Category Archives: Blog

The Pocahontacaust: Jewsmedia Affirms One Drop Rule, Genetic Basis of Race

elizabeth_one_drop_warrenRace is a social construct, the jewsmedia regularly screeches. The lie is revealed by controversies like this.

Elizabeth Warren Releases DNA Results: She’s Native American:

Sen. Elizabeth Warren has taken the extraordinary step of releasing DNA test results that provide “strong evidence” that she has Native American ancestry, the Boston Globe reports. The possible Democratic presidential contender for 2020 has been repeatedly mocked by Donald Trump and other Republicans over her ancestral claims—one of Trump’s sick jokes is to call Warren “Pocahontas.”

The Pocahontas gibe has never hinged on whether Warren actually has some small amount of non-White DNA. The sick joke is that, under the current anti-White regime, people in positions of power who look White are rewarded specifically for disavowing Whiteness. This reality has not changed. The jewsmedia take confirms it. It only seems humorous to Whites to the extent it strikes us as absurd, to the extent we do not understand or do not want to understand what it implies about our current situation.

What has changed, only slightly, is the jewsmedia’s rule for racial dispensation. Before 2015 the only thing anyone had to do to justify their jewsmedia-defined righteousness was shit on Whiteness. Since 2015 certain figures have been checked for non-Whiteness. Warren’s drop of non-White blood, real or imagined, is truly potent. It demonstrates that the lying jewsmedia recognizes race is genetic, and takes for granted that even vanishingly small bits of DNA can divide racial right from racial wrong.

Rachel Dolezal and Julia Salazar are two other recent demonstrations of this rule, though both were jeered by the jewsmedia rather than cheered.

In 2015 the jewsmedia denounced Dolezal as a racial fraudster. For years Dolezal had passed as a black among blacks, going well beyond merely renouncing Whiteness. But according to the jewsmedia she didn’t have any black DNA, and therefore couldn’t legitimately claim to be black.

In 2018 the jewsmedia denounced Salazar as a racial fraudster. For years Salazar had passed as a jew among jews, going well beyond merely renouncing Whiteness. But according to jews who made a point of scrutinizing her ancestry she didn’t have any jew DNA, and therefore couldn’t legitimately claim to be a jew.

Cohencidentally, in all three cases it is jewsmedia jews, so prone to goyposing as “fellow whites”, so chutzpathically crying out about someone else’s racial fraud. The jewy joke, as always, is on Whites, especially White Trump supporters, who respond to the increasingly blatant, hostile, and jewy anti-White animus by laughing brainlessly. They dislike “the media”, “political correctness”, and “racism”, while professing love and admiration for The Tribe who define and drive it all. This double-think is embodied in the head Pocahontas mocker, the kikeservative-in-chief himself. Pilloried daily by the jewsmedia in explicitly anti-White terms, Trump never so much as addresses his White supporters as White, never identifies the “enemy of the people”, the enemy of his White supporters, as jews jewing jewily. His insincere BUILD/LOCK/DRAIN sloganeering and the insincere jewsmedia hand-wringing over it have not been replaced by jewing. The theatre is part and parcel of the jewing.

In the years to come the jewsmedia will surely push farther along these lines. Whites posing as non-White, and non-jews posing as jews, will have to do more than simply mouth support for the anti-White agenda. They’ll need a DNA test. The minimum requirement for non-White/jew DNA will increase over time, because more “diversity” means less Whiteness. Though often obscured by the jewsmedia’s squid ink, the litmus test for jewness and jew-constructed anti-”racism” has and always will be genetic.

Who is Julia Salazar?

julia_salazarIs Julia Salazar a jew? What is a jew? Why does it matter?

There was quite a jewsmedia stir around Salazar even before she won the Jew York state primary. Now the squid ink is really squirting. Here’s how Haaretz summed up the situation before the primary – State senate candidate Julia Salazar claims racism after Jewish identity questioned:

The reasons she intrigued the larger Jewish world were multifaceted: her unusual Sephardic “Latina Jew” identity; the affinity of Jews, both traditional and hipster, to Brooklyn (her district includes rapidly gentrifying parts of Bushwick, Williamsburg, East New York, Bedford-Stuyvesant and Brownsville); and the fact that not only was she Jewish but had been a Jewish professional – her last job being as staff organizer for the progressive group Jews for Racial & Economic Justice.

But more importantly, Salazar is one of the first politicians to embody the new breed of far-left Jewish activist engaged in “Jewish resistance” politics. Uncomfortably for the Jewish establishment on the right, center and even the liberal-Zionist left, that includes embracing the DSA’s endorsement of the boycott, sanctions and divestment movement against Israel.

So when Tablet Magazine published an article last Thursday documenting what it described as misrepresentations of Salazar’s political journey as well as her identity, the Jewish Twitterverse exploded with right-left sniping. While Salazar’s opponents called her a liar, her allies charged that the article author was engaged in a racist smear campaign that exposed the worst in exclusionary Jewish tribalism.

. . .

A much more emotional dialogue is centering around Rosen’s questioning of Salazar’s Jewish identity – into which the Tablet article dove deeply and, some argue, too invasively.

A few years ago I dove deeply into the many facets of jew identity, producing podcasts focused on the “latina jew” (AKA marrano) phenomenon as well as matrilineality versus patrilineality. In a nutshell, jews deliberately create confusion about the nature of jew identity because such confusion is good for the jews. The fact is that jew is a heritable trait. Throughout history the jews have functioned as a multifaceted parasitic collective – infiltrating, manipulating, exploiting, and ultimately terminating a long series of hosts.

What is jew identity? A jew named Rushkoff provided a good example of jew mentality. Most jews think similarly but mask it. Either way these congenital storytellers, who so freely shit on everyone else, characteristically get very emotional about any scrutiny of who they are or what they’ve been up to.

The day after the Tablet article was published, Salazar told JTA she had attended a two-month conversion course while in college, but that “I didn’t want to make a big deal about it. It also didn’t feel earnest to consider it a conversion because there was no religion for me to convert from.”

Salazar and her friends and allies have cried foul, saying the portrayal of her as a culture-appropriating Rachel Dolezal represents a tribal and racist view of “who is a Jew” from those who reject Jews of color, and those who claim Jewishness through patrilineal descent.

The comparison to Dolezal is apt because jewness is essentially genetic, i.e. racial, and though jews know this, most insist on denying it. To compare Salazar to Dolezal is to acknowledge that jewness, like blackness, is heritable.

More than that, The Tribe, beside being the world’s foremost tribalists, are also unquestionably the world’s historic experts in passing, chameleon-like. Crypsis is their secret sauce, the technique by which they have so successfully infiltrated, manipulated, and exploited so many hosts to death. And it is also their nature to hiss when they suspect a weapon with which they are so adept might be used against themselves.

Much of the online fury has been directed at both the Tablet, for publishing the piece, and the article’s author, Rosen. Salazar herself charged that the publication was engaging in “race science,” calling Rosen a “right-wing writer” who “made it clear that he was dedicated to distorting the truth, printing anything that would fit his fabricated narrative.” She also alleged that he had “threatened to publish her mother’s personal information if she didn’t cooperate.”

If you want a view of completely jewed political discourse, this is it. Everyone screeching as if they’re victims. This is intersectional jewing. Left-posing anti-”racist” jewing versus right-posing tribe-first jewing. Heads jews win, tails you lose.

Despite the attempts to obfuscate, what’s going on here is not complicated. Some jews screeched “imposter” at Salazar. Salazar and friends screeched “racism” back. Noticing that this line of argument was hitting too close to home, shining a light on the nature of jewing, everyone is now lamely trying to shift the focus to anything but.

As “fellow latina” Batya Ungar-Sargon put it, It’s Not About Whether Julia Salazar Is Jewish. It’s About Telling The Truth:

Salazar’s Jewish identity is complex, says Ellman-Golan, and shows “all the ways we are and can be Jewish because we don’t fit into this neat little box as a complicated, diasporic people.”

. . .

In interviews and profiles, including in The Intercept, Jacobin and The Forward, Salazar identified herself as an immigrant from Colombia. She also identified as Jewish, and told The Forward’s Ben Fractenberg that her father is Jewish.

Her identity as a Jew of Color, a socialist, and a proud critic of Israel made her the perfect avatar of a new, young, highly politicized Jewish Left engaged in the fight for social, economic, and racial justice.

Tablet (where, full disclosure, I worked in 2013-2014) begged to differ. Reporters tracked down Salazar’s brother, who said that not only was Salazar’s father not Jewish, but Salazar was born in Florida.

The outcry on Twitter was swift. But many have defended Salazar since the story broke, including many Jews on the left, who called the attempt to invalidate Salazar’s Jewishness racist.

The biggest, most transparent lie here is this pretense that the controversy is about anything but jewing. The jewess writing this article, the professional jews she cites, her jew readers. All getting very emotional because…a politician lied.

It’s appalling. A person’s identity — including their Jewish identity — is their own damn business.

The problem with what Salazar did is not that she claimed to be Jewish and an immigrant. It’s that she may have misled voters while seeking public office.

The problem is not whether or not Salazar is Jewish but whether or not she can be trusted. In other words, it’s not a question of ethnicity but one of character.

The power of the Tablet piece lies not in the fact that it exposed Salazar as a non-immigrant and possible non-Jew; it’s that it exposed her as untruthful, which is a big problem for someone asking the public to trust them to have state power at their disposal.

If Salazar had come out of the gate saying,“I consider myself Jewish, though my parents are not” or “I am a Jew by Choice” or “I traveled back and forth to Colombia as a very young child so I consider myself an immigrant” — a sentiment she tweeted in her defense — there would be no exposé here.

If Salazar were a real jew she would have known how to narrate her way through life as smoothly as a real jew. In every other respect Salazar is an exemplar of jewing. Her entire adult life has been spent arguing jewy political issues from a jew-centric point of view. Salazar has attracted the support of so many jews, as jews, exactly because they sense her jewy spirit.

Another jewess, Bari Weiss, writing for the Jew York Times, is less sympathetic. Julia Salazar, the Left’s Post-Truth Politician:

Ms. Salazar was born in South Florida. She was raised in a Catholic home and her conversion story, which no one can verify, keeps changing. She never graduated from Columbia, unlike her mother, who in fact did finish college. She grew up in a comfortable middle-class home. She even has a trust fund.

Much of this fact-checking was helped along by Ms. Salazar’s own family members, who seemed distressed about the way their past was being discussed in the press. Ms. Salazar claimed that her brother, Alex, had a political ax to grind: He has “very right-wing politics,” she told Vox. “Very anti-socialist politics.” Her brother responded that his aim was “telling the truth about my family.”

It’s hard to recall an instance where a candidate’s integrity was being openly challenged by her family more than by her political opponent.

Ms. Salazar’s first instinct was to accuse Tablet Magazine, where I used to be an editor, of practicing “race science” when it cracked open the story in August about inconsistencies in her background and raised questions about her account of converting to Judaism.

Once again, the concern about Salazar’s dishonesty is entirely jewy. It begins and ends with the question whether or not Salazar is a biological jew. If she were there would be no jewsmedia controversy. Her jewsmedia critics don’t care whether she lied about being poor or about being an immigrant.

Jewing is the reason Salazar has gotten so much jewsmedia attention, before and after the Tablet article which ripped off her mask. As Armin Rosen put it in that article:

Julia Salazar has earned media attention that most state senate primary candidates could only dream of, including serious treatment in The New Yorker, and friendly profiles in New York magazine, The Forward, The Intercept, and Vice. Seemingly everyone in a half-mile radius of Maria Hernandez Park knows who Salazar is, while Dilan, who has served in the state Senate for the past 16 years, toils in obscurity.

Rosen describes Salazar’s rise as specifically jewy:

But Salazar differs from Ocasio-Cortez, Nixon, and the rest of her cohort in one interesting respect: the state Senate candidate is the only one to have emerged from a specifically Jewish corner of leftism. She “comes from a unique Jewish background,” as The Forward put it. “She was born in Colombia, and her father was Jewish, descended from the community expelled from medieval Spain. When her family immigrated to the United States, they had little contact with the American Jewish community, struggling to establish themselves financially.” From early 2016 through May of 2017 she was a Grace Paley Organizing Fellow with Jews for Racial and Economic Justice (JFREJ). Her fellowship biography identified her as senior editor of Unruly, the “intersectional blog” of the anti-Zionist and pro-BDS Jewish Voice for Peace’s Jews of Color and Sephardic/Mizrahi Caucus. Her last publicly listed job before running for office was as a staff organizer for JFREJ, which is a New York-based left-wing social and activist organization—Salazar was working with the group when it decided to honor the controversial activist Linda Sarsour with one of their annual Risk-Taker Awards.

Going in reverse chronological order, Salazar has also been a contributor to Mondoweiss, an IfNotNow demonstrator, a Bridging the Gap fellow through Brooklyn College Hillel, a World Zionist Organization campus fellow, a co-founder of the Columbia University chapter of J Street, an AIPAC Policy Conference student attendee, and founder of the university’s Christians United for Israel (CUFI) chapter. For much of the five years leading up to her campaign, Salazar dedicated herself to explicitly Jewish causes, often in a professional capacity. If she wins, her identity as a politically radical working-class Jewish immigrant will have helped take her to a position of formal power and authority. Based on interviews with former acquaintances and an examination of her writings, social media postings, and publicly available documents, it is an identity that is no less convincing for having been largely self-created.

Social media postings, various articles, and the recollections of people who knew her at Columbia University show that in her early 20s Salazar was a right-wing pro-Israel Christian. In 2012 and into 2013, she was the president of Columbia Right to Life, the campus’s leading anti-abortion group.

. . .

However Salazar identified politically, what is clear is that she brought the same passion and energy to whatever cause moved her. By early 2014, Salazar appeared to be presenting herself as a left-wing anti-Israel Jew, according to former acquaintances and social media postings.

. . .

If Salazar experienced a political change of heart these past few years, she is hardly the only one. However quickly she changed her mind about Israel, the trajectory of her views is a coherent one, and it runs in only one direction. But there are details in her biography that are harder to reconcile—including, though not limited to, her religious shift.

That’s right. Before Salazar started posturing as a fervent anti-”racist” jew she postured as a fervent pro-Israel Christian. This makes her recent claim that she didn’t “consider it a conversion [to jew] because there was no religion for me to convert from” more intelligible rather than less. She didn’t think her “conversion” was a big deal because she’s always considered herself a member of Team Jew, and as anti-”racists” and Christians agree, identity is all in one’s mind.

The Rosens dance around it, but they know otherwise. They understand religion serves as a cover for jews. Likewise they know this fictitious conflict, over the jew state or race or anything else, serves to disguise the deeper pursuit of whatever is best for jews, as a people, not to advance some abstract ideology.

This is why Rosen delved into the details of Salazar’s family. A more recent Jew York Mag article by Garance Franke-Ruta, whose tribal bona fides are somewhat less ambiguous than Salazar’s, rendered the guilty verdict thusly: “her ancestors were Catholic elites”.

The longer story is, as jews like to say, more nuanced.

According to Maria Emilia Naranjo Ramos, a genealogist with the Colombian Academy of Genealogy and Historic Academy of Córdoba, the Salazars have for generations been a prosperous family in Colombia that has played a prominent role in civic and political life. Far from being the daughter of struggling immigrants of mixed Jewish-Catholic religious heritage, which early news reports described her as based on her statements and those of her campaign, Julia Salazar is the scion of longtime Latin-American Catholic elites.

“The Salazar and Grillo families have been recognized throughout their generations” for their roles in “public and political life,” Naranjo Ramos wrote in an unusual blog post diving into the Salazar ancestry (she doesn’t normally perform this exercise for living people) in response to the controversy in New York.

The impetus for this unusual scrutiny is jews, who seek to demonstrate that Salazar is not a biological jew, because they understand that jew is not an identity one can simply profess. Franke-Ruta consults a genealogist because she knows jew is a heritable trait, and because she knows Spain was thoroughly jewed.

Salazar, a common Basque name, is one surname on the list of hundreds of names Spain released in 2015 as having possible Jewish ancestry, as part of an attempt at reparations by offering citizenship to anyone who could prove that they were descended from Jews forced to flee or convert by the Catholic monarchs of Spain. Most of those forced conversions took place in the several-hundred-year period that ended with the remaining practicing Jews being expelled from Spain at the end of the 15th century. That much is not contested. But it’s also a name that was adopted by Roma people in Spain during the forced taking of surnames in Castille, where the Salazars were a noble family, in the 14th and 15th centuries. And it is found in Latin America thanks also to the history of a group of Catholic Salazars who were deeply involved in the conquest of the new world. Still, the legacy of the forced conversions meant an entire people and culture was absorbed, and more than half a millennium later, about 20 percent of people who live in Spain and Portugal have genetic signatures suggesting Sephardic Jewish ancestry, according to a 2008 study. That’s probably true of some fraction of New-World Catholics of Iberian ancestry as well.

I’ve pointed out the reality-inverting jew-first jew-serving nature of this sob story before. The jews invaded and colonized the Iberians, whom they still see as aliens and despise for that reason. The jews thrived at the expense of their hosts. Whatever else the genetic signature says it is testimony, again, that jew is a heritable trait, that jews are genetically distinct from others. As for the legacy of this colonialism, the many mogrelized shitholes it produced both in Iberia and overseas, apologists today tend to misattribute this solely to “Catholic elites” and deny it had anything to do with jewing. In their narrative the jews were and can only ever be passive victims.

Whether or not Salazar is some fraction biological jew, it is the anti-White agenda and oppression narrative which has propelled her so far in politics. This agenda and narrative are entirely a product of jewing. It is the only reason Salazar has the support of some jews but is criticized by others. The cacophony of screeching around her is only the sound of one form of jewing clashing with another.

Woe is Charles C. Johnson

woe_is_charles_c_johnsonAlternative Start-Ups Cut Off from Financial Services in Overnight Political Purge by Stripe:

“This canceling of our business was done for political reasons by Edwin Wee, a Democratic political operative turned Stripe employee, and it exposes the libertarian lie that one can simply just go and create a competitor if one dislikes Silicon Valley ventures,” said Charles C. Johnson, CEO of Freestartr. “You can’t. We need to get over that canard.”

Johnson, who’s been accused of being a Holocaust denier and of using racial slurs and making false charges against several individuals, is right on this issue. [Update: Johnson denies the allegations that he's a Holocaust denier. See his explanation below.] Every time reports of conservatives being silenced on social media platforms come out, a large percentage of libertarians shout, “but private companies can serve whoever they want! Build your own platforms.” It is a constant criticism of anyone saying that social media and Silicon Valley need regulation or that political viewpoints need protection under the law. But when marginalized voices create their own platforms, the puppet masters of Silicon Valley who control all the infrastructure shut them down.

. . .

Update 5:12 p.m. EST: Charles Johnson vehemently denies being a Holocaust denier. “I am not, nor have I ever been a Holocaust denier. I am a strong supporter of both the state of Israel and the Jewish people,” he told PJM. “It’s awkward to have even to say this, but the #FakeNews is trying to smear me and hurt my friends and allies because I have worked tirelessly to expose the Russia collusion lie at great personal expense and to support candidates who want to release the memo.”

Johnson told PJM, “I am one of the Yad Vashem World Holocaust Remembrance Center’s largest donors.” More here.

Charles C. Johnson Responds To Defamation – Updated:

If my persecutors are hoping that they will scare me off, they are sorely mistaken. They have just opened my wallet further.

. . .

I unambiguously believe the Holocaust happened, that 6 million Jews died, that some of those Jews who died in labor camps, gas chambers, ovens, and in all manner of dehumanizing ways. Without question, the program to exterminate the Jewry stands out as one of the 20th century’s worst crimes. My actions, as reflected in my previous statement, reflect my long-standing commitment to that historic fact. My Jewish friends, family, and allies know well my positions and others know well my financial and intellectual contributions.

I sincerely apologize to both the survivors of the Holocaust and their family members who may have been hurt by my words and I pledge never again to exploit the Holocaust — and especially Holocaust denial — in political fights against my foes. It is precisely out of respect for their plight and of those of other victims of tyranny that have I fought so hard against censorship online. Those who burn books may well wind up burning people.

. . .

In summation: I apologize to those who may be offended by some of the tactics I have used and while they have been effective at my narrow political goals they have harmed positive relations among all people and for that I am sorry. I commit never to using such a tactic again because its use is ultimately harmful to the Holocaust survivor community and to the greater cause of good will among Jew and Gentile alike.

Kikeservative psychology. The kick-lick dynamic. Jew York Syndrome. So vile.

Whatever else Johnson has said or believes, the point of the excerpts above is that he believes free access to banking services and the internet hinges on expressing a positive attitude toward jews. He is trying so desperately to signal how deferential and worshipful he is and has always been toward jews exactly because he understands his persecutors are jews.

The “holocaust survivor community” bit made me LOL. A perfect illustration of Poe’s Law. The point stands.

Lord Screech

lord_screechLord Sacks renews attack on Jeremy Corbyn:

He told BBC1’s The Andrew Marr Show: “Jews have been in Britain since 1656, I know of no other occasion in these 362 years when Jews – the majority of our community – are asking ‘is this country safe to bring up our children’.

Arnold Leese was right. “Lord” Sacks, there’s your problem Britons. He is no more than a professional screecher for his toxic tribe, against yours.

The parasite is known to have infiltrated Britain in force 600 years earlier than Screechy McScreechface claims here, carried in by their Norman hosts. Longshanks formally evicted them, with good cause, in 1290. As usual, many jews just burrowed deeper. The entire history of jews in Britain, as everywhere else they’ve gone, can be summed up as imposing themselves and feeding upon the natives. The jews themselves sum it up as one long continuous screech about jew safety.

“There is danger that Jeremy Corbyn may one day be prime minister, he is the leader of Her Majesty’s opposition, and I’m afraid that until he expresses clear remorse for what he has said and what his party has done to its Jewish sympathisers as well as its Jewish MPs, then he is as great a danger as Enoch Powell was.”

Lord Sacks said Jewish people were thinking about leaving the UK because of the current atmosphere.

He said: “When people hear the kind of language that has been coming out of Labour, that’s been brought to the surface among Jeremy Corbyn’s earlier speeches, they cannot but feel an existential threat.”

“WE’LL RETRACT OUR CLAWS AND DETACH OUR FANGS ANY DAY NOW IF YOU KEEP REFUSING TO APOLOGIZE TO US!1!!”

Sacks’ comparison to Powell and use of the term existential threat is telling. Powell opposed the existential threat immigration posed to Britons. Sacks characterizes this as an existential threat to jews. Sacks is drawing a clear distinction between jews and Britons while joining the swarming screech against Corbyn for doing the same.

Sacks’ argument, translated into plain English, is: With jews, you lose.

The OYYYY VEEEEYYYYYY Heard Round the World 2.0

diversity_makes_the_jews_who_are_replacing_whites_strongerI was not there, but I think my take on Charlottesville 1.0, and the two most substantial comments I’ve made about it since, were correct.

How Jews Jewsplain Jewing:

Charlottesville demonstrated that Whites cannot freely assemble and speak, as Whites, in public. The swift and hysterical reaction from the local, state, and federal governments, officially condemning Whites because “anti-semitism”, demonstrated that Whites and jews are political opposites. Decades of phony judicial dancing around race and privilege have suddenly been supplanted by explicit executive and legislative proclamations that the regime is officially anti-White out of deference to jews.

The ongoing chutzpathic attempt to invert this reality, to portray the kikeservative-in-chief as a tool of “anti-semites” rather than jews, merely reflects how thoroughly jewed the media and current political system are. Trump viciously counter-attacks anyone who attacks him. Everyone but the jews. When the jews kick, Trump licks.

“Don’t Be Evil” is Code for “Be Anti-White”:

White men flocked to Charlottesville en masse sensing the potential for righteous combat with anti-Whites, and the first thing most every alt-righter with a soapbox did in the aftermath was balk at and denounce that urge. Their fake hero ultimately denounced them. They ignored it. Whites are so accustomed to our fake heroes shitting on us that we take it for granted.

What makes this a tragedy is that it could be different. White as a race have a characteristic capacity for daring, for heroism, for collective mercilessness aimed at enemies, especially traitors. This capacity isn’t gone, it has been hijacked and circumcised. The jews make movies glorifying White self-sacrifice and directing it toward their own ends, even as they psychopathologize its use toward our own. Unlike White misleaders, the jews don’t discourage fanaticism and violence, they deliberately stoke it and AIM IT AT WHITES. While the Ignatievs and Ciccariello-Mahers slyly incite White genocide, the Taylors and MacDonalds respond by babbling nonsense about “pathological altruism”. This behavior is not a product of jew dominance and White failure, it’s the cause.

Whites need to get their heads straight, demand more, tolerate less. It starts, or doesn’t start, with leadership.

For the past year the jewsmedia has moaned about Charlottesville 1.0, shocked that a handful of Whites had the audacity to gather publicly and chant, “jews will not replace us”. The Whites who did that are heroes – they provoked and flushed out the anti-White/pro-jew regime.

A year later and the fake hero, the kikeservative-in-chief, still hasn’t done anything for his White supporters. Instead he tries to please the jews who condemn him by condemning all types of “racism”. The jewsmedia screeches, predictably, that this isn’t anti-White enough. Will he respond by defending his White supporters? No. He’ll respond just as he did last year, by kicking his lickers and licking his kickers.

So far Charlottesville 2.0 is looking like 1.0, but this time with hardly any prompting from defiant Whites. Anti-Whites now constitute all sides of the theatrical production, their only real disagreement being how far and how fast to elevate non-Whites above Whites.

On Tribalism

chicken-swingersHere’s an instant classic in the vast, age-old genre of jews praising jews for their jewing. David Greenberg, author of Republic of Spin, reviews David Frum’s Trumpocracy: The Corruption of the American Republic:

Has any group of thinkers stood faster in defense of its principles since the rise of Donald Trump than the neoconservatives? A decade ago, when the political right had fallen on hard times, the neocons were derided by almost everyone for furnishing an intellectual rationale for the invasion of Iraq by George W. Bush ’68. But since 2016, neoconservatives—practically alone on their side of the aisle—have consistently opposed Trump for the damage they see him doing. Writers like Max Boot ’92MA, Eliot Cohen, Jennifer Rubin, James Kirchick ’06, Bret Stephens, Cathy Young, and Bill Kristol have resisted the pressures of tribalism at a moment when few dare to leave their partisan tents.

What did these “right”-posing anti-White jews do? They crossed party lines to join their “left”-posing anti-White tribemates in screeching at Whites. Frum was one of the first to cry out in pain as he attacked Whites:

As community cohesion weakens, moral norms change. What would have been unacceptable behavior in a more homogenous national community becomes tolerable when a formerly ascendant group sees itself at risk from aggressive new claims by new competitors. Trump is running not to be president of all Americans, but to be the clan leader of white Americans. Those white Americans who respond to his message hear his abusive comments, not as evidence of his unfitness for office, but as proof of his commitment to their tribe.

But it’s difficult to say which jew in Greenberg’s list is most noxious.

The Yale Review link comes via Sailer, whose usual shtick is to pretend jews are “white”. Confronted with perfectly sober evidence that jews literally see themselves as the opposite of White the best Breezy Steve can do is try to laugh it off:

In the Current Year, are Members of the Tribe as witty as they used to be? Their current moral panic over “tribalism” is a particularly funny example of today’s Jews not getting the joke.

As usual, the joke is on Whites. When jews moralize against White tribalism (or supremacism, or victimology, or fake news, or privilege, or fragility, or hate, or any other buzzterm the jews have weaponized and aimed at Whites) it’s not because they are unaware that the shoe fits their tribe better than anyone else. By so brazenly trying to shift blame onto Whites they are clearly expressing their keen racial awareness and seething racial animus.

Jews Jewing Jewishly

tengrim01-bigSome big academic jew got weinsteined last week. Setting aside the melodrama, articles in the jewsmedia aimed at keeping jews well informed provide some indication of the elaborate degree to which they obsess over their collective interests, in this case fretting about “jewish continuity” and “jewish survival” in the face of some blowback from the toxic feminist and race-mixing agendas they have long and shamelessly promoted amongst Whites.

How Jewish Academia Created A #MeToo Disaster, The Forward:

At the end of World War II, several Jewish communal bodies, most importantly the American Jewish Committee, funded scholars to study Jewish life and used those studies to prescribe communal priorities.

It is no accident that by the early 1970s, a so-called marriage crisis emerged as a core priority of Jewish communal institutions, fueled by population surveys and anecdotal evidence. The achievements of second-wave feminism seemed stacked against the blunt tools that Jewish social scientists used to measure what communal leaders increasingly termed “Jewish survival.”

Marriage, inmarriage, and fertility rates among American Jews all were declining, while women’s aspirations for careers, for public power, and for control over their bodies and sexuality all seemed to be on the rise.

Starting in the 1980s and growing in the 1990s and beyond, a Jewish communal infrastructure empowered a class of social researchers to generate the data from which policy decisions would be made.

The fall of a top sociologist could change the field of counting Jews, Jewish Telegraph Agency:

Over and over, across decades and cities throughout the United States, sociologist Steven M. Cohen painted a picture of American Jews using a consistent set of questions.

How much do Jews love Israel? How many Jewish friends do they have? Do they attend a synagogue? Do they belong to one? Perhaps above all, are they married to Jews and raising Jewish children?

The titles of articles that Cohen has written over the years reflect the demographic concerns — and anxieties — of a generation of Jewish planners: “Lessons Learned From Orthodoxy’s Dramatic Growth.” “Can Intermarriage Lead to an Increase in the Number of Jews in America?” “Conservative Jewry’s Numbers Plummeting, but Core Engagement Steady.”

“We would argue that numerical strength is inherently valuable and essential to the meaningful Jewish life of American Jewry,” he wrote with a colleague, Mijal Bitton, in a 2015 article titled “More Is Better When It Comes to Jewish Numbers.”.” “More engaged Jews mean stronger communities able to mobilize more people and more resources, critical to achieving political influence, social diversity, cultural creativity and religious vitality.

“Not just researchers, but the American Jewish community has been concerned with the size of the population and changes in the population of different communities,” Leonard Saxe, director of the Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies at Brandeis University, wrote in an email to JTA.

Some take issue in particular with Cohen’s focus on Jewish continuity — the question of how many Jews will exist, identify as Jews and affiliate with Jewish institutions in future generations. Cohen has long cited statistics to conclude that the ever rising numbers of Jews marrying people of other faiths is “the greatest single threat to Jewish continuity today.”

“What I would love to see change are some of the questions that get asked, and specifically the questions that shape the debates over continuity and the birth rates of Jews,” said Deborah Dash Moore, a professor of American Jewish history at the University of Michigan. “Stop assuming that there are gradations of being Jewish that make one better than the other, that intermarriage is a bad thing or that intermarriage is a good thing.”

As usual, the conflict is fictitious, just jews arguing with jews about what’s best for jews.

Johnson’s Jews

trust_me_you_stupid_entryist_hatersDov Bechhofer Did Nothing Wrong is less about what Bechhofer did and more about what Greg Johnson is doing. Bechhofer has already disavowed the dissembling and dissimulation Johnson senselessly praises him for. Johnson is writing instead to argue that he, Greg Johnson, has done nothing wrong.

To make his case Johnson quotes one of the last (and most telling) of the rabbi’s son’s most based comments at Counter-Currents:

I’ve had it in my head to write a little something called “A Jewish Defense of Anti-Semitism,” but it’s been slipping my mind. In short, the vocal majority of Jews act so irritatingly and display such reprehensible attitudes – publicly and privately – that I’d rather see a “tempered” anti-Semitism now than see Jewish perfidy continue without consequence until, as Johnny Cash might say, the man comes around. Because he will. As I frequently tell Jewish acquaintances, if there is another Holocaust, it will be entirely of their doing

The way I read that, Bechhofer was concerned about jewing becoming too obviously anti-White, worried that the White reaction might be bad for jews, and decided to help his tribe by trying to moderate the White reaction. Such entryism is hardly new or even rare. Rather than seeing it as bad for Whites, Johnson sees it as a perfect opportunity to explain his vision of uniting Whites and jews against the people he perceives as the real problem.

The name Dov also made it highly likely he was Orthodox, which was interesting to me, because since 2016, I have been seeing signs that significant numbers of Orthodox Jewish men in their 20s are plugging into the Alt Right and White Nationalism. This phenomenon bears watching, since it may herald a split in the Jewish community, which is the major impediment to white identity politics.

The “split” Johnson sees among jews is non-White/anti-White identity politics, jews arguing with jews about what’s best for jews. It’s an argument that actually highlights the fact that jews see themselves as racially distinct from and at odds with Whites, and that they see it as good for jews that Whites remain confused on this point.

There is a world of difference between Jews like Michael Hart and Laurence Auster, who claim that Jews are white and seek to police anti-Semitism in the White Nationalist movement — and Jews like Dov or Gilad Atzmon, who do not try to alter our movement but instead seek to change Jewish attitudes toward white identity politics. None of them are “us.” But the former are subversives. The latter are allies.

It is more reasonable to assume different jews are subversive in different ways. Bechhofer was trying to change White attitudes. When he was called out, likely by a tribemate, he responded by immediately apologizing to his tribemates.

The organized Jewish community has played a disproportionate role in creating this crisis and preventing racially-conscious whites from dealing with it. A terrible reaction is brewing. White ethnostates are the only solution.

Moreover, Bechhofer did not fall in with the juvenile buffoons, LARPing Nazis, and violent thugs who have hijacked the most important cause on the planet and driven it off a cliff. He gravitated to the best of the movement — Counter-Currents, VDare, American Renaissance — and tried to imagine humane solutions to this mess. He doesn’t need “professional help” to deal with “issues.” He’s one of the sane ones. It is the rest of society that has gone mad.

Who is Johnson praising? A subversive jew. Who is Johnson accusing of wrong-doing, specifically “hijacking”? That would be his bugbear, “LARPing Nazis”.

Johnson’s greatest ally wasn’t even pretending to be for Whites against jews. He was merely in favor of jews continuing to feed on Whites rather than offing us. That’s what Johnson is swooning over. Johnson isn’t an idiot who can’t understand this. He doesn’t want to understand. He’s posturing as a racially conscious leader while advising Whites to welcome subversive jewing. Why? Because that is easier than admitting he is wrong.