R. Yitzhok Alderstein: ‘What I Learned at the Ulmer Institute Inaugural’

Rabbi Adlerstein writes:

Decades ago, too long ago for most of us to remember, Jews and African-Americans enjoyed a close strategic alliance. The marriage broke up horribly. Blacks felt that they had been dealt with paternalistically, and also resented a relationship that was one-sided. The Jews were doing the giving; they could not reciprocate. (The mussar seforim speak about how people, when they cannot discharge an obligation, will come to deny that obligation rather than deal with the crushing weight of the debt.) Jews, watching this, felt that they had been kicked in the rear by ingrates. The relationship ended, at least on anything close to its previous scale.

Watching the return of open racism during this presidential campaign (with blacks, Latinos and Jews all targeted), some people scratched their heads. Shouldn’t the old alliance be resurrected?

Last night I learned that it could be. A room full of a mix of blacks and Jews enjoyed each other’s company, besides honoring a project that brought them together. Perhaps the African-Americans sensed the new reality. This time around, an embattled Israel and her supporters needed them more than they needed the Jews. Perhaps that is the new equalizer.

Whatever the case, the easy, comfortable conversation was a throwback to a much earlier time. That conversation was laden with expectation that, at least in Los Angeles, some new bridge-building had moved from the drawing board to the construction stage.

The other thing I learned is that we inadequately train our rabbis in public speaking. If they want to do it well, they need to listen to black preachers.

There never was a close alliance between blacks and Jews. There have been at various times, a strategic alliances between various members of the coalition of the fringe against the white core.

You can’t find two groups more dissimilar than blacks and Jews. Ashkenazi Jews have an average IQ of around 110 while American blacks have an average IQ of 85. These two groups are like oil and water. They will never mix.

Black oratory is based upon appeals to emotion aimed at the 85 IQ crowd. Judaism is a cerebral religion aimed at a high IQ crowd. I’m not sure rabbis can learn much from studying black preaching.

Blacks and Jews have different interests. On occasion, they can form a strategic alliance, but they are fundamentally different peoples.

Blacks have no fundamental interests in Israel just as Jews have no fundamental interests in blacks. The occasional black or Jew for whatever reason may take an interest in the other, but the two groups have fundamentally different interests.

Political scientist Robert Weissberg explained “The Relationship Between Blacks and Jews” in a year 2000 talk at the American Renaissance conference:

If you looked around our cultural landscape and tried to find two groups with different values that venerate different things, who worship at different altars, it is hard to find two groups more different than blacks and Jews. Jews are obsessed with education, blacks destroy it. If you’ve gone to school in the inner city, you know that not only do they hate the idea of learning, but they assault their teachers and physically destroy their schools.
When blacks move into a neighborhood, the first people out are Jews. Jews did not invent white flight but we perfected it. As far as intermarriage and social exchange, there’s almost zero. They just don’t mix. Jews are not into crime. The sorts of things that blacks specialize in — muggings, assaults, rapes — are not a Jewish predilection.

How Jews really relate to blacks is something Jews hardly talked about except when they are amongst themselves. When Jews get together in a safe place and talk about blacks, they will use the term “schvartze.” When you go to Leo Rosten’s Joys of Yiddish, he’s very careful in what he says. With “schvartze”, he becomes tight-lipped. “A black person, a negro.” That does not begin to depict what the term means among Jews. There may be a degree of affection, as in, ‘I hear Mrs. Schwartz got a new schvartze.’

It is not necessarily a negative word. It’s not the same thing as nigger. If you inserted the word ‘nigger’ to achieve some lexiconic variety, Jews would be genuinely offended. There can even be a degree of affection in schvartze. As in, ‘Ahh, I heard Mrs. Schwartz got a new schvartze. Oh, how nice.'”

When you use the term ‘schvartze’, it always implies cognitive inferiority. The mental picture of a stupid black embedded in the term schvartze is true even with pro-civil rights [liberal] Jews… Adding the phrase ‘dumb schvartze’ is superflous, reserved only used for the most egregious stupidity. Invisible baggage likewise includes gullibility, emotional excitability, and a weakness for here-and-now conspicuous consumption. Violence, especially inter-personal, alcohol-induced mayhem, is also associated with schvartze. The image that comes to the mind with Jews when you say ‘schvartze’ is simple-minded, impulsive, easily seduced by trinkets. This is extremely close to the traditional Southern image of blacks, almost identical to what many Southerners would privately say about blacks… This is continually reinforced by daily experience, such as in integrated public schools.

We had a procession of cleaning ladies [in New York]. Growing up, I honestly believed that all black people come from a thing called The Agency. We’d hire black cleaning ladies and invariably they’d steal and drink the liquor and my mother would come back and say, ‘I’m calling up The Agency and getting another.’ Very few Jews of my generation had any other contact. We had a procession of handymen and cleaning people come to my house.

It was always believed that any Jew can ultimately out-smart any schvartze except save being confronted by a demented gunman. Despite immense cultural chasms, Jews held themselves as innately capable of finessing blacks thanks to their superior wits, verbal talent, and a mastery of black psychology. The unmatched success of Jewish ghetto merchants and Jewish civil rights leadership positions proclaim this truth. Even today Jews may secretly brag about their success in beguiling blacks in contentious interpersonal relationships. People sometimes ask me, ‘What did you do when they showed up as a demonstration to your office?’ This happened to me one time. A bunch of angry young blacks came to my office… I said, ‘I just relied on the wisdom of my ancestors. I gave them a little rope-a-dope. I moved around. I said this, I said that. Within half an hour, they were fine. I sold one a suit and several new jewelry and they were happy. They got a deal from Mr. Weissberg.’

Where personal manipulation might fail, the storehouse of survival tactics sufficed exceedingly well. Black pathologies were bearable, especially since most black mayhem was self-inflicted. Jews might even profit from these disorders as merchants or nanny state therapists. Threatened Jews can flee deteriorating neighborhoods, enroll their children in private schools, hire security guards, co-opt black leaders financially, or otherwise escape.

Jews see no conflict between righteously defending black criminals as political prisoners and living in fortress-style buildings.

On the one hand, Jews dread blacks physically. When Jews see blacks walking down the street, they feel tremendous fear. Yet they dutifully pay the danegeld (extortion money).

For most Jews, it is the white goyim who pose the most threat. Contrary fact-based argument fall on deaf ears. Like the schvartzes, the Chinese [and Japanese] are never called goyim.

Blacks are incapable of such well-organized horror [as the Holocaust] unless directed by nefarious whites… A full-scale pogrom is beyond their capacity. Can you imagine blacks systemically rounding up thousands of Jews or even keeping tabs on Jewish neighborhoods? Assess enemies by capabilities, not intentions… The schvartze pose minimal risk. They’re too stupid.

Peter Novick writes in his book The Holocaust in American Life:

Matter-of-fact references by blacks to their “ghetto” (a century-old usage) are condemned as pernicious attempts to steal “our” Holocaust. Let Ted Turner, denouncing what he regards as Rupert Murdoch’s autocratic behavior, refer to Murdoch as “fuhrer”, and the ADL (I’m not making this up) sends out a press release demanding an apology for Turner’s having demeaned the Holocaust. The greatest victory is to wring an acknowledgment of superior victimization from another contender. Officials of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum tell, with great satisfaction, a story of black youngsters learning of the Holocaust and saying, “God, we thought we had it bad.”

…there was never much of a black-Jewish alliance on the communal or organizational level. There were a great many individual Jews who over the years had worked on behalf of blacks, but, with some exceptions, they were leftist and liberal activists who had little connection to the Jewish community. This was certainly true of the Jewish lawyers and student volunteers who worked with the black movement in the South in the 1960s…During the McCarthy era, Jewish organizations repeatedly pointed out that it was a fallacy to infer from the fact that a great many (perhaps even a majority of) Communists were Jews that a great many, let alone a majority of, Jews were Communists. The logic was impeccable with respect to alleged Jewish pro-Communism, and equally impeccable with respect to alleged Jewish civil rights activism.

…From the 1970s on, the growth sector in the Jewish organizational world consisted of old and new “schrei gevalt” agencies, while those with other agendas, like the American Jewish Committee and the American Jewish Congress, declined. The Anti-Defamation League, together with the enormously successful Simon Wiesenthal Center, bombarded Jews with mailings announcing new anti-Semitic threats. (The ADL was especially assiduous in giving wide circulation to anti-Semitic remarks by obscure black hustlers and demagogues, thus vastly increasing their audiences.) Of the dozens of local Jewish newspapers in the United States, all but a handful were organs of local Jewish Federations, whose success in fundraising was directly proportional to the level of anxiety among potential contributors.

…Once the Holocaust became centered in Jewish consciousness, and to the extent that it became centered, it provided a language and framework that deepened anxiety about American anti-Semitism, and a spiraling interaction came into play. Once one starts using imagery from that most extreme of events, it becomes impossible to say anything moderate, balanced or nuanced; the very language carries you along to hyperbole. A journalist who supported black community control of schools was told by Norman Podhoretz in 1969 that he was one of those who wanted to “shove the Jewish people back into the gas ovens.” “The ovens” recurred again and again. In Brooklyn, a militant protester against busing for school integration insisted that “we wouldn’t be led to the ovens this time.”

…As the Holocaust moved from history to myth, it became the bearer of “eternal truths” not bound by historical circumstances. Among other things, the Holocaust came to symbolize the natural and inevitable terminus of anti-Semitism: first stop, an anti-Semitic joke; last stop, Treblinka. Every loudmouthed Farrakhan acolyte was the opening act in the Julius Streicher show.

…In the late sixties and early seventies, at the same time that the arrival of the “new anti-Semitism” was announced, American Jewish organizations were changing their priorities and their posture, a change that has so far proved permanent. It is probably best described as an inward turn — a shift away from the previously dominant “integrationist” perspective and toward an emphasis on the defense of distinctive Jewish interests, a kind of circling of the wagons…

The qualifications for certification as a Righteous Gentile [by Yad Vashem] had little connection with the everyday meaning of “righteousness”: following accepted moral norms and doing what people could reasonably be expected to do. The criteria were to have risked one’s life, and often the lives of the members of one’s family as well, to save another; to have displayed self-sacrificing heroism of the highest and rarest order. At Yad Vashem nominees for Righteous Gentiles are carefully screened. Often the process takes many years, and the most rigorous standards are applied. (Thus fishermen who transported Danish Jews to Sweden in 1943 are not eligible because they were paid.)

Posted in Blacks, Jews, R. Yitzhock Adlerstein | Comments Off on R. Yitzhok Alderstein: ‘What I Learned at the Ulmer Institute Inaugural’

Far-right nativists eye Kris Kobach for Donald Trump’s vice president

MSNBC: Far-right Donald Trump supporters are eyeing Kris Kobach, an immigration hardliner and a leading figure in the Republican assault on voting rights, as a potential running mate for the presumptive GOP nominee.

The two appear to have similar worldviews. For decades, most modern Republicans have talked about the need to shrink government in order to protect liberty. By contrast, Trump and Kobach are more likely to emphasize “security” – both on the border and at the polls. Call it big-government conservatism.

Kobach, the Kansas secretary of state, endorsed Trump in late February. And last month Kobach said Trump’s idea for getting Mexico to pay for a border wall came from him. The plan involves cutting off remittances from the U.S. to Mexico, which inject about $20 billion a year into the Mexican economy. In response, goes the thinking, Mexico would agree to fund the wall, which is projected to cost about $10 billion, as the cheaper option.

“Mr. Trump was receptive to that idea. And I think he’s an excellent negotiator, and he looks for opportunities to put pressure on opposing parties in negotiations, and this fits the bill,” Kobach told the Topeka Capitol-Journal.

Experts have said the idea would only drive remittances onto the black market and could needlessly alienate an important regional partner.

The nativist website VDARE.com has promoted Kobach as a veep selection for Trump. Peter Brimelow, the site’s founder, called Kobach’s endorsement of Trump “a very brave move,” adding: “Kobach for veep.” The Southern Poverty Law Center describes VDARE, which has regularly published writing by white nationalists and anti-Semites, as a hate group. It’s named for Virginia Dare, said to be the first English child born in the New World.

In March, Kobach served as a de facto surrogate for Trump in an interview with PBS, in which he appeared alongside Marco Rubio supporter Henry Barbour. Kobach praised Trump for “taking the strongest position that we’ve ever heard a presidential candidate take on illegal immigration” and attacked Rubio as a supporter of “amnesty.”

The performance drew raves from VDARE. “In a GOP party that was living up to its professed principles, people like Kobach, and not Barbour, would be running things,” a writer for the site enthused, describing Kobach as “a stalwart warrior against the illegal immigrant invasion.” The post also appeared at the neo-Nazi site The Daily Stormer, whose founder has endorsed Trump.

Last week, the vice presidential speculation went more mainstream with a tweet from Mickey Kaus, a former writer for The New Republic and Slate who has adopted an increasingly hard line on immigration.

Kobach, a former aide to then-Attorney-General John Ashcroft, was the lead author of immigration laws passed by Arizona and Alabama in recent years, which are seen as the strictest immigration measures in the nation. The laws require law enforcement to try to determine a person’s legal status during any legal stop if the officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person is undocumented.

Posted in America | Comments Off on Far-right nativists eye Kris Kobach for Donald Trump’s vice president

Pat Buchanan – Trump Is The Great White Hope!

Posted in Pat Buchanan | Comments Off on Pat Buchanan – Trump Is The Great White Hope!

Feds Divert MILLIONS To ‘Slush Fund’ That Fuels These Liberal Activist Groups

Daily Caller: Department of Justice officials diverted millions of dollars slated for victims of the 2008 housing meltdown to politically favored third parties, including “left-wing radical groups,” according to the chairman of a House of Representatives oversight subcommittee.

Rep. Sean Duffy, a Wisconsin Republican and chairman of the House Financial Services oversight and investigations subcommittee, said Friday the officials “skimmed” off three percent from mortgage-related bank settlements. This created what he called a $500 million “slush fund” that could be steered toward favored groups.

“The first objective of a settlement is to make sure that we have victims who are made whole,” Duffy said, referring to millions of Americans who lost their homes during the meltdown that led to the Great Recession of 2009. “If you’re diverting money away from victims and sending it to third-party activist groups, you have victims who are being harmed not just once, but a second time.”

Justice officials were long able to “skim 3 percent of any settlement money into their own account to for the most part spend it the way they see fit,” Duffy told participants in the media briefing hosted by the Cause of Action Institute, a nonprofit legal watchdog group.

Posted in America | Comments Off on Feds Divert MILLIONS To ‘Slush Fund’ That Fuels These Liberal Activist Groups

Anti-Trump Protests In San Diego

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* John Derbyshire’s “Cold Civil War” is starting to heat up. Trump supporters have a sense of dispossession–symbolically on the currency and on the stage (Hamilton) and now in the streets. Anything that reinforces that sense of dispossession (“It’s not my country anymore”) will help Trump.

* Civil society collapses when citizens have nothing in common. Neither long term interests nor a common culture and set of values. The USA is slowly crumbling down before us.
Trump could very well be the last chance to veer course, but what are you gonna do when half of the population consists of hostile aliens (including African Americans)?

* I wonder if the Mexican vs “Anglo” conflict is turning out to bear some similarity to what happened between the Serbs and Croats after the end of the Cold War. Those two Balkan populations lived together quite amicably (after WWII, in a dictatorship) and had a high rate of intermarriage until something happened that seemed to be a contest for resources mobilized by historical grievances. Only *some* similarity, since the Serbs and Croats are likely genetically indistinguishable even by Jayman’s standards and the rate of intermarriage between Mexicans and whites is I think pretty low outside Texas. Also, for now at least, the USG state is of course far too strong for anything resembling open conflict to break out.

* I’m not suffering economically but I remember one day being in a shopping mall and realizing that I felt like I was living in a foreign country – the America of my youth was gone. Am I wrong to feel that way? Is it “racist” and therefore evil to oppose having the historical population of your country replaced by people from other cultures, some of whom are violently incompatible with Western civilization? Are we morally obligated to open our borders because anything less would be “racist”?

Now I can understand that if you are a Mexican and you have only brought half of your friends and family over, you might be upset at the idea of someone closing the border before you can bring the rest of your village to join you, but this doesn’t seem to be a particularly righteous anger, just people who are upset at having their cheese moved, like the French labor demonstrators who are unhappy that the government wants to break their iron rice bowl jobs-for-life. In that sense, the demonstrators are the reactionary conservatives – they want things to stay the way they are (porous borders) and are angry at the person who is proposing change.

* The days of grabbing a cop’s gun out of the holster are largely past. Nearly all cops in big departments now utilize retention holsters, which make it impossible to pull the gun from the holster unless the cop depresses a small latch with his index finger as he’s drawing. Easy and fast for the cop, impossible for someone else.

About the only way to get a cop’s gun today is if he has already drawn it and then loses control of it.

Secondly, and I don’t mean to be pedantic here, I hate the phrase “it went off.” Guns don’t “go off;” people discharge them.

* Part of it is that Trump has been in the public eye for decades and is a natural and well practiced on camera and not easily flustered by low blow questions, but the other part of it is that the rules of the game have changed. Trump know (instinctively) what the new rules are but the other side has no clue and is still playing by the old rules, so they are getting their asses handed to them. The things that used to run up the score in their favor are suddenly own-goals in the new rule book, but they still keep kicking the ball into the net because they don’t know what else to do – they’re confused. The reporters (and all of Trump’s political opponents and their paid consultants) are like wizards with magic wands that always worked in the past – they cast their spell and wave their wand – “No tax returnium disclosurum” and instead of lightning bolts emanating from the wand and knocking Trump to the ground the way that they expect, nothing happens or else the bolts just bounce back at them and sting them instead.

* Trump is attracting support from people who want to keep their own nation.

That’s pretty clearly what this is about–nationalism. But a particular nationalism–white Americans actually expressing nationalism. That is what is making the non-natives restless.

This analysis is made crystal clear by the protestors themselves. Even though it’s bad “optics” for persuading actual American *voters*, the protesters just can’t help themselves and they bring *their* flags. These aren’t folks who are necessarily anti-nationalist. They are just against Americans and in particular white Americans having any nationalism. White people must just submit.

At root the protesters’ demand is that they be allowed to live among and loot white people. All of these people have their own race\ethnic group. The people from “immigrant communities” have their own nations. It’s just that white people create *better* nations–more orderly, more law abiding, more productive, more prosperous, more free. And these people demand that they be allowed to live in the white nation, grab the fruit that white people grow for themselves.

Trump supporters–quite morally and ethically–say “no”. They want to have the orderly, free and prosperous nation that their own efforts produce and pass it on for their children and grandchildren to enjoy.

Explaining Trump’s protestors is as simple as that: Parasites protesting against the application of antibiotics.

* The thing about Trump that really makes him a wild card in this election is precisely that he just tramples (trumples?) over the ordinary rules of what a Presidential candidate is supposed to say. This completely disarms and confuses his opponents — including his legion of opponents in the media — who have nothing in their playbook to counter such talk. They have come to realize that ratcheting up the usual invective does no good — they are already at 11, having gone long ago to Hitler to no apparent effect — and have no idea what to do next.

Trump has now turned his trash talk on Hillary and Warren, using “Crooked Hillary” almost as an Homeric epithet, and deriding Warren as “Pocahontus”. Usually, even surrogates of Presidential candidates would avoid such statements like the plague, because they were thought to tarnish the candidate himself.

What Trump has to hope for is that his sort of trash talk gets normalized in the public’s mind by the time of the election. Ironically, his opponents, who are now starting to engage in the same sort of talk in counterattack, do as much as Trump himself to render such things pretty ordinary.

My guess is that Trump’s election prospects mainly hang on whether, over the next 5 months, Trump can manage to recalibrate and detoxify his sort of rhetoric enough that it doesn’t repel too many of the voters. Ordinarily, such things take many years, even decades, but he has already made remarkable progress (is that what it is?) toward this end.

* Nothing makes Trump more popular than watching foreigners who are waiving foreign flags and speaking in foreign languages disrupt our national political process by destroying public property and assaulting police officers.

More protests please!!!

* Kevin Michael Grace, of the indispensable 2Kevins podcast, suggests that an unelectable Hillary may die suddenly from a previously undiagnosed respiratory ailment, AKA, smothered in her sleep with a pillow.

* Trump wants that. He picked on Susan Martinez in New Mexico. Yesterday, he picked on the judge in the Trump university case. He is smartly trying to frame Hispanics as “others” and not real Americans. This may be a winning strategy if it can rile up the Hispanics even more and lead to a hot summer. That and some BLM histrionics may even lead to some riots putting him in the White House.

* If Trump follows through with this, it’s going to be a big win for him with the voters. And it’s going to put Hillary in a huge bind: she can’t repudiate any aspect of BLM without alienating both the blacks and the liberal white voters whom she is counting on in the general. Bill could have his Sistah Souljah moment and still retain his liberal support; but liberals have moved well past that possibility at this time; only abject compliance with the dictates of black activists is allowed.

Frankly, it wouldn’t surprise me if rejecting the BLM movement doesn’t do more for Trump than his coming down hard against illegal immigration. The vast majority of white voters will never believe that what happened in Ferguson and Baltimore was all about white racism, and that blacks rioting and looting afterward was understandable and forgivable.

* The irony is that after both the terrorist attack in Paris as well as the attack in San Bernardino, Trump’s popularity increased and it was around this time he really soared above the rest of the 16 other GOP candidates. Also, soon after the attack in Brussels, Trump’s popularity soared again. It’s almost like his point of a temporary ban on Muslim immigration hit home “See? I told you guys, I warned you what would happen if this continued unchecked and these people crossed the border without being properly vetted.”

So if something unfortunate were to occur later this yr in the first world, how exactly would it prove detrimental to Trump’s presidential chances? If anything, and judging by recent terror attacks, it would only serve to increase his popularity again and perhaps help him in the polls.

* My guess is that both he and his father spent so many decades talking business with tenants, contractors and staff who had about a Grade 9 level of literacy that Trump has learned how to express himself effectively at that level of English. You can see him speak in much more nuanced terms in older interviews on CNN when he’s speaking in his indoor voice.

Posted in America | Comments Off on Anti-Trump Protests In San Diego