Tag Archives: jewish identity

The Burden of Jewing, Part 1 – “Messianism”

I’m halfway through The Burden of Silence: Sabbatai Sevi and the Evolution of the Ottoman-Turkish Dönmes, written by Cengiz Sisman and published in 2015. This is a good place to pause and summarize my impressions so far. I wanted to learn more about the secretive crypto-jews of Turkey, the Donmeh or Dönmes, and it seems that the earlier, screechier phase of their “silent” jewing is worthy of special attention.

The first half of the book focuses on the origin of the Dönmes in the Ottoman empire circa the 1660s. It is essentially a biography of the rabbi Sabbatai Sevi, and also sketches out the Sabattean movement, the fanatic sect of jews Sevi inspired. At the time, jewing was relatively open and widespread, and it was relatively well recognized and documented as jewing even by non-jews. Of course, the extent and depth of this jewing was not well known and not properly understood, even by most contemporary non-jew observers.

The story unfolds on the margin of Europe, and remains on the margin of White minds, but the consequences run deep and continue to reverberate. The subject is promising – an exposé of centuries worth of secretive jewing – but what the author delivers is more tribute than revelation. The book is advertised as the “first monograph on Sabbateanism” because it represents the first attempt to integrate contemporary non-jew sources with the jealously guarded jew narrative. Non-jew sources are cited, but primarily to bolster those aspects of the story which are least interesting to non-jews – the speculative, nit-picking digressions concerning who said or did what and where, based on still scant evidence.

Thankfully, there are only a few sections where Sisman takes for granted that his reader is familiar with (or cares about) some point of jewy orthodoxy. His prose is lucid and not larded with the histrionics usually found in jew versions of history. And it is not difficult to see in this tale concerning one obscure sect of jews, in one particular place, the outlines of more general patterns and the far broader impact jewing has had across space and time. On the surface Sisman describes how the jewiest jews jewed the Turks. But he is also, though sometimes between the lines, describing jewing more generally.

The dual nature of his tale starts with the title, The Burden of Silence. This might seem to refer only to the Dönmes and their fraud, but it applies just as much to The Tribe as a whole. This is just one of many frauds their tribalist criminal code of silence has abetted.

A more honest title would have been Such a Burden to Trick the Goyim, Time and Again, Without Gloating. As with any apology for jew crypsis, you must imagine the “burden” of the jew, “forced” to lie and disguise themselves. Imagine the “silence” of not being able to screech freely, as a jew, and having to screech at the filthy goyim while posing as a fellow goy. Imagine the “trauma” of having to manipulate the goyim you are feeding upon.

Imagine Sisman’s burden, having to jewsplain how jews are the victims, even while describing their success in duping their marks. Here’s how he lays out his task in his introduction:

In this book, in a set of connected arguments, I show how Sabbatean messianism found receptive religio-socio-political conditions throughout much of the early modern world at an astonishing speed. In response, the Ottoman authorities devised various measures to contain the movement, but they were confronted by crypto-Jewish Dönmes using flexible identities to evade external interference.

. . .

Even “emancipated” Dönmes in the twentieth century continued to carry a somewhat traumatic and secularized form of the burden of silence with them as do many Dönmes today who hold on to this silence about their past to safeguard their positions in Muslim society.

Although the Dönmes maintained an impenetrable and “forced” silence concerning their private practices and beliefs, their existence had always been an “open secret.” Repressed feelings due to the practice of a burden of silence, added yet another layer to the complexity of Dönme history and created a form of cognitive dissonance, a trauma, or, as Houman Sarshar has characterized it in another context, “the anxiety of remembrance” of the past. For some, there is no greater torment than bearing an untold story inside.

Throughout the book Sisman makes liberal use of sneer quotes, as I do, to highlight terms of special significance, especially terms which mean different things to jews and non-jews.

Secret and semi-secret societies such as the Dönmes are inherently fascinating but pose numerous challenges as a subject of academic inquiry. Not only is there a paucity of sources because of their silence, but writing on the silence itself raises a moral dilemma about disclosing the society’s “secrets.” The contemporary existence of the Dönme community makes writing about it or its members even harder. To overcome such challenges, a researcher needs to develop new methodological approaches, particularly because nothing is simple or can be taken at face value in the Dönme histories. One needs to remain constantly aware of the capricious nature of right and wrong in this context. Everything has multiple layers of meaning.

Is Sisman a Dönme? He doesn’t say, but his account of Dönme beliefs and history is told from an entirely sympathetic insider’s perspective. He rejects certain negative aspects of the mainstream jew narrative on Sabbatai and the Sabbateans. He admits to purposefully withholding some information to protect the still active, still secret jews.

The mainstream jew narrative on Sabbatai and the Sabbateans is that they were heretics, bad jews. They claim the Dönmes were never real jews, never had any real influence, and exist today only in the minds of “conspiracy theorists”. In a short interview in 2017 Sisman staked out his two main differences with this mainstream narrative. First, he emphasized that the Dönme see themselves not as jews but as “messianic jews”. Second, he summarized his thesis, which is that these secret super-jews have had a profound influence.

In the interview Sisman also says he wanted to counter “conspiracists”. He spells out this desire in his book’s introduction:

The topic of the Dönmes is currently one of the most controversial conspiracy-prone subjects in modern Turkey and in some parts of the Middle East and has been the subject of several speculative and conspiratorial works (and seems likely to be the topic of several new studies in the future). Consequently, I always felt a need for nonsensational academic works about the Dönmes to counterbalance those controversial perspectives without externalizing, homogenizing, and stereotyping them. The conspiracy theories—mostly, but not entirely, emanating from the religious right—would have the Dönmes as a secret branch of world Jewry or, alternatively, Zionism, that undermined the Ottoman regime and played a central role in the empire’s final demise in order to replace it with a secular Turkish republic.

This is the main point on which Sisman agrees with the mainstream jew narrative. He sees Europeans and Turks, to the extent we exist at all, as the bad guys. His book is a celebration of jew conspiracy, a history of jews conspiring to outwit, outplay, and outlast the goyim. Naturally he dislikes “conspiracists” and their “conspiracy theories” taking a negative view of that same jewing. The “silent” subtext of his book is that the jews and their dupes are opposites, enemies! That jews should know and the goyim shouldn’t is the very key to how jewing works, how it survives, not some accident of history.

Sisman saves most of his argument concerning the outsized influence of jewing, and specifically the central role the Dönmes secretly played in the Ottoman empire’s demise and replacement with a secular “liberal” Turkish republic, for the latter half of his book. We’ll get to that later. His main point in the first half of the book is that the influence of the Sabbatean phase of this jewing “was felt even more strongly outside the empire borders”. In other words, felt more among Europeans than among Turks.

The following long snippet contains that argument, and conveys Sisman’s own speculative, conspiratorial style. It also illustrates one of the more general patterns of jewing he touches upon throughout the book. “Messianism.” When jews babble about “repairing the world” to suit “G-d”, what they’re talking about is manipulating the goyim to suit jews. Sabbatai’s “messianism” was a particularly acute display of this characteristic jew behavior, just one example of how their shameless jew-serving moralizing has repeatedly turned their host societies inside out and upside down.

Here Sisman dryly recounts the impact of Sabbateanism upon a world already profoundly shaped by prior jew-driven upheavals:

The common assumption about the magnitude and impact of the movement, mostly originating from narrative sources, was that the world Jewry, including the communities of both the Ottoman Empire and Europe, were overwhelmed by the Sabbatean euphoria during its heyday. Based on that assumption, many Ottomanists and Jewish scholars thought that the movement had a major destructive impact on the already declining Jewish communities.

Examining the Ottoman context of the movement forces us to revise some of these assumptions. First, the movement was not as big in the Ottoman Empire as it was in Europe. Second, the impact of the movement did not pose a major threat to the fate of Ottoman Jewry. Why was the Sabbatean movement perceived to have been as such in modern scholarship, then? Earlier responses to this question focused on Christian millenarian expectations, which calculated that the coming of the messiah and the end of time would occur in the year 1666. Such expectations, it was argued, built up a massive messianic expectation in Europe and, that coupled with Jewish messianic expectations, fueled the rapid dissemination of the Sabbatean movement in Europe.

In challenging this argument, Richard Popkin, for example, claimed that seventeenth-century Europeans and, following them, many modern researchers were misled by the writings of contemporaneous Christian observers of the movement, such as English royalists Paul Rycaut and John Evelyn, who deliberately magnified the success and failure of the movement in order to both ridicule the Jews and to dash the expectations of home-grown non-conformist millenarians. Without refuting the validity of this explanation, I think that there was yet another factor behind the rapid dissemination of the movement in Europe, particularly among millenarian circles in the Reformed countries: the prophecies of “the doom of the Turkish empire.” According to an age-old Christian prophecy, there was an inherent connection between Christian millenarianism and Jewish messianic expectations. Jews were supposed to convert to Christianity and then return to the Holy Land before the Second Coming of Jesus. And the notorious date of 1666 was calculated as the date for the rise of the Antichrist—the Jewish Messiah. Ironically, the Christian Mary was seen as a supreme she-devil, demonic counterpart to the presence of God, the Shekhina, according to some Kabbalistic traditions in those times. There was one “stumbling block” to realizing this project in its entirety. The Holy Land was under Turkish rule in those days, and it was supposed to be redeemed from Turkish hands. A Jewish messiah, or Antichrist, arising from the East was seen as a sign on the way to the fulfillment of the prophecy. In other words, Sevi, coming from the East, would bring an end to the “Turkish menace,” which had posed a threat to European ambitions for centuries, leading to the redemption of the Holy Land and preparation of the Jews for conversion to Christianity. Seventeenth-century books of Christian prophecy are filled with this account of the connection between Turkish doom, Jewish conversion, and Christian salvation, as reflected in the following quotation.

Turks running over all nations, as a Plague (following Antichrist) upon the Christian world. God hath purposed to destroy [Turks] utterly; that the way of the kings of the EAST mighty be prepared. By the king of the East, we are to understand the Jews who are called Kings. . . . The way that is to be prepared for the Jews is two-fold. First, their conversion and, second, for their return unto their own Land, by taking the stumbling-block out of their way. The Papists are a very great stumbling block unto the conversion of the Jews; and the Turks are a great impediment unto their return unto their own Land, unto which God hath promised to bring them.

Influenced by these kinds of millenarian and royalist writings, most narrative sources agree that the movement brought chaos to the commerce and daily affairs of the empire.

The more things change, the more they stay the same. Update “Turks” to “Islamists” and that 17th century quote still fits fundamentalist Christian thinking. It fits other, more secular forms of jewhadist thinking as well. What’s reflected in this “age-old Christian prophecy” is the power of jew moralizing and narrative.

The idea behind it all is “messianism” – a jewy word for a jewy idea whose origin long predates Christianity or Islam. Lots of non-jew dupes have adopted and lamely tried to adapt the idea for themselves, even to the point of imagining themselves as the “real” jews. However distorted that idea, the crux of it remains: Fight to save the jews, because the jews say so.

Sisman never draws a direct analogy, but in Sabbatai Sevi he describes a latter-day Jesus. No generic prophet, but an iconoclastic rabbi who specifically presented himself as a “messiah”, as a savior of jews. Sabbatai comes across as an anti-“messiah” to Christians exactly because they prefer a previous version of the story, they’ve already accepted another jew as their “messiah”.

What may appear to be a conflict between opposites is in fact just the usual clash of jew narratives. The disagreement over methods disguises the more fundamental agreement over who must benefit. Generally speaking, the game is: Two jews, three opinions about what’s best for the jews. In this case the game is: Two “messiahs”, three opinions about how to save the jews. This view of jew movements generally is borne out in Sisman’s tale about Sabbatai and the Sabbateans.

The first thing to understand about the jews who became Sabbateans, and eventually Dönmes, is that they were the descendants of jews who had long and successfully preyed upon a variety of goyim. This is the jew normal. However diverse their travels, however different their methods and modes of jewing, they see themselves as a collective, utterly distinct from and at odds with the people among whom they live:

The Ottoman Jews came from different parts of the world and over centuries became an integral part of this Ottoman economy and society and occupied important, if not unique, positions such as ambassadors, political advisors, tax collectors, private bankers, Ocakbezirganis (the merchant-banker of the Janissary corps), physicians, and court musicians.

. . .

At the end of the fifteenth century, Rabbi Tsarfati of Edirne, in his well-known letter to European Jewry, described the Ottoman Empire not merely as a place of refuge but also as a land of economic opportunity where, unlike anywhere else, Jews could live and practice their religion freely. This call caused a wave of Askhenazi migration to the empire. Then came the Sephardic Jews and Marranos, who had been chastised and expelled from the Iberian Peninsula in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.

Things then and there were much like they are here today. The jews are the original “refugees”, and it is their narrative, their “messianism” in one form or another, which empowers them to magically wander across the borders of states which are only ostensibly ruled by hostile non-jews. The Ottomans, for example, had their own President Kushner:

For example, Capsali, using a messianic vocabulary, likened Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent to King Solomon, as an emancipator and protector of the Jews.

Sisman attributes the rise of Sabbateanism among jews inside the Ottoman empire to their collective consciousness and sense of common cause with jews elsewhere:

A massacre in neighboring Poland in 1648 connected the stories of Sabbatai, the Ottoman Empire, and Poland. In 1648, the Ukrainian officer Bogdan Chmielnicki (1594–1657), with the support of the Tatar Khan of Crimea, incited the local peasants to fight against their Polish overlords and brutally killed thousands of people, including Jews. On the assumption that the Jews were allied with the Polish nobility and served them as purveyors, tax collectors, and financial advisors, the Cossacks massacred them. It is estimated that 100,000–200,000 Jews were killed during the revolt in 1648–1649. This event introduced the Cossack term “pogrom” into our vocabulary.

Of course “holocaust” has been introduced into “our” vocabulary in the same way and for the same reason. Because the jewsmedia broadcasts “messianism”, it broadcasts jew fears and fictions as facts. What’s all-important, according to the jewsmedia, is that somebody somehow get the six million to safety.

When the news from the Chmielnicki massacres reached Izmir in the 1648s, Sevi was still enrapt in his own world, studying the Kabbalistic texts about the nature of the Jewish messiah. We do not know for sure whether he was influenced by this terrible news that put the Jewish world in such a state of shock, but possibly for the first time in 1648, Sabbatai proclaimed himself the long-awaited messiah and uttered in public the Tetragrammaton, the ineffable name of God, which Jews had been forbidden to pronounce since the destruction of the Second Temple. As contemporary Armenian historian Arakel (d. 1670) confirms, he said “I am that savior and I have come to save Israel.”

It is worth repeating that “messianism” is particularist, it specifically concerns saving the jews. It is complemented by jew atrocity hoaxing, which specifically concerns generating sympathy for jews. Both are characteristic expressions of jew tribalism, and the frequency and intensity with which they manifest is an indirect measure of the strength of that tribalism.

Making sense of Sabbateanism is not difficult. Sabbatai Sevi imagined a new way of saving the jews. The jews who more or less agreed with him became the Sabbateans. The jews who preferred the current way of going about it regarded them as heretics. Though the details were different, the thrust of this Sabbatean-flavored “messianism” was neither unique nor uncommon:

As amply demonstrated in studies on Hassidism, another widespread Jewish mystical-messianic movement in Eastern Europe in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, studying the socioeconomic and cultural context of the religious movements provides us a deeper understanding of their developments and their connection to other histories. Ruderman, with the same concern in mind, demonstrates how Jew communities in the early modern period were linked to one another in fascinating ways. To him, especially two early modern figures, Sabbatai Sevi and Marrano-origin Baruch Spinoza, changed Jewish religious and cultural landscapes forever.

Whereas Europeans see Spinoza ambiguously, as a secular figure, jews see him more accurately as a “messiah” figure. As a key proponent of the Enlightenment, Spinoza’s “messianism” had a tremendous impact on Europeans. The “classical liberalism” which sprang from that upheaval is still being actively promoted by “right”-posing jews. It amounts to preaching that it is the height of reason is to renounce tribalism, because as individuals we can better protect “minorities”, like The Tribe. As Ben Tillman once pointedly put it:

So, we have a Jewish intellectual milieu (connected by the Jewish neural network to all other such milieux), out of which comes an intellectual movement of atomisation – the ultimate individualist strategy – the absolute worst strategy we could adopt if we were to face subsequent competition with the Jewish or any other competing group. Might this not be the ultimate in the “culture of critique”? The counterpoint to chapter 5 of Separation and Its Discontents?

Three possibilities come to mind. The first is that the Enlightenment ideals that were the “antithesis” of Judaism were conceptualized by the Jewish community and sold to the gullible goyim. The second is that these ideals were a spontaneous (though ultimately maladaptive) creation of the European intellect reacting to the Jewish presence. The third, which seems most likely, is some combination of the two. Each of these possibilities, however, is dependent on the presence of Jews and/or Jewish memes, the putative “germs”.

The pattern of behavior Kevin MacDonald identified and calls jewish intellectual movements can be better understood as a secularized expression of the jews’ propensity to spawn “mystical-messianic movements”. Indeed, Sisman’s The Burden of Silence is about one form of movement changing into the other. It traces how Sabbateanism, an overtly jewy movement aimed at saving the jews, transmuted into a crypto-jewy movement pursuing the same goal by a different path. The takeaway, for non-jews, is that crypsis, or “silent” jewing, is only the continuation of jewing by other means.

When Relentless Remorseless Exterminating Machines Control the Media

Revealing themselves and their tricks, again: The Secret Jewish History Of “Alien”.

Most of the “secret” connections are tenuous, having to do with media being totally jewed. It’s all just fluff padding out the core truth:

One might also consider the alien lifeform itself as an embodiment of the Jewish condition. Alone, wandering in space, it is as Ash calls it, a “survivor.” The organic-machine combination gives it an androgynous quality (it is a female entity but played by a male actor, Bolaji Badejo), again something which has been leveled historically at Jewish men in particular. Technically known as a Xenomorph, its ability to blend into the surroundings of the spaceship suggest a gift for mimicry – a hallmark of the Jewish condition — echoing that of the Transformers.

The very name of the film also suggests how Jewish immigrants have been perceived in Europe and the United States as reflected in the anti-immigrant legislation in Britain specifically designed to curb a Jewish “invasion,” The Aliens Act of 1905.

. . .

Finally, the alien is a relentless, remorseless exterminating machine. All biological organisms are its potential victims. In the prequel “Prometheus,” a crew member describes a pile of corpses he has stumbled upon as resembling a “Holocaust picture.” Thus, it has even been asked, “Can we say that behind those murderous vagina dentata of “Alien,” these atrocities of the twentieth century lurk?

They didn’t give the alien any lines because it would have sounded like nasally screeching in yiddish, letting the goyim know too quickly.

DNA Reveals The Legacy of Jewing

jewdna

New article in The Jewlantic: DNA Reveals the Hidden Jewish Ancestry of Latin Americans. That was the original title. Revealing indeed. Now it reads: “The Genetic Legacy of the Spanish Inquisition”. It wraps the latest revelations with the usual cover story, mischaracterizing an invasive species as passive victim:

As Spain simultaneously persecuted its Jews and expanded its colonies in the Americas, conversos secretly came over to the New World. Their legacy lives on in DNA.

. . .

In 1492, best known as the year Columbus sailed the ocean blue, Spain also decided to expel all practicing Jews from its kingdom. Jews who did not leave—and were not murdered—were forced to become Catholics. Along with those who converted during earlier pogroms, they became known as conversos. As Spain expanded its empire in the Americas, conversos made their way to the colonies too.

This is the usual jew-excusing narrative, intended to distract from the fact that the jews had colonized Spain, forcing themselves upon the Iberians in much the same way they have forced themselves upon Europeans in other times and places. This particular persecution narrative is dishonest not only because it paints the jews as powerless, but because it also falsely implies they were ultimately destroyed. The DNA tells another story, the legacy of jewing:

A new study examining the DNA of thousands of Latin Americans reveals the extent of their likely Sephardic Jewish ancestry, more widespread than previously thought and more pronounced than in people in Spain and Portugal today. “We were very surprised to find it was the case,” says Juan-Camilo Chacón-Duque, a geneticist at the Natural History Museum in London who co-authored the paper.

This study is one of the most comprehensive genetic surveys of Latin Americans yet. The team also found a mix of indigenous American, European, sub-Saharan African, and East Asian ancestry in many people they sampled—a legacy of colonialism, the transatlantic slave trade, and more recent pulses of immigration from Asia. This is the history of Latin America, written in DNA.

. . .

Spain did not allow converts or their recent descendants to go to its colonies, so they traveled secretly under falsified documents.

. . .

Conversos who aspired to high offices in the Church or military often tried to fake their ancestry.

The genetic record now suggests that conversos—or people who shared ancestry with them—came to the Americas in disproportionate numbers.

. . .

Nearly a quarter of the Latin Americans shared 5 percent or more of their ancestry with people living in North Africa and the eastern Mediterranean, including self-identified Sephardic Jews. DNA alone cannot prove that conversos were the source of this ancestry, but it fits with the historical record. This pattern of widespread but low North African and eastern Mediterranean ancestry in the population suggests that its source is centuries old, putting the date around the early days of New Spain.

. . .

Geneticists have also noticed rare genetic diseases prevalent in Jews popping up in Latin America. “It’s not just one disease. It’s like, wow, this isn’t a coincidence,” says Harry Ostrer, a geneticist at Albert Einstein College of Medicine. In 2011, Ostrer and his colleagues decided to study two populations—in Ecuador and Colorado—with unusually high prevalence of two mutations often found in Jews. (One mutation was in the breast-cancer gene BRCA1, and the other caused a form of dwarfism called Laron syndrome.) And indeed, they found enriched Sephardic Jewish ancestry in the 53 people they tested.

Chechar BTFO. The jews themselves never forgot this legacy, they’ve always simply directed all the blame for it at Europeans.

Lying about race and genetic traits is a jew trait. This study is in effect another substantiation of race science, confirming that jew is a genetic trait. It also helps explain why the revelations of crypto-jews in high office is a recurring theme in American politics. The Spanish Inquisition may have been in part a healthy reaction to jewing, but in the end it entrenched the disease rather than curing it.

Ioffe Jewsplains Oppression

merry_oyyyy_veeeeyyyyyyPlease don’t wish me ‘Merry Christmas’ – The Washington Post:

I like good cheer. But please do not wish me “Merry Christmas.” It’s wonderful if you celebrate it, but I don’t — and I don’t feel like explaining that to you. It’s lonely to be reminded a thousand times every winter that the dominant American cultural event occurs without me.

To write “I don’t feel like explaining” while doing just that is like saying “yes” while shaking your head “no”. Ioffe brims with irrepressible loxism that she certainly does feel like expressing. It’s just that she also feels that she can’t be completely honest about why. Ioffe could have said, “As a professional member of the ruling tribe, I feel entitled to spell out how you mindless goyim need to reorganize your society to suit me.” Instead she said:

When you are from a minority religion, you’re used to the fact that cabdrivers don’t wish you an easy fast on Yom Kippur. But it’s harder to get used to the oppressive ubiquity of a holiday like Christmas. “This is always the time of year I feel most excluded from society,” one Jewish friend told me. Another told me it made him feel “un-American.”

To say it’s off-putting to be wished a merry holiday you don’t celebrate — like someone randomly wishing you a happy birthday when the actual date is months away — is not to say you hate Christmas. It is simply to say that, to me, Julia Ioffe, it is alienating and weird, even though I know that is not intended. I respond: “Thanks. You, too.” But that feels alienating and weird, too, because now I’m pretending to celebrate Christmas. It feels like I’ve verbally tripped, as when I reply “You, too!” to the airport employee wishing me a good flight. There’s nothing evil or mean-spirited about any of it; it’s just ill-fitting and uncomfortable. And that’s when it happens once. When it happens several times a day for a month, and is amplified by the audiovisual Christmas blanketing, it’s exhausting and isolating. It makes me feel like a stranger in my own land.

Ioffe admits she’s saying what she’s saying because she’s a jew, she just adds the usual thick layer of reality-inverting jew victim narrative on top. Sure, she’s a member of the most privileged and powerful tribe in the world, but they’re a MINORITY. That makes you goyim the real problem. You make jews feel UNCOMFORTABLE. You make jews feel like STRANGERS. You make jews feel OPPRESSED, ALIENATED, EXHAUSTED, ISOLATED. And worst of all, you just being yourselves forces jews to pretend they’re not jews. Which is why they write articles like this. Every day of the year may be Holocaust Day, but every now and again jews need a different pretext to jewsplain how their jewy hostility toward the goyim is really all the goyim’s fault.

When I tried to explain this on Twitter, I earned thousands of attacks: people vindictively wishing me a Merry Christmas, vicious and ad hominem condemnations accusing me of being angry, whiny, impolite, self-centered, ungrateful, sad and, in general, a bad person. (“We’ve already got a reputation for being miserable f—s,” one Jewish commenter wrote, “let’s not make it worse.”)

I find this surge of hostility baffling. To voluntarily opt out of Christmas, apparently, is an act of aggression against Christmas itself.

What Ioffe didn’t want to explain, at first, was that she was thinking and speaking as a jew. Then the vindictive goyim attacked her for no reason. So now she’s trying to jewsplain. “As a jew, I’m the real victim here. Stop being so hostile you filthy mindless goyim.”

There’s something a little deranged about taunting someone of another faith with “Merry Christmas” after they’ve politely asked for a recusal. It feels out of step with what Christians say this holiday — and Christianity — is all about: peace, love and mercy. It feels, instead, to be of a piece with the warring tribalism that has consumed our politics.

How, I was asked, are people meant to know what you celebrate? They’re not. Which is why my wish, this holiday season, is for people not to make assumptions about others, to put themselves in others’ shoes, to respect others as they wish to be respected, to respond with kindness even when they disagree, to live and let live. I heard about a guy who used to say all that stuff, and apparently his birthday is coming up. Why not honor him that way?

You know what’s deranged? Trying to paint yourself as a victim while telling others they annoy you and should change their behavior to please you. It’s disgusting to contemplate, but it isn’t difficult to understand this victim/control-freak mentality. In individuals the symptoms are commonly described as antisocial personality disorder. Such individuals feel no empathy for others, but they understand how to manipulate others to feel empathy for them.

Though Ioffe lamely attempts to personalize her story, she isn’t standing on her Washington Post soapbox as an aggrieved individual. She’s speaking as a member of her tribe, “from a minority religion”. That’s the key to her identity, the magic jew card that, in their minds, fills them with righteousness and moral authority. She may have no empathy for the Christians (by which she means Whites) whom she’s collectively complaining about, but clearly she understands how to moralize, to shamelessly exploit whatever sense of honor, respect, or kindness the gullible goyim will show her.

Furthermore, Ioffe has previously described just how self-aware she is about this, how she knows it has more to do with race and nation than religion:

Personally and not because I’m a pessimistic Soviet Jew– personally I was kind of glad to see the outpouring of antisemitism, because for a long time I was very frustrated by the discussion on kind of the liberal side of the political spectrum, where Jews, like Israel, were no longer seen as the underdog, no longer seen as the persecuted minority, in fact, this kind of scurrying line of anti-Semitic stereotype of us as the establishment, and people who run and control everything…. I had black friends, for example, black intellectuals who say, “Our issue is the more important one, we are the persecuted minority, you’re part of the establishment, you are white,” and to me seeing that reaction, that seeing that anti-semitic reaction that came with Trump I think got those people to kind of see us again as the minority… I think that people are recognizing that we’re still kind of in the same boat…I’m seeing it as a little reminder to people.

Ioffe doesn’t see jews as White, she sees jews as victims of Whites, “in the same boat” with other non-Whites, against Whites. She likes the “persecuted minority” narrative, the jews’ oldest, biggest lie. She promotes it, and is glad to see others influenced by it, because she sees the value in that for herself and her tribe, not because she believes it’s true.

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.