Why Jews should abandon The Holocaust

eternal_death_awaits

We should never forget The Holocaust. Not only was it a tragedy, but it is an example of where right-wing movements should rein in their emotions and look toward fairness and practicality. However, it is currently killing the world’s Jews, even if the reasons why are invisible.

The Holocaust is a huge industry. It brings in hundreds of millions of dollars for survivors organizations and civil rights groups. But it also carries with it a weight which is that of being victims, and this is dooming Jews to a role they do not need to fulfill. In the name of the few who make a living, the many are confined.

When you style yourself as a victim, this infects all of your thinking. You no longer think, “What should I do?” but think about what a victim would do, namely revenge himself on his victimizer and only long after that, worry about what else he should do in life.

It also makes you sensitive to not victimizing others, even if their “victimhood” is nonsense. For example, Middle Eastern immigrants — errr, Palestinians — in your native land will claim they are being victimized. In reality, they are a population of lower IQ that belongs in nearby lands like Egypt, Syria and Jordan. But you can’t say that if you style yourself as a victim.

It does not take a rocket scientist to see The Holocaust was bad news. But many ethnic groups overcome near annihilation. What does it say about you, when you are stranded on this one event? It proclaims weakness and inability to act in self-interest.

Much as Europeans should get over perceived slights of the past, and they really should, Jews should not imprison themselves in the category of victim. The past is past; Hitler is buried or at least gone. We need to think about the future, all of us. This requires leaving grievance behind and looking toward the horizon.

Tags: , , , ,

23 Responses to “Why Jews should abandon The Holocaust”

  1. crow says:

    You’re doing a metaphor, here, for spiritual enlightenment. This is the essence of what it takes, and what it means.
    To sever the past, and move ahead from the present, existing a half-second into the future.
    This doesn’t mean abandoning the past’s lessons, but rather leaving it to sink, like a doomed ship, while you swim away to survive, unencumbered.
    Unfortunately, it appears very few can manage it.
    So far.

    • -A says:

      Survival of the fittest really is a zero sum game. The fewer, more fit, there are the better the process worked. This raises the baseline of the lower classes each time we have those who can’t measure up go down with the ship.

      • JPW says:

        There always has to be a disaster first to get rid of the vast herd of the unfit. This is why a lot of people (religious and otherwise) fear otherwise.

  2. Chris says:

    Like black Americans, Jews are a feminine people: Nagging/shit testing white men with PC nonsense, entitled, manipulative, attention-whoring, materialistic and self-destructive. It’s going to take the back hand of a few nationalistic white men to rock them into a self-dependent people.

    It’s time to give them the divorce papers and tell them to take their Zionism and cultural Marxism with them.

  3. Jack says:

    You are correct to a degree, but victimhood complexes result in higher in-group cohesion and increased motivation to act in one’s own collective self-interest, which is a desired outcome according to ethnocentric Jews, as well as the intended outcome according to ethnocentric Whites; hence the “White Genocide” narrative.

    >What does it say about you, when you are stranded on this one event? It proclaims weakness and inability to act in self-interest.

    Weakness, maybe. As for inability to act in one’s self-interest, this presupposes that ethnocentrism, which is resultant of the victimhood complex, is essentially against one’s self-interest. The question is whether or not this presupposition is true. For the superior races: the Northwestern Europeans, the Japanese, and the Ashkenazim, it doesn’t ring true. It is better if they act in their self-interest than if they don’t.

    There’s no substantial contradiction between Jewish self-interest and White self-interest, but there’s indeed a substantial contradiction between the perceived self-interests of the groups. Imagine, for instance, that Jews perceived White Nationalism as beneficial to themselves, on the condition that Jews are regarded as legitimately White; and proceeded to spread this Jewish-inclusive White Nationalism via the media and the academia. Wouldn’t both Jews and Whites benefit in such a scenario?

    Therefore, the Jewish interpretation of The Holocaust should be: “this is what happens when we are considered non-White”, which would compel the Jews to identify with Whites (if only for the purpose of effective crypsis) rather than with everyone who isn’t White. This is a rather unpopular Jewish interpretation of The Holocaust, whereas other interpretations which focus on the perceived wickedness of Gentile Whites abound, so it is not surprising that Nazism — Jewish-excluding White Nationalism — gains steam at the moment.

    It’s not that Jews don’t look toward the horizon, it’s that they do so in an absolutely detrimental, not to say debilitatingly shortsighted, manner.

    • EX says:

      “hence the “White Genocide” narrative.”

      This doesn`t really work outside of their in-group since whites are considered as the Eternal Oppressor.

      “Jews perceived White Nationalism as beneficial to themselves, on the condition that Jews are regarded as legitimately White; and proceeded to spread this Jewish-inclusive White Nationalism via the media and the academia.”

      Wouldn`t that just lead to it being all-inclusive and end back where it started from?

      • Jack says:

        >This doesn`t really work outside of their in-group since whites are considered as the Eternal Oppressor.

        That’s because those ethnocentric Whites are a minority. If “White Genocide” ceases being metaphorical, and becomes literal instead, most Whites will become very susceptible to ethnocentrism, just as most Jews have become very susceptible to ethnocentrism following The Holocaust and other gory events. However, ethnocentrism can take many forms; it doesn’t have to look like Nazism.

        >Wouldn`t that just lead to it being all-inclusive and end back where it started from?

        Unlikely. You can plausibly argue that Ashkenazi Jews are White. You can’t make a similar argument about most other races.

    • -A says:

      What Brett was saying in regards to being weak and unable to work in their own self-interest was that the narrative of victimhood will always come first and that these groups always seek out-groups to facilitate their goals.

    • Dualist says:

      Funnily enough, my parents just got back from Poland yesterday. They’d visited Auschwitz while they were there.

      But what their tour-guide (not at the camp itself but in the “Jewish Quarter’ of Krakow) said was very interesting and surprising. Without being prompted he said ‘…but the Jews never integrated. It was always us and them. They have never once FOUGHT for US….”

      So when you say ‘the Jewish interpretation of The Holocaust should be: “this is what happens when we are considered non-White”’ I agree – and this is what most Jews actually DO think, consciously or unconsciously.

      Though I don’t agree that this realisation ‘would compel the Jews to identify with Whites (if only for the purpose of effective crypsis)’.

      Because another way of dealing with this scenario would be to completely eradicate to whole notion of ‘whiteness’ itself so that Europeans no longer felt any sense of racial solidarity whatsoever, and so would never be a threat again.

      Now, this shouldn’t be of much concern – unless Jews ever gained massive influence over what average white people think and believe, that is. For example, if Jews ever had substantial control over the Media (including Hollywood) and Academia….

      • Or: “This is what happens when we are a disproportionately successful minority among otherwise consistent majority groups.” That was Herzl’s analysis, paraphrased.

  4. Charles V says:

    “inability to act in self-interest” – Are you kidding?

    More than most ethnic groups, Jews act in self-interest and show high in group preference.

  5. Dark Axe says:

    This article is very succinct . I agree with the main point that once you overcome something its best to not dwell on the past. The only caveat I would add is that there are 50 types of Jewish sects. In at least one of the sects (ironically ) called the Ashkenzi: are kind of historically persecuted like Gypsies so much that some of the things that could be considered wrong or unethical that they do are actual survival mechanisms that have been ingrained generationally. You point still stands . I’m simply pointing out that things like this or “black victimhood” for instance – these things become harder to unwind as they are institutionalized in the schools, or popularized in the culture. NGOs set against the slave/victim mentality (by these very cultures themselves) are necessary to combat these residual(ist) mindsets which are so engrained in their populations and propaganda efforts. It is hard for us as outsiders to open their minds to these ideas. Ultimately they will have to change on their own .

  6. Dark Axe says:

    oops Ashkenazi I meant . Sorry about the typo.

  7. Max Blancke says:

    Honestly, I have never been much of a supporter of Israel or Jewishness in general. However, I have worked in Israel and the neighboring countries quite a bit. While some things really annoy me over there, like having to constantly bargain with people to get them to do their jobs, I have to say that I strongly support Israel. They have to be tough people to survive as a nation. And I honestly think that their treatment of their hostile neighbors is restrained. If the power dynamic were reversed, the Palestinians would visit biblical horror on the Jews.

  8. Y. Ilan says:

    The original reaction of the State and society of Israel to the survivors of the Holocaust, which included a hefty amount of ridicule for being weak and “galuti” (of the Exile) did have some positive outcomes. As you say, it is important for the victimhood to be taken out of the former victim. As the descendant of survivors, I do not concern myself with Jewish victimhood. It is of no consequence to me, beyond clarifying the need for Jewish power and self-reliance.

    • It is of no consequence to me, beyond clarifying the need for Jewish power and self-reliance.

      We will have a healthy world when those things — power, self-determination and self-reliance — are considered necessary for every ethnic group.

    • Dualist says:

      I’m very surprised to hear the survivors faced such a reaction. Were not most of founders of the State of Israel survivors themselves?

      I knew there had always been a handful of Jews living in the Holy City itself, both before and during the Mandate, and that Zionism as a movement preceded the rise of Fascism, but I still thought the real ‘push’ for Aliyah only came around because the survivors, most understandably, no longer wanted to live in Gentile lands after the War was over?

      I’ve been to Israel myself twice on pilgrimages, spending time on both ‘sides’ in Bethlehem and Tiberias. Our coaches were regularly boarded by sour-faced National Service men (and women!) wielding machine-guns, and attack helicopters often flew over heads near the Golan Heights. At no point was I ever in any doubt who had the ‘power’.

      Though I also fully understand why it has to be that way: if you relented for one second ‘they’ would rise and drive you into the sea. I also understand why Leftism is the default-position for practically all Jews, even many religious ones.

      But what I don’t know, and would be really grateful if you could answer as honestly as you can, is: even though most American Liberal Jews proclaim a gospel of universal ‘humanity’ and multiculturalism, what proportion of them actually consciously (if secretly) use those doctrines solely as a self-defense mechanism at the expense of the European majority (see my comment above)?

      • One oblique counterpoint: if diversity is fail, and health societies recognize that, Europe was already in ill health when Jews arrived.

        • Dualist says:

          Diversity, as in having a large numbers of foreigners such that they become a sizable proportion of the population, is bad. We all know that.

          But the situation was never like in (northern) Europe with the Jews. They have been here since the middle ages in tiny numbers, and only in the few cities that existed then (also remembering that 99% of the population lived rurally).

          To give you an idea of small numbers, in 1190 there was an anti-semitic riot in York and the whole Jewish population was killed “without any scruple of Christian conscientiousness”, as one chronicler put it. But ‘only’ 150 were killed. Remembering that York was the 2nd largest city in England, and we see they were only ever a tiny proportion of the population.

          They were obviously of use because of the Christian disapproval of money lending. Though dishonourable Kings were wont to eject them if he didn’t fancy settling his account, as in Spain later on. As far as I’m aware they never instigated any trouble themselves (as we can be pretty sure that the blood-libel stories are pure fabrications.)

          I don’t feel having such a small amount of ‘the Other’ in a society is a sign of ill health – as long the prospective immigrants are (a) useful to the host society for some reason and (b) in such small numbers they never start to have any effect on the native culture, and coexist peacefully.

          Though I do agree that these conditions (especially the last one) are very hard to guarantee.

          • Remembering that York was the 2nd largest city in England, and we see they were only ever a tiny proportion of the population.

            This was my recollection: their numbers were tiny and they were appreciated for what they brought to society.

            I don’t feel having such a small amount of ‘the Other’ in a society is a sign of ill health – as long the prospective immigrants are (a) useful to the host society for some reason and (b) in such small numbers they never start to have any effect on the native culture, and coexist peacefully.

            Here I must disagree. Our people are kind; to accommodate the Other, no matter how small, they loosen social standards. Herein lies death. But it begins with kindness.

      • Y. Ilan says:

        The founders of the State of Israel, those who were responsible for the pre-state “Yishuv” were certainly not Holocaust survivors. Significant Zionist migrations start in the late 19th century, and so by the time of the Holocaust there is already a well-fuctioning Jewish entity in Mandatory Palestine, with its population mainly concentrated in the coastal plain and not Jerusalem. The militias who would make up the IDF already existed for more than a decade by WW2.

        The ridicule and roughness towards Holocaust survivors is better understood as the reaction of an already established peoples, who saw themselves as the “New Jews,” tough workers of the land who do not shirk from confrontation, towards a people that they saw as weak, pathetic and still belonging to the hated Exile. I believe that this interaction was helpful in the long-run as it forced survivors to take to the Israeli mentality with gusto.

        While we have our share of leftists here in Israel, especially in the cosmopolitan bubble of Tel Aviv, I would say that the vast majority of Jewish Israelis have a much more cynical and right-winged view of the world. Israelis are casually racist (towards everybody, but in a jocular manner) and thoroughly unimpressed by political correctness.

        I would say that American Jews and established Jewish communities outside of Israel in general tend towards leftism simply because they are a minority. Exile is poison.

  9. […] Which way, dissident Right? Which way out of “Crowdism”, which still infects us? Also: Why Jews should abandon The Holocaust. And why all victims should abandon the Victimhood Industrial Complex. Related: Stevens also has […]

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>