“Naming the Jew” and why you won’t see it here

The right-wing provides the only realistic view of politics, and the spectra of right from paleoconservative onwards to Plato provides the best hope for humanity, in my view.

However, this forces you in with some strange bedfellows. As Francis Fukuyama pointed out, liberal democracy dominates the globe, and so ended history. The struggle between overlords (kings) and peasants is over and the peasants won, owing to superior numbers.

As a result, the only real opposition in this world at all comes from the right, who by insisting on time-honored tradition uphold the values of not just the past, but a better form of a society, one where in total contrast to all liberal societies, the equality of all people is not presupposed.

In a rightist society, no one is equal — it’s an insult, like saying you are mediocre. People instead serve roles. As a result, these societies are neither individualist nor collectivist, but organic. They are people cooperating at a level of such maturity that each person finds a role they can serve and stays there. If that’s king, great; if it’s peasant, ditto.

Every other political system on earth is shaped around a single premise: the presumed equality of all people. Through mission creep this moves from political equality to assumed equality of ability. This idea underlies all liberal philosophies, and modern “conservative” (or neoconservative) ideals as well.

Because the right stands out as the only real opposition, it is a target of both (a) people who want to discredit it and (b) power hungry people, often those who have nothing to offer but outrage. There are also a number of good people getting confused by by of those other groups (which often share members).

Many of the latter, who are angry at life and want politics to be an outlet, participate in an odious practice of “naming the Jew” as a way of shifting blame. Some have asked in email why we here, who face all truths as much as possible, do not “name the Jew.”

In fact, some won’t stay out of my email box about it and while that behavior may be annoying, they have a point: only a coward backs down from a legitimate challenge to his beliefs. If the beliefs are good, they should be defended.

First, a definition: “naming the Jew” practice of using someone’s Jewish heritage, culture or religion to debunk their arguments or make them a target of aggression. It used to be a right-wing thing, but now that the left hates Israel for not assuming Palestinians are equal, it’s also left-wing.

Here is why this blog and this writer will never “name the Jew”:

  1. Blame is unhealthy. Diagnostics are good. We like to figure out where we went wrong. But we steer this ship. Just because the kid next door tells us a lie doesn’t mean it’s his fault we follow it. We are responsible for figuring out our own course. Among us there are good and bad people. Bad people love lies. Lies help them cover up their own bad deeds. Good people should hate lies. If an outsider tells a lie, and bad people repeat it and give him money for his products based on that lie, the problem is those bad people, not the outsider. Even more, focusing our blame on outsiders means we do not clean our own house. For every second we spend talking about how someone oppressed us, how someone screwed us, and how someone else did this to us, we experience a corresponding drop in our own power. We sabotage ourselves by undermining our faith in ourselves. Even if the outsider were to blame, and he is not, we make ourselves weak by not insisting that the solution lies within ourselves. If we feel the power to fix ourselves in our own hands, we have power to do what must be done. If we insist that this power lies in the hands of others, we feel helpless and convince ourselves to fail.
  2. Blaming Jewish people or Judaism is not accurate. What destroyed the West was class revolt. Peasants, who breed without concern for the future, breed themselves above carrying capacity for their land, then starve and blame their leaders. They overthrow those leaders and set up governments based on equality, because if you’re at the bottom of the totem pole of life you (a) want to rise but (b) lack the initiative to do so and therefore (c) your only option is to pull others down to your level. These societies re-create themselves with a founding mythos of revolution: anyone with more than The People, by nature of us all being equal not just in political validity but in ability, must have stolen it to rise above that equal state. Therefore, we band together and crush the rich, crush the authority figures, and crush anyone who tells us that we should do anything other than exactly what we desire right now. That is what did the West in. If — and I don’t endorse this view — a bunch of outsiders showed up to profit from your decline, it isn’t their fault. It’s just good business. Europeans, you defeated yourselves. Or rather: your peasants did.
  3. We share a struggle. This was the point that spurred me to write this column. Israelis, as a high-IQ population surrounded by a lower-IQ ethnically Syrian/Jordanian/Egyptian of “Palestinians,” are trying to find a way to say, “We need this space for ourselves, and we will not feel guilty about excluding you even though we are wealthier.” The West can’t seem to turn down immigrants of any kind because we feel so horribly guilty that we invented many things, built strong economies, and have high productivity. We forget that we forged these things in blood and horror from a relatively low-resource landscape, and that people arrived in Europe by fleeing from easier living areas where disorder was higher. Israelis did the same thing, as did Jews, who left Israel after political disorder, passed through Turkey, Armenia and Eastern Europe, and finally arrived in Western Europe. Both Europeans and Jews have risen above the rest by going to a different part of the world and making themselves useful despite misfortune. Now both of us are being told we cannot have our societies for ourselves, and that we must admit anyone who shows up with an excuse. Both Jews and Europeans are trying to find plausible arguments for their own nationalism, cultural preservation and even more, the ability to set standards for themselves according to their own values system. Together we are the vanguard of a conservative revolution.

Some will immediately begin countering my bullet points above with lits of crimes by Jews or faults of Judaism. While those may be true, the question is what made us go wrong, and the answer is that even if Jews or Judaism were a contributing factor, they were not the cause. Banishing them is not the solution. It may be an incidental factor, in which Europeans decide they want to live by European idealist values systems, in which physicalist Judaism may be out of place, and vice-versa. But that’s what occurs after a solution, and by pretending that naming the Jew is our solution, we blind ourselves to the solutions we really need to wake up and see.


  1. Benjamin says:

    “They [Jews] are a living and most striking evidence of the falsity of that pernicious doctrine of modern times, the natural equality of man.”
    - Benjamin Disraeli

  2. Matt Parrott says:

    I agree that we should ultimately take “ownership” of our fate and refrain from “blaming the Jew” in the sort of pervasive way you contrast your position with. I also agree that White Americans and Israeli Jews have some similar circumstances and challenges. I don’t “hate” Jews, but I do believe they:

    1. Are not my ethnonational tribe and share neither their group interests, their heritage, nor their destiny with me and my people.

    2. Played pivotal (perhaps decisive, but not exclusive) roles in both the revolt of the Western peasantry AND the revolt of the Western elite.

    There’s nothing special about “banishing” them. To become a true nation, again, we have to do what the Jews have been trying to do in Israel – which is secure ourselves one single patch of land on this Earth where we and we alone dictate our culture, our laws, our traditions, and our future. By setting up a false dichotomy between naming the Jew as the sole factor behind our decline and ignoring the Jew, then going with the latter option, you’re the one blinding yourself to solutions.

    1. To become a true nation, again, we have to do what the Jews have been trying to do in Israel – which is secure ourselves one single patch of land on this Earth where we and we alone dictate our culture, our laws, our traditions, and our future.

      I agree here thoroughly, which is one of the reasons why I see unproductive enmity with Judaism as a reversal of our goals.

  3. K(yle) says:

    Have to agree with Matt Parrott. You have set up a false dichotomy here. You point out the Liberal mindset of not being capable of rejecting immigrants, but don’t apparently see an issue with alien people living among us.

  4. [...] Stevens – “The Problem of Tolerance“, ““Naming the Jew” and Why You Won’t See it Here“, “The Pathology of a [...]

  5. Miguel says:

    First of all, excuse me for my poor english. I’m from south-america, so it’s not my first language.

    In general, I agree that blaming is unhealthy, but I think you are overlooking something: “equality” is NOT a natural idea. Its not an idea that is present in any of the great civilizations of the past. On the contrary, hierarchy was always considered something natural and essential.

    But equality is an idea that is caracteristic of one CULTURE: The Jews. They are a people who identify themselves with “liberated slaves” from egypt. In the Bible we are gonna see a constant topic: the hate for the powerfull. They are against the kings, they are against the rich. Their greatest king (David) is of plebeyan origin.

    This idea infected the West through CRISTIANITY. A religion of slaves (the immigrants of the time), that seduced the masses and rebelled against the aristocratic gods of the pagan civilizations. They were the communists of the past. In this religion, “it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

    The cristians were the responsibles for the fall of Rome. As Nietzsche pointed. And the rationalization of this idea is the origin of modern equalitarism. And that’s why the (french) New Right is “pagan”.

    1. I think you are overlooking something: “equality” is NOT a natural idea. Its not an idea that is present in any of the great civilizations of the past. On the contrary, hierarchy was always considered something natural and essential.

      Here we agree. Equality is a crazy notion that has no anchor in reality.

      But equality is an idea that is caracteristic of one CULTURE: The Jews. They are a people who identify themselves with “liberated slaves” from egypt. In the Bible we are gonna see a constant topic: the hate for the powerfull.

      This is not unique to Jewish culture, however; others discover it and share it. Also, the Rabbinical tradition clearly emphasizes hierarchy. It’s likely that equality/underdog thinking was a weapon against the Romans and nothing more.

  6. odin says:

    PEASANTS are to blame for outbreeding the resource base?

    Sorry, but it has been cultural and global elites for CENTURIES who have criminalized birth control and abortion as means of population control.

    Conservatives have vilified these technically advanced, high IQ methods since the 19th century, criminalizing them, and playing the card of Near Eastern religion, to the point of turning human fetuses into fetish objects. Liberals have romanticized the resulting lack of checks on population.

    If conservatives had allowed free abortion and birth control on demand from the 1970s on, we would not see the world in such a state as it is, particularly in the swarming nations of the “third” world.

    It was liberal realists who have been fighting all along to elevate the intelligence and judgment of fertile women to make these decisions–often in nations where culture and religion make it so they cannot say no to a male’s sexual advances, or where rape is used as a means of social control and organization (Rwanda, Uganda, other Muslim nations).

    It’s all well and good to point out the failings of past political systems, but at least be willing to see it clearly. If it had been up to the liberals you (and I) hate, free and legal contraception and abortion would have been the norm from the ’70s on. It was CONSERVATIVES who couldn’t make the connection between illegalizing population control, and the outcomes.

    1. PEASANTS are to blame for outbreeding the resource base?

      Yes. The lower in intelligence something is, the more it breeds, whether birth control is available or not.

  7. [...] discussion started with a comment on an article by one Brett Stevens, on why we never will see him “naming the Jew”, and developed [...]

  8. Jew? What Jew? says:

    Right, Jews can’t be blamed for:

    Classical Marxism
    Revolutionary internationalism
    Critical Theory
    Second-wave Feminism
    Second-Wave Libertarianism
    Gay Rights/LBGT Rights
    American Civil Rights
    Human Rights
    White Privilege/White Abolitionism
    Agitation for open borders and mass immigration
    Academic race-denial
    Encouragement for white race-mixing (incl. Zivism)
    Exploitation of the official holocaust narrative
    Israel Lobby
    Promulgation of hate speech law
    Internet pornography
    Negative imagery of whites on film and TV
    Anti-white bias in media reporting

    Why, anyone that links organized Jewry with these concepts or movements has GOT to be one of those “anti-Semites.”

    Anti-Semite: one who is hated by Semites
    Anti-Semite: one who judges Jews by the same standards as any other group
    Anti-Semite: one who studies history

    That’s right, do the left’s job for them– be sure to attempt to be “respectable” where the respectability is bestowed upon you by your enemy, the leftists.

    That’s right, do the Jew’s job for them– be sure to attempt to avoid being “anti-Semetic” where the determination of anti-Semiticism or “sanity” is bestowed upon you by your enemy, the Jews.

    Keep going with this strategy! It worked GREAT for the Republicans (neoconservative rat’s nest).

    1. That’s right, do the left’s job for them– be sure to attempt to be “respectable” where the respectability is bestowed upon you by your enemy, the leftists.

      Whether or not Jews disproportionately or proportionately participated in the above,

      (1) A much larger group helped them, and that is liberals, leftists, progressives, et al. (the terms denote the same thing at different stages in its evolution).

      (2) The ideas used to invent leftism are not unique, and are invented in every society by those who will usher it to its death.

      (3) The solution is to find a better path than leftism, so we can bypass all these errors, instead of fighting (perceived) heads of the Hydra.

      (4) Finally, you’re ignoring the work of many Jewish people in countering things such as denial of biological determinism (Steven Pinker, Richard Herrenstein), Marxism (too many to count), neoconservatism (Paul Gottfried), and multiculturalism (Theodor Herzl), preserving Western culture like classical music, literature and philosophy (too many to count).

      I don’t want to repeat the past. The Holocaust was awful, and stupid (its only “positive” side effect being, through a bottleneck on the European Jewish population, making them stronger and smarter on average). Anti-Semitism turns us into haters, not rebuilders.

      You may be right; I can’t “prove” that the downfall of the West wasn’t a great Jewish conspiracy (ZOD) weekend project. Jews also have a focus on self-interest and ethnonationalism I admire, although I don’t share much else with their culture, which like all cultures is genetically ingrained. I admire their dedication to education, intelligence and culture as well. I wish my own people would adopt these traits instead of blaming Jews for having them.

      Finally, I am interested in (a) purely logical philosophy and (b) political reform that benefits our constituents, the European-descended middle classes worldwide. This group is not interested in anything resemble a hate group, or jihad against an ethnic-cultural group. They will support nationalism for themselves, and may be induced to adopt other positive Jewish traits like a focus on education and intelligence, however.

      I rub elbows with all sorts of people, not just on the far right but on the far left. I know many people in both groups have this opinion of Jews and Israel. I do not and cannot share it. I am not telling you not to have it; I am saying it’s not a path I will take, in part because I think (a) it blames as the root cause what is at best (worst) a partial cause and (b) it blames a whole group for actions of part of the group and (c) it is unhealthy for us as a race to focus on blame and retribution on others, when the real task ahead of us is rebuilding in such a way that we do not slide into liberalism again.

      You could eliminate every Jew, Talmud and Hollywood movie from the face of the earth and you’d still have that real task before you.

      1. Janet says:

        The term anti-Semite has been used as an attack buzzword for years… though now it seems somewhat less so? My godfather sued the New York times for insulting his anti-Communist lectures as being “anti-Semitic”. He was a Messianic Jew (which they didn’t realize). The case was thrown out as the judge ruled that he was a public figure. He was a Jew who changed our country for the better!

  9. [...] to high-minded, elitist conservatism. He also claims that thinking of oneself as a victim is unhealthy. In my view, however, it is being a victim that is unhealthy. Feeling victimized, however, is not [...]

  10. [...] week or so ago, one of my blogscreeds provoked a bit of a intense response across the right-wing blogosphere. In short, people thought I [...]

Leave a Reply

37 queries. 0.715 seconds