Tag Archives: politics

The Politics of Fear, The Psychology of Treason

(((donor class)))

In Fear and Loathing and Treason – Part 1 and Part 2 I discussed the psychological motives and mechanics of the White traitors aiding and abetting the invasion and colonization of Europe by “refugees”.

(((Corey Robin))) has written an article for the Jew Republic, What’s in it For The Collaborators?, getting inadvertently at what I was try to get at more deliberately. I’ve just taken the liberty here of deobfuscating (in the current year even the jews admit “elite” is just code for “jews”) and excerpting those portions which well describe the interplay of host collaboration and jew parasitism:

By conventional understanding, a collaborator is one who assists an enemy, helping groups to which he does not belong threaten groups to which he does belong. But this definition, it seems to me, is too restrictive. It presumes that a group is a discrete whole, that once in it, we can’t get out of it or have competing affiliations. Collaborators, however, cannot be so neatly bound.

Whether we belong to one group or another in some existential sense, in the course of our lives we do incur moral obligations to our comrades and friends, whom we betray when we aid our opponents.

But to avoid the question of identity that restrictive definitions of collaboration entail, I will use the definition contained in the word’s Latin root collaborare: “to work together.” By collaborator, I simply mean those men and women who work with jews and who occupy the lower tiers of power and make political fear a genuinely civic enterprise.

The collaborator confounds our simple categories of jew and victim. Like the jews, the collaborator takes initiative and receives benefits from his collaboration. Like the victim, he may be threatened with punishment or retribution if he does not cooperate.

Many collaborators, in fact, are drawn directly from the ranks of the victims. Perhaps then we can distinguish between collaborators of aspiration, inspired by a desire for gain, and collaborators of aversion, inspired by a fear of loss. The first are akin to jews, the second to victims. But even that distinction is too neat. Jews also fear loss, and victims hope for gain, and as the economist’s notion of opportunity costs attests, the hope of gain often informs the fear of loss.

Collaborators serve two functions. First, they perform tasks that jews themselves cannot or will not perform. These tasks may be considered beneath the dignity of the jews: cooking, cleaning, or other forms of work. They may require local knowledge—as in the case of informers, who provide information jews cannot access on their own—or specialized skills.

Second, collaborators extend the reach of jews into corners of society that jews lack the manpower to patrol. These collaborators are usually figures of influence within communities targeted by jews. Their status may come from the jews, who elevate them because they are willing to enforce the jews’ directives. More often, their authority is indigenous. Figures of trust among the victims, they can be relied upon to persuade the victims not to resist, to compound the fear of disobedience the victims already feel.

Because their functions are so various, collaborators come in all shapes and sizes. Some travel in or near the orbit of jew power; others are drawn from the lower orders and geographic peripheries. One common, though unappreciated, influence upon their actions is their ambition. While some collaborators hope to stave off threats to their communities and others are true believers, many are careerists, who see in collaboration a path of personal advance.

Whether the payment is status, power, or money, collaboration promises to elevate men and women, if only slightly, above the fray.

Though ambitious collaborators like to believe that they are adepts of realpolitik, walking the hard path of power because it is the wisest course to take, their realism is freighted with ideology. Careerism has its own moralism, serving as an anesthetic against competing moral claims. Particularly in the United States, where ambition is a civic duty and worldly success a prerequisite of citizenship, enlightened anglers of their own interest can easily be convinced that they are doing not only the smart thing, but also the right thing. They happily admit to their careerism because they presume an audience of shared moral sympathy.

The Jew-State Solution

john_kerry

Secretary of State John Kerry’s Remarks on Middle East Peace:

Throughout his Administration, President Obama has been deeply committed to Israel and its security, and that commitment has guided his pursuit of peace in the Middle East. This is an issue which, all of you know, I have worked on intensively during my time as Secretary of State for one simple reason: because the two-state solution is the only way to achieve a just and lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians. It is the only way to ensure Israel’s future as a Jewish and democratic state, living in peace and security with its neighbors. It is the only way to ensure a future of freedom and dignity for the Palestinian people. And it is an important way of advancing United States interests in the region.

Despite our best efforts over the years, the two-state solution is now in serious jeopardy.

The truth is that trends on the ground – violence, terrorism, incitement, settlement expansion and the seemingly endless occupation – they are combining to destroy hopes for peace on both sides and increasingly cementing an irreversible one-state reality that most people do not actually want.

Today, there are a number – there are a similar number of Jews and Palestinians living between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. They have a choice. They can choose to live together in one state, or they can separate into two states. But here is a fundamental reality: if the choice is one state, Israel can either be Jewish or democratic – it cannot be both – and it won’t ever really be at peace. Moreover, the Palestinians will never fully realize their vast potential in a homeland of their own with a one-state solution.

Now, most on both sides understand this basic choice, and that is why it is important that polls of Israelis and Palestinians show that there is still strong support for the two-state solution – in theory. They just don’t believe that it can happen.

After decades of conflict, many no longer see the other side as people, only as threats and enemies.

Kerry’s assertion that “Israel can either be jewish or democratic” touched a nerve, causing yids everywhere to flip their lids.

The context provided by Kerry is testimony to the inordinate power jews wield outside Israel, right now, an open admission that a pro-jew mindset prevails at the highest levels of USGOV and distorts policy-making in the most profound ways. The unhinged response from jews – inverting the situation, imagining themselves victims of powerful enemies – serves mainly to distract from the fact that, as usual, the entire argument is all about what’s best for the jews.

As infuriated jewess Mona Charen put it in Stupid Anti-Israel Policy, there are so many ways the stupid goyim could be better serving the jews:

The world is aflame with threats and instability, yet Kerry and Obama, petulant leftists with an Israel fixation, could not resist this last kick in the teeth to the region’s sole democracy. They knew it would harm Israel’s moral standing – now the delegitimizers can claim that Israel is in violation of “Security Council” resolutions – and give an unmerited win to the Palestinians. Perhaps most infuriating of all, they claim to be doing it all for Israel’s own good.

Kerry presents “democracy” and the jew ethnostate as two mutually exclusive ideas, as if jews will some day have to choose one or the other. Yet the two ideas are best understood as complementary outgrowths of the same whatever’s-best-for-the-jews premise. The political reality is that the jews have their ethnostate, and its form of government, whatever anyone might call it, has been and will continue to be decided exclusively by jews. When apologists like Charen emphatically advertise Israel as “the region’s sole democracy” all they’re really saying is that they see it as the duty of everyone else’s “democracy” to serve this jew ethnostate. The “two-state solution” Kerry prefers is moot. It’s not good enough for the jews, who see no compelling reason to concede anything to their enemies. They already have a “two-state solution” – their ethnostate and a USGOV which serves them too.

Ezra Pound is purported to have noted that “democracy is now currently defined in Europe as a country run by jews”. It fits this jew ethnostate, overtly run by jews, just as well. Where Kerry and other “petulant leftists” get hung up is in the pretense there is any more sensible definition.

The Jewed Establishment is Anti-White

bill_oreilly_defends_one_jew_narrative_while_attacking_another

In their own ways Bill O’Reilly and Bill Clinton have just highlighted the defining character of the political zeitgeist – a clash of establishment narratives.

Referring to Trump’s selection, Clinton said, “He doesn’t know much. One thing he does know is how to get angry White men to vote for him.”

Referring to the jewed establishment’s response to Trump’s selection, O’Reilly said, “The left wants power taken away from the White establishment and they want a profound change in the way America is run.”

Trump and his campaign manager responded to Clinton. Trump, as usual, refused to even say the word White. Conway, rather than noting Clinton’s invective was anti-White, simply accepted his premise and responded in kind.

The jewed establishment’s response to O’Reilly has been to shit on O’Reilly for having the temerity to defend the establishment, specifically because he imagines it is White. Bill O’Reilly rose to the defense of white privilege in America’s presidential voting process, from The Washington Post, and Bill O’Reilly, in Defending “the White Establishment,” Nails a Liberal Vision of America, from Salon, capture the gist of this response.

Both little Bill scandals are merely reverberations of the recently completed hyper-racialized selection process. To recap, the Clinton team went with an anti-White strategy. Meanwhile, the Trump team wanted White votes, but wouldn’t even speak to Whites as such.

The jewsmedia, which in effect served as part of the Clinton team, has been pushing two conflicting narratives before, during, and now after the campaign.

The first narrative – decrying “White supremacism”, “White privilege”, “institutional racism”, and even lowly working-class White voters – is based on the premise that the current establishment is White. The second narrative decries the same thing – Whites, specifically because they are White – but is based on the premise that Whites have been emboldened by Hitler 2.0 to rebel against the current establishment, which alarms organized jewry and the jewsmedia precisely because they perceive this as a threat to jews.

There is some truth in both narratives. The apparent contradiction is resolved by putting them together.

The Clintons and the Trumps and many other individual members of the establishment may look White but their words and behavior aren’t pro-White. They all recognize the difference White votes can make, but none will so much as speak explicitly in favor of Whites. And even when the Conways or O’Reillys do use the word White, it’s only because they have internalized and are regurgitating the anti-White premise they are responding to, not to defend Whites as Whites.

The larger truth is that jews aren’t White, they’re anti-White. The establishment is anti-White because it is so thoroughly jewed. That’s why members of the current establishment, whether they look White or not, won’t say anything positive about Whites or negative about jews. Those who do dare are denounced and excluded.

Jews currently rule and are pushing a genocidal anti-White agenda. This is what’s making Whites angry. The jewsmedia reports every aspect of this situation, they simply report it from a point of view entirely sympathetic to jews and other non-Whites, and antipathetic to Whites.

On Dog Whistling

again

Based on what Conway says at Harvard, and what Forbes writes about the Kushner-orchestrated electoral college strategy, it is evident the Trump campaign did discreetly but deliberately go after the White vote. This is the big jew taboo team Trump violated. Thus team Clinton’s strategy was, for the entire campaign, to screech that this violation alone disqualified Trump. And they still are.

All the political insiders understand that dog whistling – saying what White voters want to hear – is taboo. They all know it is a jew-created, jew-enforced taboo. The Trump campaign took the attitude, “screw this, we love jews but we need these White votes, so we’re going to use dog whistles”. They did it only because they were determined to win, not because they genuinely intended to serve White political interests. Wanting to serve Whites as Whites would be unacceptably “racist”, on this point the Trump and Clinton teams agree.

In fact, the White voters never get what the dog whistling politicians promises – that’s the other, less recognized half of what dog whistling means. The first half, the pandering, the yids screech and flip their lids about. The second half, the betrayal, the jews only concern troll (as they did before the election) or cackle and gloat about (as they’re doing now).

The jewsmedia could have done more to counter Trump’s Rust Belt strategy. They could have put him on the spot about White genocide, forcing him to take a position on this specific “conspiracy theory”, as they did with David Duke and the KKK. They could have called attention to Trump’s old mentor, Roy “McCarthyite” Cohn, or his good friend, Jeffrey “underage pussy-grabber” Epstein. They didn’t. Why not? Because even though any of it would have likely diminished Trump in the eyes of White voters, it would have done so only by exposing just how thoroughly jewed Trump and the current regime is and always has been.

Fake News, Real Power

cy_vz-euqaaps7v-jpglarge

ADL jew Etzion Neuer twits: “Today’s @NYDailyNews front page confirms what @ADL_NY knew: it has been far too busy in the last month. #fighthate”

Neurotic jews busy painting mangled swastikas. The jewsmedia and lobbyists busy screeching, “FIGHT HATE!!1!”. Kikeservatives in government and academia busy serving the jews:

Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA) and Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) have introduced the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act which according to a statement on Casey’s website is meant to “to ensure the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) has the necessary statutory tools at their disposal to investigate anti-Jewish incidents” on college campuses.

Citing a recent FBI report stating over half of all reported hate crimes in 2015 were of an anti-Semitic nature, the senators claim their bill is necessary to provide the DOE with the “firm guidance” it needs to determine “what constitutes anti-Semitism.”

The bill’s definition of “anti-Semitism” is directly culled from a 2010 State Department memo, which The University of California Board of Regents considered adopting as official policy, before ultimately agreeing to a softer condemnation of “Anti-Semitism, anti-semitic forms of anti-Zionism,” but not a blanket ban on anti-Zionist expression itself.

Unfortunately, the bill also proposes the following as examples of hate crimes:

  • Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust
  • Demonizing Israel by blaming it for all inter-religious or political tensions
  • Judge Israel by a double standard that one would not apply to any other democratic nation

No other other group has government departments specifically dedicated to promoting their interests. No other group enjoys the privileged protection of speech codes and laws which specifically condemn and even criminalize their political opponents. Only the jews.

The Jew Normal

oyyyy_veeeeeeyyyy

A major theme for the jewsmedia this selection cycle, especially after getting a result they didn’t expect, has been to cry about how out of the ordinary this or that aspect of Trump’s campaign has been. The current year’s new normal is, “wow, just wow”, and we can expect more of the same for the next four current years.

Of course, many aspects of the Trump campaign were extraordinary, but a truly frank discussion of the who, what, and why isn’t something you can actually find in the jewsmedia unless you read between the lines. Trump’s many transgressions were, vaguely speaking, violations of political correctness, which his supporters actually liked. The loudest screeching and deploring of these violations came from the jews, who created this web of taboos in the first place.

At heart the conflict is over what constitutes normal, it’s about who gets to define what normal means. The jews, tremendously amplified by the jewsmedia, see themselves and their screechy, neurotic sensibilities as normal, and have for decades foisted their preferences and priorities onto everyone else. Whites, on the other hand, voted for Trump exactly because they don’t like this jew normal. They imagine he might actually change it and return them to a less jewed culture they innately perceive as more natural.

A clear example of this struggle over the definition of normal is occurring right now. The cabal behind The Bannonocaust perceives it as just one battle against the “normalization” of Trumpism. It’s an unselfconscious inversion of the term. The idea is that anyone treating Trump like any other candidate or president-elect has ever been treated is behaving abnormally. How many times do the jews have to announce that Trump is Hitler all over again, “anti-semitic”, fueling “anti-semitism”, or let’s just say he’s promoting “conspiracy theories”, “racism”, “xenophobia”, “intolerance”, “hate”, “oyyyy veeeeeeyyyy”. What is it about all these jew buzzwords the stupid/crazy/evil goys don’t understand?

The tone of this screeching isn’t new. What’s new is the volume and the clarity with which the battle lines are drawn. The jews are at war with Whites. To see it just take a peek behind the jewsmedia curtain:

Elad Nehorai: “In case you don’t think antisemitism is officially normalized in the US, take a look at @PeterBeinart’s feed.”

Peter Beinart: “In name of Jewish safety, America’s most powerful Jewish groups normalized Trumpism. And now it’s turning on us.” Beinart links his own article in Haaretz, America’s most influential Jewish groups have prioritized Netanyahu over U.S. Jews’ safety.

David Corn: “Read this: White Nationalists Celebrate Trump’s Victory and Early Appointments. (Don’t Normalize Trum) #DONT” Corn links Pema Levy’s article in Mother Jones, White Nationalists Celebrate Trump’s Victory and Early Appointments.

The Bannonocaust, Hoax Culture

bannonocaust

In the wake of the selection of Donald Trump on the 8th of November a fresh wave of malformed swastikas began showing up in various jewy haunts across America. Despite the lame nature of these so-called “hate crimes”, and the long history of fakery, each new incident is soberly and earnestly reported by the jewsmedia not only as if it were an example of real hate but as the most disturbing crime ever committed. After each furtive act comes another very public act, the theatre echoing with cries for more money and more laws to combat “hate”. And even when some later report reveals yet another hoax there is no connecting of dots, no recognition of the larger pattern. Thus by very deliberate acts of both commission and ommission the jewsmedia creates and sustains this “hate” hoax culture.

Of course many people see through this charade, and when jewsmedia forums permit comment many critics do in fact speak out. On social media sites it is increasingly common to see these tall tales of “hate” not only called out but mercilessly derided. Alas, corporate social media is ultimately just another more insidious form of jewsmedia – owned, operated or otherwise ultimately marching to the tune called by jews. Critics are squelched with a circular argument: opposition to the jewsmedia narrative is by definition “hate”, especially if you notice the jews. Bad goy. Shut it down.

Amidst the swastikas comes an even grander hoax, The Bannonocaust, a jewsmedia construct through and through. Before social media platforms were widely used the journalist cabal used to strategize and coordinate via email. Nowadays they conspire more broadly and openly on Facebook and Twitter. On the 13th, when Trump tapped Steve Bannon as his chief strategist, the yids who operate the jewsmedia immediately flipped their lids. Before any articles had even appeared prominent jewsmedia figures were screeching anti-White invective into their collective Twitter echo chamber, decrying Bannon’s supposed “anti-semtism” and advising each other to gird for battle.

Jamil Smith: “Steve Bannon, an anti-Semite whose website is a hub for white nationalism, will be the @WhiteHouse chief strategist. We are in trouble.” Charles P. Pierce: “Let us be clear. The hiring of Steve Bannon as a WH policy adviser is exactly the same as hiring David Duke. Please don’t normalize this.” Jonathan Alter: “Bannon’s bigotry must be front and center in all coverage of him for as long as he has power.” David Corn: “Hey, media, if the words “white supremacist” or “racist” are not in the lede of your stories in Stephen Bannon, you’re doing it wrong.”

This is how the jewsmedia narrative on Bannon was constructed. Over the course of the next week it oozed out of various outlets in longer forms. On the 14th, David Rothkopf’s Trump Appointments Send an Ominous Signal appeared at Foreign Policy. In it Rothkopf laid out the jew versus White nature of the conflict fairly clearly. A similar, prescient article by Sarah Posner and printed by Mother Jones in late August, How Donald Trump’s New Campaign Chief Created an Online Haven for White Nationalists, was also widely cited and recirculated as an explainer.

Much of the broader print media and television coverage was less explicit. Generally the jewish source of the hostility toward Whites has been more muted, the accusations against Bannon reduced to unspecified “bigotry” and “racism”. Jay Reeves’ article, AP EXPLAINS: Election brings white nationalism to forefront, is typical in this regard, presenting Whites as the source of the trouble:

White nationalists often support the idea that white people are under attack in the U.S., and need protection from the growth of minority and immigrant groups. Adherents sometimes use the hashtag #whitegenocide on social media to promote their belief that the future of the white race is in peril. They see diversity as a threat to fight, not a goal to embrace.

In spite of such whitewashing, the fundamentally jewy nature of the Bannon controversy is made obvious in other ways. Self-righteously jewish screeching to fire Bannon has manifested quite literally. A representative of the bagel republic “found” yet another swastika, and the jewsmedia literally helped attach blame for the “hate crime” to Bannon. On the 18th, the “conservative” wing of organized jewry officially and collectively condemned Bannon’s appointment.

As with Trump, Bannon has long surrounded himself with jews and supported zionism – a jew-specific form of parasitic nationalism. Several jews have come forward to vouch that Bannon is a good goy, but none makes as compelling a case for it as Bannon himself. The Wall Street Journal ran an article quoting their interview with Bannon on the 18th:

Here are a few things you’ve likely read about Steve Bannon this week: He’s a white supremacist, a bigot and anti-Semite. He’s a self-described Leninist who wants to “destroy the state.” He’s associated with the “alt-right,” a movement that, according to the New York Times, delights in “harassing Jews, Muslims and other vulnerable groups by spewing shocking insults on social media.”

At first Mr. Bannon insists that he has no interest in “wasting time” addressing the accusations against him. Yet he’s soon ticking off the reasons they are “just nonsense.”

Anti-Semitic? “Breitbart is the most pro-Israel site in the United States of America. I have Breitbart Jerusalem, which I have Aaron Klein run with about 10 reporters there. We’ve been leaders in stopping this BDS movement”—meaning boycott, divestment and sanctions—“in the United States; we’re a leader in the reporting of young Jewish students being harassed on American campuses; we’ve been a leader on reporting on the terrible plight of the Jews in Europe.” He adds that given his many Jewish partners and writers, “guys like Joel Pollak, these claims of anti-Semitism just aren’t serious. It’s a joke.”

He blames the attacks on a lazy media, noting for instance that the “renegade Jew” line wasn’t Breitbart’s. Conservative activist David Horowitz (also Jewish) has taken responsibility for writing the headline himself, in a piece about Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol.

What about the charge of white supremacism? “I’m an economic nationalist. I am an America first guy. And I have admired nationalist movements throughout the world, have said repeatedly strong nations make great neighbors. I’ve also said repeatedly that the ethno-nationalist movement, prominent in Europe, will change over time. I’ve never been a supporter of ethno-nationalism.”

“Our definition of the alt-right is younger people who are anti-globalists, very nationalist, terribly anti-establishment.”
But he says Breitbart is also a platform for “libertarians,” Zionists, “the conservative gay community,” “proponents of restrictions on gay marriage,” “economic nationalism” and “populism” and “the anti-establishment.” In other words, the site hosts many views. “We provide an outlet for 10 or 12 or 15 lines of thought—we set it up that way” and the alt-right is “a tiny part of that.” Yes, he concedes, the alt-right has “some racial and anti-Semitic overtones.” He makes clear he has zero tolerance for such views.

Even before Bannon spoke out Dylan Byers was begging the question, “What’s the end-game of the anti-Bannon crusade?” What’s the point of any jewy hoaxing and screeching? As with so much of their swastika drivel The Bannonocaust is nothing more than a hoax – an attempt by jews who already dominate the political discourse to mold public opinion, to influence the political agenda, to grab more public funds and government-backed privilege for themselves. It’s not “nazis” doing this. It’s the jews.

In the News: Screeching Jews and Their Taboos

a_jews_election_nightmare

Ex-ADL chief: Trump’s ‘raise your hand’ gambit was deliberate, Nazi-style ‘fascist gesture’, The Times of Israel, 7 March 2016:

“It is a fascist gesture,” Foxman said. “He is smart enough — he always tells us how smart he is — to know the images that this evokes. Instead of asking his audience to pledge allegiance to the United States of America, which in itself would be a little bizarre, he’s asking them to swear allegiance to him.”

. . .

“What scares me is he’s broken all these taboos and it’s helped him,” Foxman said. “That frightens me. It frightens me that there are all these things that we’ve worked so hard on, but one after another he breaks these taboos and the people applaud him and come back for more.”

Despite Foxman’s fears, the ultimate taboo remains unbroken by Trump and the bulk of his White supporters, who have so far demonstrated little explicit recognition that jews are the driving force behind the “political correctness” they so despise. Indeed, though Trump knows the elites are thoroughly jewed and hostile to Whites, and could expect applause for speaking that truth, he has not done so and likely never will, because his family is very much a part of that jewed, hostile elite.

The irony is that jews are doing what Trump won’t. In reaction to his rise they have provided several pointed op-eds expressing their alienation and antipathy in explicit in racial terms, specifically against Whites. Here are three examples.

Trump’s America is bad, very bad, for the Jews, The Times of Israel, 26 February 2016:

In other words, Trump’s base tends to be white, male, undereducated, and struggling financially. But that doesn’t necessarily explain Trump’s appeal. After all, if economic self-interest were their only motivation, such voters might well support Bernie Sanders, who blames big business and crony capitalism for the inequality that has suppressed wages and decimated the working class.

But put it all together, and you get a chunk of the electorate for whom the New America is hardly America at all. If you were to create a composite from the Pew stats, you’d have a white guy who has almost nothing in common with the kinds of characters in Master or Transparent — that is, brown, Jewish, nontraditional, college-educated, pluralistic. These shows don’t represent to him what’s new about America, but what’s wrong with America. And worse, the seeming success of these characters, he feels, comes at the expense of “real” Americans like him.

Trump’s real ideology is murky, but his targets are clear: Immigrants bring problems and take away jobs. Muslims represent the worst kind of threat: an internal one. America is corrupt and fallen, and by opening its doors to foreigners, tolerating difference, and insisting upon “political correctness,” it has suppressed the very people — that is, middle-class white families — who once made the country great.

Donald Trump Is Winning Because White America Is Dying, Huffington Post, 29 February 2016:

Noam Chomsky, the renowned scholar and MIT professor emeritus, says that the rise of Donald Trump in American politics is, in part, fueled by deeply rooted fear and hopelessness that may be caused by an alarming spike in mortality rates for a generation of poorly educated whites.

“He’s evidently appealing to deep feelings of anger, fear, frustration, hopelessness, probably among sectors like those that are seeing an increase in mortality, something unheard of apart from war and catastrophe,” Chomsky told The Huffington Post in an interview on Thursday.

. . .

“[They] are sinking into hopelessness, despair and anger — not directed so much against the institutions that are the agents of the dissolution of their lives and world, but against those who are even more harshly victimized,” he said. “Signs are familiar, and here it does evoke some memories of the rise of European fascism.”

Trump’s Triumphs Demolish Netanyahu’s Fortress GOP Strategy, Haaretz, 3 March 2016:

The Jews will run away from Trump because he scares them. Because his demagoguery is ominous, his willingness to slash and burn anyone standing in his way is disturbing, his tendency to incite his supporters against other ethnic groups from rapist Mexicans to terrorist Muslims, is a source of deep anxiety. Beneath the great wave of popular support for Trump one can make out with increasing clarity the dark undercurrents of rage and resentment and xenophobia that is often seen morphing into White supremacism and abhorrence of African Americans and then, on the outskirts, bad old hatred of the Jews. The allusions to Germany in the 1930’s are absurd, no doubt, but nonetheless surfacing with ever-increasing frequency.