Posts Tagged ‘anti-semitism’

Another Reason Why Anti-Semitism Will Fail You

Thursday, August 17th, 2017

From A Program For The Jews by Rabbi Harry Waton:

In any struggle between men, whether it be a struggle on the battle-field, on the political arena, on the economic terrain or in the realm of thought, ordinary men fight their adversary by endeavoring to belittle the adversary, to treat him with contempt and to ridicule him. This is a suicidal method, for by this they shut their eyes to the merits and virtues of the adversary, and for this they pay a terrible penalty. But the great man fully recognizes the merits and virtues of the adversary, endeavors to acquire those merits and virtues, and thus prepares himself to meet the adversary successfully. By this alone we can recognize the great man.

This was the method used by Balaam. Because Balaam knew Jehovah, he fully recognized the merits and virtues of the Jews. In the four addresses, Balaam sought to convince the nations that, unless they acquired the merits and virtues of the Jews, the Jews would destroy them. This was the reason why Balaam praised and blessed the Jews. In what, then, consisted the curse? It consisted in this. Balaam did not praise and bless the Jews for their sake, but he praised and blessed the Jews for the sake of the nations, that the nations should acquire the merits and virtues of the Jews, and thus be able to destroy the Jews. The curse was not in what he said, but in the purpose. And now, how did Jehovah turn the curse into a blessing ? Jehovah turned the purpose of Balaam into a blessing. Balaam intended that the nations should endeavor to acquire the merits and virtues of the Jews, in order to be able to destroy the Jews; but this very purpose turned into a blessing.

By endeavoring to acquire the merits and virtues of the Jews, the nations would become Jews. And so, instead of destroying the Jews, the nations would themselves become Jews and join the Jews. Thus Jehovah defeated the purpose of Balaam. History repeats itself. Since the days of Balaam, Hitler is the first great anti-Semite that adopted Balaam’s method. Hitler fully recognized the merits and virtues of the Jews, and he convinced himself that, unless the Aryan nations will unite against the Jews, the Jews will destroy them. To convince the Aryan nations of this, Hitler wrote his work, Mein Kampf. In this book Hitler endeavors to convince the Aryan nations that the Jews are a world menace, that they would destroy the Aryans, their culture and their world, and would inherit the earth.

But to convince the Aryans of this, Hitler, like Balaam, recognizes the merits and virtues of the Jews, and advises the Aryan nations to endeavor to acquire those merits and virtues; otherwise, they will be destroyed by the Jews. Since the days of Balaam, Hitler is the first anti-Semite that was great enough to adopt this method. But, like Balaam Hitler does not perceive that, if the Aryan nations endeavor to acquire the merits and virtues of the Jews, they will also become Jews, and then they will join the Jews. And so, as in the case of Balaam, Jehovah turns the curses of Hitler into a blessing.

Reminiscent of course of this:

Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster… for when you gaze long into the abyss. The abyss gazes also into you. ― Friedrich Nietzsche

Translating this to the practical, what it means is that one cannot substitute polemic against another for a sense of self-identity. To assign enemy status to another group is to cede agency for the future of your own group, and in doing so, you will adopt their tactics as a means of fighting them. In turn, those tactics will convert you, and you will become the new Jews.

In the West, anti-Semitism has involved adopting Old Testament tactics which were designed to eradicate Jews, but in doing so, the West adopted a simplistic version of Jewish morality in which it was conjectured that there existed universal right and wrong, which caused the West to abandon its sense of uniqueness and its self-interest, which consists of us doing what works for us without judging it by categories, instead looking toward our inner spiritual intent and the results we create. By abandoning consequentialism, we made ourselves into people who follow symbols that are alien to us, and it has ruined us.

Leftists Turn On Jews, Just As Class Warfare Theory Predicted They Would

Tuesday, July 11th, 2017

Even the most stolidly oblivious of the mainstream legacy media has noticed that the Left has turned on the Jews:

Last weekend, organizers of a gay pride parade in Chicago ejected three people carrying pride flags emblazoned with a Jewish Star of David. Subsequent bizarre statements attempting to rationalize their action, claiming that Zionism is “an inherently white supremacist ideology” only exacerbated the sense that the organizers were deaf to the concerns of the Jewish community and engaged in anti-Semitism — denying Jews the same rights that were extended to other participants, basically to celebrate their identities as Jewish queer women.

…Last summer, a plank in the platform of the Movement for Black Lives bizarrely accused Israel of genocide.

Linda Sarsour, a leader of the women’s rights movement, has lambasted Zionism as incompatible with feminism and advocates for the exclusion of pro-Israel Jews from activist groups. And some in the anti-Israel movement have accused Israel of “pink-washing,” claiming that Israel and its supporters celebrate freedoms enjoyed by the LGBTQ community in Israel to divert attention from Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians.

Amerika has noticed this for years, and has differentiated between Leftist opposition to Jews and Rightist opposition to Jews. In the Leftist version, Jews are wealthy, therefore elite and privileged and the Leftist theory of class warfare justifies attacking them. On the Right, Jews are viewed as outsiders who act in self-interest, which clashes with the self-interest of the national population.

The Left is comprised of people in the grips of an ancient human tendency to scapegoat others for their problems. These, when emboldened by finding other individualists and forming a collective together, then enforce their vision on the rest of us. It consists of one idea, “equality,” which means taking from the thriving to give to the failing as a way of ostensibly ending class warfare through class pacifism, when in fact is is merely another weapon of those who wage class warfare, who are always on the bottom attempting to remove those above them.

Never Trust A Leftist (But Trust The Metaphor Of The Jew)

Thursday, May 18th, 2017

Some advice once received: “If you want to know how this world works, look in the mirror.” This world is driven by human psychology, and our greatest problems are not mysterious, but rather enduring humdrum everyday human dysfunction amplified by some accident of history.

When this is fully understood, it is easier to recognize the nature of our decline: we failed to push back against the failings of human individuals, and instead legitimized them, then turned them into a motivational force. This allows us to have an outwardly functional society that is inwardly miserable and full of doubt.

Each of us faces a choice in times like these: we either accept the decline and rationalize it, or we push back. Your moral character and the caliber of your personality are known by how you respond, as with all decisions. What you may see as a “personal choice” (because all people are equal) is in fact a public choice, and anyone above you recognizes your lower ability.

Some make a religion out of accepting decline; these tend toward the Left because the Left has one idea, equality, and nothing is better for decline than equality. This states that someone who accepts decline is equal to someone who fights back against it. Equality causes people to accept decline because they get the same benefit as if they resisted it.

Never trust anything a Leftist says, or does not challenge. If a Leftist notices that you are doing something stupid that will harm you, they will congratulate themselves on having avoided that mistake and feel superior to you. They need this superiority complex because they are over-compensating for their own lowered status as those who accept decline.

Leftists will always blame others for our decline. This is also essential to their maintenance of their self-image: someone else must be to blame, and Leftists must style themselves as victims. Victimhood justifies their exploitation of society, like a child saying “but he hit me first” as an excuse for beating up the other kid and taking his lunch money.

Another form of scapegoating, frequently identified at Amerika, is anti-Semitism. Even if all of the horrible things said about Jews are true, the problem still lies in our acceptance of dysfunctional behavior among ourselves, and the solution is to end equality so that we can again be intolerant of dysfunction and thus, raise ourselves on both Darwinian and moral levels.

However, the Jew as metaphor proves persuasive. Not that these are true stereotypes, but the Jew of lore has the following traits: cheapness, deceptiveness, nepotism, manipulation, perversity, cleverness without depth of intelligence, and a desire to destroy all good and golden things and replace them with venal, lowest common denominator substitutes.

No one really wants to face this, but… the Jew of lore is in fact a description of everything dark in our own psychological makeup. One becomes the metaphorical Jew when giving in to human failings, both in oneself and in others. You either push upward or you allow yourself to be pushed downward, and a declining civilization will definitely push you downward.

The metaphorical Jew inside of us is everything we project onto the actual Jews. He is selfish, greedy, and dishonest. He is perverse, apathetic and opportunistic. He is cruel, destructive and crass. When we articulate these things, we are looking into the mirror and seeing everything we fear in ourselves, and we fear these things because they have come to the surface.

Our society resembles our inner selves. What we feel in our hearts, think in our minds and intuit in our souls is what we act out on our world. In a time when most people are tolerant of their own dysfunction, tolerance becomes the rule, and dysfunction replaces sanity, goodness, honesty, pride, honor and love.

How Anti-Semitism Wagged The Dog For Adolf Hitler

Monday, May 15th, 2017

Contemporary sources — who are bound to lies because in an egalitarian time, everything is a lie — seem baffled by the Holocaust. Was it mere racism, ideology or pathological cruelty? Perhaps some of the above, and also, “philosophy.”

It was clear to me early on that Adolf Hitler attempted to fight back against the root ideology of socialism, which is a tricky animal because it is both collectivist and individualist. Individualism — “me first” before nature, society or others — is its goal, but collectivism is its method. Already this concept is too complex for any but a few in modern society.

He also recognized, as did Schopenhauer and Plato, that a thriving civilization acts by choosing the idea it strives for first and method later, where dying civilizations choose a method and then rationalize the results as being the idea for which it was striving.

As Plato wrote, during the Golden Age of humanity, materiality was viewed as a means to an end. Good men had wealth so that they could do good things; bad men were deprived of wealth because with it, they would do bad things. Hitler wanted to refute materialism.

He — like many others — may have misinterpreted the crucifixion of Jesus in the Bible, or just given in to prevailing superstitions and analysis, which assigned to the Jews a role as materialists and to Christians, that of idealists. This is not entirely wrong but it is misinterpreted.

Jewish materialism is in my view a Buddhist-like attempt at rejecting dualism, or the idea of a perfect world with the true actual rules of reality in it, as opposed to this world which is just symbolic or otherwise irrelevant. Buddhists recognize dualism as early onset schizophrenia.

In addition, the point of the crucifixion scene in the Bible was not that Pontius Pilate was Roman and the crowd were Jews, but that a crowd demanded the death of Jesus, and they did so through democracy. A vote was taken and the herd opted to kill the prophet instead of an actual criminal.

History fans notice that this mirrors what happened to Socrates, the story from which the crucifixion story is almost certainly derived. (Fundamentalism regard the Bible, which is a metaphorical story compiling spiritual knowledge from a half-dozen traditions, will also make you schizoid).

But Hitler wanted a unifying concept, one that could motivate his people toward the right idea and away from what he hated, which was the shallow materialism that defines the modern time. Unlike Nietzsche, who associated this with Christianity, Hitler took another direction.

We have no records of Hitler reading Nietzsche, although he was certainly conversant with the ideas of that philosopher. We do know that he was fond of carrying a volume of Schopenhauer around, and that this philosopher argued that Christianity, like Hinduism, was an attempt for a heroic idealism, where Judaism had a materialistic basis:

While all other religions endeavor to explain to the people by symbols the metaphysical significance of life, the religion of the Jews is entirely immanent and furnishes nothing but a mere war-cry in the struggle with other nations. – “Fragments for the history of philosophy”, Parerga and Paralipomena, Volume I.

This may have been the source of the metaphor that Hitler used. He wanted the Germans to rise above mere individualism, and so he gave them a metaphor for individualism through Judaism. However, this proved too popular, and quickly caught on and the base anger overwhelmed the finer details of the idea.

At the point where he was most popular, Hitler could no more have backed down on his anti-Semitism than a fundamental campaign process. Germans knew something had gone wrong in their society, and they blamed the foreigners. How much of this was true is a question for another time, but clearly the method became wrong, but because scapegoats are always more popular than nuanced truths, this should have been expected.

However, Hitler was an artist, not a politician, and so he was swallowed up by the idea. At this point, his constituents expected him to act on it, and according to Albert Speer, he did so by first attempting to scare away Jews, then imprisoning them, and finally turning to more extreme methods.

This reflected an apocalyptic view of Judaism in the Nazi imagination:

According to Confino’s historical-cultural analysis, the Holocaust cannot be explained as just another one of the events of the horrible war, or as an outcome of its circumstances. The Nazi urgency to murder all the Jews but not the members of other persecuted groups, Confino writes, is explained by the Jews’ consistent apocalyptic role in the Nazi imagination. In other words, and Prof. Confino says it brilliantly numerous times, the annihilation of the entire Jewish people was the Nazis’ supreme goal in World War II. They came to save the world from the Jews and from Judaism, regardless of the price of this “salvation.” It was their mission in this world.

Providence, as Adolf Hitler told the Reichstag in December 1941, when he declared war on the United States, consigned to the German people the leadership of the battle which would shape the world’s image in the following 1,000 years—the uncompromising battle against the Jews and Judaism. This perception was not limited to the members of the Nazi party: Many Germans participated in the persecution of Jews, Confino states, while many others—basically, the entire German society—did not oppose the Nazi regime’s anti-Jewish initiatives. Not a single group in the German society rejected the Nazi offensive on the Jews and on Judaism—for the information of Israelis and Jews in Berlin.

Hitler may have thought this treatment was relatively uncontroversial. The world has barely blinked during the Boer and Armenian genocides, and laughed off mass killings in the New World and India. To his mind, this may have been a standard method within the norm, not an aberration.

Imagine an American candidate running on the idea of eliminating “materialism” among us, and identifying a group of “materialists.” You cannot touch materialism, but you can wring the neck of a materialist, and so that is what the crowd will demand.

In a sad repetition of the acts of the French Revolution, the crowd swept Hitler up in a wave of popularity he could not control and demanded the return of the guillotine. This unfolded in events that to our great sadness were modern, all too modern.

If we are to survive into the future, our path lies elsewhere from modernity. We do not need more crowds chanting for the crucifixion of Jesus, beheading of nobles or gassing of Jews. We need a calm process of sorting out who should stay from those who must leave, and to do so as gently as possible, if nothing else for the conservation of beauty and clarity in our own souls.

Tanya Gersh Lies About Her Actions That Caused The “Trollstorm”

Thursday, April 20th, 2017

In perpetually-clueless The Guardian, Montana realtor Tanya Gersh — best known for her attempt to extort money from Richard Spencer’s mother — whines about how she has been made accountable:

The post on the Daily Stormer last December claimed I had been trying to extort and threaten the mother of Richard Spencer, a white nationalist whose family has a vacation home in our town. It had a photograph of me and contact information: phone numbers, email addresses, and links to social media profiles for me, my husband, my friends, my colleagues. It had my son’s Twitter handle. He is 12 years old.

…Do we tell our children that we’re running in the middle of the night because we’re Jewish?

There are too many lies so far, so we are going to stop there. First and foremost: are you running because you are Jewish, or because you committed the Federal crime of extortion in collusion with a Leftist terror group?

Here is the vital quotation from Richard Spencer’s mother:

On November 22, Gersh and I spoke on the phone. She relayed to me that if I did not sell my building, 200 protesters and national media would show up outside — which would drive down the property value — until I complied.

Tanya Gersh does not refute this statement anywhere. By doing so, she admits it is true. She spins it slightly different, but never refutes it.

However, she wants to shift the blame to anti-Semitism — admittedly a component of The Daily Stormer — instead of her own actions.

Jewish people may be as self-destructive as whites, which makes sense since Jewish people are just white people with an additional 2-5% of Semitic DNA.

Gersh, by denying the actual complaint and blaming anti-Semitism, is weakening every case of outrage at actual anti-Semitism. She broke the law. Deflecting from that will make people very angry. This is how Holocausts happen, just like the 40% participation in the Communist Party by 2% of the general population made it all too easy for people to buy into the anti-Semitism and go along with the raging mob.

Then, with no warning, Sherry Spencer published a post on Medium attacking me and telling a twisted version of our interactions.

Gersh seems to forget her own statements:

“She (Sherry) is profiting off of the people of the local community, all the while having facilitated Richard’s work spreading hate by letting him live and use her home address for his organization.”

She contradicts herself and in doing so, proves that her statements in The Guardian are lies.

That being said, Amerika stands against anti-Semitism. Jews act in self-interest like every other group, and the solution as Theodor Herzl said is nationalism, or relocation of Jews to a land of their own where they are safe. (The last part is crucial; they are not “safe” while Palestinians, Syrians and others are raging around with homemade missiles and suicide attacks.)

We also do not take the position of The Daily Stormer, although we do not support the lawsuit against them either. The correct response to abusive and criminal realtors like Tanya Gersh is to submit a complaint to the regulatory board. Note: she has not been prosecuted for her extortion attempt.

Instead of acknowledging her own failings, Ms. Gersh and those who support her have embarked upon a disastrous lawsuit which can only end badly:

Andrew Anglin, publisher of far-right site Daily Stormer, has been sued in Federal Court today for $300,000, stemming from his reporting about Tanya Gersh, a Montana real estate agent who he accused of attempting to extort Richard Spencer’s mother into selling a Whitefish, Montana property. In the lawsuit, Anglin is accused of creating a “troll storm” against Gersh that caused her emotional distress and anxiety.

…The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana, Missoula Division, seeks compensatory and punitive damages. It accuses Anglin of invading Gersh’s privacy and intentionally inflicting emotional distress. It also outlines how his campaign violated the Montana Anti-Intimidation Act.

If the courts approve of this suit, they are going to open the door to infinite frivolous lawsuits by people enraged at their clashes with others. After all, what did Gersh lose? She received threatening messages by phone, email and social media. She lost her job, but then again, she also committed a crime, so Gersh losing her real estate license or job is hardly Anglin’s fault. It is Gersh’s fault.

On the other hand, if the court refuses this case, they may open the door to more online harassment. Then again, one wonders if that cat can be put back in the bag, since too many people rely on online information as “true” and not enough realize that it is the new daytime television, i.e. of dubious truth value at best.

In the bigger picture, however, the truth is plain: Gersh is not a good actor here; in fact, she is committing what can only be viewed as extortion. American courts are unwilling to raise this case because they fear violating political correctness.

At Amerika, we both reject trollstorms and think Tanya Gersh belongs in jail. Sherry Spencer did not deserve this attack, which leveraged the threat of Leftist rioters against her, and Richard Spencer should be able to speak his mind without all of these puny, parasitic people attacking him.

All of this is more evidence that America the nation ended years ago. There was a chance for a nation here, but instead, we divided it up into special interest groups, and now they are warring it out in court, essentially passing the costs on to the rest of us. As Roosh V elaborates:

As for prudent measures to protect yourself, I recommend not criticizing or speaking against individual Jews in the United States, who can reach out to multiple organizations with deep pockets. Jews are a privileged group that can not be criticized like heterosexual men or white people can by the media or organizations like the SPLC, which came after me in 2012. This lawsuit proves that even a middle class Jewish woman in the middle of Montana has the full backing of the powerful Jewish lobby—with tens of millions of dollars in the bank—to attack her enemies.

He’s right, but we should elaborate on this: Jews are only one of the many special interests dividing America. GMO foods, elderly pensions, women, military contractors, Hispanics, the pharmaceutical industry, minority races, minority religions and mothers against drunk driving all have their advocacy groups, donors and lobbyists. This is how democracy always ends, as a de facto oligarchy that becomes so chaotic it culminates in tyranny.

In the meantime, the actual problem remains unaddressed. Sherry Spencer should not have been persecuted for her son’s beliefs. Tanya Gersh (and others) did the persecution. We need to end the situation where people can be attacked for their beliefs alone, and grow up and accept differences in thought.

How Far We Have Fallen

Monday, April 17th, 2017

Oh look; we’re busting people for posting things to internet forums now. America has inverted its original purpose of “freedom” to mean “many different groups demand obedience from one another,” and predictably, this has led to an absurd game of lies:

The 50-year-old was arrested in July following an investigation that linked him to messages posted that spring and summer on the website.

“I will slaughter them and burn their Synagogue to the ground . . . kids, goldfish, old folks. Shove money down their throats,” Sullivan wrote under the screen name KS43. “These Jews of 2016. They think they are safe.”

Investigators searched Sullivan’s Stamford home and found more than two dozen firearms, gun parts, high-capacity magazines and hundreds of rounds of ammunition.

So, he wrote something about a group, and also possessed weapons. In the old America, this would have merited an unkind comment from his betters or a discussion on whether his view has merit. While anti-Semitism goes too far, recognizing that different groups need different spaces is a type of sanity that our ideological government fears. We could at least hash it out and end the issue.

Instead, we have this sad pretense of a society. Our purpose long ago departed, we now act “for others” because this makes us feel momentary flickers of meaning to life, and therefore we crave it like a drug. In doing that, we refuse to admit that most people cannot get along and that homogeneity lessens this to the benefit of all.

Our pretense commands us to deny this, and so we smother small problems today, letting them grow so that at some point in the future, we will have an outbreak of violence and anger which will shock us all until we realize that, all along, we were living in denial and refused to see the obvious pattern forming before our eyes.

Bourgeois Corporate America Throws Tantrum Over “Hate” Videos

Sunday, March 26th, 2017

A number of large companies — Coca-Cola, PepsiCo Inc., Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and Dish Network Corp. among them — have pulled some of their advertising from Google’s YouTube network because of their ads appearing alongside “hate” videos after a change in Google policy.

Like the rest of the Dot-Com 3.0 boom/bust gang, Google is in trouble. Its ads do not work as well as ads in newspapers, television or magazine at least used to work, and so it can no longer charge the high rates that propelled it into superstardom. People on the internet are not paying attention, or if they are, do not have the money to do anything about it, so are near-useless to advertisers.

As a result, Google is looking for ways to expand the number of ads it shows, and as the world shifts Rightward, more people are watching videos about related ideas — “five YouTube videos peddling racist and anti-Semitic content, according to a review by The Wall Street Journal” — and so Google wants to show ads on those.

Not so fast, says corporate America, which obeys the old bourgeois rule of “criticize no one, accept everyone” because in its view, every person out there has some dollars in their fat little fists. What it forgets is that its mainstay, the upper half of the middle class, has a values system and these are the people who are the “power users” that other consumers emulate.

The problem that corporate America faces is that, while the urban elites are Leftists to the core, the suburban and rural upper half of middle class still tend to be WASP and conservative-leaning. By pandering to an audience outside of this group, corporate America continues to demonstrate its sliding relevance, and the possibility that the new audience it has chosen for itself has not panned out.

Asked about the Journal’s finding that their ads were still appearing with such content on YouTube as of Thursday night, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo Inc., Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and Dish Network Corp. said Friday they were suspending spending on all Google advertising except targeted search ads. Starbucks Corp. and General Motors Co. said they were pulling their ads from YouTube. FX Networks, part of 21st Century Fox Inc., said it was suspending all advertising spending on Google, including search ads and YouTube.

Wal-Mart said: “The content with which we are being associated is appalling and completely against our company values.”

Other companies whose spots appeared, including Toyota Motor Corp. and Microsoft, said they were monitoring the situation. Procter & Gamble said it was working with Google but declined to say whether it was reducing spending.

Every time a sea change is underway as we see happening currently, the market divides into two groups: those betting on the old way, and those betting on the new. Corporate America has backed the wrong horse on this issue because pluralism has failed. People want strong national identity, and that includes the ability to have some opinions considered “extremist” by the Left.

Trump Questions Fake Hate Crimes In Addition To Fake News

Friday, March 3rd, 2017

Sometimes it becomes necessary to merely “unspin” the media from its neurotic circular argument with itself so that we can see the actual context, understand the events in them without the false context of the Leftist Narrative, and get some idea of what they are telling us that is independent of the need of Leftist ideology to generate constant outrage.

Consider this low energy hit piece on Trump for questioning the assumption of veracity behind hate crimes:

When Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro (D) asked him about the recent threats against Jewish facilities, the president responded by condemning the incidents but then “suggested the ‘reverse’ may be true,” Shapiro said.

…When he and other attorneys general discussed it after, Racine said: “We wondered whether that statement in some way questioned the underlying fact of increased anti-Semitic conduct.”

…Trump did mention the anti-Semitic incidents during his speech to Congress on Tuesday night, although he did not elaborate on who he thinks could be responsible.

Of course the Leftist establishment does not know what white America has known for a long time: when you set up a group to be pitied, you give them a superpower, which is the ability to claim victimhood and have everyone take them seriously and give them free stuff. And so we get pity scams from any pitied groups: False rape claims. Fake hate crimes. Bogus Holocaust survivors.

Trump is ushering in a new era of realist common sense. In this case, it means that we do not take any crime at face value. We go through the process of investigation and find out who is actually responsible and why. This stops the false rape claims, for example, dead in their tracks because the scam artist no longer gets the payoff of free publicity, pity and donations.

As Leftism falls after reaching its apex, the normal/healthy people in society — perhaps 40% — are realizing that in fact most people are not scrupulously honest, and lie by omission as much as anything else, and that we have a large number — perhaps 20% of each generation — who are born bad and will do nothing but scam, grift, cheat, lie, steal, rape, assault, vandalize and plagiarize.

This means that where in the credulous 90s we took every hate crime as a literal affirmation of the narrative, assuming that the victim was 100% pure and the attackers 100% evil white male Christian guys who liked death metal, we now are more skeptical, and say we will wait to see if this hate crime is a crime or a scam, because either is possible and often, as with the rest of human activity, a scam is more likely than the truth.

Why Both White Nationalists And Leftists Attack Me

Tuesday, February 28th, 2017

File photo: lumpy Leftists.

Over at a site that has been on my reading list for years (and on which my writings have appeared) a rather detailed and articulate attack against me has appeared. It makes sense to analyze this in good faith and see what points it makes.

The author argues that I am (1) a mainstream conservative and (2) a world Zionist disinformation agent. Unbounded accusations like this cannot be refuted simply because there are too many inputs; I can show that the Bank Of The Learned Elders Of Zion did not send me any checks, but maybe they used another source, or pay me in Kentucky Burley. Same with the mainstream conservative accusation: perhaps I keep a television in the basement crawl space to covertly watch Fox And Friends late at night.

The first argument takes this form:

dispatched to re-direct WN into American patriotardism

By “patriotardism,” the author seems to be suggesting an affiliation with the GOP and its defense of the “proposition nation”/”magic dirt” nation state. Fortunately, we have some source material: “Nationalism Rises As The Proposition Nation Fades Away”, The Death Of The Proposition Nation, Race-Nationalism Versus Ethno-Nationalism” and perhaps most fundamentally, “Patriotism Or Nationalism?”.

One might also wonder how the GOP jives with the four pillars advocated here for the restoration of Western civilization, the rejection of democracy, the dislike of equality, and other notions that are part of the mainstream conservative lexicon.

He does make a good point about mainstream conservatives however which is that they are the Rightists who were willing to work with the new, post-Revolutionary order as established in France, giving rise to the terms “Right” and “Left.” However, the impulse toward conservatism occurred long before that, and it is this type of “roots conservatism” — found in Plato and Nietzsche — that informs my advocacy of it and understanding of the term.

Moving on to the “Jewish Question” or JQ, which is always a point of conflict:

Of course those in service of the YKW do not feel the need to be especially covert about their advocacy in all places nowadays, particularly with The Alternative Right Tentosphere being what ((it is))), as it is devised to be YKW friendly – markedly so in its charter name site, Alternative Right, which re-published the Brett Stevens article “The Roots of Modern Anti-Semitism.” They feel no need to be ashamed of their defense of Jewish interests, they are free to exercise their chutzpah, as they do by way of Stevens in this article. However, the real points for style in shabbos service come into play as Stevens and committee go to work confounding and re-directing proper ethno-nationalist understanding of the world that the more sophisticated and Jew-wise would otherwise be sorting out.

My point is simple: Western Civilization’s decay is the result of poor decisions made by Western people. We cannot blame anyone else. In addition, we should cheer Jewish nationalism because it ends the diaspora and revitalizes nationalism. Western Civilization rose by being reflective, or intuitively bonded to the best aspects of reality and geared toward qualitative improvement of the experience of life, and breaking away from that by relying on scapegoats is beneath us, inaccurate and will lead to more horrifying stuff like The Holocaust. We are not murderers, nor are other racial groups our concern; our goal is to restore Western Civilization and make it better than ever before. This is the goal of any sane and healthy civilization, and we are not sane and healthy now, nor have we been for a long time, although the French Revolution really formalized our decline.

He wonderfully clarifies my argument here:

blaming our demise solely on our individualism and lack of rectitude

Yes. That is our illness. Everything else is a symptom. We do not achieve victory by fighting symptoms, but by going to the cause. Degeneration — first moral, then mental, and now physical — is the hallmark of the decline of the West. As one observer said, “Civilizations die by suicide, not murder.” We lost our way and have made ourselves miserable, and are now self-destructing.

This is the difficult problem we must solve. If stopping civilization decline were easier, there would be more great civilizations still in existence. Instead, it serves as the means by which every advanced human civilization so far has passed into darkness. This is the challenge before us: to save civilization.

Whether or not Jews are a symptom of this problem, they are not its source. Even more, whipping people up in a fury against them fails because it both distracts us from the actual cause, and inspires people to do ignoble things like genocide. We do not need to kill those who might appear to be our enemies; we need to fix ourselves, which includes excluding everyone else.

It is the same way with the African-Americans. Some wish to blame them, but the actual cause is diversity, which in fact gets more deadly if it involves “nice” groups because then your people hybridize with them, erasing the original population. This type of soft genocide leaves behind a civilization capable of none of the great acts of the old.

On this issue, the philosophers have it right: our civilization entered into decline because people became individualistic, or acting for themselves first against the natural ways a civilization structures itself. Individualism is reality-denial, a form of hubris. The only solution is a cultural change reversing this pathology.

Stevens wants us to believe that the Jewish population were probably once European

Much of Jewish genetics originate in Southern Europe, which makes sense given the proximity of that region to Israel, and that we know Israel was a trading hub between West, East and Africa. That would lead to a mixed-race group of Caucasian and Asian roots with some African.

Think about this another way: if you take New York and analyze the people who are successful in business there, most will be Caucasian, followed by Asians, with a few exceptional African-Americans who have made it big in business. If all of these wealthy people go to the same schools, country clubs and the like, they will intermarry, producing an ethnic mix resembling the Judaic mixture.

Jews are not the enemy; they are what is left after a civilization dies in the higher socioeconomic classes. Again, think of New York. The reason pro-Aryanists fear The Eternal Jew is not because the Jew is the threat, but because the Jew is a symbol of our future if we do not end diversity.

we should be able to relate to them as being of common European origin

Race is not binary. Consider the fringes, such as parts of Italy where the population is clearly intermixed with Persian and Phoenician remnants, or parts of Russian where the population despite being blonde/blue has a quarter Asiatic mixed into it. That does not mean we should do more than understand these other groups as being similar but crucially different to us.

The same is true of Spain, for example. Many Spaniards show clear evidence of admixture with Moors or Sephardim. Many Americans have Asiatic (Amerind) heritage, or some like the Melungeons of Appalachia, show African admixture. What does this mean? For starters, that admixture makes a group different, but not so radically different that we cannot understand them.

My hope for the Jewish people is the same as their hope: for the diaspora to end with a prosperous, safe and stable Israel as their ancestral homeland and a place for all Jews. Of course, the White Nationalists would work to prevent this and instead focus their energies on dreams of genocide, which then allows the actual problems of the West to go unchallenged.

Not coincidentally, this is also my hope for Western Europeans — and every other group, including Eastern Europeans, Africans, Southern Europeans, Asians and any other identifiable human group.

Our path lies between cuck and sperg, which means that we are trying to find a path between the cowardly GOP who will never act to save Western Civilization, and the White Nationalists, who will act on one issue obsessively and ignore the rest. The middle path is crucial here.

He continues:

First of all, deconstruction is a mainstay premise of what modernity does to clear-away “the arbitrary” in its quest after foundational essences. It is NOT so concerned to not subject to arbitrary deconstruction and experimentation the precious inheritance that is. So, we already have a clue that Stevens is going to probably give us not something radically different for our interests at all (certainly not White Post Modernity) but something a lot more like bald modernity and nihilism in the service of the “reality of inequality”, a “reality” that just so happens to serve the ehem, rather unequal position now of Jewish power and interests – who will try to placate us, if we are good sheeple, by sneaking-in some “radically” traditional Noahide consolation.

Deconstruction is also a powerful method for reducing the seeming omnipotence of certain socially-acceptable illusions. For example, “the reality of inequality” applies to the failure of democracy and diversity.

the “irony” is that the notion of necessity that he is alleging as being opposed to fatalism and the humility (as opposed to hubris) to know one’s factual limitations is, in fact, of an appeal to a less socially interactive and agentive kind of cause and effect – it heads toward deterministic cause and effect quite the opposite of the agency that appeals of social critique and social constructionism.

And yet, life is deterministic. People have different innate abilities and inclinations. It sounds almost like he is arguing for Leftist universalism here, or the idea that people are equal and that accurate portrayals of reality are discernible by all people equally. That is clearly not the case, which is why hierarchy is needed.

democracy is put aside as something that doesn’t work because people start worrying too much about what others think

Yes, and for many other reasons too. Democracy is what the cucks defend. Mob rule is the downfall of the West.

Modernity has not only been atop a short list of the most profoundly transformative ways of life, it will remain to feature as an integral capacity of any competent post modern culture.

Modernity, which is the era which begins with the assumption of equality, has created vast degeneration in the West. The sooner we escape this time of illusion the better.

those peasant revolts! they were based in delusional thinking too – they should have just known their place!

His objections are starting to sound very Leftist. We need hierarchy; peasants who pretend to be kings are prone to make terrible decisions. Look at our history since the time when we rejected monarchy.

Stevens reverses this, and says that the unversities are merely responding to what students want. He is disingenuously suggesting that these liberal teachers, cultural Marxist and Jewish academics are innocent, they are merely responding to market demand of students, not indoctrinating them and selling them endless words, endless critique aimed at effecting the teacher’s personal interests along with peer Jewish and liberal interests.

Another way to look at this is that academia aims to sell its product to students who already agree with it, which thanks to the Leftist high schools, is most of them; however, the bigger argument is that Leftism is always more popular because it flatters the ego, and so people flock to it for social reasons.

Because you think that we just hate reality, beauty and happiness, we aren’t dealing with reality, not accepting what “is”, we only care about what we think “ought” to be. Do you really believe that Brett?

Yes. People are not good, and only some can become good through self-discipline and a sense of reverence. The rest are self-interested monkeys who behave like a prole revolt and destroy everything good. We can see this exemplified in Leftism and the associated movements that follow it, including White Nationalism, which attempts to destroy Western Europe through trace admixture and uniformity.

While it was not totally surprising that Alternative Right blog spot would unabashedly re-publish his Jewish advocacy, viz., the article quoted in the post, it was a little surprise to see it republished uncritically (save the capacity for critical comments) at Alt, and it appears that critical of them as I have been, that I still gave them too much credit. I assumed that it had to be the case that Stevens was not only selling a new podcast but a new website: why, after all, would these sites, supposedly wise to the JQ, be promoting the work of one with a long-standing track record of ardent defense and attempted exoneration of Jewish interests?, and why would AltRight re-post it, allowing for comments, yes, but re-post it un-accompanied by any critical editorialization of its own?

Alternative Right publishes a number of authors with somewhat divergent views. This can help expand dialogue about Right-wing topics instead of turning us into a Right-flavored version of Leftism, which forces conservative thought into a dogma or ideology and thus lessens its actual potency by making it related to symbol and not reality.

You would have to ask the editors there what their intent was, however. So far, I have found no reason to criticize them, even when they publish articles that I personally disagree with in whole or in part.

The points I take away from our dialogue here today are thus: there are no binaries regarding nations; each group acts in self-interest. The groups that succeed will unite individual self-interest with that of the group, which requires people who are not individualistic. Those who argue in favor of individualism are, at their heart, Leftism, or believing in the equality and goodness of humanity, which history shows us is nonsense and drivel. Even white people — especially white people! — are prone to become narcissistic and self-preening instead of focusing on the end results of their actions in reality. Rightism is found in rejecting the preening and focusing on reality, and this is what made the greatness of the West.

Majority Rights will succeed where it offers an alternative to the modern time. Once we assume equality, no amount of racial awareness will stop that from eventually extending to its natural end result, which is inclusion of everyone as equal. For that reason, we need a method of thinking outside of modernity/equality, and this is found in some of the ideas I pursue that are feared by both the underground white nationalist Right and the mainstream cheeseburger cuckservative Right.

I do not expect these ideas to be immediately accepted. No new idea ever is, mainly because it takes on a new form and so is unfamiliar to its audience. However, it seems to me that the greatest threats come to us from failed ideas of the past dressed up as something desired, for example Leftist pro-democracy talk disguised as pro-white or pro-nationalist.

For my ideas, the bottom line is this: we are here to restore Western Civilization. We know that to do that, we need to escape from the house that equality built, because it is the ideology of our enemies. In the interim, there will be those who try to sell us the same old thing in a new form because they know it will be popular. It makes sense to ignore those.

All in all, this seems a productive dialogue. We have gotten to the core of two ideals — my futurist traditionalism versus DanielS’s racialist democracy — and can compare them as they really are. This offers a lot to someone who is looking for an option to the present, and wondering how deep they must cut to get beneath the necrotic flesh and encounter healthy tissue again.

Roots Of Modern Anti-Semitism

Friday, February 17th, 2017

While anti-Semitism makes no sense because it scapegoats one group for the failure of the much larger phenomenon of Western Individualism, it is easy to see how it came about in the modern time because of the unfortunate affinity of a large percentage of Jews for egalitarian ideologies which also reveals the eternal tragedy of the Jewish people in Europe and Eurasia:

In 1934, according to published statistics, 38.5 percent of those holding the most senior posts in the Soviet security apparatuses were of Jewish origin. They too, of course, were gradually eliminated in the next purges. In a fascinating lecture at a Tel Aviv University convention this week, Dr. Halfin described the waves of soviet terror as a “carnival of mass murder,” “fantasy of purges”, and “essianism of evil.” Turns out that Jews too, when they become captivated by messianic ideology, can become great murderers, among the greatest known by modern history.

When 2% of the population represents nearly 40% of the Communist Party, they will be targeted. Herzl recognized this when he noticed that among national populations, those who do not fit the national profile are attacked whenever things go wrong. But even more, when a stereotype becomes somewhat true, the brutality that follows seems justified or at least forgivable to most people, despite being unrealistic.

Naturally the tragedy of the Jews comes into play here. The Jewish diaspora began before the Jewish people were exiled from Palestine. It lies in the mixed-race nature of the Jewish population, who were probably once European but became merged with Asiatics and Asiatic-African hybrids because of Israel’s place as the center of world commerce at the time.

The Jews are a bourgeois tragedy: successful in business, they accepted everyone, which led to them changing from a European population to a mixed one. This guaranteed them a home on none of the continents and, when their homeland in the middle east was dispossessed from them, a wandering group who could never point to an origin and say “there, alone, we belong.”

Like the good businesspeople of the West today, the original Jews accepted diversity because it made good business sense. Thriving businesses do not turn down customers because of their national origin. But in doing so, the Jewish people invited in the hybridization that ensured they would never have a racial home or continental home except themselves.

This fundamental alienation led to a fascination with anti-majority movements for many Jews, explaining their higher participation in Leftist movements. However, their lack of an identity in one of the four root races — Australid, Caucasian, Asian and African — then turned against them, as even the Communists recognized the power of nationalism.

While this seems like a problem without solution, nationalism solves this problem. A new race was made: the Jewish people. It belongs to no one but itself, and it needs its own homeland, whether in Israel or Madagascar. It will never be European again, but it can be the best of what it is, and this begins with a divorce from the alienation that has led it into so many disasters.

In the meantime, these historical events prove how nonsensical anti-Semitism is. Our problem in the West is that we are following the path that the ancient Jews did because, as individuals, we are willing to “succeed” at the expense of civilization. We cannot blame others for our own moral failing, and indeed, doing so obscures what we must do, which is to change our ways.

Recommended Reading