The White Race and its Discontents


Regarding the war on Whites – the origin and destruction of White/Western civilization.

Remarks by President Trump to the People of Poland, 6 July 2017:

Under a double occupation the Polish people endured evils beyond description: the Katyn forest massacre, the occupations, the Holocaust, the Warsaw Ghetto and the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, the destruction of this beautiful capital city, and the deaths of nearly one in five Polish people. A vibrant Jewish population — the largest in Europe — was reduced to almost nothing after the Nazis systematically murdered millions of Poland’s Jewish citizens, along with countless others, during that brutal occupation.

The fundamental question of our time is whether the West has the will to survive. Do we have the confidence in our values to defend them at any cost? Do we have enough respect for our citizens to protect our borders? Do we have the desire and the courage to preserve our civilization in the face of those who would subvert and destroy it? (Applause.)

We can have the largest economies and the most lethal weapons anywhere on Earth, but if we do not have strong families and strong values, then we will be weak and we will not survive.

Our own fight for the West does not begin on the battlefield — it begins with our minds, our wills, and our souls.

. . .

Our freedom, our civilization, and our survival depend on these bonds of history, culture, and memory.

. . .

I declare today for the world to hear that the West will never, ever be broken. Our values will prevail. Our people will thrive. And our civilization will triumph.

Trump’s speech was reportedly written by jewhadi Steven Miller and though he specifically condemned “nazis” and specifically mourned the jews, and only referred ambiguously to “our civilization” and “the West”, this was enough to trigger non-White jewsmedia critics to immediately vent their anti-White animus.

The Racial and Religious Paranoia of Trump’s Poland Speech, Peter Beinart, 6 July 2017:

In his speech in Poland on Thursday, Donald Trump referred 10 times to “the West” and five times to “our civilization.” His white nationalist supporters will understand exactly what he means. It’s important that other Americans do, too.

The West is a racial and religious term. To be considered Western, a country must be largely Christian (preferably Protestant or Catholic) and largely white. Where there is ambiguity about a country’s “Westernness,” it’s because there is ambiguity about, or tension between, these two characteristics.

The most shocking sentence in Trump’s speech—perhaps the most shocking sentence in any presidential speech delivered on foreign soil in my lifetime—was his claim that “The fundamental question of our time is whether the West has the will to survive.” On its face, that’s absurd. Jihadist terrorists can kill people in the West, but unlike Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union, they cannot topple even the weakest European government. Jihadists control no great armies.

Trump’s sentence only makes sense as a statement of racial and religious paranoia. The “south” and “east” only threaten the West’s “survival” if you see non-white, non-Christian immigrants as invaders. They only threaten the West’s “survival” if by “West” you mean white, Christian hegemony. A direct line connects Trump’s assault on Barack Obama’s citizenship to his speech in Poland. In Trump and Bannon’s view, America is at its core Western: meaning white and Christian (or at least Judeo-Christian). The implication is that anyone in the United States who is not white and Christian may not truly be American but rather than an imposter and a threat.

. . .

America is racially, ethnically, and religious diverse. So when Trump says being Western is the essence of America’s identity, he’s in part defining America in opposition to some of its own people. He’s not speaking as the president of the entire United States. He’s speaking as the head of a tribe.

Beinart’s critique only makes sense as a statement of racial and religious paranoia. He is shocked to hear words like survival because he understands it to mean White racial survival. He understands it is his own tribe which threatens White survival, thus interprets any concern for White survival as an implicit threat to his own tribe.

The white nationalist roots of Donald Trump’s Warsaw speech, Jamelle Bouie, 7 July 2017:

To the extent that he does have an ideology, it’s a white American chauvinism and its attendant nativism and racism. It was the core of his “birther” crusade against Barack Obama—the claim that for reasons of blood and heritage, Obama couldn’t be legitimate—and the pitch behind his campaign for president. Trump would restore American greatness by erasing the racial legacy of Obama’s presidency: the Hispanic immigration, the Muslim refugees, the black protesters.

House nigger Bouie also links approvingly to some hysterical Haaretz jew complaining that the kikeservative-in-chief’s recounting of the jews’ big lie “erases victims of Polish anti-Semitism”.

Here are some other examples. The hallmark is explicit anti-White animus, often marked by a telling attempt to shift blame for the speech from Miller to Bannon. Zeleny: Trump address in Poland a ‘White America, America First’ speech, Trump’s theo-nationalistic Poland speech sounds a whole lot like Steve Bannon, Trump’s alt-right Poland speech: Time to call his white nationalist rhetoric what it is, Fourteen words? Three words from Trump’s speech in Poland are truly terrifying.

The mainstream cucked kikeservative defense of Trump’s speech uniformly downplayed race – ignoring the explicitly anti-White nature of the hostility and only obliquely acknowledging its jewy source. The hallmark in this case is the term “judeo-Christian” (which sprang into being during WWII) and otherwise reducing and equating civilization to judeo-liberal values: Trump’s Poland Speech — Western Values Trump Universalism, Yes, They Really Do Despise Their Civilization.

The anti-White critics are correct in that the West and Western civilization are euphemisms for European civilization – which is a product/construct/extension of the White race. As Beinart alludes, “the West” is understood to extend beyond Europe only because this is so. Though terms like White and European are much older than “judeo-Christian” they are all still newer than the people and gene pool to whom they are attached.

Who are these people? The answer isn’t as ambiguous or as complicated as anti-Whites pretend. If you ask them what they oppose they’ll tell you it’s “Whiteness”. If you ask what that is, they’ll claim it’s a social construct. Of White people. And so it is, of course.

From archeological and ancient genetic evidence it appears the particular mix of DNA which constitutes the White race was already relatively stable 40000 years ago, when Cro-Magnon hunter-gatherers settled what we now call Europe, replacing the Neanderthal inhabitants. Certainly this was the case by about 6000 years ago when the Yamnaya/Aryans swept westward, conquering and interbreeding with their distant Cro-Magnon cousins. Until the 20th century the European gene pool was only relatively slightly altered by additional migration and mixing and evolution. The jews were among the more recent interlopers, and certainly the most deleterious.

A civilization and its culture are racial constructs – the bottom up, grass-roots instincts of the masses largely modulated and moderated by the elite. The West’s elite is today thoroughly jewed, racially distinct from and hostile toward Whites. The disfigured culture of the current anti-White/pro-jew regime is expressed in its propagandized slogans: “Diversity is our greatest strength!” “Combat racism and anti-semitism!”

Loxism – the jews’ hatred for Whites – is not a new phenomenon. In the past the jews simply did not have the same breadth or depth of political power that they do today. Cuddihy’s The Ordeal of Civility describes the shift, the jewing of European civilization, exposing the roots of cultural Marxism, a collective effort personified primarily by Marx and Freud.

Freud’s psychopathologization of European social norms was particularly toxic and typically jewish. He imagined himself a conquering semitic general like Hannibal, waging war on Rome (yet another ancient expression of and metaphor for the White race). Freud waged his war culturally and cryptically, in part by projecting his own tribe’s sick predilections under the guise that he was revealing universal truths about “our” civilization.

Freud is just one example of historic jew hostility toward Whites. Jews as a group are the seminal source of anti-Western/anti-White critique. Another example is Susan Sontag (born Rosenblatt), who in 1966 produced a quintessential expression of loxism, infamously claiming that “[t]he White race is the cancer of human history” in Partisan Review, a journal founded and run by communist jews.

Sontag’s loxist outburst was never punished, and to this day is rarely discussed. Like Beinart, Sontag perceived Western civilization as an expression of the White race, and thus a righteous target for her loathing. This is clear from the context of her statement:

If America is the culmination of Western white civilization, as everyone from the Left to the Right declares, then there must be something terribly wrong with Western white civilization. This is a painful truth; few of us want to go that far. It’s easier, much easier, to accuse the kids, to reproach them for being “non-participants in the past” and “drop-outs from history.” But it isn’t real history Fiedler is referring to with such solicitude. It’s just our history, which he claims is identical with “the tradition of the human,” the tradition of “reason” itself. Of course, it’s hard to assess life on this planet from a genuinely world-historical perspective; the effort induces vertigo and seems like an invitation to suicide. But from a world-historical perspective, that local history that some young people are repudiating (with their fondness for dirty words, their peyote, their macrobiotic rice, their Dadaist art, etc) looks a good deal less pleasing and less self-evidently worthy of perpetuation. The truth is that Mozart, Pascal, Boolean algebra, Shakespeare, parliamentary government, baroque churches, Newton, the emancipation of women, Kant, Marx, Balanchine ballets, et al, don’t redeem what this particular civilization has wrought upon the world. The white race is the cancer of human history; it is the white race and it alone — its ideologies and inventions — which eradicates autonomous civilizations wherever it spreads, which has upset the ecological balance of the planet, which now threatens the very existence of life itself. What the Mongol hordes threaten is far less frightening than the damage that western “Faustian” man, with his idealism, his magnificent art, his sense of intellectual adventure, his world-devouring energies for conquest, has already done, and further threatens to do.

Sontag was condemning the White race in defense of the 1960s freakout, led by jews, and described the jewed mindset of the “kids” she sympathized with as “post-Freudian and post-Marxian”. She concluded her screed by distinguishing her tribe from the White race:

One last comparison, which I hope won’t seem farfetched. The Jews left the ghetto in the early nineteenth century, thus become a people doomed to disappear. But one of the by-products of their fatal absorption into the modern world was an incredible burst of creativity in the arts, science, and secular scholarship – the relocation of a powerful but frustrated spiritual energy. These innovating artists and intellectuals were not alienated Jews, as is said so often, but people who were alienated as Jews.

40 thoughts on “The White Race and its Discontents”

  1. Geoffrey Miller: “A lot of ‘social science’ researchers seem to think their job is to do ‘oppo research’ against their own society.”

    Indeed. Because jews.

    MacDonald on The Boasian School of Anthropology and the Decline of Darwinism in the Social Sciences:

    Several writers have commented on the “radical changes” that occurred in the goals and methods of the social sciences consequent to the entry of Jews to these fields (Liebman 1973, 213; see also Degler 1991; Hollinger 1996; Horowitz 1993, 75; Rothman & Lichter 1982). Degler (1991, 188ff) notes that the shift away from Darwinism as the fundamental paradigm of the social sciences resulted from an ideological shift rather than from the emergence of any new empirical data. He also notes that Jewish intellectuals have been instrumental in the decline of Darwinism and other biological perspectives in American social science since the 1930s (p. 200). The opposition of Jewish intellectuals to Darwinism has long been noticed (Lenz 1931, 674; see also comments of John Maynard Smith in Lewin [1992, 43]). 1 In sociology, the advent of Jewish intellectuals in the pre–World War II period resulted in “a level of politicization unknown to sociology’s founding fathers. It is not only that the names of Marx, Weber, and Durkheim replaced those of Charles Darwin and Herbert Spencer, but also that the sense of America as a consensual experience gave way to a sense of America as a series of conflicting definitions” (Horowitz 1993, 75). In the post–World War II period, sociology “became populated by Jews to such a degree that jokes abounded: one did not need the synagogue, the minyan [i.e., the minimum number of Jews required for a communal religious service] was to be found in sociology departments; or, one did not need a sociology of Jewish life, since the two had become synonymous” (Horowitz 1993, 77).

    Cuddihy from The Ordeal of Civility, p8 (h/t Von Hash):

    As Jewish intellectuals with cultural aspirations constructed putatively value-free social sciences with which to talk about the social encounter of Jew with Gentile in the West, rank-and-file Jews with social aspirations were seeking religiously neutral places in which to interact with bourgeois Gentiles. Sociologically, the quest of the Jewish intellectual for value-neutral social sciences and the quest of the Jewish bourgeois for value-neutral social places are one event.

    His accompanying footnote reads:

    Sociology was sometimes then [turn of the 20th century] called the Jewish science … Sociology is a Jewish sect”

  2. Why do these guys act, as shown by the comments with exampmes of Rome etc. That jews did not exist before christianity? That jews jewing began with the start of Christianity? Can you offer any insight into this? It is the old suicide bs, but the first time I noticed them arguing this way (maybe I wasnt paying close enough attention in the past?)
    That the fall of Rome mimics others after christianity but they seem to think that jewing wasnt a thing in Rome? And base this “flaw” in Whites from the get go leaving jews with zero blame.
    Check comments as well.

  3. Since you combined references to Trump and MacDonald, I’m interested in your perspective on MacDonald’s slow shift in rhetoric as part of the Trump campaign. Certainly MacDonald’s earlier work was excellent, but now his articles, websites, speaking engagements, et cetera, have become explicitly pro-Jewish, so long as the Jews whom he supports claim to be “right wing” or “conservative” Jews. In your view, has MacDonald succumbed to pressure, been genuinely tricked into believing the battle is mere ideology, or was he always a sleeper agent just waiting to be activated once the younger generation was ready to have its healthy instinctual reactions misdirected into political ideology? Or, conversely, do you believe that he has chosen a wise course in having the white “right” ally with the Jewish “right” in order to stop the white left through Our Savior Trump?

  4. MacDonald mentions to Ford that he now has jews writing for him at Occidental Observer. I can’t think of any good reason why someone who knows what he knows would do this, but fair-mindedness would be a wrong-headed reason.

    do you believe that he has chosen a wise course in having the white “right” ally with the Jewish “right” in order to stop the white left through Our Savior Trump?


  5. Glad to hear you say that. Perhaps MacDonald’s work should have us not examine “our” selves for susceptibility to pathological altruism, so much as to question just how much of our immune system has been created expressly for the purpose of failing us at a later time, and how well and with what foresight the genome active inside Jews has scripted our resulting history. The simplest example of such is probably Christianity, where Saul of Tarsus’ fabricated “Jews did it” story sugared the pill and prepared Europe, seemingly impossibly, for rabbi-worship. Whatever trifling expulsions of Jews occurred over those thousand years, the net effect was a successful takeover of the societies involved. Our very presence here, discussing the issue, contrasts with the reactions of our hypothetically healthy predecessors, who would use, at the least, axes, to solve the problem.

    More recently, consider the Third Reich. If it had, for example, actually put a quiet final solution in place, preventing the initial escape via emigration (and the later “rescue”) of so many of the Enemy; or, if it had not permitted the first failed British assaults to escape and rearm, the twentieth century would have unfolded quite differently. Perhaps the superficial, almost completely absent harm done to the Enemy by the world wars was intended–perhaps, in the absence of the Third Reich, more European states would have tried to overthrow Bank rule. Ergo we might contemplate the extent to which “our” leaders, even those who seem most cognizant of the problem, are actually on our side. It’s likely that there are cultural operatives out there right now, who will develop small followings, and then in 20 years be activated to lead some variety of milkwater resistance. We’re certainly seeing many of those types at later stages of their careers, now, leading various otherwise-anti-Semites to embrace Israel.

    It doesn’t seem that these crypto-rabbis are effective on most of us because of an inherent desire for pathological altruism. If the internet is to be believed, these people are excited to build the wall, join the border patrol, have black criminals executed en masse, cut welfare to zero, et cetera. There is something else; some particular susceptibility to flattery that causes gentiles to be so excited when they get Israeli support. Why do MacDonald et al. abandon all their beliefs and principles at the thought of having a Jewish staff? What is that hollowness?

    It’s probably somewhat spiritual, but the Jews are far too clever and have, besides controlling Christianity, made the concept of “paganism” into a perhaps deserved joke, so that’s not going to serve as a way out.

  6. There is something else; some particular susceptibility to flattery that causes gentiles to be so excited when they get Israeli support. Why do MacDonald et al. abandon all their beliefs and principles at the thought of having a Jewish staff? What is that hollowness?

    Strange new respect. After years of stick even a rotten carrot looks good.

    The dynamic is more pronounced in Trump. The jews screech “anti-semite”, pointing to shit everyone knows is fake, and the kikeservative-in-chief just keeps jumping higher.

  7. Re: Torah Talk

    KMac: When you get to jewish influence it’s much more difficult. You have to do some reading. You have to have a higher IQ. People shouldn’t even talk about jews unless they have an IQ of 120 or more and have read a lot. It’s a very difficult thing to deal with.
    Corey: These jewish people are refusing to worship the state gods and participate in ways that the Romans thought were fruitful. I guess with a certain negative capability I can also see how that might be sort of a good thing, sort of a virtue like – if it is true that maybe jews become like the last stand against a totalizing globalism or against empire. Do you think there’s any merit in that? You talk about the group evolutionary strategy, it seems like that might be a bulwark against a kind of complete totalitarianism. Ya think?
    KMac: That’s an interesting way to put it.

    Corey’s “high IQ” explanation that jews are beneficial to Whites is literally retarded.

    The White middle class suffers the most under jew rule. Meanwhile a country without jew money and jew influence does not appeal to White Hollywood stars, White tenured professors and White high-level politicians.

    Jews have been kicked out of countries at the insistence of the middle class. The only reason the White upper class (who were just as guilty as the jews) agreed to get rid of the jews was to save their own skin from middle class wrath.

    KMac says he’s writing another book. I’ll pass. I’d rather spend my time reading posts by “low IQ” Whites who understand jews are the enemy and no f*cks given that gtkrwn is plebeian.

  8. Great show Tan. Hope to hear more in the future.

    Never knew the full context of the Sontag (nee Rosenblatt) quote. It’s one of the most blatant anti-white quotes ever and it’s no wonder this is a top thinker in the family-destroying ideology of feminism. One of my fellow DS writers covers it pretty well in his Merchants of Sin series. Highly recommended.

    Anyway, great work as usual. Keep it up.

  9. Urgh, Bucky Beinart, what a bug. There are times when he out-shapiros Ben Shapiro. ;P

    Re: the yiddishkeit or lack thereof of Mrs. Jamelle Bouie, née Tess Krovetz, Krovetz is a Jewish as well as a goyish surname. Fwiw, I get a good-goyess vibe offa her, kind of a despoiled, latter day, utility grade, high openness (wishes she had a higher Big 5 neurotic score tho) Mia Farrow. Bleh. Recently relocated to be a big Charlottesville (((anti-White))), so #ourguys will surely see her again on The Glorious Twelfth (of August).

    Lovin’ the latest volley of Tan – will goad for moar if necessary. o/

  10. Geoffrey Miller made a podcast coaching Asian men to seduce White women. He’s one of those ev-psych fellas who falls at the last and only hurdle that matters.

    While it would be a real cultural victory if in his field Miller’s generally sound ideas were to replace patently insane prevailing dogmas, that itself is likely to be a problem for us going forward.

    Similar easy victories are available in so many areas of science, culture and policy, where Jews could allow only those safe for them, and not ultimately meaningful for us. Yet so many wacky, harmful ideas and policies could be overturned, and sensible new policies instituted that we’re all gonna be thinking we have won. Trump X 1,000,000 if need be.

    But we won’t be any better off, really.

  11. Sunic did Luke Ford, too. Why?


    A friendly podcaster interviewing MacDonald should open with a nod and a wink, faux-Maddow, with the question, ‘Kevin MacDonald, why do you hate the Jews?’

    MacDonald replies, ‘Well, I don’t hate the Jews,’ and then goes into a a short discussion of what he has learned about Jews and their effect on our societies.

    Podcaster then says seriously, ‘Kevin MacDonald, why DON’T you hate the Jews?’

  12. kMac loves to make the topic of jews far more difficult than it actually is. Stating a high IQ is a must, well what about dem skin heads? People love to call skins low iQ and they may be. But they recognize the jew as the problem. Sure they may not be able to articulate it at a scholarly level but they can get the point across.

    Either way the topic of jews is actually very easy. The altright who worship KMac for some reason take his approach as well. This arrogance that only slowly waking people up can work and onky their way will work(it doesnt) This approach also assumes we have decades left to “win”. That they have it figured (and 9/10 times they actually dont). Its an odd mindset the arrogance that they figured it out and now have to slowly help you along like niggers. This is the altright busing niggers in mentality. Dumbing down the message instead of raising the bar. I think you get what Im driving at here?.

    Talk to people as they should already know about jews, let them catch up. People tip toeing around jews is one reason we are in this situation presently. Calling them Eskimos, liberal,marxists etc is cowardly and counter productive. The other terms except Eskimo, lead people to think Whites are doing this and not jews.

    Anyone using any other term besides jew, its a safe bet they dont get it and are working against White interests.

    Kmac should have retired after CoC.

    Also to note:
    The only group Trump openly disavowed was the Whites supporting him.

  13. Jews attack us as Whites. While proWhite always search for the good one. Jews want us all gone while proWhites want to save and promote the “based one”
    Jews promote good goys to serve their interests. ProWhites promoting good jews, serves jews.

    Seeing the jews as the enemy is only hard for people who serve jews..

  14. Tan being ironical: “The true path to victory is to praise the enemy and do as they advise.”

    Now that Trump is in the White House, I wonder if he is unable or unwilling to do what’s needed. I wish he would denounce Jewish power, Jewish over-representation in the media and central institutions, as well as the Jewish program of race replacement for White people. He won’t do it because he is not a White Nationalist.

    Even so, he is still pro-White. In any case, he got elected by sounding pro-White. But he had to be careful what he said during his election campaign. He might have won more votes by sounding a little more pro-White. But he had to be careful not to lose votes by sounding too pro-White.

    How much could he get away with? What would have happened if during the campaign he had criticized Jewish anti-White activism and the Jewish over-representation in the administration and the media? The jewsmedia were already campaigning against him anyway. How could it get worse?

    I don’t know exactly, but still, I tend to agree with Jews that there are circumstances where, for our own good, it’s probably better not to talk too much about them.

    Obviously, if you are an internet blogger trying to wake people up to the JQ, you are not in the same situation as Trump trying to get elected.

    Even as a blogger, there are different ways to go about it, depending on your personality, your style, who your audience is…

  15. Armor wrote:

    “Now that Trump is in the White House, I wonder if he is unable or unwilling to do what’s needed. I wish he would denounce Jewish power, Jewish over-representation in the media and central institutions, as well as the Jewish program of race replacement for White people. He won’t do it because he is not a White Nationalist.”


    Not to badger you Armor, but Trump is 100% in the jew’s pocket. He’s no crypto White Nationalist playing 3D chess. He’s a jew-tool* through and through and was put there to serve jewish interests. All the anti-Trump jew media stuff is just the usual jew confusing BS to get us to think there is some kind of “power struggle” going on. It’s all jew theatre.

    People like Kmac, etc., who put their hopes in Trump are just revealing their political naivety.

    * Trump as j-Tool?

    BTW, looking for entries to: White Glossary

  16. Chris Taylor wrote:

    “Kmac should have retired after CoC.”

    Perhaps a bit harsh, but yes, his various opinions have been elevated in importance beyond his area of expertise. I’ve found his opinions on politics, especially Trump, to border on cringe worthiness, at times.

    Yet, he runs TOO, and its print publication, TOQ, which are major contributions to our cause in providing a venue for all sorts of well considered “academic” opinions. Andrew Joyce comes to mind. Academics may be the source of great analysis but very rarely the source of practical wisdom, especially in politics.

    I think its the old problem of people being celebrated for a particularly great contribution, then being expected to be all wise on all other relevant, associated areas.

    So Kmac should be praised for his past and continuing contributions, but he should not be looked upon as someone who can provide us with big answers to big political issues.

  17. MacDonald is the reason I awoke to the JQ, so I won’t judge him too harshly, but at the end of the day, he’s a professor, not a firebrand leader. He doesn’t have the aggression or attitude for that.

    Nonetheless his psychological theory that jews are “self-deceptive” in terms of their behavior always struck me as wrong. There is no way in hell jews are not aware that they are nation-wreckers. Judaism is not a “group evolutionary strategy,” it is a strategy of perpetual warfare via parasitism.

    As for chechar, he’s an odd one. I read somewhere that he was once under psychiatric care, though I don’t know if that’s true. He definitely has a monomania when it comes to his “White suicide” meme and he refuses to listen to anyone who believes otherwise.

  18. Thanks Goy. Ben Garland’s Merchants of Sin is indeed a masterwork. He documents the 20th century jewing of American culture, and specifically how they exploited the liberal concept of free speech to promote hardcore jew degeneracy.

  19. “There is no way in hell Jews are not aware that they are nation-wreckers.”

    Oh give me a break. The vast majority of people stumble through life with nothing but instinct and social pressure to guide them. Do you suppose a 110 IQ Jew – in other words the average Jew – is any different?

    The human capacity for self-deception is virtually limitless; especially as a face-saving measure according to one’s own self-appraisal. Do you believe the average Jew looks in the mirror each morning and says, “Yes, of course I am a human parasite. No better than a tapeworm on legs!”

    Wake up, numb nuts.

  20. “Yes, of course I am a human parasite. No better than a tapeworm on legs!”

    Yes, actually, to the extent they are aware they are a jew, they are aware what that implies, that the historic “canards” and stereotypes do have substance. I gather this is the gist of Roth’s The Human Stain. The book is well-known among jews, a classic exposition of the jews’ loxist mindset, deploring and reveling in it at the same time.

    Here this jew-awareness is visible in recent non-fictional form, in the context of down-low and in-your-face jews arguing about the best way to jew:

    Opposition to the eruv has also veered into what some fear is anti-Semitic territory. An anti-eruv petition (since taken down) included comments describing Orthodox Jews as “these nasty people” who do not “benefit the town in any way.” Screenshots of a since-shuttered private Facebook group also Mahwah residents describing Orthodox Jews as “terrorists” and “parasites.”

    Freud’s fraud is not merely his own, but his tribe’s. He is infamous because he gave their projection a name while demonstrating how it works. At some level the jews know that “anti-semitism” is caused by their own behavior – jews jewing. They deal with the pain/threat this causes by group-consciously shifting the blame for it elsewhere, away from jews, onto some other group, usually their hosts. Scapegoating is a more ancient jew term for this characteristically jewy behavior.

    Consider also the jew terms MOSER and SHANDA. The jews know. The real crime, in the jew mind, starts only when the goyim know.

    Andrew Joyce: “A good example of Jewish self-deception: violence against Jews incomprehensible/ totally unrelated to Jewish behavior. “Just for being Jews”

    Kevin MacDonald: “@AJOccidental That’s a great example of self-deception.The occupation, apartheid, ethnic cleansing have nothing to do with Palestinians attacking Israelis”

    MacDonald and Joyce deceive themselves on this point. What they call “self-deception” is not technically so – it does not have to do with an individual jew trying to protect their ego, or advance their individual interests. It is a collective behavior. In the very example they point to the jews are explicitly screeching that the crux of the issue is jews just jewing. The problem, from the jew point of view, doesn’t begin until their enemies understand and act on that same realization. As soon as you stop internalizing and trying to rationalize the jew point of view (i.e. stop projecting your White objectivity onto jews) the “self-deception” evaporates.

  21. @Captainchaos,
    Jews are aware of what they do. The have wrecked/destroyed these civilizations. They openly brag about it when your corner them or they are amongst their own.

    They see what they did as necessary for goyim noticing the jewing they were up to. Most of this destruction and genocide is celebrated by their holidays some for over 2,000 years.

    They sell it as persecution and a just reaction to anti-semitism. This also works to unite them on team jew to attact us on teamWhite, they polarize and win, we make excuses for them. Because jews in our head saying its wrong to notice and also because of their desert cult christianity.

    The destruction of these nations is known to jews and people like us, for the same reason,
    Jews jewing.

  22. Recently on TFeed two jews (psycho-specialists, of course) were talking past each other about self-deception in front of a live audience of (((Jew York Shitty skeptics))).

    Galef defends the usual individualistic meaning of self-deception, while Kurzban argues the social (i.e. tribal/racial) aspect is essential. Kurzban’s point is that such deception is “strategically wrong”, that its very existence is explained by its fitness in a long-term collective competitive sense – what MacDonald, when more lucid, calls a group evolutionary strategy.

    Galef prefers the (safe for the jews) non-evolutionary non-collective view of deception, providing an example of “strategic wrong”, jew-serving willful ignorance, which the more dim-witted goyim mimic and even the more jew-aware misdiagnose.

    Tribemate Kurzban, though almost as cryptic, is more willing to talk evolution and collective. His jewsplaining thus gets closer to the truth he and Galef are arguing about, and the psychology of jewing more generally.

  23. Oh give me a break. The vast majority of people stumble through life with nothing but instinct and social pressure to guide them. Do you suppose a 110 IQ Jew – in other words the average Jew – is any different?

    No, the average jew is no different. The thing is, the instincts and social pressures that guide him are jewish ones, which are based on parasitism and hostility towards Whites. The average jew may not consciously recognize this, but the jews in charge (i.e. the ones who run the banks, media corporations, and government) certainly do.

    The human capacity for self-deception is virtually limitless; especially as a face-saving measure according to one’s own self-appraisal. Do you believe the average Jew looks in the mirror each morning and says, “Yes, of course I am a human parasite. No better than a tapeworm on legs!”

    You would be surprised at how the worst jews- the pornographers, sex traffickers, communists, homosexual propagandists- revel in their parasitic behavior. These jews do see themselves as saboteurs and parasites and they love it. Their mentality is not like ours. They have no shame at all.

    Wake up, numb nuts.

    What a jewy thing to say.

  24. Do your Jewish in-laws conceive of themselves as parasites, Tan? If not, why do you think that is?

  25. It’s a tribal-conception more than a self-conception CC.

    I learned the term jewish lightning from my in-laws. I never heard all the dirt, and I rarely see or talk to them, but I know at least one is a stereotypical shyster.

  26. How Anti-Semitism Shapes the Far Right:

    Understanding anti-Semitism’s centrality, Ward argues, explains the fuel behind white nationalists’ anti-black, Islamophobic, misogynistic and anti-LGBTQ views, among other hate-based agendas.

    After the black-led civil rights movement shook the social order of the country in the 1960s, white nationalists and white supremacists created a narrative of white dispossession in the U.S. But at the same time white nationalists struggled to accept that blacks—a so-called “race of inferiors” according to white supremacist ideology—were able to change social order alone.

    “Some secret cabal, some mythological power, must be manipulating the social order behind the scenes,” Ward writes. “This diabolical evil must control television, banking, entertainment, education, and even Washington, D.C. It must be brainwashing White people, rendering them racially unconscious,” he writes: “It is, of course, the Jews.”

    The ordeal of “anti-semitism”.

  27. KSA: “MacDonald is the reason I awoke to the JQ / Nonetheless his psychological theory that jews are “self-deceptive” in terms of their behavior always struck me as wrong. “

    He had to come up with that theory so as not to lose delicate and sensitive readers like Captainchaos who are not psychologically ready to accept the full truth at once.

    KSA: “There is no way in hell jews are not aware that they are nation-wreckers.”

    My intuition is that you are right.

    Some American WN activists specialize in raising awareness about racial differences in IQ. They are trying to educate White people and make them more realistic. Most White people know at some level that Blacks are usually less smart, less honest, more dangerous… But our instincts are counterbalanced by the Jewish propaganda. So, WNs are doing useful work by talking openly about it.

    But IQ is an easier topic than racial differences in morality. How do you go about explaining to naive White people like Captainchaos that the Jews are psychopaths who use a dual morality? Besides, if you publicly say so in Europe, you will be fined in court. Even so, it’s obvious that non-Whites do not have the same morality as us. I guess the Japanese are a little more like us. But Jews are very different. Actually, as a nation of parasites, they are a special case.

    The question whether Jews are aware that they are genociders makes me think of the other question, which is whether White people are committing suicide. On this blog, we know that White people are not suicidal. Most Whites do not even fully understand that they are being destroyed. They cannot believe that the government wants to kill them. And they don’t know that the Jews are behind it all.

    Jewish psychology is not what I’m most interested in. Rather, I’d like to know what’s going on in the minds of White politicians and journalists. How many psychopaths among them? How many self-deceivers? My guess is that only a small minority are psychopaths.

    The message we need to spread is that the Jews rule White countries, want us dead, and are behind the third-world invasion. I think that’s a big part of K.MacDonald’s message. He keeps writing that the problem comes from the top, and that there isn’t any country where White people have agreed to the mass immigration policy. So, I don’t care that he’s still using the word suicide.

    What annoys me is all those stupid commenters on WN forums who keep repeating that White people agree with their governments. In their view, the government’s genocidal policies do not demonstrate any genocidal intent, but the lack of reaction in the streets and the polling stations is proof that people agree with the government and don’t mind being race-replaced. Next month, Merkel will probably be reelected, and then, internet commenters will keep repeating that the Germans have decided to commit national suicide.

    Those commenters are not afraid of harming their own side by claiming that people agree with the government. That is because they believe in telling the brutal truth! But they cannot handle the truth about the genocidal Jewish-run government. They will rant against the third-world invasion, against the liberals, the media, the government, but they have not really figured out that the government wants us dead.

    They don’t understand the concept of soft dictatorship and how censorship prevents the formation of a self-conscious pro-White popular opinion, even when people have the right instincts. They know that their own relatives, who are not anti-White, vote for anti-White politicians. But they will still say that the Germans who vote for Merkel want to destroy Germany.

    The problem is simply that White people trust the dominant opinion more than their own instincts, but that simple idea is too sophisticated for many internet commenters!

  28. The Swiss Alps seem quaint until you learn the truth about their residents:

    All those rosy-cheeked village girls serving rosti, all those solidly built goat milkers. But it turns out that the more pastoral a place looks, the more it’s swarming with racists and nationalists. The more like a postcard it appears, the more politically benighted it is. The purer the sausage, the more authoritarian the personality structure. Best not to think about what the little goose girl would have been doing had she lived 75 years ago.

    Typically chutzpathic loxism. The Swiss simply being Swiss makes jew blood boil.

  29. Who are you calling a ‘warmonger’?

    After jewplaining how the term warmonger is stupid/crazy/evil and needs to be shut down because it is used almost exclusively to oppose bloodthirsty jewy warmongers like himself, Kirchick concludes with a bit of psychoanalytic warfare:

    Calling someone a “warmonger” is, then, a politicized form of the psychological phenomenon known as “projection,” whereby one ascribes his own nefarious conduct and motives onto others.

    The jew cries out in pain as he accuses others of behaving like jews.

  30. Why Freud Survives | The New Yorker:

    He’s been debunked again and again—and yet (((we))) still can’t give him up.

    The article calls Freud a charlatan and notes his psychoanalysis has long been discredited. It describes “the cardinal Freudian principle”:

    that the sources of our feelings are hidden from us, that what we say about them when we walk into the therapist’s office cannot be what is really going on. What is really going on are things that we are denying or repressing or sublimating or projecting onto the therapist by the mechanism of transference, and the goal of therapy is to bring those things to light.

    This principle is summarized as:

    Decoding and exposing are what psychoanalysis is all about.

    This is what Freud and his apologists have to say about the fraud, thus by their own principle it is not what is really going on. What is really going on is cryptic ethnic warfare, waged by jews against Whites. A sublimated and projected description appears in the article’s conclusion:

    Crews does bring what appears to be a novel charge (at least these days) against psychoanalysis. He argues that it is anti-Christian. By promulgating a doctrine that makes “sexual gratification triumphant over virtuous sacrifice for heaven,” he says, Freud “meant to overthrow the whole Christian order, earning payback for all of the bigoted popes, the sadists of the Inquisition, the modern promulgators of ‘blood libel’ slander, and the Catholic bureaucrats who had held his professorship hostage.” Freud set out to “pull down the temple of Pauline law.” . . . “freeing his people from two millennia of religious persecution”

    The fact is that the jews have for millennia imposed themselves and their moral/historic narratives upon Europeans, setting themselves up as the arbiters of good and evil while mischaracterizing White resistance as “religious persecution” and psychopathology. The specific irony of the psychoanalysis fraud is that it serves as both a diagnosis and demonstration of jew mentality, all the more because it continues to be misrepresented otherwise.

  31. Ted Gold and the Jews of Weatherman, Part 1:

    Ted Gold was a Jewish member of Weatherman, the Communist terror group of the late 1960s and 70s, which was a radical spin-off from the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). Gold is best known for perishing in the dramatic explosion in the New York townhouse caused by Weatherman’s ignorance of how to build a powerful bomb that explodes when desired and not before. His real importance, however, lies not in his spectacular demise, but rather in his frank public call for a communist dictatorship in this country, run by a revolutionary committee from the Third World. Consistent with the thesis that Jews place a high value on group interests, Gold worked unwaveringly within a mainstream Jewish subculture against Whites and White power, the enemy whose destruction many Jews thought would advance their own influence and power.

    Ted Gold and the Jews of Weatherman, Part 2:

    Another gentile, Bill Ayers, in his pretentious and often mendacious memoir, gives this odd reaction to his immersion in Marx coupled with the unjust expulsion of a Jewish friend from school:

    I didn’t want to be a goy. I drew a Star of David and the word Jew on my forearm . . . recolored it for weeks and kept it hidden under my jacket. In Kerry’s honor, and for Marx as well, I invented another identity, part rootless, wandering scholar, part brilliant if ill-tempered Moor—I imagined myself a Jew.27


    Weatherman was a movement led almost wholly by Jews, concerned deeply with Jewish themes, and straining fanatically towards a potentially genocidal communist dictatorship in which they could hold untrammeled power over the Whites of America.

    That genocidal potential is now realized.

  32. That’s a good article on how Jewish particularism might thrive within a ‘leftist’ subculture. But it derives at the end to arguing for ‘leftism’ as the essential problem. TOO says,

    the Weathermen, “and their leftist peers have carried out the Gramscian “long march” through American society and have shaped much of the country to their image.”

    In fact Jews adopted and sponsored venal or vulnerable but certainly manipulable Whites like Ayers and Clinton from the left, as well as stooges on the right like William Buckley or Donald Trump, and promoted them all as models for White-race denialism / Jew-race subservience.

    Only such un-White Whites are permitted by Jews any power or influence. It has nothing at all to do with right or left inanities! It is all about Jews.

    MacDonald has been influenced lately to push rightism as solution to the phantom leftist problem. But it’s quite clear that Jewish particularism is protected within even the altright subculture by ‘goys’ like Taylor, Spencer and Brimelow, on behalf of Jews generally, and under the direct influence of specific Jews like Gottfried, Hart and Weissberg, just as it was in the countercultural left of the 1960s.

    Resurrecting the right is not a good White strategy. Perhaps Trump’s betrayals as they become more and more overt will help TOO and others regain focus on simple pro-Whiteness? But I fear there’s a subterranean army of influencers determined not to allow that.

  33. McDonald’s flaw was always his atheistic detachment from his racially-incarnated gift of free will…

    And his unWILLingness to clearly state that the Jew qua Jew is the archetype anti-white (S)upremacist.

  34. Another toxic jewess, sister to the Facebook mogul, screeching her discontent with the White race and its civilization.

    Welcome to the New Eidolon!

    Our writer pool has excellent diversity of race, age, gender, professional status, and sexuality. We work hard to keep it that way. But we’ve been accused of not being “ideologically diverse.” This charge is a common one, but I think it is misguided, in addition to being morally bankrupt. Making ideological diversity a primary objective is fundamentally incompatible with fighting against racism, sexism, and other forms of structural oppression, and we choose to prioritize the latter.

    But Eidolon isn’t going to publish articles arguing that identity politics are ruining Classics. I don’t feel any obligation to represent that view here. I don’t believe that political neutrality is either achievable or desirable. Classics as a discipline has deep roots in fascism and reactionary politics and white supremacy, and those ideologies exert a powerful gravitational pull on the discipline’s practitioners. If we want to fight those forces, we need to actively work against them.

    Donna Zuckerberg is the Editor-in-Chief of Eidolon. She received her PhD in Classics from Princeton, and her writing has appeared in Jezebel, The Establishment, and Avidly. Her book Not All Dead White Men, a study of the reception of Classics in Red Pill communities, is under contract with Harvard University Press.

    The lame critique Zucc is giving the finger to comes from alt-jews who refuse to notice that the cultural marxism she’s promoting is entirely a jew construct, and that it is explicitly anti-White. Quillette is a platform for this false opposition, a hive of latter-day Lawrence Austers.

  35. Skeptic » Reading Room » The Wizardry of Freud:

    Philosophers of science have indicted key concepts of Freud’s psychoanalysis such as “free association,” “repression,” and “resistance” as circular and fatally flawed by confirmation bias. Historians have tracked down the actual patients whose treatment served Freud as evidence for his theories and have sought to place Freud and his theories in the historical and cultural context of his time. Crews—to his own surprise—became well known as a major, if not the major, critic of Freud in the public eye because of a series of articles he published in the New York Review of Books in the 1990s. For Crews is that now all too rare and rapidly disappearing creature—the public intellectual—who is able to explain and make accessible an otherwise unwieldy amount of erudite scholarship in clear, elegant, and jargon-free prose. Defenders of Freud have sought to discredit him as a “Freud basher,” thereby continuing the (not so honorable) tradition that Freud began of questioning the motives of a skeptic and attributing it to “resistance” instead of answering his objections.

    This is precisely one of the reasons that in previous books Crews has said that psychoanalysis is not only pseudoscience (as most philosophers of science agree, though for different reasons), but “the queen of pseudosciences,” because it is the only one that incorporates within its theory an explanation of why some people refuse to believe it, i.e. “unconscious resistance” which needs to be explained by Freud’s own ideas and methods—a most brilliant and masterful way of disarming criticism.

    The article makes no mention of jews even though Freud’s fraud (and thus its attributes) sprang from the pseudoscience of anti-“anti-semitism”. In Freud’s case this indirect jewing was, and still is, quite deliberately disguised as something else.

    Crews takes his clue from the fact that Freud saw himself (and other family members, especially one of his sisters) as suffering from an hysteria exactly like those of his patients, and that what he represented as his empirically based “science of psychoanalysis” were actually his own—real or imagined—childhood sexual experiences. Crews’s exposition of what in Freud’s biography led him to his theories makes for interesting reading indeed. In the end, Crews demonstrates that Wilhelm Fliess, who at their last actual meeting in 1900 accused Freud of merely reading the contents of his own mind into that of his patients, was right. What this means is psychoanalysis is based on a case of one—Freud himself. That is, Freud took himself as representative of all people in all times and in all cultures—surely a supremely grandiose, narcissistic—and preposterous—idea.

    The neurotic degenerate inbred lying jew cries out in pain as he tells you everybody else is crazy.

Comments are closed.