Category Archives: Blog

Pew Polls Jews

Pew’s recent poll, A Portrait of Jewish Americans, showcases the essential duplicity of jewish identity. The poll, conducted by Pew Research Center’s Religion & Public Life Project, puts the oldest, best example right out front. They distinguish two main types of jew: “jews by religion” and “jews of no religion”.

The term “jews of no religion” presents a problem for those who misunderstand (or want others to misunderstand) the true nature of jewishness, specifically by mistaking it as a type of theology or “faith”. The second page of the report, Sidebar: Who is a Jew?, finesses the problem with the usual double-talk:

One of the first decisions that had to be made in conducting this study and analyzing its results was to answer the question, “Who is a Jew?” This is an ancient question with no single, timeless answer. On the one hand, being Jewish is a matter of religion – the traditional, matrilineal definition of Jewish identity is founded on halakha (Jewish religious law). On the other hand, being Jewish also may be a matter of ancestry, ethnicity and cultural background.

Jewish Crypsis – Half-Jews – Part 2 goes over the issue of matrilineality and the biological nature of jewishness in more detail. Suffice it here to note that even the “religious law” is actually a matter of ancestry. So the “ancient question” does in fact have a “single, timeless answer”. Being jewish is, and always has been, a matter of ancestry. All along the jews have also pretended otherwise.

The primacy of ancestry comes through in the flowchart Pew uses to describe how they categorized poll participants. Those who “were raised jewish or have a jewish parent” but profess no “religion” are counted as jews. Those who claim no jewish parent are excluded, even if they regard themselves as jewish.

It’s not on the flowchart, but Pew also inquired about the parents of those who claimed to be “jews by religion”. They buried those numbers (and another hint of the primacy of ancestry) in a brief reference in Chapter 3: Jewish Identity:

Nearly all Jews say they had at least one Jewish parent, including 96% of Jews by religion and 97% of Jews of no religion.

All in all, 98% of Jews (and, by definition, 100% of Jews of no religion) were raised Jewish or had at least one Jewish parent; 2% of Jews had no such background but indicate they had a formal conversion to Judaism, while 1% did not formally convert.

In other words, jewishness is 96-97% a matter of ancestry.

Here are a few more of the relevant and interesting bits from that same chapter. According to jews this is what being a jew is about:

U.S. Jews see being Jewish as more a matter of ancestry, culture and values than of religious observance. Six-in-ten say, for example, that being Jewish is mainly a matter of culture or ancestry, compared with 15% who say it is mainly a matter of religion. Roughly seven-in-ten say remembering the Holocaust and leading an ethical life are essential to what it means to them to be Jewish, while far fewer say observing Jewish law is a central component of their Jewish identity. And two-thirds of Jews say that a person can be Jewish even if he or she does not believe in God.

Importance of Being Jewish

More than four-in-ten U.S. Jews (46%) say being Jewish is a very important part of their lives, and a third (34%) say being Jewish is somewhat important to them. One-fifth of Jews say that being Jewish is not too (15%) or not at all important to them (5%). Jews by religion are nearly five times more likely to say being Jewish is very important to them compared with Jews of no religion (56% vs. 12%).

Nearly nine-in-ten Orthodox Jews (87%) and two-thirds of Conservative Jews (69%) describe being Jewish as very important in their lives. Far fewer self-identified Reform Jews say being Jewish is very important to them (43%). Among Jews who are unaffiliated with any particular Jewish movement or denomination, just one-in-five say being Jewish is very important to them (22%).

Pride, Connectedness and Responsibility

More than nine-in-ten Jews (94%) agree they are “proud to be Jewish.” Three-quarters (75%) say they have a strong sense of belonging to the Jewish people, and about six-in-ten (63%) say they have a special responsibility to care for Jews in need around the world.

Overwhelming majorities of both Jews by religion and Jews of no religion say they are proud to be Jewish (97% and 83%, respectively). Most Jews by religion also say they have a strong sense of belonging to the Jewish people (85%) and that they feel a responsibility to care for Jews in need (71%). Far fewer Jews of no religion share these sentiments.

What Does it Mean to be Jewish?

. . .

The survey asked Jews whether each of nine attributes and activities is essential to what being Jewish means to them, is important but not essential, or is not an important part of what it means to be Jewish. In response, roughly seven-in-ten U.S. Jews (73%) say remembering the Holocaust is an essential part of what being Jewish means to them.

From this it’s clear that jewishness is more about peoplehood than religion, more biological than ideological. In fact the ideological portion is just another facet of the biological portion. In spite of their many profound ideological differences, the core beliefs that jews share most religiously have to do with seeing themselves as part of and concerned for the well-being of their people, a biological collective.

Theologically speaking, note that the jewish collective sees God as unnecessary but regards their guilt-tripping and extortion narrative as essential.

When Revolting Elites Revolt

secretprojectrevolution

Watch Madonna’s Insufferable 17 Minute Black & White Video About Persecution, Roger Friedman, Showbiz411:

Madonna wants to start a revolution. No one will take her seriously. So she’s made this video with photographer Steven Klein. This is what she wants to know: “If I was a black man and had an Afro would you take me seriously? If I was an Arab waving a hand grenade would you take me seriously?”

This sophomoric nonsense is the product of a 55 year old woman whose view of the world really comes from her own isolation from reality.

It’s called “secretprojectrevolution.” It’s dedicated to anyone who’s suffered persecution.

Madonna’s ‘secretprojectrevolution’ should stay hidden, Kyle Smith, New York Post:

“Economic markets are collapsing,” she intones. “People all over the world are suffering.” But the real enemy is intolerance. “I keep telling everyone I want to start a revolution, but no one is taking me seriously,” she complains, and it’s all because, “I’m a woman. I’m blond. I have t - - s, an ass and an insatiable desire to be noticed.”

Madonna Screens ‘Secretprojectrevolution’ in New York, Megan Buerger, WSJ/Speakeasy:

If shock value were currency, Madonna would be the richest woman in the world.

At last night’s premiere of her new short film, the previously top-secret “Secretprojectrevolution,” she pulled out all the stops to get her political message across: Asking everyone in the audience to sit on the floor of New York’s Gagosian Gallery, including several A-listers, she blurred the lines between pop art and interpretive dance in the name of fighting oppression and discrimination.

The 17-minute short, a black-and-white collaboration with photographer Steven Klein, is indeed disquieting. Madonna plays a jailer and a prisoner, sings an eerie rendition of “My Country, ‘Tis of Thee” and there are guns and blood and a stroller on fire (things to know before cueing it up at the office). She also serves as the narrator, issuing a call to arms for the world to join her in a “revolution of love.” In Madonna-speak, this means standing up for those who are discriminated against because of their race, gender, religion or sexuality.

STEVEN KLEIN STUDIO: #secretprojectrevolution.

Madonna and Steven Klein Foment Revolution For Art Piece, Erik Maza, Women’s Wear Daily:

In a press release days earlier Madonna said “secretprojectrevolution,” as the film is formally called, would be a “call to action and give people a place to voice their own creative expression to help fight oppression, intolerance and complacency.”

For a party, there were an awful lot of instructions from the pop star. Before the projection began, Madonna requested that everyone sit down, and so the black-and-white short film played out with everyone cross-legged on the floor, like in art class. The bar staff was instructed to stop serving or refilling wine until after the performance was over. And no one was allowed to leave until the end

From Merriam Webster:

rev·o·lu·tion noun ˌre-və-ˈlü-shən

: the usually violent attempt by many people to end the rule of one government and start a new one

: a sudden, extreme, or complete change in the way people live, work, etc.

: the action of moving around something in a path that is similar to a circle

An elite revolt against the revolting elite? Not even close. It’s the dog chasing his tail sense of the word revolution that applies here. The point of Madonna’s secretprojectrevolution is not to foment violence or change. Quite the opposite.

A more accurate name would have been projectlookatmelookatmemoreofthesame. It’s just more of the same old hypocritical moralizing against oppression, persecution, discrimination and intolerance – of “minorities”. As every member of the “minority” at the tippity-top of the judaized elite well knows by now, whether you’re a jew or not you had better be able to mouth all the right jewish platitudes. Or else.

Even well-established critics find Madonna’s performance art recasting of the well-established jewish narrative “insufferable”. Why? The message is too overt, too vague, too heavy-handed, too flip. The messenger is also at fault. She’s too privileged and prosperous, too obviously posturing and self-absorbed.

Though challenging the judaized elite or their sensibilities is probably the last thing on Madonna’s mind, her “sophmoric nonsense”, this 17-minutes of burlesque holocaustish harangue, is so absurd it might do some harm.

There’s no real need for her to supply such nonsense. The jews, their media and their puppets already provide a constant stream of authorized and offical nonsense.

Sophmoric reinterpretations and regurgitations of the jewish narrative pose a threat to the extent they broaden and thereby dilute and distort that narrative. The whole purpose of favoring “minorities” is to benefit the jewish “minority” that’s on top, pimping that narrative. Thus Madonna, so celebrated for vulgarizing all things goyishe, becomes “insufferable” in this case exactly because she’s vulgarizing something so ineffably jewish.

A Reminder to HBDers and Race Realists

A comment to Steve Sailer’s Smith student in trouble for liking boys:

Michael said…

People telling Jews they can relax now since we’ve “won” remind me how easy it is for victory to lead to relaxation and then defeat. Yes, Jews are now the establishment, and it’s tempting to feel we can relax now, but that’s especially when we have to be most on our guard. Historically, victory is usually followed by softening and defeat. It’s only Jewish paranoia – one of the healthiest, strongest, and most positive of Jewish instincts. The lack of understanding gentiles have for this powerful instinct betrays a fatal weakness in their character and sheds some light on why they ultimately didn’t have what it takes to retain power – and an exceptionally tough and enduring will to victory that has a chance of sparing Jews from this historical pattern.

Comments on this site never fail to remind me of how dangerous the temptation to relax really is. I have no doubt if Jews did relax, guys like the hideous and creepy “agnostic” would immediately crawl out of the woodworks with their festering resentments and Jews would once again be banned from country clubs and similar places.

Fact of the matter is, we are dealing with whites, Aryans if you prefer, who have historically been the most virulently racist genetic group in history. All groups are racist, but none as virulently as European whites. It’s probably a genetic character trait but if you compare historical racist attitudes it is clear as day that no other race or civilization equals white Europeans. Even modern day white Western self-hatred, which although helped along by the Jews is an essentially white European construct, is a kind of racism in reverse! It’s the same need to demonize and hate an entire people that seems genetically white, just this time directed inward! Even the white attempt to get away from racism ends up being just racism in reverse, its surreal! It would be comic if it wasn’t so sad. Orwell said that Western Communism was just nationalism attached to another group, and its the same with Western anti-racism – it’s just racism attached to one’s own group.

The Muslims noted the Crusaders inability to treat any other race as equals. We are not dealing with a mildly racist people like the Chinese or the Arabs, with whom perhaps Jews might be able, over time and in the right cultural climate such as exists in the secular West today, to relax their guard.

9/19/13, 11:07 AM

This is a good example of how jews argue. Whites are condemned first for not being “racist” enough, for not having the instincts of jews. Then also for being too “racist”, for supposedly exceeding the jews at demonization and hate. The hypocrisy and contradictions are beside the point. The point is to condemn Whites, as a race, in direct contrast to jews.

This is a reminder that jews are 1) acutely aware of the reality and importance of race, and 2) see themselves as racially distinct from and at odds with Whites.

Syria: Organized Jewry Organizing War

Mainstream jewsmedia reports:

Pro-Israel and Jewish groups strongly back military strike against Syria – The Washington Post

Simon Wiesenthal Center calls for action against Syria

Adelson New Obama Ally as Jewish Groups Back Syria Strike – Bloomberg

AIPAC in Full Court Press on Syria – The Daily Beast

Jewish groups back Obama on Syria, but downplay Israel angle | Jewish Telegraphic Agency

Jewish organizations in US support Syria strike | The Times of Israel

Simon Wiesenthal Center calls for action against Syria

Andrew Anglin’s Daily Stormer:

Jewess Debbie Wasserman Schultz Justifies Planned Syrian Slaughter by Invoking the Holohoax: ‘As a Jew … Never Again has to Mean Something’

Top Israeli Intelligence Chief Confirms Israeli Interest in Toppling Syrian Government

Top Jew Kissinger Says Not Invading Syria Would Have ‘Enormous’ Consequences

Bloodthirsty Zionist Billionaire Sheldon Adelson is Obama’s New Ally as Jewish Groups Back Syria Strike

Kevin MacDonald at Occidental Observer:

The Israel Lobby and the Organized Jewish Community Want Regime Change in Syria

How the media works: David Makovsky on the non-existent AIPAC 800-lb gorilla

Pat Buchanan: Just Whose War Is This?

Gregory Hood at Counter-Currents provides the most comprehensive analysis: Standing With Syria

– – –

By far the best indication of the poisonous nature of jewish power is the confused reaction of some patriots in the US military: Tea Party Troops Protest Syria Strike On Facebook, Raise Questions About Military Code Of Conduct.

Jews and jewish organizations are the driving force lobbying for US/European miliary strikes aimed at degrading/toppling the Assad regime in Syria. Their weaponization of the jewish narrative is blatant. The bottom line of all the jewish moralizing is that non-jews must kill and die in order to protect jews.

The mainstream jewsmedia is openly reporting on both the who and the why of this jewish drive for war. The White servicemen who will be doing the killing and dying sense something is wrong, but cannot properly identify what. They are disturbed at the prospect of serving inimical alien interests, but cannot accept that they already do.

Fifty Years of Nightmarish Fraud

Many people know that Martin Luther King was not the virtuous saint the jewsmedia propaganda portrays him as. This is only the most blatant aspect of the fraud that has been perpetrated for the past fifty years. The more subtle yet far more significant apsect of this fraud has been the promotion and celebration of a short string of ambiguous words – a promise of hope and change disingenuously offered and naively accepted.

Here is just one perfectly typical example of the jewsmedia aiding and abetting the ongoing fraud, describing two starkly different perceptions of this string of words and attributing that difference to political partisanship rather than race.

King ‘content of character’ quote inspires debate, by Jesse Washington, AP, 20 Jan 2012:

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

This sentence spoken by the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. has been quoted countless times as expressing one of America’s bedrock values, its language almost sounding like a constitutional amendment on equality.

Yet today, 50 years after King shared this vision during his most famous speech, there is considerable disagreement over what it means.

For at least two of King’s children, the future envisioned by the father has yet to arrive.

“I don’t think we can ignore race,” says Martin Luther King III.

“What my father is asking is to create the climate where every American can realize his or her dreams,” he says. “Now what does that mean when you have 50 million people living in poverty?”

Bernice King doubts her father would seek to ignore differences.

“When he talked about the beloved community, he talked about everyone bringing their gifts, their talents, their cultural experiences,” she says. “We live in a society where we may have differences, of course, but we learn to celebrate these differences.”

For many conservatives, the modern meaning of King’s quote is clear: Special consideration for one racial or ethnic group is a violation of the dream.

The quote is like the Declaration of Independence, says Roger Clegg, president of the Center for Equal Opportunity, a conservative think tank that studies race and ethnicity. In years past, he says, America may have needed to grow into the words, but today they must be obeyed to the letter.

“The Declaration of Independence says all men are created equal,” Clegg says. “Nobody thinks it doesn’t really mean what it says because Thomas Jefferson owned slaves. King gave a brilliant and moving quotation, and I think it says we should not be treating people differently on the basis of skin color.”

Last week, the RightWingNews.com blog included “The idea that everyone should be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin” in a list of “25 People, Places and Things Liberals Love to Hate.”

“Conservatives feel they have embraced that quote completely. They are the embodiment of that quote but get no credit for doing it,” says the author of the article, John Hawkins. “Liberals like the idea of the quote because it’s the most famous thing Martin Luther King said, but they left the principles behind the quote behind a long time ago.”

“To ignore color is to ignore reality,” says Lewis Baldwin, an Alabama native who marched in the civil rights movement and now teaches courses on King at Vanderbilt University.

“Dr. King understood that we all see we are different. You accept color differences, affirm them, celebrate them, but don’t allow them to become a barrier to human community,” said Baldwin, author of a new King book, “In A Single Garment of Destiny: A Global Vision of Justice.”

To reduce race to skin color, to the point of equating the two, is to willfully distort reality. Long before King’s speech this distortion and others were promoted by Franz Boas, whose followers included it in anti-“racism” propaganda they produced in the 1940s.

Fraud works to the extent that the lie it is based on appears plausible on the surface. In this case the thinking goes like this: Race is just skin color, and color is unimportant, therefore race is unimportant. The article excerpted above depicts “liberals”, i.e. blacks enabled and led by jews, as pimping this lie that they themselves don’t believe. “Conservatives”, i.e. Whites, are depicted as the only ones who have really taken King’s demagoguery to heart, misunderstanding its true meaning and intent.

Skin color is only the most obvious racial difference. The lie is that it is the only significant difference, which disguises the fact that the content of character is too. In this light, what King actually said is revealed as tautological nonsense:

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation (amongst those of common heritage, race) where they will not be judged by their race but by their race.

For fifty years “conservatives” have sought to judge people by their character and “liberals” have been telling Whites that non-Whites shouldn’t be judged, period. Thus IQ statistics are “racist”, violent crime statistics are “racist”, stereotypes are “racist”. Anything that reflects negatively on the content of non-White character is “racist”. And in a sense it is.

Taking King at his word is “racist”. The stark differences in understanding and reaction to what King said is itself a reflection of racial differences in character. Whites buy the lie. Non-Whites don’t. Whites have deliberately shared and conceded power, setting aside their racial identity and group interests. Blacks, in contrast, have followed the lead of white-skinned jews. They shamelessly promote their own identities and group interests. The fraud comes through clearly in the rhetoric. The supposed ideal is equality, which can supposedly only be attained by celebrating differences, with the most important difference being that Whites must continue to defer to the moral authority and superiority of non-Whites.

The differences are as much in each groups’ thoughts as in their genes.

It’s high time for Whites to recognize the fraud, to assess the terrible cost of the false belief that race is just skin color and doesn’t matter, to take heed of what non-Whites actually mean and do rather than blindly trusting what they say. Wake up. End the nightmare.