What’s Flipping Yid Lids Today: Tom Perkins on the 1% and Kristallnacht

In a short letter to the Wall Street Journal, Progressive Kristallnacht Coming?, Tom Perkins, the Silicon Valley venture capitalist, retired founder of Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, expressed a simple-minded concern which appeared not at all out of step with the thoroughly judaized contemporary political discourse:

I would call attention to the parallels of fascist Nazi Germany to its war on its “one percent,” namely its Jews, to the progressive war on the American one percent, namely the “rich.”

This is a very dangerous drift in our American thinking. Kristallnacht was unthinkable in 1930; is its descendant “progressive” radicalism unthinkable now?

The response from outraged jews was swift and venomous. Undeterred by Perkins’ wealth, power and love of jews, jews big and small have taken to their soapboxes to insult and lecture him. The gist of it all is to self-righteously inform Perkins, and any other uppity goyim who might be under a similarly mistaken impression, that only jews are permitted to invoke the jewish narrative.

To illustrate I’ve selected a few of the clearer examples of jews getting so carried away with their attempts to describe what Perkins has done wrong and condemn him for it that they effectively end up describing and condemning themselves and their tribe.

Steven Greenhouse, labor and workplace correspondent for the New York Times, issued this twit:

As someone who lost numerous relatives to the Nazi gas chambers, I find statements like this revolting & inexplicable

Then this one:

Rather shocking that Tom Perkins seems to embrace Nazi Germany’s stereotype that Jews were Europe’s rich 1%

Perkins’ mistakes are hardly inexplicable. It’s jews who have filled his head with nonsense. He has internalized jewish myths. He has misunderstood jewish self-pity and self-concern as applying more generally to wealthy minorities.

What Greenhouse is revolted and shocked about is Perkins equating the merely rich to the jews. Greenhouse knows there is no such equivalence. His hysterical overreaction probably has less to do with events decades past and more to do with the “stereotype” of jews in the 1% of the right here and now.

For a lecture about the jewish version of history, Greenhouse links a Salon article by Elias Isquith, titled Wealthy venture capitalist Tom Perkins says the 1% in America are treated like Jews in Nazi Germany:

For those who don’t already know: Kristallnacht was a giant anti-Semitic riot, organized by the Nazi government, that left nearly 100 Jews in Germany and Austria murdered and resulted in the incarceration of some tens of thousands more in concentration camps. It was an act of coordinated barbarism done in service of the Nazis’ ultimate goal, the expulsion (and, later, elimination) of Europe’s Jewish population.

Is it any mystery why accounts that differ from the jewish narrative go unknown or unheeded? Look how jews howl and bring to heel even someone rich and famous who tries to parrot their story in some way that doesn’t please them.

For those who don’t already know, there are other versions of history that don’t excuse the jews. For example, Carolyn Yeager, based on the work of Ingrid Weckert, has made a convincing argument that organized jewry instigated and benefited from “Kristallnacht”.

As confused and conflicted as Matthew Yglesias is about jewish identity, he is confident that Tom Perkins is nuts and that his letter “certainly proves you can get rich without being very thoughtful, perceptive, or intelligent”.

Steve Benen, another ambiguous jew, aims his psychoanalysis more broadly, claiming the letter reflects “a persecution complex at the heart of conservative ideology” “that bordered on self-parody”. For one thing, it certainly proves you can get a gig defending the jews at MSNBC without being very thoughtful, perceptive, or intelligent.

One of the more telling responses I’ve encountered so far comes from Mark Suster. If not for his overweening jewish superiority Suster would come closest to being a peer of Perkins. Suster’s response to “this terribly insensitive and tone deaf letter”, Putting Tom Perkins Comments into Context, begins:

Um. Seriously?

People of middle or lower income families protesting the concentration of wealth in America is the same as a political party in Germany instituting a policy of systematically killing 6 million Jews and countless more who didn’t fit the model Aryan citizen?

It probably doesn’t take much more to explain how disconnected from reality Tom Perkins is.

Perkins, recall, referred to the jewish Kristallnacht myth, not their six million myth. It is Suster and his tribemates who are disconnected from reality.

Referring to a WSJ article in which Perkins claims others call him the king of Silicon Valley, Suster mocks:

Who says out loud that they are the king of anything?

I’m sorry, Mr. Perkins. You are now the bumbling dunce of Silicon Valley.

True enough. How much of a king can anyone be when the jews can so easily transform them into a bumbling dunce?

This is not a mere gaffe that people won’t remember in 3 years. Perkins will forever be associated with greed, insensitivity and lack of historical context.

Never forgive, never forget. Vex the jews and they will ensure that you go down in their history as the one who is greedy and insensitive.

And then there are the Jews of which I am one.

Mr. Perkins. Jewish people weren’t persecuted merely for their financial successes and it’s total mythology to believe all Jewish people are wealthy despite our population over-indexing in education, arts and wealth. Jews were persecuted for being different. The sort of mindless intolerance that I see lobbed today against Muslim people, African Americans, gay couples and others.

Jews followed their own rituals that made them seem “strange” to gentiles. Jews were excluded from trade guilds across Europe for hundreds of years which made it impossible for Jewish people to have a normal, stable income from the most important jobs of those era. Because they couldn’t have “normal” professions they become traders, peddlers, market makers and financiers.

Again we see Suster’s disconnection from reality and arrogance in lecturing others about what is or isn’t mythology. His account of the one-sided jewish version of history is quite typical. We’re to believe Europeans somehow couldn’t ever make the jews leave but could compel them to become financiers.


Jews weren’t persecuted for being rich. Jews were scapegoated whenever countries had economic problems simply because they were different and were an easy target for political leaders. It’s a societal consequence when times turn bad and people affected look for somebody to blame.

This too is a common jewish account of “scapegoating”. What the financier jew is saying is that when there are economic problems the people shouldn’t blame financier jews, they should instead blame themselves for blaming the financier jews, not to mention forcing the jews to become financiers in the first place.

Mr. Perkins. I am a member of the 1%. Yes, I earned it. But with a lot of help that many of the 350 million other Americans don’t have. I’m ok with you having extravagant houses and competing with the likes of Larry Ellison for extreme spending on Yachts and such. That’s your prerogative.

But when it comes for speaking for our great state or country. When it comes to speaking for Jews around the world. When it comes for speaking up for venture capitalists for which you are simply not a “king” I have but one bit of advice.


Not only is there no honor among thieves, in the minds of commissars like Suster only the jewish thieves should be speaking for anyone.

As illuminating as these examples have been, I’ve saved the most pompously self-unaware for last. Paul Krugman titled his New York Times op-ed Paranoia of the Plutocrats. He begins like Benen, by making it clear that his critique is aimed at a broader group:

You may say that this is just one crazy guy and wonder why The Journal would publish such a thing. But Mr. Perkins isn’t that much of an outlier.

Here’s the punchline:

But every group finds itself facing criticism, and ends up on the losing side of policy disputes, somewhere along the way; that’s democracy. The question is what happens next. Normal people take it in stride; even if they’re angry and bitter over political setbacks, they don’t cry persecution, compare their critics to Nazis and insist that the world revolves around their hurt feelings. But the rich are different from you and me.

And yes, that’s partly because they have more money, and the power that goes with it. They can and all too often do surround themselves with courtiers who tell them what they want to hear and never, ever, tell them they’re being foolish. They’re accustomed to being treated with deference, not just by the people they hire but by politicians who want their campaign contributions. And so they are shocked to discover that money can’t buy everything, can’t insulate them from all adversity.

I also suspect that today’s Masters of the Universe are insecure about the nature of their success. We’re not talking captains of industry here, men who make stuff. We are, instead, talking about wheeler-dealers, men who push money around and get rich by skimming some off the top as it sloshes by. They may boast that they are job creators, the people who make the economy work, but are they really adding value? Many of us doubt it — and so, I suspect, do some of the wealthy themselves, a form of self-doubt that causes them to lash out even more furiously at their critics.

There you have it. The jews aren’t normal people. They see themselves as somewhere outside and above normal. That’s why they can think and write so critically about others without seeing how the criticism applies to themselves, without even thinking that they or anyone else could apply it to themselves.

It isn’t self-doubt that makes the jews lash out furiously at their critics, much less at someone like Perkins, who grovels for them. It is an aggressive sadism. A hostility born of racial animus, enabled by a confidence born of racial solidarity. They see themselves having more in common with each other, rich or poor, left or right, than they do with any multi-millionaire goy.

Some jews no doubt fear their group’s cover being blown, their depredations being revealed. Not the ones I’ve quoted here. These jews appear confident that they can say and do as they please, no matter how blatantly overbearing.

16 thoughts on “What’s Flipping Yid Lids Today: Tom Perkins on the 1% and Kristallnacht”

  1. Koenig Name Meaning & Koenig Family History at Ancestry.com:

    German (König) and Jewish (Ashkenazic): from Middle High German kunic, German König ‘king’, hence a German nickname for a servant or retainer of a king (for example, a farmer on a royal demesne); or alternatively a status name for the head of a craftmen’s guild, or a society of sharpshooters or minstrels. As a Jewish surname, it was ornamental, one of several such Ashkenazic names based on European titles of nobility or royalty.

    Is Koenig a Jewish last name:

    Koenig is of Germanic origin, it means ‘king’. The surname Koenig is often used by Northern and Eastern European Jews too.

  2. Jewess Kaili Joy Gray thinks Perkins “sounds a tad hyperbolic”, Tech Bazillionaire Tom Perkins Warns Of New Holocaust: People Complaining About Google Buses:

    The parallel of Nazi Germany and some people getting kind of annoyed by the tech bro dudes is exactly ZERO. If you don’t believe us, treat yourself to a trip to the Museum of the Holocaust, where you can see the grotesque photographs of all those millions of dead Jews, and not a single one of them wearing Google Glass. And let us give you another protip: The only thing that is like Nazi Germany is Nazi Germany.

    The hyperbole is from jews whose premise is that jews can and should dictate which terms and topics everyone else can speak about.

  3. Jon Swartz at USAToday:

    It’s difficult writing a column while holding your nose . . . Repugnant as the task may be, it’s necessary to fill in the general public . . . Perkins had the unmitigated gall – OK, inexplicable ignorance . . . But his misguided letter highlights what many perceive as a self-entitled, boorish attitude

    of jews.

  4. The Jews are just protecting the reputation of their brand. Holocaust, Kristallnacht, and Anne Frank are all registered trademarks of the State of Israel. All rights reserved.

  5. Not sure about the Krugman criticism. He’s gone after the plutocrats a lot, and doesn’t seem to care whether or not they’re Jewish. He actually said something shocking once: “Listen to the Gentiles.”

    My own favorite quip is the flip side of the coin: “Nothing’s important in this country any more unless some damned Jew says it.”

  6. More from Yglesias at Slate, Tom Perkins and the Davos problem: It’s time to stop listening to rich people:

    The sheer level of derangement on display here is remarkable, and has prompted a fair amount of armchair psychoanalysis

    Yes indeed. Deranged jews psychoanalyzing themselves via the mirror provided by Perkins. Here’s Yglesias’ indirect self-analysis:

    But the larger issue here is simply that the letter is extraordinarily stupid. Its author, successful as he was in business, was still perfectly capable of writing an extremely stupid letter to the editor. The political and historical analysis contained in the letter is stupid. But beyond that, the idea of publishing it was stupid. Anyone with the slightest sense of public opinion would recognize that the analogy is offensive and counterproductive. There is simply no viewpoint on economics or American politics from which writing this letter was anything other than stupid.

    What this deranged jew is trying to say: “Stupid, stupid, stupid, offensive and counterproductive. Stop listening to the jews!”

  7. Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo was pushing the no-prisoners, anyone-who-looks-like-Perkins memes back on the 25th. The Brittle Grip, Part 2:

    This [Kristallnacht] claim manages simultaneously to be so logically ridiculous and morally hideous that Perkins deserves every bit of abuse he’s already receiving.

    But I think we’re missing the point if we see this as the gaffe of one aging, coddled jerk. Because it’s only a more extreme and preposterous version of beliefs that have become increasingly widespread in the wealthiest sectors of American society, especially since 2008 and the twin events of the global financial crisis and the election of Barack Obama.

    Let me state the phenomenon as clearly as possible: The extremely wealthy are objectively far wealthier, far more politically powerful and find a far more indulgent political class than at any time in almost a century – at least. And yet at the same time they palpably feel more isolated, abused and powerless than at any time over the same period and sense some genuine peril to the whole mix of privileges, power and wealth they hold.

    There is a disconnect there that is so massive and glaring that it demands some sociocultural explanation.

    Look how easy it is to transform the words of one person into an indictment of a whole class, a whole group. It’s just as easy to plug “the jews” into Marshall’s analysis. Every point fits, and in most cases fits the jews better than “the rich”. As this Perkins Purimfest demonstrates, the jews are objectively far more cohesive and coordinated in their opinions and actions than any group of every-man-for-himself wealthy goyim are.

    These media jews are describing what the jews do, the way the jews act, but transferring the attention and blame to “the rich” instead.

  8. And let us give you another protip: The only thing that is like Nazi Germany is Nazi Germany.

    That’s amusing, considering we are frequently reminded that every white gentile group or institution is perpetually two steps away from morphing into the NSDAP.

  9. There are times when it seems Jews find the throne they usurped uncomfortable.

    My theory is that what made Jews particularly capable in the “long march through the institutions,” or KMAC’s culture of critique, also uniquely makes them very incapable at being even mediocre caretakers.

    Jews are highly capable of sustained, moral attack and critique in a uniform and intelligent manner, which is extremely adaptive in taking over or orienting Western institutions. In gentile intellectual cultures where reasoned objectivity is considered a core foundation, good-old fashioned disingenuous critique and pack attacks are extremely effective, especially when those being attacked believe its just impartial and honest arguments they’re receiving.

    Gentile intellectuals are simply the least equipped people in dealing with social-warfare strategies that any conniving high school girl would be highly familiar with: shame from being outside “consensus,” arguments from emotion, etc.

    Most intelligent gentiles these days know exactly which side of the bread is buttered, and know that any chance in upper class money and status requires taking on some routine philo-semitic stances. I wonder, though, how many more Perkins there will be in the coming years, as the number of targets for anti-semitic inquisitions continually shrinks. I suppose, the hammer of Jewish critique increasingly sees all the problems around them as nails, and accordingly start hammering without much thought for restraint.

    I think this phenomenom is working behind the scenes to our advantage. What would this Perkins affair teach to some gentile billionaire/millionaire, who more or less goes through the motions of philosemtic platitudes? Well, it would teach him that even if you prostrate yourself before this tribe, they may still punish you for simply being incorrectly submissive.

  10. Hank, that was a superb comment. Worthy of an entire post. Hope to hear more from you in the future.

  11. These media jews are describing what the jews do, the way the jews act, but transferring the attention and blame to “the rich” instead.

    And Perkins might have thought that the jews would appreciate his pointing out that populists might transfer the blame from the rich to the jews. But no.

  12. “Jews were excluded from trade guilds across Europe for hundreds of years…they become traders, peddlers, market makers and financiers.”

    The bribed the Church to give them the monopoly on money-lending.

    “Jews weren’t persecuted for being rich. Jews were scapegoated whenever countries had economic problems”

    Caused by Jews shrinking the money supply through excessive money-lending.

    It should always be remembered that Europe’s economic stagnation lasted from the time Jews were given the monopoly of banking around the 4th century until their expulsion in the 13th and the current decline of the West coincides with their getting back to where they were before the expulsion.

    Jewish bankers = economic problems.

  13. “treat yourself to a trip to the Museum of the Holocaust, where you can see the grotesque photographs of all those millions of dead Jews”

    but not pictures of the millions killed by Jewish Bolsheviks in the Soviet Union.

  14. “My theory is that what made Jews particularly capable in the “long march through the institutions,” or KMAC’s culture of critique, also uniquely makes them very incapable at being even mediocre caretakers.”

    Their disagreeableness – chutzpah – is an evolved adaptation to Western agreeableness. As you say it gives them a competitive advantage in bringing down a culture or hijacking a civilization but it also means they are incapable of maintaining one.

    They are simply too destructive.

  15. I’ve always said that about Jews and ‘liberals’ (ha!) in general. If, even inadvertently, you have offended them, grovelling will do you no favours, they’ll just see it as a sign of weakness.

    Not sure how successful this is as a strategy. On the one hand maybe you can terrorise people into blind and comprehensive adherence to the party line. But you make a hell of a lot of enemies in the process.

Comments are closed.