more Jewish than Putins’ and almost as Jewish as Bidens’. I mean, have you seen the new Ukrainian Defense Minister? He claims that he is “Crimean”! But what do your lying eyes tell you?

It would be tempting to see the failed UAF counter-offensive as a turning point and a clear policy turnaround from the previous year and a half of mismanagement. But, sadly, the same mysterious behavior of Shoigu’s MoD reasserted itself as soon as the initial danger passed. Allow me to list a few examples of what I mean. As I have written about before, Shoigu continues to leave Russian aircraft unprotected and in the open so that American intelligence can spot them and so that then Ukrainian drones can disable them. This has been widely discussed and ridiculed within patriot circles in Russia. I brought it up with my last interview guest and he was even more pessimistic than I was that this problem would be addressed. Another example is the military’s stalwart refusal to destroy UAF tanks disabled in the field. It is standard military procedure to destroy vehicles once they have been disabled to ensure that they cannot be repaired and reused by the enemy. Despite this, Shoigu’s MoD doesn’t touch these tanks with their much-vaunted artillery superpower. There are videos of tanks lost in the spring muds being recovered by the UAF in the heat of the steppe summer. The result is that they have undamaged tanks that can then be redeployed against Russia.

I ask you again: at what point does gross incompetence become sabotage?

Luckily for the Russian war effort, the UAF is almost as grossly corrupt and incompetent as they themselves are. Still, it is much easier to make out what Moscow’s plan or lack thereof entails than Kiev’s. The sequence of events that brought us to the current disaster is roughly as follows:

  1. Zelensky and his team shut down Putin’s oligarch friend Medvedchuk, which convinced the Kremlin to prepare a regime-change and rescue operation.
  2. The Kremlin was given the green light to launch its SMO by their esteemed partners at Langley and given assurances that NATO would not intervene.
  3. Unsurprisingly, they blundered into a trap and have been trying to extricate themselves from it ever since.
  4. To that end, they retreated from Kiev out of “goodwill” after signing a secret peace deal that was promptly discarded.
  5. They have committed to fighting this war “humanely,” i.e., minimizing the damage to oligarchs’ profits by continuing to ship raw materials into and out of and through Ukraine and making secret deals to export products to the Third World in exchange for surrendering territory (like Snake Island).
  6. They have refused to pull out of any international organizations like the WTO or WHO or the SDG Green agenda and instead insist that Russia will be globalism-compliant — if they are just given a second chance!
  7. They only fight on pre-agreed on terms for inconsequential territory (Bakhmut) almost as if the goal was to get as many people on both sides killed as possible.

I’ve mapped out every major step leading into and through this SMO exhaustively on my blog for those who might be interested in following along.

The Wagner Mutiny in Retrospect

Apart from the emergency mobilization last fall to make up for the steep losses in the initial SMO, Russia has continued to fight this war like an LLC. Prominent oligarchs, government officials/spooks and regional government leaders have all created their own private armies. Evgeniy Prigozhin’s personal mercenary force, Wagner, simply stole the headlines with his grueling Bakhmut offensive, his media slug-fest with the Ministry of Defense and then the attempted half-mutiny followed by his subsequent assassination at the hands of Kremlin assassins via bomb on his plane.

Prigozhin’s mutiny actually revealed a lot about the power structure of the Kremlin.

We discovered just how weak Putin’s government really was and why the West’s plans to overthrow the Russian government are based on a sound understanding of the internal power status quo in Moscow. Furthermore, we learned that the elite in Russia is too fractious and short-sighted and greedy to be able to deal with problems in a timely manner. The Prigozhin drama was spiraling out of control for half a year at that point. But because Shoigu kept licking his far-eastern chops and salivating over dismembering Wagner, Russia’s battlefield success was diminished and then, eventually, their best battle-capable organization dismantled. No one in the Russian elite stepped in to stop this except for Belarus’s Lukashenko, who tried to broker a cease-fire because Putin and his buddies were too untrustworthy. This suspicion was confirmed when the Kremlin had Prigozhin and some of Russia’s best battlefield commanders assassinated.

Since the plane crashed, we’ve stopped hearing about secret offensives on Kiev and Wagner chess games in Africa. People are starting to understand that there won’t be a grand victory over NATO. The Kremlin simply won’t allow it.

A Looming Peace/Surrender Deal?

We have had numerous sources both anonymous and highly-placed hinting at the possibility of planned formal negotiations being held before the end of this year. Off the top of my head, we have had Lukashenko, Erdogan, Orban, Burns, Kissinger and many anonymous sources leaking this information. However, I find myself largely unconvinced, but not for the same reasons that the ZAnon community or NAFO might be misled. A self-styled pro-Russia analyst who doesn’t speak Russian, hasn’t lived in Russia, and doesn’t understand anything about who rules Russia might reject the news about planned negotiation on the grounds that Moscow is winning this war handily.

However, anyone still capable of objective analysis and not infected by cult-style wishful thinking can see that Putin has been led into a disastrous trap by his handlers esteemed Western colleagues in the intelligence community.

As a result of this SMO, the Russian army has been shown to be a rusted-out wreck, its generals compromised and incompetent, the Russian political elite divided and treacherous, Russia’s allies actually nothing more than fair-weather friends — the Kremlin tool of either naive fools or vicious retards and that isn’t even the half of it. Ukraine is lost to Russia for the next century now. Its territories have never been more militarized and anti-Russian, which was supposedly the situation that the SMO was supposed to rectify. The EU has since divested from Russian natural energy, its political elites caving to Washington’s pressure and forced to buy LNG at a mark-up instead. That is not to say that all trade with Russia has stopped. All manner of natural resources continue to flow across the territory of Ukraine from Russia to the markets of the Satano-Nazis that the Kremlin is supposedly in a fight to the death against, so that’s some good news, at least.

I could go on listing the catastrophes inflicted on Russia as a result of Putin’s “mistakes,” but suffice it to say that someone backed into the corner as thoroughly as the Kremlin is doesn’t have much to negotiate over. What cards does Russia have left to play? Syria is teetering on collapse, again. The UAF is bigger, better, and more motivated than the amalgamation of warlords and mercenary captains fighting for Moscow in Donbass. Kazakhstan has turned against Russia. Armenia turned against Russia, lost Nagorno-Karabakh, and turned even more on Russia. The Azeris kill Russian with impunity abroad and within Russia. China has not lifted a finger to help Russia in any way … but there I go again listing facts and boring my audience.

My point is that the Kremlin has nothing to negotiate with, except perhaps the much-vaunted hypersonics, which no one has independently verified the existence of or seen used anywhere.

So, any “peace” negotiations would actually resemble surrender negotiations.

As bad as I think the Kremlin leadership is, I don’t think they’re quite ready to surrender just yet. And on the other side, we have Senators like Lindsey Graham gloating about how many Russians they killed and about what a bargain the United States government got for their dead Russians. Washington is fighting this war without even breaking the budget, he says. I agree with Graham on this and so we should all be wondering what NATO stands to gain by letting up on the war when it’s clearly going so well for them and they’re not even using up their own troops to prosecute it.

I suppose the only sliver of possible hope that NATO will pick up their toys and go home is the Palestine crisis and the looming holy war brewing there. Many Russian patriots have already weighed in on that crisis, with the prevailing sentiment being that Russia should do all that it can to stay out of the conflict and adopt an isolationist stance.

A Few Last Words on the Info-Wars

More and more people in the West are suspicious of the Western narrative and so have rejected the mainstream Western media out of hand. On some level, this is understandable, but the blind acceptance of mainstream Russian media and alternative media sources that have declared Russia’s victory a foregone conclusion is a mistake as well. The divorce from reality is as strong as ever among mainstream media sources in both the East and the West and in the alternative media, which has proven itself to be just as unreliable if not more than the mainstream media.

As a blogger and an analyst, it has been eye-opening to discover for myself that the vast majority of people are unable to differentiate between cheer-leading and serious analysis. In other words, if an analyst declares that country A is winning and country B is losing, what they are really saying is that they simply support Country A. The concept of supporting a losing country or being neutral is too much for the vast majority of people to grasp. This is because winning is considered a direct consequence of morality. In other words, the country that is winning is the better country because they are winning. It is impossible for people to fathom the possibility that the “good guys” are losing a war. This explains so much about he current political, cultural and moral paradigm that we find ourselves in now. For years I found myself wondering why the vast majority of people were so emotionally tied up with the moral narratives of the winner countries of previous wars.

Belatedly, I came to realize that this war is being evaluated through a religious lens.

Many ostensibly Christian allies of Russia in the West are actually motivated by the Gog v Magog prophecy and excited about the prospect of the world coming to an end because of WWIII and not out of solidarity with the Russian people. The corollary to that insight is that all politics is fundamentally a religious affair for most people. In other words, the idea that a “good country” might have lost or is losing a war currently, is difficult to conceive. For most people, the war is a referendum on God’s favor for one country or civilizational project or another, even if they may not formally be a member of a traditional Abrahamic religious organization that gleans these truths from their big fat book of pious lies. So, because the West is onboard with SJWism, they are supposed to be losing the war on account of losing God’s favor, the logic goes. Unfortunately (or fortunately), this is not how wars work. In theory, one could be sympathetic to Russia and the cause of Slavic reunification, but also suspicious of Moscow’s intentions and critical of their methods. In practice though, such a position appears to be largely untenable because it violates pre-programmed religious conditioning.

The truth of the matter is that Moscow is losing this war to NATO and that Russians in both Ukraine and Russia are suffering for it. There will be no Russian breakthroughs and the creation of a large, armed, and hostile “Israel” on Russia’s borders is now a reality. Unless something changes drastically, Putin will either be forced to surrender or his elites will stage another mutiny to try and hand his head over to Washington on a platter and thereby end the conflict that way.

Consider yourself forewarned.

Homo judaicus: The Political Theology of US Foreign Policy

/20 Comments/in , /by

Below is a short compilation of excerpts from my book, first published almost two decades ago, and republished by Arktos media in 2017.  In light of the new geopolitical realignments and continuing political tremor in the Mideast it may be worth looking again at some underlying aspects of US foreign policy.

America’s unconditional support of Israel resembles a belated form of White House Christian-inspired medieval neurosis. Fear of being called an anti-Semite prevents American politicians and a great number of American academics from openly criticizing Israel. When some sparse critical voices are heard, they usually leave out the founding myths of the Biblical narrative, and focus, instead, on dry facts relating to the influence of Jewish lobbies in America. In the typical fashion of American “expertise,” American academics who happen to be critical of Israel use one set of arguments while neglecting other scholarly approaches. In their analysis of the holy alliance between postmodern Israel and America, American scholars tend to forget that the Old Testament ties between these two countries had already predestined America to nurture a special and privileged rapport with the state of Israel.

Clearly, America gains little, if any, geopolitical benefit from supporting Israel. Israel is more of a liability than an asset for America. From the geopolitical perspective, Israel is even a nuisance for America, given that as a small country of approximate size of New Jersey it surrounded by a host of hostile cultures, religions, and neighbors, both outside and within its borders. Although America, due to its unique insular position, has been able to avoid troublesome neighbors and their tribal problems, it has willingly accepted on its own soil the issue of the balkanized Middle East. America’s special friend, Israel, acts in a way similar to that of ancient Prussia; it must grow at the expense of its neighbors — or it must perish. [i] But America’s special filial-fatherly links to Israel must also prevent this last from happening.

Metaphysically speaking, Israel is the spiritual origin of the American divine world mission and the incarnation of American ideology itself. Only within the context of a strange filial relationship with Jewishness and Israel can one understand why America is accepting with equanimity its own deliberate decline into a world-wide morass in the early 21st century — especially since America’s foreign policy actions stand in sharp contrast to the originally proclaimed goals of America’s founding fathers.

Unfortunately, the fear of being called an anti-Semite prevents intelligent Americans from openly discussing the explosive issue of American-Israeli entanglement. Unlike previous geopolitical evaluations that had some sound basis in American foreign policy decision-making, the role of Israel and the Jewish lobby in America are the two major elements that formulate overall American foreign policy. The imagery of Israel and “God’s chosen people” represents the framework of America’s commitments, not only toward the Middle East but also regarding other foreign policy issues. In the meantime, “any aspiring policymaker is encouraged to become an overt supporter of Israel, which is why public critics of Israeli policy have become an endangered species in the foreign policy establishment.”[ii]

These words were written in 2005 by two prominent American scholars whose essay was relayed by major media outlets around the USA and Europe, in turn prompting Jewish lobbies in America to cry foul and raise the proverbial specter of “anti-Semitism.”

What John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt write, however, is nothing new to knowledgeable individuals. Similar critical views of Israel were voiced earlier by many American authors, and these views also reflect, both privately and officially, those of many European scholars and politicians. But when such observations are uttered by scholars from respectable academic establishments, they leave a different aftereffect on the entire American political scene. This explains the reason for worry among American Jews and Israelis.

In Yahve we Trust 

American founding myths drew their inspiration from Hebrew thought. The notion of the “City on the Hill” and “God’s own country” was borrowed from the Old Testament and the Jewish people. The Biblical idea of predestination served the early American founding fathers as a launching pad for their own concept of democratic self-righteousness. Of all Christian denominations, Calvinism was the closest to the Jewish religion and, as some authors have noted, the United States owes its very existence to the Jews. “For what we call Americanism,” writes Werner Sombart, “is nothing else than the Jewish spirit distilled.” [iii]

The author, a disciple of Max Weber, was sympathetic to Jews and, therefore, when he describes the overwhelming influence of the Judaic spirit in American life, he cannot be accused of manifesting a bias against Jews. Similar remarks will be found later among legions of European authors, most of whom fell into oblivion or disgrace given their ties to antidemocratic and racialist schools of thought. Sombart further writes that “the United States is filled to the brim with the Jewish spirit.”[iv] Many wide-spread customs in America, such as giving newborn children Judaic names, or administering circumcision to young newborn males, come from Jewish heritage.[v]

Very early on America’s founding fathers, pioneers, and politicians identified themselves as Jews who had come to the new American Canaan from pestilent Europe. In a postmodern Freudian twist, these pilgrims and these new American pioneers were obliged to kill their European fathers in order to facilitate the spreading of American democracy world-wide. “Heaven ha[s] placed our country in this situation to try us; to see whether we would faithfully use the incalculable power in our hands for speeding forward the world’s regeneration.” [vi]

Even American Christian antisemites are subconsciously enamored with the Jewish idea of predestination, which they harbor side by side with their antisemitic sentiments. In fact, American antisemitism can be described as a distorted and hidden form of philo-Semitism which, while not able to materialize itself on its own American chosenness, projects its would-be supremacy through its hatred against Jews. It is not far-fetched to argue, as some authors do, that the American dream is a role model for universal Jewishness, only one which must not be limited to a specific race or tribe in America, as is the case with ethnocentric Jews who are well aware of their ingroup racial feelings. Americanism is designed for all peoples, races and nations on Earth. America is, by definition, an extended form of globalized Israel and not reserved for one specific tribe only. Does that, therefore, mean that our proverbial homo americanus is a universal carbon copy of homo judaicus?

The word “antisemitism,” unlike the words “anticommunism” or “antifascism,” does not reflect political beliefs or critical views of the Jews. This term is exclusively used as a lexical label to depict a person’s grave mental illness. As a perceived medical or judicial illness, antisemitism must never be debated; an antisemitic patient must not be a partner in scholarly duels; his sick views must not be the subject of academic inquiry and counter-inquiry. As an element of medical pathology, antisemitism must only by treated by doctors, preferably by a Jewish psychoanalyst, or legally, by a liberal prosecutor in court.

Accusing American Jews of possessing extraterrestrial powers, or blaming them for their purported conspiracy to subvert Gentile culture, borders on delusion and only reflects the absence of normal dialogue. American antisemitic delusions only provide legitimacy to American Jews in their constant search for a real or surreal antisemitic boogieman around every corner. Without the specter of antisemitism, Jews would likely assimilate quickly and hence disappear. Thus, antisemitism provides Jews with alibis to project themselves as victims of Gentile prejudice. Consequently, it assigns them the cherished role of posing as the sole educational super-ego for Americans and, by proxy, the entire world. In his book on the social role of Jews, a prominent Jewish-French politician and author, Jacques Attali, writes: “As Russian Jews invented socialism, and as Austrian Jews invented psychoanalysis, American Jews in the forefront, participated in the birth of American capitalism and in the Americanization of the entire world.”[vii]

For certain Jewish authors, like Attali, such a remark is easier to put to paper than it would be for a Gentile thinker, who with the same comment would be immediately shouted down as an “anti-Semite.” If a serious American scholar or a politician venture into this forbidden field, his gesture is interpreted as a sign of his being an agent provocateur, or worse, as an indication that he has decided to write his own obituary. Such a schizophrenic climate of self-censorship in America will sooner or later lead to dramatic consequences for both American Jews and Gentiles. The lack of healthy dialogue can last for a century or so, but feigned conviviality between American Gentiles and American Jews cannot last forever, if it continues to take as its basis distorted perceptions of the Other and how this Other should behave. Mendacity carries the germ of civil war.

[i] Jordis von Lohausen, Les Empires et la puissance, (Paris: Le Labyrinthe) p. 266.

[ii] John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, “The Israel Lobby” London Review of Books, Vol. 28 No. 6, March 23, 2006. Also published in an extended version by Harvard University, “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy,” by John

  1. Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt; Working Paper Number: RWP06–011; Submitted: 13/03/2006.

[iii] Werner Sombart, The Jews and Modern Capitalism, translated with notes by M. Epstein, (New York: Burt Franklin, 1969; originally published in London 1913), pp. 43–44.

[iv] Ibid., p. 38.

[v] Ibid., p. 249.

[vi]  George B. Cheever, God’s Hand (New York: M.W. Dodd Brick Church Chapel, 1941; London: Wiley & Putnam, 1941); in Carl Bode (ed.), American Life in the 1840s (New York: Doubleday & Company, 1967), 315.

[vii] Jacques Attali, Les Juifs, le monde et l’argent (Paris: Fayard; 2002), p. 419 and passim.

Destination 1922: A Return to Claims of the Arabs in Palestine

/5 Comments/in /by

Bernard M. Smith’s recent article, Israel Is Not Our Ally, presents a concise and cogent overview of the current American predicament — that of having an obsequious relationship with Israel and how our interests and worldwide opinion are realistically affected by it. While the American public is generally awash in one-sided propaganda backing the Jewish State, few get an education on the subject of Zionism, let alone opposing viewpoints unless they were readers of Alison Weir’s If Americans Knew website or her book Against Our Better Judgement: The Hidden History of How the U.S. Was Used to Create Israel. But as we are now a little over a century since the British helped secure the embryonic home of the Jews with the 1917 Balfour Declaration, would it not be prudent to revisit the British Palestine Mandate through the words of its native Palestinian leaders from that early 1922 inception? Thanks to the wonders of Newspapers.com, we can act on our imperative to revisit the roots of the Palestinian-Jewish conflict. Prepare to enter our time capsule. The course is set for Canada, May 6, 1922, and The Edmonton Journal for a counter-narrative not known to many of that time, save buyers of the Ford Model-T automobile!

Here we find a full-page article titled Claims of the Arabs in Palestine, by York Guille (reporting from Jerusalem) of the McClure Newspaper Syndicate. This piece is presented in its entirety, with key points and arguments of the text italicized by me in bold for quick perusal if you wish. Here’s the article with my emphasis throughout:

Jews Smuggling German Revolvers Into the Holy Land is One Charge Made — Firearms as Agricultural Machinery — Situation In Palestine, Says Arif Pasha, Nationalist Leader, Rapidly Getting Worse — “Syria Will Soon Be Ablaze”

“The situation is rapidly going from bad to worse. Unless the plan to make Palestine the national home of the Jews is abandoned, Syria will soon be ablaze and the gravest international consequences may follow. Both the Christian and Moslem worlds are concerned. The Arabs will never consent to the Zionist program. Zionism, instead of settling Jewish problems, already threatens a world-wide revival of the anti-Semitic movement.”

This is the considered view of Arif Pasha el-Dazzinn, president of the executive committee of the Congress of the Moslem- Christian Leagues of Palestine, which represents 93 per cent of the entire population and all of the Arabs. He described to me, in a special interview, the Arab point of view and stated it with marked moderation through his secretary, who speaks English fluently. This alert, highly educated representative of one of the most picturesque races of the East, a race which kept learning alive in the Dark Ages and has left Spain a rich heritage of art and culture, upset all of one’s pre-conceived ideas of the Arab. Instead of burnous and turban, he wore a finely tailored grey lounge suit. He belongs to the ruling class and is fully acquainted with Western knowledge and international politics.

Do suits matter? Yes, you say, if wishing to exercise diplomacy? In America today, a hundred of the most perceptive, articulate and scholarly gentlemen dressed in finely tailored grey suits can gather for a peaceful meeting of the minds and cordial presentations at the finest Italian restaurant in the Washington D.C. area, only to be violently attacked by a mob of rabid Antifa immune from prosecution while dressed like the zombies from the movie Night of the Living Dead. It appears that thugs have more power than some of our best suits, because suits who haven’t learned everything they know from television, TikTok, or liberal-approved textbooks cannot even gather at a hotel unharmed. Who is it that plays a predominant role in financing and leading these anarchists to denying American freedom of assembly and freedom of speech? I don’t think it’s the Arabs. But getting back to the article, do many Americans realize that 93 percent of the Palestinian population of 1922 were represented by both Moslems and Christians, all of whom were Arabs? What is that percentage today?

“The worst phase of the situation today is the smuggling of firearms by Jews,” he explained. “The latest incident is the discovery of 96 cases of revolvers and ammunition as they were being landed at Haifa. These cases were labelled ‘agricultural implements.’ They were German revolvers and had been shipped from Trieste. They were assigned to Mr. Rosenberg, the president of the Jewish labor party at Haifa. He is, by the way, also a member of the Haifa city corporation, Rosenberg was arrested and his house searched.  Correspondence was seized and papers found disclosed the fact that this was the second consignment. The first had been successfully smuggled in and a second was on the way. Three other Jews who lived in a village outside the town were implicated. The chief of police hurried off to arrest them, but arrived to find they had fled. A Jewish telegraphist at the Haifa telegraph office – a government servant – had warned them by wire to clear out. Rosenberg was released on bail of 12,500 dollars. He has just been acquitted. This, of course, has called out volumes of protest from all over the country.

Does this Mr. Rosenberg of Haifa have any familial relationship to atomic spies Julius and Ethel Rosenberg or BLM fundraising director and convicted American terrorist Susan Rosenberg? Don’t even go there, or you’ll be charged with blatant anti-Semitism! These are all just unrelated individuals of specific identity facing their own objective and selfish reality, Ayn Rand style (Ayn being born Alisa Zinovyevna Rosenbaum).

“Jews are smuggling in firearms incessantly. Only last week there were six cases and six Jews arrested. Public opinion is greatly perturbed and the peace is menaced unless the Jewish immigration is stopped. Already over 25,000, mostly from Poland, Germany, Russia and Central Europe, have come in. They are all young men and women, most of them penniless and many infected with Bolshevism. Firearms have actually been distributed by the government among the Jewish colonists and the people of Palestine are now asking that they should be collected again. Over 900 rifles have been given to these colonists. The Jews complained that they were defenseless and in danger of attack, so the government gave them these rifles to enable them to defend themselves until troops could reach them in sufficient numbers to protect them. At the same time, and this is the worst feature of the position, all the natives have been disarmed.

While controlling the rights to firearm possession seems to have been a key factor in aiding the creation of the Jewish state, it is odd then that Jewish billionaire Mike Bloomberg (who believes in a “secure and stable Jewish democracy”) finds himself in the targets of the NRA for misleading voters in His Anti-Gun Apparatus! Is Mike trying to disarm today’s Americans like the Palestinians were disarmed in 1922? Does Mike believe in a secure and stable American democracy? And was Jewish smuggling of guns, rifles and ammunition only the prelude to smuggling in stolen nuclear weapons material against American and Middle East interests?

Reds Foment Riots

“One of the gravest dangers of this Jewish immigration lies In the type of immigrant. As I have said, many of them are Bolshevistic. Now the Arabs are not, and they will not tolerate the methods or the system of Lenin and Trotsky in Palestine. The night before the Jaffa riots the police seized proclamations printed In Hebrew, Yiddish and Arabic. They were signed by the executive committee of the Palestine Communist Party and called upon the people to fight for the Social Revolution. They appealed to Jewish and Arab laborers to join in an effort to throw off their oppressors and ‘in beating down your torturers and the tyrants among you.’ The Hebrew and Yiddish appeal ended:

Long live the First of May.
Down with the Dictatorship of the Bourgeoise.
Down with the Palestine Rule of Force.
Long live the International Solidarity of the Jewish and Arab Proletariat.
Long live the Civil War.
Long live Soviet Russia.
Long live the Third Communistic International.
Long live the Palestine Communistic Party.’

The Arabic version ended:

‘Down with British and French bayonets.
Down with the Arab and foreign Capitalists.
Long live Soviet Palestine.’

Before reading this Canadian article, I never realized that the predominant type of Jewish immigrant to Palestine in those days was the radical Bolshevik type. Would American Christians today find it surprising that the Israeli state was originally founded by Commie atheists? Having read Stalin’s War by prize-winning historian Sean McMeekin, and considering the influx of immigration to America before the 1924 National Origin’s Act (when Jewish radical-left politics was heavily on the public mind), I should now seriously entertain the possibility that both the USA and Israel are actually dyed in the wool “Red” nations. Why else would the slur “Commie” be unheard of in our media and forbidden in academic writing while Antifa hordes burn our modern cities?

“The Arabs have been charged with responsibility for these riots and those here at Jerusalem in 1920. But what are the facts? A government inquiry was held into the circumstance of the Easter disturbances here when there was serious loss of life, but their report has never been published because the high commissioner (Sir Herbert Samuel), a staunch Zionist, did not wish it. The fact is that its publication would injure the Zionist case. The riot was started by a Jew who threw a stone at the sacred flag of the Hebron Mosque when it was being carried in procession through the streets by a large crowd of Arabs on their way to the Harames-Sherif for the animal national festival of Nebi Mousa. But the report on the Jaffa riot of last year has been published and this shows they were due to a quarrel between Jewish Bolsheviks and the Jewish Labor party. A large quantity of explosives was found by a British army officer in a Jewish house. The official inquiry report states: “We are convinced that the charge constantly brought by Jews against the Arabs that this outbreak had been planned by them, or by their leaders, and was pre-arranged for the first of May is unfounded…the (Arab) notable on both sides, whatever their feelings may have been, were always ready to help the authorities in the restoration of order and we think that without their assistance the outbreak would have resulted in even worse excesses.”

 

The Zionist High Commissioner denied publication of a report on rioting so as to protect Jewish Bolsheviks, much like the Heaphy Report on the 2017 Charlottesville rioting is generally suppressed from our public knowledge and public opinion today, suggesting facts that differ from mainstream propaganda.

“The Arab objects to the Hebrew language, which is spoken by barely one percent of the population, being recognized as an official language. He objects to the tide of Jewish immigration which is bringing into his country mass of undesirable aliens who are not even self-supporting. This foreign laborer deprives the Arab of his daily bread and gets a higher rate of wages for half the amount of work the Arab could do in the same time. Contracts for public works in the majority of cases go to Jews, though their tenders are usually higher than those sent in by Arabs. Road-building has been started to give employment to these Jewish immigrants, who would otherwise be stranded. This work is paid for out of the taxes, paid for mostly by non-Jews. Under normal circumstances this work would have gone to Arab workmen.

A contract for the generation of electricity from the water power of the Auja River, north of Jaffa, has been granted to a Russian Jew named Ruttenberg, who has now come here to carry out his contract. This contract was given to this man without being put to public tender. The administration has no right to give concessions to foreigners before the final status of Palestine has been determined.

This really begs one to look at the true possessors of meaningful privilege in the world today. Here in 1922 we find the native Palestinian population discriminated against for valuable employment opportunities, but paid for by taxes on non-Jews. If there’s a modicum of truth to these statements in the article, then there must be a reassessment as to who the “victims” were in 1922 Palestine. And isn’t it uncanny how similar support is being played out for minority migrants and open borders in America today. Who is driving this? It might be the multi-religious efforts following the Jewish creed, “Welcome the Stranger, Protect the Refugee,” as heard from the Hebrew Immigration Aid Society.

Half Goods Imported German

Another matter which we do not like, as we fought with the Allies during the war, is the fact that the last customs statistics show that over fifty per cent of the goods that came into Palestine in the last six months came from Germany through Hamburg and Trieste. And you can walk along the streets here and hear nothing but Yiddish.

The laws and regulations now in force check our liberty and prevent our expansion. Patriotic Arabs are arrested and imprisoned or deported on the pretext that they are dangerous to the State. And the press is muzzled. There is strict censorship. We are not allowed to say what we think nor to disagree with Zionism. Anyone who did so would be deported. Not only can the High Commissioner deport whom he likes but a new law gives power to the governors of districts to recommend anyone they think dangerous to the state for deportation. And they can call on that person to deposit money as a bond to keep the peace. Several prominent Arabs have already been bound over under this regulation. Some of them have had to deposit as much as 5,000 dollars, and where they could not find the money the title deeds of their lands and buildings were taken. Only the other day an ex-Procurator-General was deported. This Is Costaki Saba, who eighteen months ago resigned his post, worth 420 dollars a month, because he could not agree with his chief, the legal secretary, Norman Bentwich, a Jew and a Zionist. Then he started journalism and he has been told to leave the country. When he asked for the reason in writing, it was refused. Mr. Wadie Bustani, a former government official at Haifa, was told the other day that if he took any farther part in politics he would be deported.

What chance has an Arab when the high commissioner is a Jew and a Zionist, and the legal secretary, the controller of stores, the director of commerce and industries and the chief of immigration  are all Jews? Every department of the government has been swamped by Jews, the majority of whom are new and have no previous experience. According to the official statistics one fifth of the senior service are Jews, though Jews represent only seven per cent of the population. In the junior service one third of the staff are Jews who hold the chief places.

Aaaah, where to begin! First, there seems to even be a “Germany story” before WWII and Hitler that benefited organized Jewry and Zionism instead of victimizing them, one most people of today are completely unaware. Next, I’d like to point out that there might be a similarity between harmless Palestinian patriots of 1922 and the diehard MAGA patriots of January 6, 2021. What ties these innocent victims together? And isn’t it prescient that the Palestinian quoted here described leadership in “every department of the government” with a word that would help President Trump coin the term, “The Swamp?” Maybe Trump reads old newspapers too.

That we are not alone in our objection to the Jewish immigration is proved by the fact that there is here a large section of Jews who are hostile to the Zionist movement. When Lord Northcliffe was here recently a deputation of these Jews appeared before him and complained of Zionist religious and political aspirations. There are some 35,000 Palestinian Jews with whom we live and lived before the war in perfect harmony. They object, as much as we do, to Zionism. Indeed, only a day or two ago, Zionists attacked these Ashkenazim rabbis in the synagogues and the police had to be called in to protect them. Ten Zionists were arrested.  Lord Northcliffe, after hearing all sides of the case here on the spot, took a very grave view of the position and has returned to England to wage a campaign in our favor. There are prominent Jews, both in England and America, who support the fight against Zionism. Among them are Mr. Monteflore, who has just resigned the presidency of the British Jewish Colonization Association, and Mr. Morgenthau, the former United States ambassador to Turkey.

Just a thought: was Morgenthau placed in Ottoman Turkey to help Jewish interests in the case that the Germans won WWI, a strategy of having resources on both sides of politics or both sides of the war? I’m not a historian and not as familiar with Henry Morgenthau, Sr., as with Morgenthau, Jr. – a prominent Treasury Secretary highlighted in McMeekin’s book, Stalin’s War. It is, nevertheless, intriguing how this father and son would have the power to shape America and the World.

So strong is the feeling of Palestinians, both Christian and Moslem, that we have combined to send a delegation to Europe and America. The president is His Excellency Musk Kazim Pasha el-Husseini, who belongs to one of the oldest families in Islam, which can trace its descent right back to the prophet.

Under the Turks he filled several important governorships and under the British was mayor of this city. He resigned because he would not allow Hebrew to be used as an official language and would not subscribe to the Jewish policy of government. The vice-president of the Hai Tewik Hammad, who was a member of parliament for Nabious at the Imperial Parliament at Constantinople. The secretary, Shibly Effendi Jamal, is a B.A. of Beyrout University and has been occupied with education for many years and is also a prominent journalist. The other two members are graduates of the college for officials at Constantinople and the sixth member is a prominent merchant. Four are Moslems and the other two Christians. They were elected at the fourth congress which met in this city of Jerusalem last June. The delegates to the congress, numbering 96, were elected by popular vote by the Moslem-Christian leagues. The late pope received the delegation and talked with them for over an hour. He expressed great sympathy with our aims and promised active cooperation. He told them he would write to all the Catholic powers asking them to support us actively in the League of Nations.

Three members of the delegation then went to Geneva for the last assembly of the League of Nations last September and there interviewed the representatives of all the powers with the important result that the ratification of the mandate for Palestine has been postponed pending a more thorough examination of the situation. In England, I hear, the delegation has already succeeded in gaining the sympathy of many members of parliament who have arranged meetings for them in the house of common and they are to lay our case before the foreign affairs committee. The delegation has not yet finished its work in England, but when it has it will go to the United States, where It believes it will find valuable support among the Jews. It must be made clear that we have no hatred of the race. On the contrary, we have lived with them for a long period and get on well with them. But we hate the Zionist movement which aims to make our land a Jewish state.

Today in America, any criticism of the state of Israel is tantamount to anti-Semitism, regardless of whether you are in love with the Jewish race or enjoy their friendship as individuals. The recent donor response to Ivy League student protests demonstrates how a young college student’s professional future can be destroyed by blacklisting for merely exercising free speech on campus. Note: in the Fox News report linked above, they show a large banner demanding “NO DIALOGUE WITH WHITE SUPREMACY.” Is it not long overdue for Americans to have a conversation on who retains real supremacist power and influence today? And do they simply appear White to everyone, giving European descendants a bad rap?

The British government has now published a resume of the constitution for Palestine. The executive is all in the hands of the high commissioner and his advisers. He has the power to deport any person whom he thinks dangerous to the state without trial and without appeal. There is to be a legislative council of 25 members in addition to the high commissioner who has the casting vote. He nominates ten of the members from the officers of the government and two others as well. The chambers of commerce nominate one and the rest are elected. Thus the high commissioner will have fourteen votes at his command, the votes of the twelve nominated by him and the two votes be had as head of the council. The Jews will, according to numerical strength, have the right to elect one or two. That leaves the Arabs with only ten or eleven members at most. This means they will never have any power because they will always be in the minority of the council although in an overwhelming majority on the basis of population. Moreover, if any measure is passed by the council the high commissioner has the power to veto it. The fact that he is Zionist is not likely to help matters.

As European-Americans are quickly becoming a minority in the country they founded and have had their political leaders sell them out for more than the last one hundred years, can we see White Americans becoming the future Palestinians, held up in Balkanized open concentration camps for future Gaza-styled tyranny? There’s never been a better time for uncensored, unfettered free speech like that which was permitted in the Edmonton Journal of Canada, 1922. But as Elon Musk has discovered, we must first overcome the hate-filled NGOs controlling “what speech has reach.”

Pledges to Arabs Broken

The case for the Palestinians is a strong one. The Arabs are the original inhabitants of the land, whereas the Jews only occupied Palestine as a whole for 520 years and that was many centuries ago. Their proper home is Ur of the Chaldees, which is some-where near the Euphrates. When King Hussein in 1915 took up arms for the allies the British government assured him that the independence of the Arab countries would be acknowledged. Mr. Balfour’s pledge to the Zionists in 1917 seemed a direct contradiction to this. But again in 1918 Lord Allenby promised that nothing would be decided about the future of our land without first consulting its people. In 1919 Mr. Lloyd George stated that the pledge given to King Hussein would be redeemed. But when a Jew and a Zionist was made high commissioner, when Zionists openly boasted that they drew up Mr. Balfour’s declaration and secured the appointment of Sir Herbert Samuel, and above all when they asserted that they did not only mean to make Palestine a home for the Jews, but a Jewish state, ‘as Jewish as England is English or the United States is American,’ we felt it was time for us to protest.

“…as England is English or the United States is American!” What a dream that would be! Today, there seems to be no Western nation that will long reman as an ethnic/cultural homeland. They are all under attack, as professed by the Jewish Barbara Lerner Spectre, who opposes the existence of monolithic or even culturally-tight European societies. Could someone like Barbara explain when Israel “will learn how to be multi-cultural,” as France and Germany and especially Sweden are learning today?

That is why the delegation has been financed for an appeal to the civilized nations and why both Moslem and Christians have joined hands to fight for the self-determination. Mr. Winston Churchill has admitted in the British parliament ‘that the only cause of unrest in Palestine arises from the Zionist movement’ and this has cost the British people for military garrisons fifteen million dollars this year, 22,500,000 dollars last year and 22,500,000 dollars the year before.

The Arab population is composed of merchants, tradesmen, men in the professions, about forty per cent, and landowners and peasants. We have been described as wild, lawless, brutal, ignorant and savage.

What did former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett just call the Palestinians while exploding on Sky News?

Look at this photograph of an Arab peasant woman. She is wearing a gown of which any woman may be proud. It was embroidered by herself and it is worth at least a hundred dollars. Modern methods of agriculture are now being used and up-to-date machinery was introduced before the war. The Turkish government, anxious to encourage modern methods, released agricultural machinery from custom dues and also supplied machinery on the installment plan.

The Jaffa orange industry is in the hands of Arabs and their products are famous the world over. They have brought it to a highly efficient state. During the war owing to the lack of petroleum and machinery most of the gardens dried up and withered but during the last three years everything has been revived and the orange growing is today as good as ever it was. Millions of dollars are invested in it. Soap is another important industry. Palestinian soap is exported in large quantities to India, Egypt, Arabia, Persia, Syria, Mesopotamia and Turkey proper. Cloth is made at Medjel, Ghaza, Nablous and other towns. The mother-of-pearl work at Bethlehem is sent all over the world and a lot goes to America. The olivewood work of Jerusalem and the needle work are both exported in large quantities and are known everywhere. The natives are not asleep. And they certainly do not need Zionism to wake them up.”

Zionism cost Winston Churchill’s Britain the 2023 equivalent of billions of dollars then, and tens of billions of dollars for America today. Isn’t it ironic that as our post-WWII society progresses more to the left every year, we can’t even shelter our increasing homeless population? Why is that? And who has ever read every word of the congressional budget that has stiffed us to the tune of a $33 trillion in debt? I sense that a common playbook of shenanigans is leading America to the abyss.

Abbreviated captions of photos shown in this article:

“Here is a typical Palestine peasant woman of Arab blood. The native dress she is wearing is embroidered by hand and is quite valuable. This is the photograph to which Arif Pasha refers in the special interview he gave to our correspondent.”

And…

“A photograph of the Arab delegation from Palestine, now in England to place their case against Zionism before the British government.”

End of Article, But Please Read on to My Second Destination…

________________________________________________________

Destination 1920

Let’s conclude our time capsule journey by going back two more years, to a Jewish newspaper from Cincinnati, Ohio. There we find embedded a quote from Sir Herbert Samuel (High Commissioner of Palestine):

Herbert Samuel, former British Cabinet Minister and Special Commissioner to Belgium, in passing through Cairo from Jerusalem on his way home, issued a statement to the press, both native and British, in which he declared that the riots In Jerusalem had been due to a misconception of Zionism on the part of the non-Jewish population. He wrote:

They have assumed that Mohammedans and Christians will be placed under the government of a Jewish minority, that the present possessors and cultivators of the soil will be dispossessed of their property, that the ownership of Mohammedan and Christian holy places will be affected, and that the Jews will fill the administrative offices to the prejudice of others. All these assumptions are untrue, but, even if the Zionist organizations entertained such ideas, Great Britain would not permit their adoption.” — The American Israelite, July 1, 1920

He obviously underestimated the tactics of Irgun terrorist leader Menachem Begin (i.e., future Prime Minister of Israel Begin) who ordered the bombing of the British Headquarters at the King David Hotel! But what of the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty and the 34 deaths and 174 wounded Navy servicemen? Why did an American carrier group get ordered to turn away from the defense of the Liberty and our American sailors in 1967, while today in 2023 two carrier groups are sent in to aid Israel? The fact is that the average American citizen knows virtually nothing about the details of terrorism that have swept over Palestine lands from 1922 through today except for what our mainstream media has repetitively pounded into our heads. I’ll end my point with a quick one question test: 1. Who was Count Folke Bernadotte?

The time capsule has returned to our present day, 2023, as Israel’s IDF prepares for a ground assault into congested Gaza. I trust that our journey gives you a better understanding of the situation at hand, one that complements the work of Bernard M. Smith, noted in my introduction. I wrote this for the memory of the innocent victims of the last century, the innocent victims of the future, and in the hopes that the American people can find their roots, before it’s too late.

Survey of Anti-White Attitudes

/6 Comments/in /by
Aporia Magazine commissioned two Penn State professors, Eric Silver and Prof John Iceland, to survey anti-White and anti-Black attitudes.

The way we talk about racism has changed. Over the past decade or so, words like “bigot” and “extremist” have been overshadowed by words like “white privilege,” “white supremacy,” and “white fragility.” The new words portray a new kind of racist. Instead of wearing a hood and spewing hate speech, the “new racist” is an ordinary white person whose socialization into “whiteness” causes them to undermine people of color, whether they know it or not.

It’s not hard to see why well-meaning people might be drawn to this image of the new racist. Racial disparities persist. More than a century after Emancipation and 50 years after Civil Rights, blacks continue to lag behind whites in virtually all areas of success. To attribute these disparities to anything other than racism might seem like blaming the victim. Condemning the “new racist” avoids this problem. [It avoids the problem of persistent disparities that have not disappeared despite massive expenses over at least 5 decades by creating “causes” that are unmeasurable and therefore immune from rational criticism. White racism as a cause has become an axiom, a statement that is accepted without controversy or question, like a tautology. Such a statement is supposed to be so obvious that there is no need to try to prove it.]

Not everyone, however, agrees. Parents protest at school board meetings. State universities quietly soften their antiracism agendas. Individuals take defiant stands, sometimes at great cost to themselves, to combat what they perceive as the spread of anti-whiteness. And then, of course, there’s Florida, where “woke goes to die.”

These actions are motivated in part by concern over the antiracism movement’s use of morally charged language that depicts contemporary whites as racists and blames them for past and present racial injustices. They are also motivated by a fear that if left unchecked, the movement will succeed in normalizing a culture of anti-whiteness, with devastating effects not just for whites but for the country as a whole.

Are such worries warranted? How much of a problem is anti-whiteness, really?

To investigate this, in 2021, we hired YouGov, one of the world’s leading survey research firms, to ask a nationally representative sample of 1,125 US adults whether they agreed or disagreed with five statements designed to measure their “anti-whiteness.”

The statements were:

●     Most white people in this country believe that whites are better than other groups.

●     Most white people in this country just don’t get it when it comes to understanding the hardships of other race groups.

●     Most white people in this country would rather keep society as it is rather than make changes that would benefit other groups.

●     Most white people in this country don’t care about the hardships experienced by other race groups.

●     Most white people in this country are reluctant to give up their white privilege even though doing so would make society more equal.

We found there’s a lot of anti-whiteness out there, including among whites! Blacks were the most anti-white (69-79 percent), followed by Latinos (47- 62 percent), whites (40-53 percent), and other race groups (33-39 percent). Anti-whiteness, it seems, is far from rare, making concerns about its effects on society far from unreasonable.

These results may come as a surprise to those who view the US as a hopelessly white supremacist society where whites are universally admired and put on a pedestal. The data suggest this is far from the truth.

What’s most depressing is that between 30 and 40 percent of White people agree with these statements. These are the people prone to voting for leftist policies along with their non-White coalition partners, an increasingly unbeatable coalition given current demographics and the continuing deluge of non-White immigration, legal and illegal.

The results for Blacks are the opposite. In general, they don’t blame themselves for their problems, trying harder is not the answer, they are not responsible for racial tension, and they don’t think they have too much influence on politics.

The authors propose that diversity training should focus on common values, “shared values that transcend race”— like “liberty, and progress, values that have been a source of unity in the American context for centuries.” However, the problem with that is that it’s not going to change the disparities, and Blacks and Latinos can’t get stuff like affirmative action in education, job preference, and a lenient criminal justice system. by endorsing them. So we’re back where we started.

The Wisdom of Enver Solomon: Importing Fans of Hamas and Other Non-White Savages Is Very Good for the White West

/6 Comments/in /by

If you want to understand Muslim atrocities against Jews, the Jewish Bible is a good place to start:

Deuteronomy 20:16 But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth: 20:17 But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee.

Numbers 31:15 And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? 31:16 Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the LORD in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the LORD. 31:17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. 31:18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

Islam is a kind of gentile Judaism, translating the ethnocentric barbarism and bloodlust of the Torah into more universalist terms. Where Judaism has a chosen people entitled to exploit and prey upon outsiders, Islam has a chosen ideology. In short, Muslims think like Jews and behave like Jews. This means that Muslims don’t just attack outsiders: they often turn on each other too. The atrocities committed by Palestian Muslims against Jewish civilians in October 2023 were bad. But Pakistani Muslims did the same on a much bigger scale to Bangladeshi Muslims in the 1970s.

Jewish sex-pest vs British anti-Semites

There is no “Turn the other cheek” and “Love your enemies” in Islam. But there is “Rape your enemies,” of course. When Western nations began importing Muslims after the Second World War, those Muslims did the Allah-approved thing and began raping and sexually enslaving White women and girls. Jews and White traitors in high places yawned and looked the other way. It doesn’t matter when it happens to Whites. But it does matter when it happens to Jews. The Jewish sex-pest Nick Cohen has never written about the rape-gangs of Rotherham. But he hastened to his keyboard after the atrocities committed by Hamas against Israeli Jews. He was angry and disturbed at the way “British anti-Semites” have been “delighted by the attack on Israel.” Dave Rich, head of a Jewish spying agency called the Community Security Trust (CST), has told him that “Anti-Semites are getting excited by the sight of dead Jews” and that “Hamas murdering Israeli civilians has exhilarated them and filled them with joy.” The CST has “had reports of people driving past synagogues shouting ‘kill the Jews’ and ‘fuck you’.”

Cohen goes on to highlight what he calls a “shameful statistic.” He says that “There are only 271,000 Jews in the UK according to the last census. Yet the Home Office says that this tiny group contains the victims of a quarter of all religious hate crimes.” But the progressive anti-racist left ignore these Jewish victims! They also ignore the “inconvenient fact” that “Hamas is a far-right wing clerical fascist movement.” It’s shocking, isn’t it? But Cohen is, of course, ignoring some big “inconvenient facts” of his own. Fascist Hamas is partly a creation of Israel itself. And when Cohen laments Jewish victimhood at the hands of “British anti-Semites,” he fails to describe those anti-Semites in any way. Dave Rich of the CST shares his reticence. Who exactly is “driving past synagogues shouting ‘kill the Jews’ and ‘fuck you’”? Rich doesn’t say. This is because he and Cohen don’t want to admit that Jews have manufactured the very problem they are wailing about. The “British anti-Semites” they’re condemning aren’t British at all, of course. Instead, they’re non-White Muslims imported into Britain against the clearly expressed opposition of the White majority, but with the full approval of Jews.

Ethnocentric Jews in control

In fact, those non-Whites are here only because Jews wanted them here. Mass migration from the Third World into the West has been a thoroughly Jewish project. Kevin MacDonald has shown how the 1965 Immigration Act that opened America’s borders to non-Whites was the culmination of a decades-long campaign by ethnocentric Jews to dilute (and eventually destroy) America’s White Christian majority. Jews have done the same in Britain. When New Labour opened the borders in the 1990s, the party was led by a corrupt and devious gentile called Tony Blair. But he was just a shabbos goy, because the real power rested with Labour’s treasurer, an ethnocentric Jew called Michael Levy. When Levy was forced out by a scandal about underhanded donations to Labour from Jewish businessmen, he was replaced as party treasurer by another ethnocentric Jew called Jonathan Mendelsohn.

Ethnocentric Jew Barbara Roche relates “The British story of migration” at TedX

It’s no surprise, then, that New Labour appointed an ethnocentric Jew called Barbara Roche as minister for immigration. In 2001, Roche told the Guardian that she “entered politics — she still emphasises this today — to combat anti-semitism and xenophobia in general.” In 2003, while urging her party “to promote the benefits of legal migration,” she told the Independent that “My being Jewish informs me totally, informs my politics.” After all, she’s the “child of a Polish-Russian Ashkenazi father and a Sephardic Spanish-Portuguese mother.” In one speech she was clearly gloating about her ability to open the borders. She was the proud descendant of Jews who had been insulted more than a century ago by a xenophobic White Briton. Note how she begins this section of her speech with a blatant lie:

Britain has always been a nation of migrants. There were in practice almost no immigration controls prior to the beginning of the 20th century. The 1905 Aliens Act was a direct response to Jewish immigration and it is difficult to deny that it was motivated in part by anti-Semitism. Major [William] Evans-Gordon, an MP, speaking in support of the legislation, said: “It is the poorest and least fit of these people who move, and it is the residuum of these again who come to and are let in this country… Hon[ourable] Members [of Parliament] opposite do not live in daily terror of being turned into the street to make room for an unsavoury Pole [i.e. Polish Jew].”

I expect Major Evans Gordon would be spinning in his grave if he knew that their descendant would not only be Immigration Minister but would be standing before you today making this speech. (UK migration in a global economy, Draft Speech by Barbara Roche MP, Immigration Minister, London, 11th September 2000)

Roche’s blatant lie — “Britain has always been a nation of migrants” — was taken from Jewish propagandists in the United States. A “nation of migrants” is a complete contradiction in terms, because nations are created by bonds of blood and shared history. After all, the very word “nation” is from Latin nasci, meaning “to be born.” Migration destroys nations, but that’s precisely why Barbara Roche and the other ethnocentric Jews in New Labour opened Britain’s borders to the Third World. This is Roche surveying the effect of her labours after she left office:

Friday rush hour. Euston station [in London]. Who’s here? Who isn’t. A kaleidoscope of skin colours. The world in one terminus. Barbara Roche can see it over the rim of her cup of Americano coffee. “I love the diversity of London,” she tells me. “I just feel comfortable.” (Hideously Diverse Britain: The immigration ‘conspiracy’, The Guardian, 2nd March 2011)

Jews like Roche “feel comfortable” in an atomized society because they no longer stand out as Jews and no longer fear gentile retribution for their bad behaviour. But alas, that Jewish “comfort” is beginning to evaporate. Here’s another ethnocentric Jew, a journalist called Madeline Grant, in 2023:

Britain is finished if Jews no longer feel safe here

Complacent policing and brazen anti-Semitism after Hamas’s shocking terror attack should worry us all

… Across the world, people have rallied in support of Hamas murderers. Hundreds converged outside the Sydney Opera House, chanting “gas the Jews”. Masked Hamas supporters at the Israeli Embassy in Copenhagen removed flowers laid by Danish citizens. Though scarcely the most distressing event of recent days, the callousness of this gesture was striking. They couldn’t even let people grieve.

Following the darkest day in Jewish history since the Holocaust, British nationals gleefully took to the streets to celebrate indiscriminate slaughter. That there are people at the heart of our polity who feel empowered to revel in such desecration, in public, with no consequences, suggests a catastrophic erosion of social norms. Up and down the country, Jewish families will be debating whether it’s safe for their children to attend school; schools already protected by heavy security designed to guard against anti-Semitic attacks. Tragically, it has emerged that Jake Marlowe, a UK citizen missing following the Supernova rave massacre, left the UK for Israel because of fears over the rise of anti-Jewish bigotry. …

We should feel shame at the spate of anti-Semitism within our borders. But above all, we should be afraid. Between a state that apparently cannot, or will not, apply the law evenly and the thousands of people openly broadcasting their hatred for Jewish people, this is a toxic combination with potential consequences too terrifying to contemplate. The authorities must offer Jewish citizens all the protection they can, while clamping down on anyone glorifying terrorism on our streets. If Britain isn’t a place where Jews can live safely, it really is game over for our civilisation. (Britain is finished if Jews no longer feel safe here, The Daily Telegraph, 11th October 2023)

Comfort evaporates: a part-Jewish journalist changes her mind about the joys of “Britain’s multicultural societ

Madeline Grant doesn’t explain that it’s precisely because Jews wanted to “feel safe” that they “no longer feel safe.” Like Nick Cohen and Dave Rich, she doesn’t describe the “British nationals” responsible for the “spate of anti-Semitism within our borders.” Like Cohen and Rich, she doesn’t want to admit the truth: that Jews have manufactured the very problem they are wailing about. When the Conservative party won power again in 2010, it promised to reduce migration and repair the damage done by New Labour’s reckless opening of the borders.

Ehud Sheleg, ethnocentric Jewish treasurer of the not-at-all Conservative party

The Tories were lying. They’ve increased migration and Third-World folk are flooding into Britain in greater numbers than ever. This is because the Tories are funded and controlled by the same ethnocentric Jews as New Labour were. Labour had Jewish treasurers called Michael Levy and Jonathan Mendelsohn (both are now members of the House of Lords). The Conservatives have Jewish treasurers called Sir Mick Davis and Sir Ehud Sheleg. Sir Ehud has condescendingly said this to the British goyim whose destiny he now controls: “I was brought up, albeit in Israel, with the sentiment of very strong ties to Britain. In the family of nations, this has to be my favourite one. Second to my homeland, of course.”

Israel’s Likud party boasts about strengthening Israel’s borders against the Third World (n.b. Hebrew is read from right to left)

Sheleg’s homeland of Israel does not have open borders to the Third World. Instead, it has high-tech fences keeping the Third World out. If Britain is Ehud Sheleg’s “second favourite” nation, why has he remained treasurer of the Conservative party while Britain is flooded with low-IQ tribalists from the corrupt, violent, and diseased Third World? The answer is simple: because he thinks that Third-World migration into Britain is good for Jews. It atomizes society and allows Jews to “feel comfortable.” But Third-World migration into Israel would be very bad for Jews. It isn’t good to atomize society when Jews are the majority. That’s what Ehud Sheleg thinks and that’s why the Conservative party keeps the borders open in Britain, working against the interests of British Whites even as it works for the interests of Israel and its sealed borders.

“Open borders are good for you, goyim!”

Ehud Sheleg is supposedly right-wing, but he has the same attitudes to migration as the left-wing Jew Enver Solomon, who works tirelessly for Third-World invaders as “chief executive of the Refugee Council.” Here is Solomon dispensing his wisdom in the Guardian:

Enver Solomon, ethnocentric Jew and “chief executive of the Refugee Council” (image from ThirdSector)

[Current government policy] is a purposeful move away from the commitment to a shared humanity and multilateralism forged by the international community in the wake of the horrors of the second world war to an insular, unilateralist, more nationalist agenda akin to that championed by the Italian prime minister Giorgia Meloni or Marine Le Pen in France.

So we must look behind the government soundbites about Channel crossings and ask ourselves: what sort of country do we want to be? There are basic choices to be made and we must make them — between liberalism and nationalist populism, between humanity and inhumanity, between compassion and cruelty.

Standing up for treating men, women and children seeking asylum with decency, care and understanding, respecting their rights and giving them a fair hearing. That would be a mark of the nation we want to be and the values we want to hold on to. (“We know people seeking asylum die in the Channel, but callous hardline policy kills them too,” The Guardian, 14th August 2023)

That’s the wisdom of Enver Solomon: White nations like Britain should accept unlimited numbers of migrants from the corrupt, violent, and diseased Third World. In this case, Solomon is complaining about the Tory government’s pretence that it will stop illegal migrants crossing the English Channel in small boats. It won’t, of course. Both the left and the pseudo-right are very happy to exchange fiery rhetoric about the Channel crossings, because their fake debate takes attention from the far larger numbers of Third-World folk who are migrating into Britain legally.

The Guardian also publishes articles about what Third-World migration will sooner or later create in Britain. This is one of those articles:

It was early afternoon when the mob surged down an alley of neat rose bushes and halted outside Zarifa’s house. The Kyrgyz men broke into her courtyard and sat Zarifa down next to a cherry tree. They asked her a couple of questions. After confirming she was an ethnic Uzbek, they stripped her, raped her and cut off her fingers. After that they killed her and her small son, throwing their bodies into the street. They then moved on to the next house.

“They were like beasts,” Zarifa’s neighbour, Bakhtir Irgayshon, said today, pointing to the gutted bedframe where she had been assaulted. A few pots and pans remained; the rest of the family home was a charred ruin. Zarifa’s husband, Ilham, was missing, Irgayshon said, probably dead. Only his mother, Adina, survived the Kyrgyz-instigated conflagration that engulfed the neighbourhood of Cheremushki last Friday.

The scale of the ethnic killing that took place in Osh — as well as in other towns and villages in southern Kyrgyzstan — was grimly obvious. In the next street were the remains of another victim. He burned to death in his bed. Not much was left, only a jigsaw-like spine and hip. Nearby, Uzbek survivors were retrieving the bodies of seven small children. They had been incinerated, together with their mother, while cowering in a dark cellar. (Kyrgyzstan killings are attempted genocide, say ethnic Uzbeks, The Guardian, 16th Jun 2010)

As the great Chateau Heartiste so often said: “Diversity + Proximity = War.” But in one way there was no diversity in the slaughter and rape of Uzbeks by “Kyrgyz men.” Both sides are Muslim. That article in the Guardian is yet another example of why it is criminally stupid for Western countries to accept migration from Muslim countries. But the Guardian ignores the obvious conclusions of its own reporting. It has the same attitude to Muslim migration as Jews like Barbara Roche and Enver Solomon. That’s why its journalists and editors should one day be put on trial for their role in the crimes committed by Muslims and other non-Whites against British Whites.

As for me, I’m a crazed far-right extremist, so I oppose murder and rape committed by any group against any other group. That’s also why I oppose Third-World migration and the continuing presence of Third-World people in White nations. If things remain as they are, Muslims will one day commit the same atrocities against Whites as they have committed against Jews in Israel and against other Muslims in Kyrgyzstan and Bangladesh. And let’s be honest: if inter-racial war breaks out in Europe and America, then Whites will commit atrocities too. We have psychopaths and sadists of our own. War will create more. The difference is that, unlike Judaism and Islam, the traditional White religion of Christianity doesn’t approve of psychopathy and sadism against outsiders.

Neither Jews nor Muslims belong in the West

Genuine Christianity doesn’t approve of open borders and mass migration either. That’s why the leaders of all mainstream churches should also be put on trial. They have been traitors against ordinary Whites and against the religion they claim to follow. But Jews like Barbara Roche, Ehud Sheleg, and Enver Solomon can’t be accused of treachery. In opening the borders and supporting non-White migration, they’ve simply done what Jews have always done: put Jews first and goyim nowhere. Benjamin Netanyahu and other Machiavellian Israelis did the same when they “helped build up a militant strain of Palestinian political Islam, in the form of Hamas and its Muslim Brotherhood precursors” against Yasser Arafat and the more moderate Fatah party. Netanyahu thought he was helping Jews and harming Palestinians. Now he’s trying to exploit the atrocities committed by Hamas. It’s quite possible that he knew about what Hamas was planning and let it go ahead in order to exploit it. Once a Jew, always a Jew. That’s why Jews don’t belong in Western nations any more than Muslims do.

Fake conservatives like Mark Steyn don’t agree with that, of course. They tell their followers that Jews are good and Muslims are bad. But they don’t discuss the central Jewish role in Muslim migration or the endless support given to Muslims by Jews:

Muslims are only in the West to commit atrocities because Jews wanted those Muslims here. If Muslims and their Jewish enablers don’t leave the West, more and worse atrocities will follow. The Hamas-fans who flooded onto the streets of Western cities are simply more proof of that simple truth.