American Jewry’s Disgraceful Hypocrisy

Uri S. Segelman writes: Of course Israel is the Jewish State, and affirming such may be among the least controversial things one could possibly say to a group of American Jews. [And when I say “Jews,” I mean people affiliated, to some degree, with the faith, even if they are not Orthodox.] To these people, Israel being the Jewish State is simply taken for granted. So if one told this same group that the United States ought to support Israel, the Jewish State, and recognize her as such, he would be as equally uncontroversial.

Why is it then that when I raise my voice in support of nationalism and self-determination for the peoples of Europe, I am met with skepticism, if not downright contempt? Why is it that when I praise the nationalist parties of Europe (many of whom are actually Zionistic), I am questioned with unease?

It appears to me that the same people who so vehemently call for Israel to be Jewish lack that same vigor when calling for France to be French, Germany to be German, or Sweden to be Swedish. Indeed, a lack of vigor would actually be satisfactory. In fact, it’s not even that: those same Zionists, by and large, fight against the nationalist sentiments in Europe. The establishment Jewish groups in the US, all of whom lock arms for Israel and lobby the American government to categorically support her at every turn, are the same groups that consistently call for open borders in Europe, increased immigration from the Middle East, a full-out embracing of multiculturalism, a weakened national culture, and a diminished Church. They are the same groups that slander and defame leaders like Le Pen in France and Wilders in the Netherlands. They are the same groups that push for the death of Europe and her people.

Quite plainly, any Jew in the US who calls for American support for the Jewish state but condemns the nationalists in Europe is a hypocrite. He is a hypocrite for the very simple reason that he wants national self-determination for a people in one part of the world but not for another in a different part of the world. He is a hypocrite because he wants his country, the US, to protect the nationalist and ethno-centric aspirations of Israel, his homeland, but not those of Europe.

But it’s even more nuanced than this. The peculiar position of these Jews is not so much in their exclusive nationalist desires for one state. It is in their exclusive denial of such nationalist rights to the peoples of Europe. For some strange reason, there is a hate for the European race, and that hate translates into a desire for its ultimate destruction. After all, what better way to crumble Europe than to replace its volk? As it is said, “demography is destiny.” Every other country on the planet, especially including the Jewish State of Israel, is entitled to national self-determination—to an ethnic nation-state. Why must Europe be left out?

The hypocrisy is glaring, and all those who praise Netanyahu and scorn Le Pen are guilty.

One common response, however, is that the nationalist Right in Europe is “anti-Semitic.” (Of course, this term has lost so much of its substance. As Joseph Sobran, an accused anti-Semite, wrote: “an anti-Semite used to mean a man who hated Jews. Now it means a man who is hated by Jews.”). First off, the Jew should not be all that confused when the European he’s trying to destroy distrusts him. But secondly, the hard truth is that Europe is becoming less safe for Jews, regardless of who is in charge. And in fact, the perpetrators of day-to-day anti-Semitic attacks are Muslims. Leftist rule has only ensured a growth in the Muslim population in Europe, which, as we have seen when Israel conducts operations against the Palestinians, spells doom for Europe’s Jews. The Muslims in Europe are the ones who have brought back the pogroms of old. At least the Right has pledged to stem immigration from the Middle East.

In short, I do not think the “who’s better for the Jews” question is relevant here. The short answer is: probably no one. [However, the majority of the far-Right parties in Europe have rooted out all traces of Nazism and anti-Semitism, and are often vigorously pro-Israel, unlike their Leftist counterparts who criticism Israel at every turn].

…The displacement of a people is no small exploit, especially a people that has played such a critical role in human history in the creation of Western civilization. With Europeans’ dwindling birthrates, the necessity to preserve the national identity of the European peoples becomes ever more important. Jews, whose homeland is the world’s shining example of the ethno-nation state, should be at the forefront of this fight. Jews, who understand better than most people the importance of continuation and preservation, should be at the forefront of the fight for Europe. It is selfish to stay out, and hypocritical to counter.

Unfortunately, the Jews seem to be on the wrong side. Again.

Posted in America, Israel, Jews, Nationalism | Comments Off on American Jewry’s Disgraceful Hypocrisy

The Migrants of Calais

Christopher Caldwell writes:

In January, INSEE, France’s national demographics bureau, announced that the life expectancy of French people of both sexes had fallen for the first time since World War II…

Even if Paris does not need a middle class, it desperately needs a lower class. Those symbolic analysts require people to chop their sushi, mix their cocktails, dust their apartments, and push their children’s strollers and their parents’ wheelchairs. This means immigrants — and increasingly it means only immigrants. Because who would you rather have washing your bathtub for 12 euros an hour? A laid-off factory worker who used to get 30 euros an hour and seven weeks’ vacation and who is now looking daggers at you? Or a polite woman from Mali, for whom the smell of Formula 409 is the smell of liberation? The banlieues are an integrated part of the world economy. There is now an immigrant-descended petite bourgeoisie. Naturally, as rich people monopolize the private housing stock, poor newcomers monopolize the welfare housing. Far from being a drain on rich people’s taxes, these projects provide subsidized housing for their servants. Big problems will eventually come, because there is no next rung on the social ladder onto which the migrants’ children can step. But this is not an acute problem just yet. For now, worrying about the banlieues is something of a red herring.

Posted in France | Comments Off on The Migrants of Calais

Steve Sailer Contest: Name the Proposed Anti-Trump 3rd Party Being Considered by GOP Donors

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* It would be a great idea to come up with some prospective names for a 3rd party representing these folks. The AEI party? The Cuba Libre party? The WSJ Editorial Page Party? The Vail Party? Likud-USA? The Act of Love Party? The 4 More Wars Party?

* Or maybe The We Hate You Party …

National Association for the Advancement of Conquistador People …

National Association for the Advancement of Billionaire People …

* Foam Party?

Inner Party?

Metrosexual-Boot-Stomping-on-an-American-Face-Forever Party?

* Goy Division

* Fair Play for Cuba Committee

* This just shows how bad the mainstream Republicans are. Of course, they still brag about helping to get the Civil Rights Act passed.

They want to destroy the US just like the Dems. Oh, but they’ll keep taxes down on the rich. That’s something I should really care about, not.

* People’s Front of Judea
The Whining Wrath
Bourgeois Globalist League
The NeoConservative NeoLiberals
The Establishment Front
Cheap Labor League
Corporate Struggle

* The Donner Party (cannibalizing White America)

* Future Of American Millenials–The FOAM Party!

* The Whining Wrath is really good.

* Or the “Burn This Bitch Down Party”. That would be REALLY diverse!

* Maybe it should be like other shady groups and have no name at all? It can just be referred to as “our thing”, “our friends in Florida”, “some important people” or, like in Point Blank, “The Organization”.

* The Anti-Semite Silencing (ASS) party.

And we do not control the media!

* I spent 100 million and all I got was this guac bowl party.

* La Cosa Nueva

* This guy is going real-time analysis on the characteristics of pro and anti Trump voters.

The strongest correlation of Pro-Trump voters – percent of county living in poverty.
Next strongest, percent of county which is biracial. Followed by percent of county which is black, followed by percent of county which is Hispanic, followed by percent of county which is foreign born.

Hmm. Anyone notice a pattern developing?

Then the anti-Trump voters tend towards:

Percent of county with higher than HS grad.
Followed by percent of county which is white and non-Hispanic, followed closely by percent of county which is white alone, followed by a number of income metrics.

What jumps out to me is that exposure to diversity strengthens the appeal of Trump and isolation from diversity predicts people scratching their head and wondering why the Trump phenomenon is taking place.

* Likud, the American chapter.

Jewish Billionaires Party.

Neocon Party.

NeoLiberal Party.

Globalist Party.

The Chosen Party.

The Israel First Party.

The Judeo-American Empire Party.

The Zionist Party.

* Bernie Sanders is fighting a similar fight with the Democratic Party but their ‘Establishment’ has already won that battle. In spite of the fact that Liberals like to think of themselves as more open minded and tolerant than conservatives, Sanders campaign is entirely limited to taking money from the 1% (white people) and transferring it to the more vibrant among us. Discussing immigration, crime, education, labor, public infrastructure, or anything else outside of the lens of “diversity” is strictly verboten. Instead of a boot stomping on his face, BLM publicly humiliates and paper trains him like a bad puppy.

* It’s not minorities that are voting for Trump, it’s whites who are forced to live around a lot of minorities, that is, they get to experience the joy of diversity for real while the anti-Trump voters, more isolated from minorities, get to experience diversity as a dream-state, and so they idealize it.

* Perhaps the most important people in the world at that point would be the commanders of submarines with sea-launched ballistic missiles carrying nuclear warheads. Once at sea they are basically unfindable even by their own navies, and captains are in complete control of the information available to the crew. Imagine a captain willing to back a faction in a civil war with even one nuclear attack–and Ohio class submarines carry 24 missiles. (I am aware that it takes three people to launch a missile, but finding three like-minded people on a submarine might not be that difficult.) I know nuclear submarine crews are carefully screened, but I wonder how one screens for those kind of attitudes.

* The Republican party has a winner in Trump and yet they don’t want him? One might think they’d be overjoyed at having a hot property and yet here they are trying to undercut him. Seems strange but this exposes how the alleged two party system is just a rigged insider’s club. Don’t be surprised if they’d prefer Hilary becoming president to that of one from their own party.

* What will happen if Trump wins the nomination and wins the general? Will these hack Republicans admit they were wrong about everything and that Trump helped their party expand more than their policy papers admitted?

It is amazing how Rush Limbaugh is sounding a lot like Sailer when it comes to demographics and voting patterns–he laid out how the Republicans are retarded for thinking hispanics will ever vote for Republicans in a big way. Even Krugman is surprised by the Republican establishment don’t understand that voters don’t give a damn about cutting Social Security and Medicare. With Trump’s campaign I’m seeing Sailer’s strategy to victory in play against the media, and against the “conservative media” that exists in Washington DC and New York.

* This presidential race is starting to sound like a Houellebecq novel. This is a two-party version of the political maneuvering that transpired in Submission. The Neo-Cons teaming up with the left to defeat the populist right.

* “Netanyahu personally attacked Trump’s immigration proposals.”

And that was after Trump made a TV spot for Israeli TV endorsing Netanyahu too. That’s some real loyalty there.

* Netanyahu was under pressure from Leftist and Arab MKs (links available on demand) to ban Trump from visiting. He didn’t want another headache or the risk that his coalition (which includes a number of lefty douches) would fall apart, nor did he want to get in further trouble with Europe (where Trump is almost universally loathed) so he issued a weaselly statement about how Israel is a democracy that respects all religions and his reception of Trump should not be treated as an endorsement of his policies. Of course this was a pathetic wimpy thing to do, and dumb as well, in retrospect, but that’s Netanyahu all over, an unprincipled man with no vision perennially thinking about how to ride out the next week.

* Can you name one pundit or hack ever admitting to being wrong on something? Punditry is the best job in America bar none. You never get fired for being wrong. You just show up. Performance doesn’t count.

* Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Davos

* You’ll Get Nothing And Like It Party
Marco Roboto Party
The Third Party
Nationalism for Me, Not for Thee Party
The Walls Are For Israel Party

Posted in America | Comments Off on Steve Sailer Contest: Name the Proposed Anti-Trump 3rd Party Being Considered by GOP Donors

Steve Sailer: Why Bernie’s Free Stuff Platform Won’t Carry South Carolina Blacks

Steve Sailer writes: In theory, Bernie Sanders’ platform of Free Stuff ought to appeal to black Democratic voters in South Carolina today. But in black politics, in both America and Africa, 19th Century European socialist logic doesn’t have much emotional appeal. It’s too abstract and impersonal.

Instead, black politics is mostly about the Big Man Gets Paid (and, in these enlightened times, the Big Woman Gets Paid.)

Hillary simply has a longer track record than Bernie of seeing that local Big Men and Big Women get their cut.

COMMENTS:

* Hillary has better name recognition. This is especially important with low-info voters. And most of the Black pols are for her. They want to be on the winning team, plus some may be paid by her campaign to get out the vote. I think I remember James Carville once bragging about bribing Black pastors. Would Bernie do that? Would he even reward his endorsers with jobs and the like if he somehow managed to win, or would he consider that sleazy?

* Also, truly poor people already get all kinds of free stuff. Bernie’s platform is for not-quite-successful white baristas who want enough free stuff to make them look upper middle class.

* Also, we already have socialism for blacks. Bernie just wants to extend the free handouts to whites. So, he isn’t really offering much new to blacks.

* The alternative theory is that poor blacks sell their votes. The sale is mediated through church or civic organizations.

Ed Rollins repeated claimed he could do this:

“We went into black churches and we basically said to ministers who had endorsed Florio, ‘Do you have a special project?’

Historical note, republican Whitman won the the race. Florio was the last governor of NJ to completely fund the state pension system.

* “The alternative theory is that poor blacks sell their votes. The sale is mediated through church or civic organizations.”

All urban democrats know this, but what gets me is that none of these black churches ever get their non-profit status revoked, whereas a white church that tried the same tactic would be under IRS scrutiny very quickly.

In a particularly weird example of this, Seattle’s homosexual mayor Ed Murray won office by buying off Somali imams who then publicly reminded him of this when he tried to shut down their hookah parlors. Naturally, he backed down.

Posted in Blacks, Democrats | Comments Off on Steve Sailer: Why Bernie’s Free Stuff Platform Won’t Carry South Carolina Blacks

Steve Sailer: Trump and the Tangible

Steve Sailer writes: Marco Rubio’s latest tactic is to denounce Donald Trump as a “con man,” pointing especially to the risible Trump University venture.

But a problem with this line of assault is that the landscape is full of giant buildings with Trump’s name on them, such as the 98-story Trump International Hotel and Tower on a great site on the Chicago River, which the Trump Organization managed to open in the teeth of the financial crisis in 2009. (The Chicago project was a storyline on Trump’s reality show The Apprentice.)

Voters tend to be impressed by the construction of tangible things, especially huge ones patronized by famously rich and demanding celebrities. We’ve all managed, at minimum, home improvement projects and recognize that they require a lot of work and a lot of decision-making. Looking at this enormous luxury hotel / apartment building, it’s pretty obvious that a lot of sweating the details went into it.

A big part of Mitt Romney’s problems in 2012 was that his business career, while no doubt energetic and cognitively demanding, mostly involved intangible financial abstractions and what PR people like to call creative destruction (i.e., laying workers off). He had something to do with Staples, but other than that, the Romney people could never seem to offer much inspiring detail on what he’d been up to.

COMMENTS:

* I was just reading an article recently–can’t remember where–that sneered at Trump because he would have made more money if 30 years ago he’d just put it all in T-bills.

That largely ignores the many jobs that Trump provided. So basically, he “spent” his money on America. The guy likes deals, he’s always wanting more, and he often loses. But in the meantime, actual jobs–not consulting jobs, either–are available.

* Working middle class white people better identify with Trump’s fortune than Romney’s fortune, because Trump making his fortune involved the hiring of a lot of working middle class white people to build his big shiny things.

* These calculations ignore that he’s also spent a lot of money on living large. He could have lived in a hut and saved all his money, but he seems to have had a pretty good time spending it.

By the way, I think there’s a subconscious connection between Trump’s current popularity and how 9/11 made people feel solidarity with New Yorkers, with Trump as the rest of the country’s image of a New Yorker.

Post 9/11, Americans seem to be prouder of New York’s gaudiness than they were before. It helps explain some of the popularity of superhero movies, such as Spider-Man in 2002.

The basis of Trump’s success was betting big on New York in the late 1970s. His optimism succeeded because of all the wealth generated in intangible ways on Wall Street from 1982 onward. But Trump represents wealth that everybody can understand and identify with: building big beautiful buildings.

Everybody has managed a home improvement project or two, so we can understand that putting up huge buildings where the fit and finish are good enough for celebrities must be a difficult job.

* I think you underestimate how many middle class and poor people know that Trump is a serial exaggerator (to be kind) but they like him because they don’t think any better of the people he’s running against. My barber told me yesterday that he knows Trump is a liar but so are all of those politicians he’s running against and at least he’s not another career politician.

My barber also said he enjoyed Trump’s campaign because of the pro wrestling aspect of it – the smack talk, finger pointing, etc. & how Cruz, Rubio etc are having to embrace Trump’s tactics. He thought that it exposes the system for what it really is.

My white collar friends and co-workers just reference President Camacho from Idiocracy.

* The national focus on New York also got sharper when Jimmy Fallon took over at the Tonight Show after Jay Leno mercifully quit phoning it in from Burbank. The new show, although not to everyone’s taste, is much more attuned to a younger, more circumspect audience. Cause, effect, both, coincidence? In any event, people probably notice New York more now, and if they didn’t then Trump would speak louder. Many Americans really want to feel proud of their country, which the parties don’t acknowledge.

* The problem with people listing all the negatives of Trump is that they give us no alternatives. Yes, Trump has skeletons. Yes, Trump has done stuff we are not proud of. He is a bragger, womanizer, etc.

OK, fine. Now whom do you suggest we vote? Most people on this blog consider immigration to be the biggest single issue. What other candidate is going to tackle it? With Trump we get a slim chance of attacking this issue versus zero chance with the others.

If Pat Buchanan were running, I’d support him. Trump is basically running on Pat’s platform of immigration, trade and to some extent non-intervention.

So if you are going to slam Trump, and in some cases rightly so, please give us an alternative that we could support with a straight face. Not one that a neocon could support. Not one that a progressive could support. But one that the majority of this blog’s readers could support.

* The other thing is that we’ve all had our sense of outrage numbed by two things over the last few years:

1) The seemingly endless string of goofball publicity stunts by supposedly serious and respectable politicians. Obama is the undisputed master of this but there are so many imitators.

2) The literally endless amount of politically correct screeching and shaming we all get hit with anytime we interact with the media or web. I’d guess the average person is exposed to about five or six “boy who cried wolf” outrages of this sort every day. We’re all totally numb to it now. Only the teenage girls and gays can manage the level of moral hysteria demanded of us.

* I just appreciate Trump as a ‘wrecker’.

Another thing. The sleaze factor paradoxically protects him because there is no pretense of being respectable.

This is how Howard Stern got away with so much stuff. Since he was shameless, you couldn’t tag him with anything. He’d just laugh and say So What?

This is where Romney was vulnerable. He looked some perfect 1950s TV dad. So, the dirt on him made him look really dirty.

Trump, like Clinton, wears his dirt on his sleeve.

In another time, I would have been offended by Trump, and in some ways, still am.

But this nation is so far on morals, decency, sanity, and etc., who cares?

It’s just a matter of who can wreck the system better.

The system needs to go.

* Romney had a “fire in the belly” problem (the lack thereof). Jeb had a similar deficiency. Or was it “low energy”?

Trump seems quite robust in this area.

* Trump’s really running a meta-campaign on these levels. He’s mocking the PC-folks, baiting them, and then going so over the top outrageous they “literally can’t even”, making his fans roar and boosting him in the polls. And then he decided that if Obama could spend one night a week on the Daily Show and the The Tonight Show answering softball questions, he could do such nonsense better, since he’s got more TV experience as a reality star.

In other words, Trump’s trolling. Gloriously.

Posted in Donald Trump | Comments Off on Steve Sailer: Trump and the Tangible

Blacks Bury Bernie In South Carolina

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* Another in the long line of warnings: true ethnic diversity is worst for Jews.

* According to exit polls, Hillary won 84% of the black vote. Which isn’t surprising. Why would any black person vote for a 74 year old Jewish Guy from Vermont over Hillary Clinton (Mrs. First Black President)?

Blacks, Hispanics, and other minorities are going to vote for Hillary. Bernie never had a chance.

* It is probably good that the white millennials get to watch Bernie being taken out by the black vote. They need to learn early on where they stand in the Democrat’s coalition.

* Steve obviously remembers “Bridget loves Bernie” a TV sit-com about a Jewish boy and Catholic girl marriage in the 1970s.

IRC, it got canceled because Catholic and Jewish groups objected. Evidently, it was too radical for the 1970s. People were OK with a Black-white couple on The Jeffersons. but Jew/Gentile was just a bridge too far.

* Do blacks ever vote in non block-like fashion? I am always amazed at their disproportionate skewing in the general election. But in the democrat primary you’d think it might be closer to a 50-50 split. After all it pits two candidates who can’t bend over enough to get their vote. Yet even among two friendly democrat candidates they skew big time for one over the other.

* Some Jews may think they’re not white (Mike Wallace), and some Jews may think Jews and blacks have lots in common (Sarah Silverman), but to blacks Jews are the whitest whites of all. I think that’s part of what’s going on.

* “They supported her over Mr. Sanders by a 5-to-1 ratio, while he won the bulk of white voters, according to early exit polling.”

I love this outcome. I enjoy the prospect of white liberals coming to terms that there is no place for them in the Democratic Party.

* Odd that white nationalists and Jewish worldviews could be so similar and yet they are enemies. Narcissism of small differences indeed.

* Blacks can’t relate to white nerds at all. No respect for that.

All blacks want to grab the mic out of Bernie’s hand. That is their natural reaction to his lack of charisma.

Blacks can’t relate to Simon & Garfunkle. Not at all.

Highly charismatic white guys like Trump, Aaahnold Terminator, Stallone etc. may not get black votes but they get respect.

* Most American blacks dislike and distrust Jews. They’ll take a White Gentile over a Jew any day of the week.

Posted in Blacks, Democrats, Jews | Comments Off on Blacks Bury Bernie In South Carolina

Iowa students admonished for “Trump!” chants at hoops game

No wonder the old lefties are scared! Americans are discovering that they have group interests. Just like Jews think about what’s good for the Jews and blacks think about what is good for blacks, Americans are starting to think about what is good for them.

If American Jews want to get in the way of the resurgent American nationalism represented by Donald Trump, then a resurgent American nationalism could turn against Jews.

REPORT:

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — A group of Iowa high school students has been admonished for seemingly using Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s name as a racial insult during a boys’ basketball game.

The chant occurred Monday during a playoff game between Dallas Center-Grimes in West Des Moines, a largely white school, and Perry, a more diverse school north of Des Moines.

According to DCG activities director Steve Watson, roughly a dozen students out of the 120 or so in attendance chanted Trump’s name after their team lost to Perry.

Trump has drawn fire for saying that illegal immigration from Mexico brings rapists and drug dealers into the U.S., among other things.

Watson says the chant was uttered three or four times before administrators stopped the students. He declined to say whether the students were disciplined, citing privacy policies.

More:

This made the Iowa news.

FOX 5 NY reported:

A group of Iowa high school students has been admonished for seemingly using Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s name as a racial insult during a boys’ basketball game.

The chant occurred Monday during a playoff game between Dallas Center-Grimes in West Des Moines, a largely white school, and Perry, a more diverse school north of Des Moines.

According to DCG activities director Steve Watson, roughly a dozen students out of the 120 or so in attendance chanted Trump’s name after their team lost to Perry.

Trump has drawn fire for saying that illegal immigration from Mexico brings rapists and drug dealers into the U.S., among other things.

Watson says the chant was uttered three or four times before administrators stopped the students. He declined to say whether the students were disciplined, citing privacy policies.

Posted in Donald Trump | Comments Off on Iowa students admonished for “Trump!” chants at hoops game

Jewish Editor: Trump’s America is bad, very bad, for the Jews

Here is Andy’s self-description: “Andrew Silow-Carroll is the editor in chief and CEO of the New Jersey Jewish News, an award-winning weekly newspaper published in four editions and on the web. He was previously the managing editor of the Forward newspaper, and host of “With the Editors,” a public affairs roundtable broadcast on The Jewish Channel. A Mandel Jerusalem Fellow and former Spielberg Fellow at CLAL, Andrew has spoken, taught, moderated, or served as scholar-in-residence at the invitation of many of North America’s largest Jewish organizations.”

From the Times of Israel:

Trump’s America is bad, very bad, for the Jews

Two of my favorite television shows are about what I think it’s fair to call the “New America.” In Master of None, on Netflix, Indian-American comedian Aziz Ansari plays a struggling actor in a very real and diverse New York. His best friend is the son of Chinese immigrants. His girlfriend is white. And the plots have revolved, pointedly but never heavy-handedly, around the portrayal of minorities in mainstream media, and the struggles of immigrants chasing the American dream.

In Transparent, on Amazon, an alarmingly and hilariously dysfunctional Los Angeles family comes to terms with their father’s late-life realization that he (she) is transgender. Jeffrey Tambor plays Maura Pfefferman, the aging Jewish college professor who ditches a lonely suburban life for one in which gender and sexuality are fluid. Both of his daughters enter into same-sex relationships, and the question of whether they are gay, bi-, or adventurous seems to be left intentionally ambiguous. A son, Josh, is straight, promiscuous, and desperate for love.

Both shows represent a multicultural, urban America in which differences of all kinds are not just tolerated but celebrated. The immigrant characters in Master don’t need to prove themselves to the American “mainstream,” whatever that is, and don’t apologize for expecting America to live up to its promises. The LGBTQ characters in Transparent don’t suffer for their natures or their choices — at least when it comes to gender and sex (the Jewish characters mostly suffer from one another, but that’s an old story).

…”Mr. Trump’s popularity with white, working-class voters who are more likely than other Republicans to believe that whites are a supreme race and who long for the Confederacy may make him unpopular among leaders in his party. But it’s worth noting that he isn’t persuading voters to hold these beliefs. The beliefs were there — and have been for some time.”

And that, ultimately, is why I see Trump as a threat, not just in what his candidacy means for America as a whole, but what it means for us as Jews. His message — of distrusting the foreign, of rejecting the new, of abhorring pluralism — is directly opposed to our history in this country and our best interests as a minority. And it is empowering people who reject the very notion of racial and ethnic diversity.

It’s not immaterial that Transparent is immersed in a deeply Jewish environment. The Pfeffermans stock up for the Yom Kippur break-fast at Canter’s Deli, Josh falls in love and impregnates his mother’s rabbi, a daughter is haunted by a grandmother’s youth in Weimar Berlin. The sexual and gender journeys taken by its characters are on a continuum with the social and religious upheavals experienced by their forebears. Jews flourished in this country because we had the freedom to shed the burdens of the past and embrace a future of opportunity.

Posted in Donald Trump | Comments Off on Jewish Editor: Trump’s America is bad, very bad, for the Jews

The Future of the Republican Party Is By the Pool At the Biltmore?

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* I wonder if Hillary watches Rubio flailing around and has 2nd thoughts about elevating Castro to VP?

He makes Rubio look bright & competent in comparison & has even fewer accomplishments.

* Just start building it with the Army Corps of Engineers using his authority to defend the borders given him in the Constitution. Then see if anybody in Congress has the guts to demand that work stop on the wall.

Posted in America | Comments Off on The Future of the Republican Party Is By the Pool At the Biltmore?

Why Trump: Luke Ford Explains It All

Kathy Shaidle writes: “I’ve started reading Luke Ford again, which is probably a mistake, but still. (He seems to be courting Steve Sailer now the way he used to court Denis Prager…)

Link:

This isn’t precisely a ‘psychology’ related blog. Then again, it kinda is. The main thing is we can’t keep clogging the same two folders with Trump threads.

I can’t keep the “Luke Ford” thing straight in my head. Are there two of them? Or two Luke Ford sites? Anyway, one gained notoriety as the blog of a Midwestern Jewish-convert porn-movie reporter, but then suddenly he’d renounced smut and had this other, completely non-porn blog, while somebody else kept his old site running as by that time “Luke Ford” was practically an acronym for porn movies.

All irrelevant preamble; this rambles a bit, as most blogs do, but his summation of Why Trump via the example of Japan is simple, brilliant and as on-point as you’ll find anywhere.

Rubio reminds me of a tiny gay dog, yipping and yapping.

Posted on February 25, 2016 by Luke Ford

If Trump wins, the Republican elites (and the non-Republican elites) lose. They’re exposed.

* “Do you realize that If Bernie Sanders wins, it will be the first time that a Jewish family moved into public housing that was left vacant by a black family?”

* There is genuine vitriol in this race.

In earlier races, there were some cons who supported McCain, some who supported Romney, some who supported Perry, some who supported etc, etc, etc.

But there was no conviction, no fire, thus no real animus. Just polite going through the motions.

Romney supporters didn’t hate McCain supporters and vice versa.
Santorum supporters didn’t hate Huckabee supporters and vice versa.

But there is genuine hatred among the various factions.

Trump supporters really hate the other camps and vice versa.

But I don’t think it’s really populism vs populism, e.g. masses who support Trump vs masses who support Rubio.

While there are masses who support Rubio or others, they do so without passion.

In contrast, there is mass passion for Trump.

The real passion is between masses for Trump and ELITES for Rubio (and others).

Masses for Trump really hate the GOP elites, the elites who support Rubio(and others) really hate Trump masses.

I think the GOP elites fear Trump for professional reasons(as for other ones).
If Trump ignores all their advice and still wins, it will mean that all the experts have been phony and useless quacks who’ve been raking it in and holding power for no good reason at all.

* I live in Asia and when an Asian asks me about why Trump is popular, this is a way I use to explain it.

If you really want to understand Trump’s appeal, just look at the fact that 45% of US citizens don’t pay taxes because they don’t make enough due to jobs increasingly being low-level service work with many of the higher level jobs being taken by H1B.

Then combine it with this scenario – imagine the head of Japan announces:
1. Japan is opening its borders and plans to make the majority of the country Chinese and Muslims
2. Japanese privilege classes will begin in all schools to combat Japanese racism and the country will begin eliminating Japanese cultural events as non-inclusive
3. Japanese will pay more taxes to subsidize these workers who for the most part won’t be pay taxes
4. Crime and terrorism will go up but that is unavoidable and Xenophobic to mention
5. When any business employs a majority of Japanese ethnics, there will be a discussion of the “Japanese problem”
6. Preferences will be given in hiring to the newcomers
7. Any negative comments about what is going on will be clamped down on because if you don’t like this cultural cleansing you are Hitler.

Now, honestly ask yourself how the Japanese would react to this plan? Add those two together and it gives you an idea of why people are backing Trump.

After that, they all say they understand his appeal and would never let that type of scenario develop in their own country.

Posted in Donald Trump | Comments Off on Why Trump: Luke Ford Explains It All