* The problem is that Jews are 33% of the 500 richest men in the world, but white goyim are not supposed to notice that fact, let alone talk about it, let alone wonder if something can and/or should be done about it.
Is it “good” or “bad” that Jews have disproportionately more wealth and power than any other ethnic group? “Good” or “bad” for whom? Are white goyim better off in a world where Jews are 33% of the 500 richest men? Would we better off if Jews made up only 3% of that list, or 66% of it, or 0% or 100%? How so?
Would white goyim be better off if George Soros were a white goy who spent his money on white-goy causes? (What is a white-goy cause, anyway?)
Would white goyim in America be better off if our government didn’t give so much money to Israel? Would we be better off if our country had a border fence like Israel’s?
These are all interesting questions. Unfortunately, white goyim can’t ask them, openly, in public, because a white goy who asks even one of them is branded an anti-Semite. Remember: We’re not even supposed to notice that Jews have a disproportionate amount of wealth and power.
Some Jews pursue Jewish interests, even at the expense of white goyim, and that’s fine. So don’t tell me that I’m wrong to want to pursue white-goy interests, even at the expense of Jews.
Ultimately, no group “should” be in charge. White goyim don’t “deserve” to rule over Jews any more than Jews “deserve” to rule over white goyim. It’s a game – winner takes all.
Jews are good at winning. One way to win is to change the rules of the game so that your opponent doesn’t even know what he can do, let alone what he should do.
White goyim can either bend over and accept losing, or they can steel themselves for a long, hard slog and try to make a few new rules of their own.
I don’t believe that Jews can (or necessarily should) be displaced from their firmly-entrenched position in the ranks of the economic, social, and political elite. But I’ll be damned if someone’s going to tell me that I can’t even acknowledge the fact that they make up a large part of that elite.
* [Cathy] Young’s article would’ve been interesting if it contained an argument, rather than ad hominem. She writes as another SJW, defining the limits of polite company and respectable debate. She apparently hails from the same community that believes that dissent can only be offered by Democrats during Republican administrations.
It’s a funny (strange) article in contrast to the USA Today article critiqued by Sailer. Either race matters–or it doesn’t. If it matters, then all aspects are discussable. If it doesn’t, then stop obsessing over it.
You’d have thought someone born and raised in the Soviet Union would respect debate–especially debate outside the constraints deemed by those ‘in the mainstream’ –but you’d be wrong.
* With Philip Giraldi, literally 100 percent of his blogs are about the Jews. To him it’s like 98 percent of the rest of the nation do not even exist. Philip Giraldi’s obsession with the Jews matches Ta-Nehisi Coates obsession with his Black body.
Philip Giraldi could be living in Wyoming where there is like 3 Jews in the whole state and 100 percent of his blogs would still be about the Jews.
* I think the idea that Jews are trying to subvert the West is nonsense. I mean, I’ve known a lot of Jews (a lot of blacks, too, for that matter). Maybe a couple have had the cliche’d “is it good for the Jews” mentality but most of them are just trying to live their lives, to the extent that their families will allow them. (Jewish mothers were Tiger moms avant la lettre).
There is a lot of nepotism in fields that Jews dominate. It’s not as bad as it sounds. It’s really no different than the way ethnic catholics tend to dominate fire and police departments in the northeast.
Jewish kids are expected to be “smart”, even when they aren’t. So they tend to be very good verbally because that’s the easiest way to appear smart, even if you aren’t. Verbal facility equals fluent writing, fluent writing means good grades and praise, good grades and praise leads to fields where you write for a living, presto, Jews are seriously over-represented in the verbal professions.
Being Jewish, Jewish writers tend to write about things that come easily to their life experience. The whole thing we are getting now where myriad Indian and Chinese youngsters are writing “sensitive first novels” about “what it means to be Indian/Chinese/etc.” was done 50-60 years ago except the authors were all Jewish boys and girls talking about what it meant to be Jewish, etc.
Also, being Jewish, Jewish writers are going to be hung up on Israel, the Holocaust, things like that. So they write about that a lot. And everyone who isn’t Jewish is exposed to it a lot. If, in fact, Jewish writers were not frequently writing about those things, and particularly Israel, non-Jews wouldn’t be complaining about Israel.
I don’t think any of this is very complicated. At the same time, Jewish perceptions are not the only possible human perceptions. Non-Jews are not necessarily going to have the same attitudes towards Israel or Jewish history that Jews do. Jews have to understand this and not reflexively accuse people of anti-semitism like that uncle on Seinfeld every time some non- Jew has a different take on these things. By the same token, to upbraid any Jew who is critical of Israel (e.g., Finkelstein) by calling him an “anti-semitic crackpot” or, worse, a “self-hating Jew” is, in my opinion, just plain wrong.
* There are a lot of Jewish people in the newspapers, movie industries, and on Wall Street (newspapers and movie studios were founded by Jews without other outlets in many cases, and Jews were in banking in Europe since the Middle Ages). People tend to be affected by their background. This tends to skew media coverage in certain ways. Why are there so many more movies about the Holocaust than the Holodomor?
Of course, there are also lots of Harvard grads, liberals, big-city dwellers, people from the Northeast, and so on. (These groups overlap.) That means that non-college grads, conservatives, small-town people, Southerners, and so on tend not to get a fair shake in the news.
Of course, ethnonationalists tend to think ethnically. So ethnic explanations tend to get foregrounded. I think that’s part of the real picture, but there’s also a complex overlapping web of interests that determines who gets their way–money is a lot of it, for example. I don’t agree that America’s elite is entirely composed of sinister Jews trying to destroy the white race, and the hatred of the white race is way overblown as an explanation (they hate whites so much 60% of them marry them?), but if Jews are 33% of the 500 richest men in the world, they’re going to hit way above their weight class. To reduce it to a simpler situation–if a committee made of George Soros and the Koch brothers makes all the big decisions, Soros is going to get a lot more of what he wants than a chicken farmer in Kansas will, even though he’ll be flustered frequently.
* If a soft drink contained only 10% feces, or even 1%, would you buy it? The usual level of tolerance in the rest of American society for public anti-Semitism is zero, so even a little bit of anti-Semitism is shocking to see. It’s unfortunate because it de-legitimizes the rest of Steve’s work that doesn’t deserve to be de-legitimized in the mainstream. It’s a tough problem, because you want to be for free speech and you don’t want to adopt the McCarthyite tactics of the left where no deviation from the Party line in any matter larger or small is permitted on pain of losing your job (and Steve is not responsible for the view of his commenters) but if your biggest fans are raving anti-Semites then you may have a problem.
* Why is the emotion of hate, and its expression, considered beyond the pale–that is, at least for so-called Conservatives?
* “The problem is that Jews are 33% of the 500 richest men in the world, but white goyim”
I don’t even say White Goyim, I just say Goyim because the term Goyim alone automatically means White people who are not Jewish. Nobody is including Tongans and Haitians in the definition of Goyim. Adding White to Goyim is just redundant.
If a Black person murders a Non Jewish White person, nobody says it is Goyim on Goyim violence.
* Life is a team sport. The amazing thing is that Whites can be convinced that otherwise.
