Many Jews object to the phrase “America First.” So what country should Americans put first? Israel?
Perhaps America should put good values first. So whose values? Biblical values? So what would those Biblical values teach?
If you take your religion seriously, you have to put your religion before your nation, right? It helps when your religion and nation are inextricably tied together. I don’t know why any Protestant nation would let in anyone who wasn’t Protestant, why any Jewish nation would let in anyone who wasn’t Jewish, why any Catholic nation would let in anyone who wasn’t Catholic, and so forth. The more divided a country, the weaker.
Christianity is flexible. For hundreds of years, it was part of the rise of the white West. Over the past 100 years, it has been a major force for the destruction of the white race.
Judaism’s conception of the Jew is that he is to be a blessing wherever he goes in the world. Until recently, I took that for granted. I took it for granted that Jews are a blessing for every country that hosts them. Now I’m more open to different perspectives.
One thing that shook me up about 16 years ago was when an Orthodox Jewish therapist friend said that for a week in graduate school, they were required to read anti-Jewish writings and a few hours into the assignment, she became anti-Jewish, and was greatly relieved when the assignment ended.
The Jews I know are excellent doctors, dentists, lawyers, accountants, professors and writers. They’re making America a better country. They generate jobs. They pay taxes and raise responsible children.
Jews tend to fear other monotheistic religions and gentile nationalisms even as they embrace their own Jewish nationalism.
The stronger the gentile’s racial, religious or national identity, the more likely he is to have negative views of aliens in his in country. Strong Americans, for instance, are not going to take kindly to their fellow citizens putting the welfare of another country ahead of America.
Until the 1960s, most American Jews, and most American minorities, felt strong social pressure to put America first publicly. Since the multicultural revolution of the 1960s, it has become more acceptable for minorities to put their own concerns first ahead of the country.
A healthy country requires its citizens to put the country first in their national identity.
A normal identifying Jew is likely to put Jews first.
So how will Jews respond to the growing nationalism around the West? By publicly putting their country of citizenship first. In their hearts and in their private deeds, they might still put Jews first, but in a healthy nationalistic country, there is strong social pressure for all citizens to put their country first in public.
In Pico-Robertson, I saw a home flying on its roof a tiny American flag and a giant Israel flag. In a healthy nationalistic America, it would be unacceptable to publicly put another country’s welfare ahead of America.
As long as America remains a dominantly Protestant country, Jews do not have to fear genocide as no Protestant country has slaughtered its Jews and Protestants tend to look at people as individuals rather than as representatives of groups. Every year, however, America becomes less Protestant, thus placing Jews in increasing danger.
For the past 500 years, the WASP has been the Jew’s best friend.
I just watched this New York Times documentary: “Aftershock: How Terrorism Sways Politics”
In it, political scientist Nona Mayer says that the National Front unstitches France’s social fabric.
That’s a common complaint against Jews from the right. As organized Jewry for the past 200 years in the West has always sided with increasing minority rights at the expense of the majority, as organized Jewry has always sided with multiculturalism over the strengthening of the goy’s racial, religious and national identity, the traditional right has seen Jews as unstitching the traditional social fabric.
Who is Nona Mayer?
She is also interested in activism associations, the racism and the anti-Semitism .
Alongside its research activities, she participates in the network RAXEN (Racism and Xenophobia European Network) and comparative investigation “Group Focused Enmity” led by Professor Wilhelm Heitmeyer (Bielefeld)
If I were a citizen of France, I would vote for the National Front.
Whites were told to abandon any racial identity to set an example for the other races, to teach them how not to be tribal.
Growing up, I dreamed of a truly colorblind America. I thought, eventually, groups like the NAACP & La Raza would wither away.
I was wrong.
NAACP, BLM, La Raza, AIPAC – tribal identity groups are only getting stronger in Diversity America. It’s time that Whites created their own.
In a Multi-Ethnic Empire like Diversity America, the only way to advance your interests is to tribe up. And Whites do have Shared Interests.
I would have preferred that none of us were in tribal or racial groups. I kinda liked being a right-wing, deracinated libertarian guy.
Whites want an end to Affirmative Action because we are the targets of it. We are punished. It’s our Shared Interest to end it.
Instead of trying to shame other groups into abandoning their Shared Interests, which will never work. We should organize & protect our own.
It’s ok for Blacks to have Shared Ethnic Interests and the NAACP. It’s ok for Hispanics to have La Raza. Whites need their own groups, too.
The ideal strategy is to be Ethnocentric while demanding competing groups be Universalist. It’s a win-win. For you.
In simulations, Ethnocentrics who preferentially cooperate w/ co-ethnics always beat Universalists in the long run.
Blacks want more Affirmative Action. Whites want less. Once you abandon Universalism you see these are just competing Ethnic Interests.
Blacks aren’t bad ppl for wanting more Affirmative Action.
And lions aren’t bad for eating the antelope.
Still not in the antelope’s interest.
Once you realize most pleas to Universalism are just another Ethnocentric Tactic – the world makes a lot more sense.
There’s no Universal Moral Right or Wrong here.
Just the inherent conflict of Nature.
Genetics in action.
Ethnic strife is inevitable in a multi-ethnic empire as ppl defect from universalism and embrace tribalism.
Steve Sailer writes: “You can impose some functional Universalism as long as other groups’ Ethnocentrism not off limits to criticism.”
In 2012, Brenton Sanderson wrote a series of essays on “The War on White Australia: A Case Study in the Culture of Critique“:
When the Australian government announced in December 1938 that 15,000 more refugees would be admitted over the following three years, the Catholic Advocate warned that:
If the present policy of admitting large numbers of Jewish immigrants is continued, we are likely to be confronted by a rapid increase in anti-Semitism. … The Jews are not simply an international religious body like the Catholics: they are a nation with well-marked characteristics, both mental and physical, with their own virtues, vices and talents, and with their peculiar loyalties. … It is the sense of this difference which has caused friction between the Jew and his hosts throughout the ages, and which has constantly brought tragedy to the Jews.[xii]
Another leading voice of opposition to Jewish immigration to Australia around this time was the patriotic Australia First movement which was inaugurated by the Sydney businessman W.J. Miles. When the movement was constituted in 1941 it issued a manifesto which declared that: “The Jewish practice of racial segregation and exclusiveness makes the assimilation of Jews into the Australian community an impossibility; … people who are determined to remain racially aloof should never be admitted in large numbers to Australia.”[xiii] Following Miles’ death in 1942, the Australia First movement came under the leadership of P.R. Stephensen, an Australian cultural nationalist, literary figure and Rhodes Scholar. In an article in the Australian Quarterly in 1940, Stephensen observed that “Wherever Jews wander they take not only Semitism, but also anti-Semitism with them. … As has been said elsewhere, ‘they chose to be Chosen, and must take the consequences.’ … It is solely because the Jews insist on preserving their racial identity that they are a problem in every country in which they settle.”[xiv]
Stephensen noted that Jews always exerted disproportionate influence in the countries they resided in because, unlike their neighbors, they are highly-organized, which “guarantees their survival and prosperity wherever they go” and “undoubtedly supplies the inspiration and model for Communist Party organization in all countries, including Russia and Australia.”[xv] Given that Stephensen started his political life as a founding member of the Australian Communist Party, he was well placed to comment on the significance of Jewish influence within Communist Party organizations. The Communist Party of Australia itself was to be dominated throughout the Cold War period by Jews like Laurie Aarons, its secretary between 1965 and 1976.
Deeply concerned at increasing Jewish power and influence in Australia, Stephensen declared:
The answer to Semitism is anti-Semitism; and when Jews gain too many advantages for themselves, by their practice of self-segregation, they invariably find (and surely should expect to find!) that the majority of non-Jews will resent, and eventually will curb, the privileges which the Jews have won for themselves by concerted sectional action. That is what will inevitably occur in Australia sooner or later, if a large colony of self-segregating Jews is allowed now to establish itself in our community.[xvi]
For Stephensen, Jewish ethnocentrism and endogamy were at the heart of the Jewish problem, and the solution to this problem was simple:
It is well known that there are many Jews who are good citizens, honest and cultured, despite the reputation of the generality of their kind of being financially “tricky”, unscrupulous, and parasitical. That there are intellectual and sensitive Jews is also as well-known as that there are many “Flash Yids” who degrade and debase public culture. No case can be made against Jews generally, except … that their insistence on racial self-segregation is anti-social, considered from the point of view of the community as a whole. We cannot concede to them in Australia a right which, if conceded in perpetuity to other types of immigrant … would lead to the sectionalizing of the community and its disunification. … The remedy is that the Jewish Race should abolish itself, by becoming absorbed in the common stream of mankind. [Otherwise] we others, who are so strictly excluded from the Jewish community, have at least a reciprocal right to exclude them from ours.[xvii]
In retrospect, Stephensen accurately predicted the fragmentation of Australian society that was to occur under the malign influence of multiculturalism – a Jewish-originated and promoted ideology designed to preserve Jewish particularism, while demographically, politically and culturally weakening the majority White Australian population. In the Jewish promotion of racial and cultural “pluralism” in Australia, Jews have, exactly as Stephensen predicted, caused the “sectionalizing” and “disunification” of the Australian community.
In 1939, Stephensen successfully sued a Communist Party newspaper for libel when it accused him of “being a propagandist for the Nazis.” When asked in court whether, through his writings, he had “sedulously endeavoured to stir up anti-Semitic feeling in this country” he replied: “Not as you put it; but as a Gentile, I am opposed to Jewish influences in Australia.”[xviii] Stephensen was the editor of the Australia First publication Publicist which published articles by a range of distinguished writers who were forthright in their views about the dangers of substantial levels of Jewish immigration. One of these contributors, Rex Williams, wrote that
Australians would be silly to ignore the warnings of 5000 years of Jewish history – a history of penetration by guile, followed by expulsion by force from almost every land in which Jews have settled. It is no use blaming gentiles for “persecuting” Jews! The Jews, by their malpractices, ask for it – and get it. They are never loyal to any country in which they settle: they are loyal only to their “international” and “non-national” Race. And that is how they get themselves into trouble, in Australia, as everywhere else.[xix]