All posts by Tanstaafl

Blog

John McCain: They Care for Our Babies

8 Comments

McCain faces angry crowd town hall [VIDEO], UPI.com, 20 Feb 2013:

Again, sir, you’re not telling these people the truth. They, they wash our… They mow our lawns, they care for our babies, they, they uh, they, they well… They clean, they wash, those where those people do, sir.

McCain projects his own problem, conflates it with telling the truth. It’s evident from his stammering that he knows it too.

It’s what I’ve been doing for 30 years.

McCain cares more for any alien than he cares for any citizen in that town hall meeting.

McCain argues that they serve our interests, that they care for our babies! The truth is exactly the opposite.

Everyone understands that aliens come to the US seeking a better life for themselves. They know that the US government, guided by the same treasonous mindset expressed by McCain, is on their side – it won’t keep the aliens out and won’t send them home. They know US citizens are forced to care for alien babies – to pay for their birthing, their education, their food, their health care, their safety.

That’s why polls show a Majority of U.S. citizens say illegal immigrants should be deported.

What more Whites should understand is that it isn’t about money. It is good and right for us to seek a better life for ourselves. To care for our own babies. A good and right government would help its citizens, not undermine them. But the US government has, over the course of decades, gradually been usurped by jews and jew-firsters. Thus US politicians have become increasingly obsessed with defending Israel as a jewish state at the same time they advocate genocidal anti-White policies in the US and every other country founded by Whites. John McCain embodies this reality, slavishly serving the interests of rich jews and poor mestizos, while betraying Whites, rich, poor and in-between.

Blog

Sweeping Explanations and the Jews

6 Comments

In Peter Turchin on the Big Picture, Steve Sailer writes:

Peter Turchin is a professor at the U. of Connecticut who started out in zoology and ecology and has moved over time into human history from a quantitative standpoint, searching for general patterns. He was born in Russia (his father was prominent dissident Valentin Turchin). His historical theorizing benefits from his knowing much about Russia, which few Americans do.

Ah, I thought, maybe Turchin has something to say from a quantitative standpoint about the general pattern of jew oligarchs in Russia, which Sailer has previously discussed. In The Unbearable Innocence of Economists, for example, Sailer quotes Bryan Caplan:

The oligarchs are disproportionately Jewish. 90% of Russian Jews have left the country over the last 30 years, but 6 out of the 7 leading oligarchs have Jewish ancestry. This would be hard to explain if their success were primarily due to political connections – but expected if their success largely reflected entrepreneurial ability.

Sailer, projecting his own style, describes Caplan as “astonishingly naive”. In this case Sailer indicates that he actually understands what’s going on and who’s responsible:

What happened in Russia in the 1990s was one of the great economic crimes in all history. And it happened largely with the approval of the American economists who were employed in large numbers, typically at American taxpayer expense, to advise the Yeltsin regime. Indeed, one of America’s top economists, Harvard’s Andrei Shleifer (Larry Summers’ best friend), was in on the corruption himself. Yet, the economics profession has done nothing to chastise Shleifer for his crookedness that ended up being penalized $28 million by a U.S. federal judge.

Then he retreats into sarcasm.

“Russian” oligarchs. “American” economists. In most forums this is as deep as the discussion gets. To his credit, Sailer does occasionally broach the subject of jewish disproportions, and mocks explanations like Caplan’s. His commentariat often digs even deeper, but it’s also chock full of Caplans, ever ready and willing to provide more explanations. The problem with Sailer is, when it comes to jews, he so often acts as if he has forgotten things he previously demonstrated he understands.

Reading farther into his post about Turchin, it becomes clear that Turchin doesn’t have any insights about jews, in Russia or anywhere else. Near the end Sailer quotes Turchin’s Return of the Oppressed, concerning US immigration restriction in the 1920s:

It almost goes without saying that there was a racist and xenophobic underside to all this. The co-operating group was mainly native-born white Protestants. African-Americans, Jews, Catholics and foreigners were excluded or heavily discriminated against.

This is the jewish version of history, though Sailer lets it go without saying, once again retreating into sarcasm. At any rate he doesn’t let it diminish his favorable opinion of Turchin, who he thinks is “on to something”. Much of Sailer’s commentariat responds by gushing about how fasinating and interesting Turchin’s sweeping theories are, and many pitch in with their own. Ben Tillman took issue with one of the more egregious bits of goofiness:

My thesis is that the elites made a deal with the white working class with the New Deal. This lasted until the early 60’s, when the affluence of the white working class started to worry the elite and they brought in blacks to cut them down to size, along with renewed immigration. The condition of the white working class has steadily deteriorated since then. The elite has acquired so much power through the media and law that they can’t be challenged and the white working class has no representation anyway.

You left out the part where the one elite was replaced by another in the early/mid-60’s, with the results you noted.

Indeed. This seems to be the point of such exercises. On the one hand there are lots of people, intelligent people, who are curious, interested and fascinated. They want explanations. On the other hand there are lots of other people, intelligent people, who literally make it their business to provide explanations. Explanations which conspicously avoid mentioning the jews, except perhaps to present them as hapless victims.

That’s the overall impression I get of Turchin’s work. As his Wikipedia page describes:

Peter Turchin has made contributions to population ecology and historical dynamics. According to ISIHighlyCited.com, Turchin is one of the top cited authors in the field of Ecology/Environment. He is one of the founders of cliodynamics, the new scientific discipline located at the intersection of historical macrosociology, cliometrics, and mathematical modeling of social processes. Turchin developed an original theory explaining how large historical empires evolve by the mechanism of multilevel selection.[1] His research on secular cycles[2] has contributed to our understanding of the collapse of complex societies as has his re-interpretation of Ibn Khaldun‘s asabiyya notion as “collective solidarity”.[3][4]

Of special importance is his study of the hypothesis that population pressure causes increased warfare.

As far as I can see most of this theorizing goes on without any critique of the outsized and deleterious influence of jews, whether in finance, media, law, politics or the academy, where so much of this jew-blind theorizing goes on. The problem isn’t that there’s any unwillingness to generalize about and criticize whole groups of people. Theorizing about Whites, Russians, Americans, elites, economists, etc. abounds.

As I’ve discussed on Age of Treason Radio, warfare, racial warfare, is how I interpret what’s going on. Jews, for their part, wage war steathily, disguising it with copious hasbara, explaining that it isn’t about jews, that “racism” and “xenophobia” are the real problems. In forums where race and borders are regarded as normal they argue instead that the real problem is White nationalism, neo-nazism or “anti-semitism”. Whites, for our part, are largely unwilling to accept the nature or extent of this warfare. The most intelligent Whites, most capable of actually figuring out what’s going on, are also the ones most terrified of being painted as stupid/crazy/evil. Ironically, they are eager to signal their intellect by entertaining sweeping theories, the more elaborate the better to compensate for astonishing naivete regarding the jews.

Blog

Ed Koch and Liberalism

8 Comments

Koch’s headstone: ‘My father is Jewish, my mother is Jewish, I am Jewish.’

The New York Daily News says Koch wanted his identity as a jew to be a central and lasting part of his legacy, citing Koch’s HuffPo article from Jan 2011, What’s on My Tombstone, and Why:

The United States, France and Israel ought to form a special unit devoted to running each of [Daniel Pearl’s] terrorist murders down and target them for execution. The Israeli Mossad did exactly that with the Munich murderers of the Israeli Olympic team killed in Munich in 1972.

On my tombstone, which awaits me at the Trinity Church nondenominational cemetery at 155th Street and Amsterdam Avenue, I had inscribed the last words of Daniel Pearl — uttered at his publicly viewed murder — which were, “My father is Jewish. My mother is Jewish. I am Jewish.” I believe those words should be part of the annual services on the Jewish High Holiday of Yom Kippur, and should be repeated by the congregants.

Koch was not only speaking for or about himself. He was speaking to fellow jews, for their benefit.

Though Koch came to fame as the mayor of New York between 1978 and 1989, in recent years he made it increasingly obvious that he was most obsessed with the narrow interests of jews. When he expressed his opinion in public, it was often plainly in this context.

On at least two occasions (see here and here) Koch identified others as bigots. As is typical of jewish bigotry, in both cases it was more a reflection of his own hyper-sensitive ethnocentrism. As is also typical, nobody of any stature in media or politics dared criticize “liberal” Koch for his increasingly blatant illiberalism.

While many of the obituaries and editorials I have surveyed remarked with some circumspect on Koch’s queer brand of “liberalism”, only a few noted Koch’s jew-first priority, and none put the two together in critical terms. John Podhoretz, a jew more often identified as “conservative”, opined glowingly at the New York Post that Ed Koch was a liberal who defied left on ‘nuts’ ideas. Though Podhoretz shares the same very jewish concerns which animated Koch, he made no mention of it. Instead Podhoretz focused entirely on an earlier era, casting Koch’s legacy in partisan political terms which make even less sense today than they did at the time. What Koch’s career best demonstrates is how jewish identity transcends silly partisan affliations.

Contrast this with Robert Byrd, who even before death was regularly condemned as a “racist”. When Byrd died it wasn’t hard to find “conservatives” complaining, for example, that Byrd’s KKK History Shows Partisan Double Standard.

Of course, the most glaring double standard isn’t partisan, it’s jewish – it clearly distinguishes jews from Whites. The idea is that nobody, and especially not tolerant “liberals”, should tolerate White bigotry. If you are now or ever have been a member of a special unit devoted to serving White interests, like the KKK, that’s considered inexcusable grounds for exclusion, censure, condemnation, etc. On the other hand, as we see with how the former so-called “King of New York” is treated, openly advocating for the best interests of jews, even to the point of calling for murder squads to hunt down and execute your enemies – well, jews will be jews. Nothing special. Not even for “liberals”.

Blog

The Preoccupations of Takuan Seiyo

32 Comments

Last week Gates of Vienna administrator Baron Bodissey introduced Here We Go Again like so:

Certain posts at Gates of Vienna, among them those by Takuan Seiyo, tend to attract the attention and comments of people who are preoccupied with the Jews. They frequently refer to “Holohoax” in World War Two, often supplementing their scornful references with obscenities or derogatory epithets.

I generally delete such comments without publishing them. One of them came in this morning, the second or third such screed submitted on Takuan Seiyo’s latest post. Before I deleted it, I sent it to Takuan, just to show him what was coming in. He suggested that I go ahead and post it, followed by his response.

Takuan Seiyo claims to be 50% Pole and behaves as if he’s 150% jew. His hostility towards Whites naturally provokes a hostile reaction from Whites. Bodissey invites this reaction. He has draped his site with European imagery and presents its mission as a defense of “Christian Europe”. Then he publishes articles, especially by Seiyo, and comments, especially from self-righteous jews, advocating in favor of jews even when their concerns conflict with the best interests of Whites.

In this particular article, Seiyo wrote:

I will deal in a later chapter with the issue of White Nats’ desperate massaging of Holocaust history as an attempt to wrest Western history from what, to them, should have been the losers, in order to place the skein of narrative back in the hands of what ought to have been the winners, that is, “white people.” They don’t quite get that WW2 is a story of the ultimate triumph of Western Civilization and of Whites, and that there is no need at all to lie or fall prey to wishful delusions. The losers who wrested the skein of history are not “the Jews” or “the coloreds” but white Marxists-Socialist professors in the 1960s.

In The Bee and the Lamb, Part 9 (Continued), posted earlier the same day, Seiyo wrote:

For over 60 years, White mea-culpists have had a firm grip in all fields of cultural mind imprinting: education high and low; paper media, then electronic, then digital media; all forms of entertainment, the plastic arts and music high and low, and religious instruction and worship too. Their main endeavor has been to enforce their compulsory (e.g. K-12) and discretionary (e.g. television) self-flaying on account of long-ago Slavery, Colonialism, Imperialism, Male Supremacism, Racism, Antisemitism, and so on.

These are perfectly typical examples of Seiyo’s preoccupation with blaming Whites while excusing jews. He has been doing it for some time. In July 2010 The Brussels Journal published From Meccania To Atlantis – Part 17: Shotgun Marriage In Europe. In it Seiyo explained how his overriding concern for jews keeps him from caring much about Whites:

It may go on for another 20, 30 , 50 years, until a magic orator appears who will galvanize a cold, reserved and quietly unhappy people the way Hitler did the Germans. After all, what Eurabia has pushed itself into is nothing if not Hitler’s revenge anyway. The whole landmass kowtows to Jew-hating Muslims because of what it once did to the Jews. It’s one of those ironies that Jews have been destined to bear since the dawn of their history (5).

Some contest the Hitler revenge theory by pointing out that Sweden — perhaps the most self-disemboweling country in Europe — had no part in the Holocaust. But they forget that Jews were not allowed to live in Sweden before 1782, their emancipation did not arrive until 1870, widespread antisemitic sentiments were common well into mid-20th century, with the remarkable actions of Wallenberg and Bernadotte acting as a counterfoil to a popular sentiment that until the end of 1942 had closed off Sweden to Jewish refugees from Nazi persecution, produced antisemitic student protests, and gave rise to the Swedish Anti-Jewish Action League (Sveriges Antijudiska Kampförbund) founded by Einar Åberg. It’s germane that the law prohibiting “incitement against an ethnic group” under which the Swedish state prosecutes its anti-Islamization dissidents was enacted due to Åberg’s widespread antisemitic activities in the late 1940s and 1950s.

Out of one side of his mouth Seiyo paints Whites as “self-flaying” and “self-disemboweling”, denying jews play any part. Out of the other side, he paints jews as blameless victims of White persecution. Either way he doesn’t sympathize with Whites, and when confronted by anyone who does he makes his contempt and distaste plain.

Similar attitudes have long prevailed at Gates of Vienna. On 12 Jan 2013, Bodissey posted Confronting the New Fascism in Sweden, which presents a Seiyo-like view of “self-flaying” Swedes being to blame for the anti-Swedish politics and media in Sweden:

Never has the power of projection been more evident than in the political culture of Sweden. From an outsider’s perspective, Sweden displays all the attributes of a fascist state: only one political point of view is considered acceptable, and any dissent against it is vigorously punished, by both official and unofficial means. Those who oppose the reigning ideology may lose their jobs or be prosecuted. They are vilified and scapegoated in the (largely state-owned) media to the point where compliant Swedish drones are made to understand that all dissidents are fair game, and deserve anything bad that happens to them.

Now, that sounds like fascism to me. But the Swedish media reserve the term for Sverigedemokraterna (the Sweden Democrats, SD), the only significant political party that opposes mass immigration and challenges the reigning Multicultural ideology.

Bodissey’s “outsider’s perspective”, with “fascism” as the key, is facilitated by a Seiyo-like blindness to the jews in Swedish media and the who, how and why behind “the reigning Multicultural ideology”.

Though Bodissey averts his eyes, in this case it’s hard to ignore the jews. The article he criticizes is also Seiyo-like, in that it’s all about the threat “fascist” Whites pose to jews.

A commenter tries to square the circle, Gates of Vienna style, by unselfconsciously explaining:

The repeated invocation of Jews, Nazis and the Holocaust in his attempt to hammer home his contention that the Swedish Democrats are wicked evil people with an inhumane agenda. Time and time again the primary school teacher appropriates the tragedy of mid C20th Jewish experience for polemic gain. The disgusting reality of course is that the Swedish Left, as with the Left of the entire Western world, is the driving force of hysterical and venomous anti-Israeli, anti-Zionist and, they can deny it ’til they’re blue in the face (but no sensible adult would accept such denials), anti-Jewish rhetoric.

In other words, Whites are correct to see sob stories about the jews as anti-White. These are hysterical, venomous attempts to hammer home the contention that Whites are wicked evil people with an inhumane agenda. That’s certainly a fitting interpretation of Seiyo’s efforts. Bodissey, by giving Seiyo and like-minded commenters a platform while squelching their pro-White critics, aids and abets it.