------------------------
Original Post Below
------------------------
This post follows up a discussion from a thread on the thought-provoking Roissy In DC blog.
I had started participating in that thread with this initial post.
[NOTE: Over the next week or so, I plan to break this post up into more focused chunks and point to those more narrow posts from this "parent post" adding a few additional notes. After that I'll try to get my posts more polished initially.]
Disclaimer: When I say "Jew" and "Jewish" I'm referring to ethnicity and not religion. I'll specify some term like "religious Jew" if needed. In fact many Jewish activists are actually atheists. Also, in some cases these folks may consider their activism to be, say, "Liberal" or "Conservative", rather than "Jewish" and they may or may not be conscious of serving Jewish group interests. And certainly not everything a Jewish person or group does is oriented toward serving Jewish group interests.
Seeking Alpha:
Scotch, a couple questions:Here's a quote from one Jewish activist (from Chapter 7 of "Culture of Critique"):
How does this grand conspiracy help Jews? I see how it helps the rich, and that the two overlap, but how specifically the Jews?
How does it help the Jews?
The Census Bureau has just reported that about half of the American population will soon be non-white or non-European. And they will all be American citizens. We have tipped beyond the point where a Nazi-Aryan party will be able to prevail in this country. We [Jews] have been nourishing the American climate of opposition to bigotry for about half a century. That climate has not yet been perfected, but the heterogeneous nature of our population tends to make it irreversible—and makes our constitutional constraints against bigotry more practical than ever. (Earl Raab, Jewish Bulletin, 1993 February 19, 23)
Obviously Mr. Raab believes Jews will be safer by living in a multicultural society where the share of the population of non-Jewish Whites is much smaller and has lost its hegemony over society. This is clearly totally unrelated to wealth but directly related to perceived Jewish safety.
I don't believe there is a "grand conspiracy" by Jews, but it is undeniable that various Jewish individuals and groups have pursued a broad spectrum of policies that have harmed the traditional population of this country and its social, cultural, religious and moral order, while benefiting the Jewish community and Israel. I think it is clear that in many cases these ethnic Jewish actors were motivated by their perceived group interests as Jews and did NOT mind the weakening and displacement of White Gentiles.
In fact this weakening appears to be the raison d'etre behind the traditional, nearly universal Jewish support for unrestricted mass immigration from 3rd world countries. Recently some thoughful Jews are questioning the wisdom of mass Muslim immigration (because it's bad for Jews).
From: High Noon to Midnight: Why Current Immigration Policy Dooms American Jewry by Dr. Stephen M. Steinlight
Thus, behind closed doors, Jewish leaders speak a different language. This is not entirely new with immigration, but the gulf is now a chasm. Privately they express grave concern that unregulated immigration will prove ruinous to American Jewry, as it has for French Jewry, and will for Jews throughout Western Europe. There’s particular fear about the impact on Jewish security, as well as American support for Israel, of the rapid growth of the Muslim population. At the conclusion of meetings with national leaders, several told me, "You’re 1000 percent right, but I can’t go out and say it yet." While they have yet to find the civic courage to break with the traditional consensus they can see the Rubicon glinting in the distance, and many recognize that eventually they will have to cross it.
Note: there is a smattering of Jews who seem to support controlled immigration for the broader interests of the country, like Dan Stein.
Another Jewish-dominated movement from the early 20th century was the banning of Christian prayer, symbols and belief from public schools which had been customary since the founding of the country. Are you denying this? (Jewish Power, J. J. Goldberg, p. 21)
Are Gentiles forbidden to notice the numerous lawsuits brought by Jews and Jewish or crypto-Jewish (e.g. the ACLU) organizations that effected these radical changes? It is significant because the Christian-based morality historically taught in public schools has been replaced by postmodern, politically correct relativism in many schools. This is the infamous Cultural Marxism mostly developed by Leftist Jewish intellectuals; see The Culture of Critique for extensive documentation).
So instead of punishing students for chewing gum and smoking like fifty years ago, our schools cope with slightly more serious hijinks, like murders, rapes and violent gangs. Every day, in every way, it's getting better and better!!!
Whites children are taught a cartoon version of history where their ancestors are the ONLY baddies and should be reviled while every other ethnicity should be celebrated for their innocence and authenticity.
Those millions of black men that were castrated before being shipped to slavery in the Arab World? Move along, nothing to see! Down the memory hole!
From Wikipedia:
The Arab slave trade from East Africa is one of the oldest slave trades, predating the European transatlantic slave trade by hundreds of years.[30] Male slaves who were often made eunuchs were employed as servants, soldiers, or laborers by their owners, while female slaves, including those from Africa, were long traded to the Middle Eastern countries and kingdoms by Arab and Oriental traders, as concubines and servants.
Also, the youth curricula linked above don't have an iota about the Jewish role in American slavery, which was NOT non-existent. But that's not surprising, the dominant Jewish narrative seems to be there aren't any black spots in Jewish history and Jews themselves never do anything to contribute to anti-Semitism. The typical Jewish anti-Semitism book essentially asserts that Jews are sinless naifs incessantly persecuted without cause by evil, jealous, irrational Gentiles. I think more Jews need to sincerely look within and acknowledge that they have sometimes harmed other groups through their activism and behavior, and they need to atone for this just as those who transgress unfairly against Jews should do likewise.
Most Jewish activists have a hypocritical, double-standard of promoting a Universalist, deracinated, secular multiculturalism for the US and Western countries BUT NOT FOR ISRAEL! Israel gets to be an ethnocentric Jewish nation that includes legalized discrimination against its own indigenous non-Jewish minorities and that essentially restricts immigration to Jews. Again, a quick google search will lead to voluminous details.
Particularly hypocritical is the attempt to deconstruct, undermine and attack the ethnic identity of Whites and to prevent them from organizing for their own group interests (racial realism). Many Jewish organizations like the ADL and the SPLC act as politically correct enforcers attempting to crush Whites who are just trying to organize in a manner that is allowed and encouraged FOR EVERY OTHER RACIAL AND ETHNIC GROUP. Of course no other group is as well-organized, well-funded and aggressive in pursuing their own interests as Jews.
Racial Realism means that Whites should look out for their own interests like everyone else is doing. The variant that seems most just to me is that Whites should have the same rights and respect as other groups, no more or no less, and that traditional Freedom of Association is restored so there can have ethnic enclaves not subject to neighborhood busting by sleazy developers. Likewise other groups can have their own sanctuaries. Of course in such a society there could also be many public spaces that were integrated as well, probably a majority.
White Supremacists believe that Whites are superior to other races and that Whites should conquer and dominate other groups.
I disagree with this position and am inspired by the following quote from Alexsandr Solzhenitsyn:
In recent times it has been fashionable to talk of the levelling of nations, of the disappearance of different races in the melting-pot of contemporary civilization. I do not agree with this opinion, but its discussion remains another question. Here it is merely fitting to say that the disappearance of nations would have impoverished us no less than if all men had become alike, with one personality and one face. Nations are the wealth of mankind, its collective personalities; the very least of them wears its own special colours and bears within itself a special facet of divine intention.
I think it is crystal clear that those two concepts are quite different. Racial Realism just says that if we're going to have a multicultural society, then Whites have same groups rights as everyone else: no better or no worse.
Right now America has a hypocritical system that is strongly biased AGAINST Whites and FOR ANYBODY BUT Whites. I'm fed up with these dishonest double standards and believe the more that Whites are belittled, discriminated against, demonized by Hollywood, the MSM, the Diversity Industry and the Youth and Higher Education Industry, and besieged by grossly disproportionate crime from the Black Thug subclass and to a lesser extent by Hispanics, the magnitude and details of which is covered up by our "journalists", the more Whites will give up on the Color-Blind society, as I have, since, for the most part, ONLY Whites have pursued it in good faith.
It is clear that the more power Whites have relinquished, the more sacrifices we've made and the more we've let ourselves be displaced by 3rd World immigration, the WORSE our treatment. Why should we keep enabling this rotten, hateful system?
Our society even allows OPENLY RACIST groups like La Raza and OPENLY SUPREMACIST groups like MEChA to receive public funds and operate on college campuses while prohibiting NON-RACIST White ethnocentric groups. On campuses members of those racist organizations are not shunned and persecuted the way a corresponding White racist or supremacist would be.
Janet Murguia of La Raza appears regularly in the mainstream media and is treated with respect, while White racialists, like Jared Taylor, don't get airtime except when framed as an evil, bigoted Nazi to be held in the highest contempt. This is a hypocritical, double standard.
Oddly enough Jewish ethnocentrists like Dr. Alan Dershowitz DON'T receive the same treatment. Dr. Dershowitz is passionately concerned with Jews ethnic survival and participates in organized groups to address this grave worry. That is perfectly reasonable and laudable! But don't accuse Whites of bigotry and agitate for legal oppression against ONLY Whites to suppress them the doing exact logical equivalent for their own people and interests!
Seeking Alpha:
How does your theory fit with the fact that many of the proponents of your stated theories aren’t Jewish? Is it secret mind control? Kennedy was behind the Immigration Act, no? Rumsfeld and Bush led the current charge on Iraq, and from what I’ve read there was plenty of hawks in the Clinton administration as well.I dispute your claim that "many of the proponents of your stated theories aren’t Jewish".I just don’t see the motive. The only motives I see (I don’t agree with them, but the argument can be made) are ways these things help the rich.
Most of these changes have been pushed predominantly by Jews. Depending on the issue the Jewish contribution can vary from moderate to overwhelming; I believe in going with whatever the facts are as well as they can be ascertained. For example, if Jews were 3% of the population but applied 80% of the force behind a certain movement, I'd call that EXTREMELY disproportionate. Even if they provided say 20% of the force, that would be fairly disproportionate but at least there would still be broad societal consensus. For most of these issues, I'd say the Jewish contribution is over 40-50%, particularly when you factor in their intellectual and cultural leadership and disproportionate influence over Hollywood, the media, government, business, education and academia which act as force multipliers by inculcating Gentiles toward supporting Jewish interests.
Decades of anti-White and anti-Christian propaganda from OVERWHELMINGLY Jewish-controlled Hollywood have had an impact.
See: Joel Stein, "How Jewish is Hollywood" and Steve Sailer's take on this story.
Gotta love Mr. Stein's conclusion:
I appreciate Foxman's concerns. And maybe my life spent in a New Jersey-New York/Bay Area-L.A. pro-Semitic cocoon has left me naive. But I don't care if Americans think we're running the news media, Hollywood, Wall Street or the government. I just care that we get to keep running them.
A truly vicious piece of anti-White and anti-Christian hatred is "Harold & Kumar Go To White Castle". I'm planning a detailed analysis of this in a future post. The short answer is that pretty much ALL the Whites EXCEPT THE THREE JEWS (including the hippie drug dealer) are vicious, moronic, perverted, psychotic, thuggish, backwards, corrupt, racist, cruel or some other undesirable trait. Of course, the innocent black guy falsely jailed by a vicious, racist cop is saintly, the Korean and Hindu protagonists are cool dudes, as are the Jewish dudes, and, oh yeah, a group of Asians dorks turn out to be cool too. They drag Christianity through the mud with pure malice. Naturally the producer, directors and writers are all Jews.
When I accessed this Wikipedia page for the movie [on 2009-01-30 early AM EST], there is NO HINT that the movie might be biased against whites, although if one looks in the discussion and history it appears someone tried to get this in there, but was wiki-censored.
The simple test of double standards is whether our glorious PC commissars would change their opinion (Funny! Brilliant! Subversively Transgressive!) if various identities are interchanged (Unfunny! Viciously Racist! White Supremacist!). Hmm... Would the reception have been different if black characters were swapped with the white characters? Can you say "100 alarm riots in 100 hoods"? How about swapping Judiasm for Christianity? I'm sure the ADL, the SPLC and hundreds of other Jewish organization would be DELIGHTED with the witty sendup! NOT!!!
OK. Back to the Neocons.
Typically Jewish-led movements in Gentile host societies like having some Gentiles around, but usually they're the second string followers or "beards" like George W. Bush and NOT the central drivers and theorists. Kevin MacDonald discusses this extensively in "The Culture of Critique".
If you think George W. Bush "led the current charge on Iraq", that is, if he actually created and developed the doctrine and strategy, there's some scenic lakefront land in Florida selling on e-Bay real cheap! It's a REAL STEAL!
"White man's burden" by Ari Shavit in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz discusses the Neocons:
In the course of the past year, a new belief has emerged in the town: the belief in war against Iraq. That ardent faith was disseminated by a small group of 25 or 30 neoconservatives, almost all of them Jewish, almost all of them intellectuals (a partial list: Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, William Kristol, Eliot Abrams, Charles Krauthammer), people who are mutual friends and cultivate one another and are convinced that political ideas are a major driving force of history.
A quick google search on neoconservative, jewish and "iraq war" will lead to many sources that provide great detail on this. Also, I gave some good initial books and some of the key players in my previous post.
The following article in The American Conservative magazine discusses the Neoconservatives including their role in promoting mass immigration for the US and in purging traditional conservatives (paleoconservatives) out of mainstream conservative media:
Among the Neocons: A foot soldier in the ideological wars relates by Scott McConnell
Justin Raimondo discusses the history of the Neocons here.
Some of the dissidents banished by the Neocons include Peter Brimelow, Joseph Sobran and Steve Sailer while others like John O'Sullivan gelded themselves to preserve their careers.
By the late 90s National Review had gotten very Neocon and Jewish and the remaining Gentiles knew they'd better not cross you-know-who if they wanted a home in "respectable media": that's the stick. Notice how Victor Davis Hanson's career skyrocketed (in Neocon controlled media) when he mouthed an extreme form of Neocon warmongering and 100% autonomic support for Israel: that's the carrot.
Check out the article: "Is Kevin MacDonald Right?" on jewcy.com which is an e-mail exchange between Joey Kurtzman and John Derbyshire which includes a discussion of Jewish power and influence in the media. This article is a gold mine. Here are two excerpts from John Derbyshire:
First Excerpt:
Working back through your questions: Yes, indeed I was, and am, “afraid of offending Jews.” Of course I am! For a person like myself, a Gentile who is a very minor name in American opinion journalism, desirous of ascending to some slightly less minor status, ticking off Jews is a very, very bad career strategy. I approached the MacDonald review with great trepidation. I gave my honest opinion, of course—the entire point of my line of work is to speak your mind and get paid for it—but I’ll admit I was nervous. Reading the review again, I think it shows.
Second Excerpt:
To your next point (I am working from the bottom up again) that my professed fear of ticking off Jews is some kind of affectation or pose, I can only assure you that this is not so. Almost the first thing you hear from old hands when you go into opinion journalism in the U.S. is, to put it in the precise form I first heard it: “Don’t f*ck with the Jews.” (Though I had better add here that I was mixing mainly with British expats at that point, and the comment came from one of them. More on this in a moment.)
Joe Sobran expressed it with his usual hyperbole: “You must only ever write of us as a passive, powerless, historically oppressed minority, struggling to maintain our ancient identity in a world where all the odds are against us, poor helpless us, poor persecuted and beleaguered us! Otherwise we will smash you to pieces.”
You can read between the lines of Derbyshire's contributions to sense his fear and caution to make sure he doesn't go too far in discussing this taboo. He also makes sure to add some sycophantic praise. Note: Mr. Derbyshire also writes some fine books for the general public discussing advanced mathematical ideas and history; I'm sure if he wants to continue getting these book contracts with major publishers that will be promoted in the major bookstores he knows he'd better be careful (Kevin MacDonald was banished from the major publishers).Here's some discussion of this infamous e-mail exchange by Patrick Cleburne.
Anyone researching Neoconservatism, the Iraq War and Democracy-At-The-Point-Of-A-Gun-For-Arab-And-Muslim-Regimes-That-Are-Threats-To-Israel quickly finds that NEARLY ALL of the principle players were Jewish. George W. Bush was the nominal leader but was completely owned by this well-organized group of highly motivated ideologues. Try swimming through the sea of Jewish and Gentile-tool Neocon op-eds from after September 11th through the first few years of the Iraq War (there are probably thousands). I read through hundreds at the time and was complete Neocon tool for years. Their goals dovetailed neatly with what they considered to be in Israel's best interest by destroying the regimes considered most dangerous to Israel (Iraq, Syria and Iran).
Again, I'm not claiming all of these movements and actions are 100% Jewish, only that Jews have an extremely disproportionate influence. "The Culture of Critique" explores this in great depth.
Most disturbing is how a group of ideologues who put Israel's interest before America's were and are allowed to hold so many important government positions. And because it's now considered politically incorrect to discriminate in any way against foreign origin or ethnicity, our national security bureaucracies are filled with people of various backgrounds that may retain a higher loyalty to their ethnostate, like China, or alien religion, like Islam, which deeply compromises our security, unlike our various competitors that are unapologetically ethnocentric and lack legions of lawyers salivating over giant payouts for discrimination lawsuits. They'd better get with the multicultural program! Oh, they're non-White? How dare you corrupt their authentic culture!
A significant factor in Allied victory in World War II was our breaking of the Japanese and German codes which gave us great insight into their plans. If our government and society are infiltrated by hundreds or thousands of moles and operatives working for our enemies BEFORE and DURING wartime, we're open to intelligence breaches and attacks of shocking devastation, particularly in this era of WMDs. Most Americans don't appreciate our vulnerability since we haven't suffered a bloody war on our soil since the Civil War.
America will likely suffer grievous harm in the next two decades because of this.
Seeking Alpha:
Kennedy was behind the Immigration Act, no?The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 was sponsored by Emanuel Celler, a Jewish Congressman from New York well known for promoting massive immigration since he was first seated in 1923. Sure, Ted Kennedy was a great supporter of of the 1965 Immigration Act but he was far from the being its primary cause. Other Jewish legislators like Senator Jacob Javits of New York also played a significant role in passing this act.
According to Wikipedia (and Kevin MacDonald agrees):
He [Jacob Javits] was also one of the main forces behind the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act that by removing immigration quota that favored Western European nations helped to make the U.S. a truly diverse and multicultural country.
Please read Chapter 7 of Kevin MacDonald's "The Culture of Critique". It lays out in great detail how Jewish organizations have forcefully and consistently pushed for mass immigration into this country. This book is heavily referenced and footnoted and includes a massive bibliography. It would be easy for a group to consult each of his original sources, excerpt a large segment around his reference and then let careful readers decide if he's been honest in his quoting and interpretation of these sources.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment