Tag Archives: steve sailer

The First and Foremost Detrimental Alien Cries Out in Pain

shlomo_patron_saint_of_refugees

On Friday Trump ordered a suspension of entry by aliens from certain countries for 90 days, entry by alien “refugees” for 120 days, and entry specifically from Syria indefinitely – proclaiming that such alien entry “would be detrimental to the interests of the United States”.

Even before this executive order was announced jews were screeching that Trump and other kikeservatives had neglected to sufficiently emphasize the jew-first moral of their WWII narrative. The screeching intensified with jews big and small slithering forth to jewsplain how Trump’s order threatened their sensibilities and interests as jews.

Beside the condemnations issued by organized jewry, social media was also full of individual jews directly invoking their muh six million narrative in support of their muh refugees agenda. The general thrust of the argument: It is irrational and immoral for you goyim to defend yourself from detrimental aliens, because that might be bad for the jews.

As one particularly noxious little jew, Lucas Neff, put it: “When you say ONLY Muslim countries, it is the exact same as saying it’s ONLY the Jews. Do you not get it??? Do you honestly not get it??” And: “I keep seeing ppl breathe a sigh of relief and say: “It’s ONLY Muslims countries. Not us.” AS A JEW, AS A HUMAN, I WANT TO SCREAM.” A few days earlier the scream was: “My wife is a permanent resident w a green card. Fuck u for voting 4 him. I do not forgive u. I will never forgive u.”

The jewsmedia social media echo chamber sent six gorillion twits along similar lines. Here’s a sampling.

Julia Ioffe: “I have to say: My family came here as refugees. You’ll never meet prouder Americans, or know how much this breaks my heart.”

David Rothkopf: “My father, his family came here as refugees too. If yours did, say so…let others understand how core that is to our country’s greatness.”

David Rothkopf: “Someone needs to take Trump to the Statue of Liberty and let him read the words at its base. They’re what make America great.”

(In the process of deconstructing America jews like to pretend their toxic tribemate Emma Lazarus was a Founding Father and her bit of doggerel praising “wretched refuse” should be treated like the Zeroth Amendment.)

Sen. Cory Booker: “On Holocaust Remembrance Day: never forget that the U.S. denied Anne Frank & her family entry into America as refugees. #RefugeesWelcome”

David Rothkopf: “Tweet of the day.”

At times there was even some lame pushback from alt-jews.

Seth Barron: “Trump reduced the number of Muslims who can come to the US in the next 90 days from 1.5 to 1.3 billion. #Holocaust #EmmaLazarusWept”

Will Saletan: “So no worries if we were to ban, say, just the Jews from countries that are populated by some violent Jewish extremists, right?”

Steve Sailer: “What hysteria over “Islamophobia” is mostly about is Jewish paranoia over completely hypothetical anti-Semitic persecution.”

Will Saletan: “Yes. So hypothetical. http://auschwitz.org/en/”

Steve Sailer: “Perfect illustration of my point: America can’t have a pro-American immigration policy because Auschwitz.”

In fact the jew agenda to destroy White America was already in motion well before WWII. America can’t have a pro-American immigration policy for the same reason American political discourse consists of so much screeching about “nazis” and “the holocaust”.

Because jews.

Sailer Forgets

Last year Sailer was writing about jewish influence on immigration. See here and here. He may have written more, and more recently. I don’t know, I’ve lost interest in keeping up with him since he moved in with Ron Unz.

Now Sailer has amnesia. He wonders, Why did we do this to ourselves?

The best excuse is that American elites did this to America in a fit of absentmindedness.

But, there is also — and in this case perhaps more significant — the massive dereliction of duty by elites. The more the evidence piles up that they ought to apologize to us, the more they will make it dogma, punishing expressions of skepticism with social, career, and legal penalties, that this was a Great Idea.

He realizes there’s an us and a them. He doesn’t want to think about that. Instead he’s thinking about excuses. I think the more evidence piles up that all the jews’ “Great Ideas” are poison, the more the jew-excusers insist that we’re poisoning ourselves.

revilo_oliver_the_jewish_strategy

The Country Club Thing

As an addendum to Junk Bonds and Corporate Raiding as Ethnic Warfare I quoted Rob Eshman’s use of the jewish narrative to excuse jewish behavior:

It’s not complicated, really. Poor little Jordan wanted to show those WASPs whose country clubs he couldn’t join that he was smarter, richer, better. What he failed to understand is that just about every Jew, every minority, shares the same impulses. But only a select few decide the only way to help themselves is to hurt others.

Sailer’s response to Eshman was:

I really am going to have to write about the country club thing one of these days. I’ve found an Anti-Defamation League report from a half century ago on country clubs that’s pretty interesting.

I can’t wait. Of course, the country club thing is only one of several common tropes in jewish tales of woe specific to America. Other, similar tropes focus on the relatively brief period during which there were informal limits on the number of jews admitted to some universities (discussed here) and informal restrictions on where they could work or reside (ala Gentleman’s Agreement, discussed here and here). The irony is that the jews are able to tell their one-sided woe-is-me version of this history only because the “WASP” defense of themselves and their institutions was not strong enough.

The explanation for jewish hostility is less complicated than either Eshman or Sailer will admit. It’s racial animus. The jews are parasites, hyper-aware of their otherness, the distinction between themselves and their host, in both body and mind. Conflicts of interest between them and their hosts are unavoidable. Jewish excuse-making and guilt-tripping is one mechanism for managing it. They understand the animus. They wish and indeed need to monopolize the explanation of it, to spin it in their favor.

The jewish narrative, stripped to its essence, is: YOU aren’t US, YOU should feel bad about that and try harder to please US. The double-think takes root in hosts with universalist, or at least pluralist tendencies. It expresses itself as a form of willful confusion about who US is: B-but, WE are all US, let US try harder to please US!

To see through this, you must be willing to think about what US means, and especially in biological terms, as the jews do. At least a few fans of Sailer’s “race realism” and “human biodiversity” are on the cusp of such understanding. As one commenter wonders:

What is this Jewish problem or hangup about country clubs? Freedom of association is a natural and okay thing. If WASPS didn’t want to have them, that’s their right. It is a PRIVATE club, not PUBLIC property like a library. Why couldn’t Jews just have their own clubs? Did it REALLY bug Jews that much that WASPS didn’t prefer them over their own kind? Why would they? Do Jews need validation so badly?

Why indeed. It is only a mystery as long as you pretend that jews are part of your US, or even wish to coexist with your US. They don’t. You are there to be infiltrated, manipulated, exploited. For their own good. This is why the suicide meme is so insidious. It is premised on, relies on, and even adds to the muddled thinking about who US is, abetting the “suicide” it purports to deplore.

While waiting on Sailer to share his little ADL tidbit, I’d like to recommend something Revilo Oliver wrote. It indicates not just how well established, how essential this “country club thing” is in the jewish psyche, but also how fruitless it is to go searching through history for ways to excuse jewish parasitism.

The following text comes from Oliver’s The Jewish Strategy:

III. THE JEWISH STRATEGY AT WORK: ANCIENT ALEXANDRIA

In the early years of our era, the Jews were then (as now) busy selling religion and revolution to the natives, and that is undoubtedly what the Emperor Claudius meant in 41 A.D. when, in his letter of warning to the Jews in Egypt (preserved in a papyrus now in the British Museum, R Lond. 1912), he described them as “the fomenters of a universal plague.”

Claudius’ phrase is the best description of the biologically innate nature of Jews that I have seen. I hope this does not startle you; if it does, I recommend a little objective observation of Jews engaged in collective action.

The publication of these papyri in the British Museum stopped with Volume V, just short of the group of papyri, beginning with #1912, that deal with Jews and Christians in Egypt. These, however, were edited in a separate volume by H. Idris Bell, London, 1924, which can be found under his name in any good library. Why the official series stopped where it did (and has never been continued), I do not know. One suspects there was a Jew in the woodpile.

P. Lond. 1912 is a long papyrus fragment excellently preserved. It is a private copy of an edict by Claudius that was posted in public places in Alexandria in 41 A.D. and is complete. It is in Greek, not Latin, because in Egypt every literate person (Greeks, Jews, Egyptians, and the comparatively few Romans who were there as governors and military commanders) knew Greek, whereas only the Roman officials knew Latin at all. Bell believes that our Greek text was translated from Claudius’s Latin, but I am certain that the text is what Claudius himself dictated to a secretary in Greek. Like every educated Roman of his day, Claudius spoke and wrote Greek fluently, and furthermore he was something of a scholar and wrote his two major historical works (now lost) in Greek. This Greek text contains stylistic peculiarities that are characteristic of Claudius’s mentality, but would probably have been smoothed away by a translator.

Claudius, who was born in 10 B.C., was the son of the male child with whom Livia was pregnant at the time that Augustus married her. If that child was legitimate, it was the son of Livia’s first husband and the younger brother of the Emperor Tiberius. If the child was illegitimate, as many suspected, Augustus was probably the father, but never acknowledged the paternity. Claudius’s mother was the daughter of Mark Antony. Claudius in infancy suffered from poliomyelitis or a similar disease that left him with a partly paralysed foot, some impediment in his speech, and muscles of the face and neck subject to spastic contractions. Regarded as unfit for public life, he devoted himself to historical and antiquarian studies, becoming both erudite and pedantic. He was quite intelligent, but timorous, excitable, and gullible, especially toward persons who showed him some attention and professed friendship during the first fifty-one years of his life, when he was regarded as an awkward and ridiculous political nullity, the butt of his nephew Caligula’s wit. Among those who thus acquired his gratitude and confidence were a number of clever Jews of great wealth and influence in Rome. Among these was Marcus Julius Agrippa (note the purely Roman name; a grandson of the Herod who appears in many versions of the Christ story), who, when the barbarian mercenaries rioted after the assassination of Caligula and, while plundering the palace, found old Claudius hiding in a closet and dragged him out to proclaim him emperor, by subtle and crafty machinations and bribery managed to get Claudius installed and recognized as emperor by the Senate. Claudius rewarded him generously, and was always under the influence of the prominent Jews in Rome. That is what makes his pronouncement so significant.

Alexandria was, of course, founded by Alexander the Great as a Greek city in conquered Egypt, and it became under his Greek successors, the Ptolemies, the capital of that country. Its position as the only real harbour in Egypt added to its great prosperity, and naturally Jews came streaming in from their colonies all over the civilized world. Alexandria became the New York of the ancient world, i.e., the largest Jewish city. The Jews took over two of the five quarters of the city for their ghettoes, from which they unofficially but effectively excluded white people, but naturally insisted on pushing their way into all the other quarters of the city and making themselves obnoxious in their normal ways. Jews always betray the countries in which they are feeding on the natives, so naturally, when Augustus attacked Egypt, the Jews naturally betrayed the Greeks, who remained loyal to Cleopatra, the last of the Ptolemies. Augustus punished the Greeks for their loyalty by depriving them of their local self-government, and rewarded the Jews for their treason with many special privileges, including the right to have a kind of Jewish government of their own.

The Jews, now riding high, naturally pushed the Greeks around more than ever, thrusting themselves into the gymnasia and other Greek institutions that were traditionally for Greeks only and inciting riots whenever they were so “persecuted” that the Greeks did not recognize them as a vastly superior race. The result was an endless series of civil disturbances that the Romans were powerless to prevent because no government dared to revoke Augustus’s grant of special privileges to the Jews. In the second year after Claudius became emperor, there was another one of the perennial riots in Alexandria that became virtual civil wars in the city, which was the most populous in the ancient world.

The Greeks of Alexandria despatched an embassy of their leading citizens to Claudius to request restoration of their local government and explain the cause of the riots, and the Jews, of course, sent an embassy of their own to snivel and whine about being “persecuted” by the wicked goyim.

The edict of Claudius of which the papyrus is a copy is addressed to the Greeks of Alexandria and announces his decision concerning the requests made by their envoys.

Omitted here are the contents of the document, both in the original Greek and Oliver’s translation.

The translation could be polished a bit, but it will show the meaning. The sentence in which we are particularly interested, delineated in detail, reads:

But if (they do) not, I shall in every way wreck vengeance upon them inasmuch as (=on the grounds that) they are persons who foment (=incite, propagate) a universal (=ubiquitous, found everywhere) disease (=pestilence, plague) of the oecumene (i.e., the settled and inhabited world, as distinct from jungles, steppes, and deserts).

You will have noticed that Jews were behaving normally in Alexandria, not only whining about being “persecuted” because of their Love of God while pushing their way into every place where the despised goyim hope to have a little privacy from them, but even illegally importing fellow parasites to prey on the white cattle, just as the Jews are constantly importing thousands of their congeners into the United States, not only across the border from Canada, but by ships that land thousands of the dear creatures at Red Hook on Long Island, whence they are carried by limousine to the New Jerusalem commonly called New York City, in open defiance of the immigration officers, who know about it but dare not intervene.

The country club thing is a parasitic thing. It is a pattern of behavior in jews which can be traced back as far back into recorded history as you care to go.

marty_lipton_joe_flom_michael_milken_ivan_boesky

Junk Bonds and Corporate Raiding as Ethnic Warfare

In PBS: The “Greed Is Good” 1980s as a war on anti-Semitism Steve Sailer waxes sarcastic over the narrative recounted in The Lucky Sperm Club: Jews, M&A and the Unlocking of Corporate America – “the inside story of the development of the mergers and acquisitions movement in the 1980s — a phenomenon that has ruled global commerce ever since”.

Sailer writes:

Back in the 1980s when I believed everything I read on the Wall Street Journal op-ed page, the junk bond mergers & acquisition boom was often justified as a war on anti-Semitism in American business life. Eventually, after Ivan Boesky and Mike Milken went to jail and junk bonds contributed to the early 1990s recession, you stopped hearing that interpretation quite so much, but it’s still out there. Certainly, nobody is much interested in debunking it.

From PBS.org, here’s a preview of a new book that revives the argument that the 1980s leveraged buyout bubble was payback for discrimination against Jews. It’s by John Weir Close and is called A Giant Cow-Tipping by Savages: The Boom, Bust, and Boom Culture of M&A

Close, the author, provides the jewish version of how the mergers and acquisitions culture started:

M&A was driven by two Jews, Marty Lipton and Joe Flom, who had simultaneous epiphanies about how to take advantage of new government regulation

America was still an agglomeration of ghettos: Italians knew Italians, Jews knew Jews, Poles knew Poles, Irish knew Irish, WASPs barely knew any of them existed and the Cabots spoke only to God.

“When I came to New York in the ’70s, the WASP aristocracy still reigned,” the Lucky Sperm Club’s Shapiro recalls. “You didn’t see an Asian face above Canal Street. You didn’t see a black face in a law firm unless it was the mailroom. You certainly didn’t see an Hispanic face. Swarthy Italians and Jews? They were not people you dealt with.”

As recently as the 1970s, Jews and all others not of the white Anglo-Saxon Protestant ascendancy were still excluded from any position of real power at the bar, on the bench, at banks and in boardrooms.

Yet again, as happened so often in their history, the Jews somehow found their own methods to carry them past such barriers, and once those blockades were destroyed, other demographics followed.

But it was primarily Jews who first became expert in taking over companies against the will of their existing executives. The white-shoe law firms and elite investment banks found this simultaneously distasteful and tantalizing in the same way medieval merchants viewed the lending of money at interest. Both groups were discouraged from joining in one of the most profitable enterprises of their day: the old merchants by, among other things, an ecclesiastical ban on the practice of usury; the new lawyers, by the establishment’s social codes of behavior. Again, the Jews found themselves in control of an industry that then perpetuated the stereotype: the omnipotent, venal Machiavellian, hands sullied by the unsavory. But the business of takeovers paid the rent. And then some.

This is the jewish narrative. Jews oppressed by Whites. Who forced them into finance! Then the jews prevailed and turned their narrative into a template for other “minorities” – neutralize the White oppressors so everyone can pay their rent (to the jews, of course).

Sailer notes that it was Ivan Boesky and Michael Milken, two more jews, who invented the “junk bond” fraud that helped finance their takeovers of corporate ownership. I wonder who the jews were who actually started it all by lobbying for and writing the government “regulations” all these other jews took advantage of.

At any rate, it was only the prosecution of Boesky and Milken in the 1990s which broke through into mainstream consciousness. The jew-dominated media was busy spinning the whole affair not as an ethnic war, but as an internecine corporate struggle, a hopelessly complex story best reduced to a parable about the excesses of greed. One clear indication that it was in fact part of an ethnic war came when Milken retained professional hyper-jew Alan Dershowitz for his legal defense. Throwing off the cloak and doubling down on the jewish privilege and aggression which had characterized the raiding all along, Dershowitz immediately went on the offensive. Aiming not so much at the courtroom as at the court of public opinion, Dershowitz leveraged the jew-dominated media to finger “anti-semitism” as the source of all the trouble.

Any perception that Dershowitz lost his battles – whether to keep Milken out of prison or to transfer blame for jewish malfeasance to “anti-semitism” – is wrong. Milken was sentenced to just 10 years in prison for the incalculable damage he had wrought. He served only 22 months. Purportedly disgraced, Milken remains rich and famous. He continues to advertise himself as a financier. At the time, the culprits were described in disapproving but deracinated terms, like “Den of Thieves“, and jews like Dershowitz howled that this was an example of jews being wronged. Today jewish power is even greater and more overt, so now the story is that jews were waging war because they had been wronged.

In fact, by the 1980s the jews had been waging an unrequited war for decades. Sailer points out that the “battle for Revlon was written about endlessly in the 1980s as a struggle between the dying WASP past and the new money meritocracy” even though the raider (Ron Perelman) and raidee (Charles Revson) were both jews.

This is no surprise to students of the jew. Henry Ford’s The International Jew well documented the distasteful qualities and startling extent of jewish power as of the early 1920s, before their hegemony was complete. The jews used the same playbook in the 1920s and 1980s as they do today. First they pillory the goyim for imagining jews are pillaging them. Then they pillory the goyim for making the jews pillage them. Pillory and pillage, pillage and pillory. Even when it’s nothing more than jews fighting jews over who gets to pillage the goyim, their age-old canard is that they’re fighting the discrimination and intolerance of an omnipotent “anti-semitic” conspiracy.

Sailer concludes with a lame plea of ignorance:

I don’t really know why the Revlon takeover of 1985 was seen in the media as such a milestone of Jews overcoming WASP discrimination. It just was.

In summary, the Revlon takeover as a plucky triumph over anti-Semitism is a good example of how malleable accounts of one’s people’s past oppression can become for the purpose of justifying dubious dealings in the present.

The corporate raiding was but a mopping up operation, a battle that could take place only because other political and social battles had been fought and won in prior decades. It was the jews’ overwhelming financial and media power, and partial control over business, which made mopping up on the corporate front possible. They prevailed mainly by default. Their whining about “WASPs” notwithstanding, in the US the jews have never faced any comparable opponent as aware, cohesive or ruthless, who clearly saw themselves at war and with whom.

The dominance of the jewish narrative today is an indication of jewish dominance not only over media, finanace and business, but over the very thoughts of non-jews. Yet the jewish narrative doesn’t spring from jewish dominance. Just the opposite. It is only an uncompromising belief in their righteousness, in the moral legitimacy of their cause, through which any people have any prospect of prevailing in the long term.

Armed with such beliefs the jews have, time and again, cultivated the opposite in their hosts – unawareness and disorganization – and thus prevailed. The very first step to combat jewish parasitism is recognize it as such. Jewish lies are not harmless, but are more properly regarded as the acts of a hostile adversary, an essential element of their stealthy struggle to attain and maintain dominance.

trust_me_goyim

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.

ronald_lauder_FORBES_APRIL_001-new-page-001

The Nature of Jewish Power

Steve Sailer at Taki’s, on Jewish Wealth by the Numbers:

Similarly, in Israel, you can write openly about one of the more interesting and important subjects of our era: Jewish wealth. For instance, the Israeli-American centrist think tank Jewish People Policy Institute reported in 2010: “World Jewry today is at a historical zenith of absolute wealth creation.”

Forbes Israel, the Tel Aviv offshoot of the American business magazine, has a cover story on Jewish billionaires. The Israeli edition has made up a list, drawn from Forbes‘s overall ranking of the world’s 1,426 billionaires, of the 165 richest Jews in the world.

Overall, n/a states that 140 of the Forbes 400 rankings of richest Americans, or 35 percent, are Jewish.

Jews are usually said to make up about two percent of the US population and perhaps three percent of the older generation that dominates the Forbes 400. Therefore, Jews are roughly 17 times more likely per capita to make the Forbes 400 than is the rest of the American population.

This 35 percent Jewish figure has been fairly stable since n/a started his analyses in 2009. The first careful analysis of the Forbes 400 was performed by Nathaniel Weyl back in 1987, when he found 23 percent were Jewish. That suggests a sizable increase in Jewish representation among plutocrats over the last generation. Yet bear in mind that’s only one data point from the past. I’ve been casually following the Forbes 400 for 30 years, and membership shifts frequently due to various bubbles.

n/a has also done a quick and dirty look at Forbes‘s global list of 1,426 billionaires (#1, by the way, is Lebanese-Mexican Carlos Slim). Unlike Forbes Israel‘s estimate of 11 percent Jewish, n/a comes up with over 17 percent. Note that this is pretty much of a SWAG for Eastern Europe, where it’s harder for an Anglophone to look up biographical information. Still, this estimate would mean that per capita, Jews are a little over 100 times more likely to become billionaires than the rest of the human race.

Lists highlighting jewish power cause hyper-jew Jeffrey Goldberg, at Bloomberg, to cry, Stop With the Jew-Ranking Already! (the original title, evident in the URL, was dear-jewish-media-please-stop-making-lists-of-jews):

The Jerusalem Post has just published its annual ranking of the world’s 50 most influential Jews, and I’m sorry but also somewhat relieved to report that I don’t appear on it this year.

I’m sorry because one of my goals in life is to inhabit the fever dreams of neo-Nazis, and nothing gets a neo-Nazi going more than the specter of supernaturally powerful Jews. I’m relieved because, who really wants to be on a target list? At a certain point, the Post should just provide home addresses to make the roundup even easier.

Speaking of neo-Nazis: It isn’t entirely clear to me why the Jewish media (not the “Jewish-dominated media” of those aforementioned fever dreams, but the press that actually cover matters of interest to Jews) fetishizes list-making. The Forward, a national U.S. Jewish weekly, publishes a list of the top 50 American Jews

‘Jewish Power’

So the lists published by the Post and the Forward always leave me with a bit of a bad taste in my mouth. Why are these publications aping a practice of non-Jews — singling out Jews for their special prominence in society? . . . The phenomenon of disproportionate Jewish representation in many high-profile fields . . . combined with ancient and deeply embedded anti-Semitic ideas that are still prevalent in some parts of the world, suggests that they should resist the urge to quantify “Jewish power.”

As with hyper-jew Jonathan Chait, Goldberg makes no attempt to refute the facts. Instead they crack jokes. Nervously. Jews like this realize, and realize well, that jewish power is based on lies and fraud.

npfh-logo

The Root of “Hate”

A post by Steve Sailer, Michelle Malkin (Oberlin ’92) on Hate Hoaxes and Hate Hysteria, prompted the following anonymous comment:

If it’s a ‘hate crime’ to falsely accuse Jews of abducting Christian boys and using them for ritual slaughter, it’s a ‘hate crime’ to accuse whites of committing all sorts of horrors they haven’t.

“Hate” is a jewish construct. They’ve weaponized it.

It is possible the comment above is a troll, made by someone with a keen sense of irony. More likely it came from a mind, and made it past a moderator’s mind, wholly unconscious of the double-think it represents.

According to jews, all accusations against jews are false accusations. The jewish “blood libel” narrative is a perfect example. The presumption is that every accusation of abduction and murder ever made against jews is false. Furthermore, they regard any rejection of this or any other part of their narrative as a “hate crime”. There is no “if” about this.

Yet the jewish tales about “blood libel” are incredibly one-sided. They are a libel against Whites. A hoax. A deliberately fabricated falsehood made to masquerade as truth. Likewise with their “holocaust”.

Here are some recent examples of jewish “hate” hoaxing I’ve run across. A more deliberate and thorough search would undoubtedly produce a much longer list.

Manalapan, N.J. Overrun With Anti-Semitic Graffiti, Other Messages Of Hate « CBS New York, Sep 2012.

Zach Tennen, Michigan State University Student, Not Attacked Because Of Religion, Police Say, Aug 2012.

Why would Jews vandalize a Holocaust memorial?, Jun 2012.

Jewish man gets caught red handed spraying anti-Jewish hate messages in New York, Dec 2011.

Lawyer suspended for falsely claiming cop called him anti-Semitic slur, Dec 2011.

Jewish student caught painting Swastikas on her own door then claiming Anti-Semitic Attack, July 2010.

Jews aren’t just going along with the “hate” hoax hysteria. They created the whole “hate” paradigm. They’ve been using it to milk Whites longest and hardest. In comparison everyone else are copy-cats, and pikers at it to boot.

The double-think in the comment quoted above is typical not only at Sailer’s blog, but also in the similarly blinkered punditry he cites – Michelle Malkin, Gucci Little Piggy and Nicholas Stix. The common theme in these forums and elsewhere in the “race realist” sphere is that blacks are the main perpetrators and “white liberals” are their evil genius co-conspirators/enablers. Stix actually claims “[t]he role of Jews on the multicultural campus is presently ambiguous” and that Tim Wise is White.

They deplore “hate” but don’t confront it’s source. Why?

Well, Stix is a jew, Malkin is married to one, and Sailer believes he’s part-jew. How many of the “white liberals” they finger are similarly compromised? I’m uncertain about GLC, but I know the rest of them pretend jews are “white”. It seems to me that nothing enables the “hate” hoaxing as much as this delusion does.

And it is a delusion. The jews themselves are very clear on the most salient fact about “hate”: jews are the victims and Whites are their oppressors. In other words, jews are the exact opposite of White. The premise that Whites “hate” non-Whites, and never the reverse, is only a generalization of the premise that Whites “hate” jews, and never the reverse.

P.S. Someone left a link to Oberlin Microaggressions — I’m the “white, Jewish professor” at GLP. Read it. It’s a good window into how the “white jew” game is played:

I’m sorry if you read this post as anti-Semitic. That was never the intent. You were identified as “white” because it contextualizes your use of the word in question. You were identified as “Jewish” because it was used in your justification of the educational merit and personal sensitivity that you had in the situation. I do not want this to turn into an attack but rather a way to further dialogue and be able to have productive conversations.

From one white Jew to another, I can only assume that you, being Jewish and a professor of higher learning, have background knowledge about systems of oppression and that you have some understanding about allyship and understand the importance of listening to oppressed and targeted groups.

peter_turchin

Sweeping Explanations and the Jews

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

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

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

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

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

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

Then he retreats into sarcasm.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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