Blacks In The US Military

I love movies about underdogs. I’ve never seen a sports movie about an underdog that I have not loved.

I’ve enjoyed many movies about blacks as underdogs in the U.S. military, including:

* Glory
* The Tuskagee Airmen
* Platoon
* A Soldier’s Story
* Men of Honor

I’ve long thought that racial integration was the final realization of America’s long journey to full democracy.

Judging by the movies and by the news, integration has been a wonderful thing for America and for the U.S. military. That’s true, right?

Posted in Blacks | Comments Off on Blacks In The US Military

LAT: Sterling foundation ads tout good works, but verifying them isn’t easy

As a convert to Orthodox Judaism from WASPism, I’ve noticed that Jews tend to feel pretty good about themselves. While the Protestants I grew up with were often uncomfortable with compliments, most Jews I know love compliments. They love being honored for their good deeds.

In this respect, Donald Sterling was the quintessential Jew. He kept taking out ads boasting about his good deeds.

Wikipedia notes:

In the early 20th century, Jewish daily and weekly publications were preoccupied with violence against blacks, and often compared the anti-black violence in the South to pogroms—this preoccupation was motivated by principles of justice, and by a desire to change racist policies in United States.[8] During the first few decades of the 20th century, the leaders of American Jewry expended time, influence and their economic resources for black endeavors—civil rights, philanthropy, social service, organizing—and historian Hasia Diner notes that “they made sure that their actions were well publicized” as part of an effort to demonstrate increasing Jewish political clout.

Who does that sound like? Wanting to publicize his good deeds to increase his clout?

Sometimes Jewish boasting is empty. In 1996, Jewish journalist Yosef Abramowitz did an expose on the Jewish National Fund, showing that they spent less than 10c on the dollar actually doing anything and all the rest of the money was ploughed back into fundraising. The Southern Poverty Law Center is the same way.

In my 20 years in shul, I’ve noticed it is not unknown for a Jew to make a public and showy donation of dramatic sums of money only to never come through with the gift.

Growing up a WASP, I saw no public fundraising. People weren’t shamed much if they didn’t give enough and they weren’t honored much if they gave a ton. WASPs are not nearly as comfortable as Jews with the natural passions for money, sex, honor and power and they don’t talk about them as easily and they don’t incorporate them as easily into their lives and they don’t channel them as effectively to strengthening their group.

Donald Sterling’s behavior in publicizing his charitable donations would have been inconceivable for all the WASPs I knew but common among Jews I know. It’s even considered a good deed in Judaism to make your donations public if they will encourage other people to donate and thus raise more money than if everything was done quietly.

Plenty of Jews give charity quietly and there is much in the Torah tradition extolling the doing of good deeds, such as charity, without seeking public attention for them, but in my experience, a far higher percentage of Jews than WASPs will admit, “I want the honor!”

The Los Angeles Times reports:

Charity watchdogs say Sterling’s penchant for advertising his philanthropic efforts is unusual.
“He is somewhat unique in how much he’s bragging about his philanthropy,” said Ken Berger, president of Charity Navigator, an online evaluator of nonprofit groups. “He’s shouting from the rooftops, ‘Look how generous I am!'”

Posted in Charity, Donald Sterling, Jews | Comments Off on LAT: Sterling foundation ads tout good works, but verifying them isn’t easy

Jews & Immigration Amnesty

The biggest Jewish organizations in America support immigration amnesty.

Stephen Steinlight writes: “While politically-correct hyper-tolerant Jews — and this is TRUE of 99.9% of ALL members of the Presidents Conference– are almost invariably more interested in appearing politically correct than protecting anything so atavistic and tribal as the Jewish people or — Heaven’s forfend — the morally compromised State of Israel, even a broken clock gets the time right twice a day. This vote rejecting the PA’s cynical anti-Zionist partner, J-Street, a TREASONOUS organization to use the right word, shows there is a modicum of self-respect left. Who knows, if this low flame can be fanned into a fire perhaps American Jews will stop feeling ashamed that this group of self-appointed leaders of aging oligarchies with dwindling memberships claims to represent them.”

These theatrics by the Reform Movement are embarrassing even by the appallingly mendacious standards of the Presidents Conference. Are you really worried about the “Jewish mainstream?” You are ALL utterly outside of it because the VAST MAJORITY of American Jews are unaffiliated with your denominations and have no interest in your organizations. The Conference is well to the left of most American Jews, and the political differences between most — exceptions for the ZOA and AIPAC — don’t amount to a hill of beans. No one reads you pronouncements, and it is only by smoke and mirrors that you have sadly convinced members of Congress that you represent anyone. You all do a gigantic disservice to American Jewry, and nothing would be better than your folding your ridiculous tent — rather than making it bigger — and put the risible circus out of business. No one will even notice. I’m sure there are other ways to indulge your narcissistic self-delusions of grandeur.”

“The VAST MAJORITY OF AMERICAN JEWS ARE UNAFFILATED WITH ANY OF THE RELIGIOUS DENOMINATIONS OR SECULAR JEWISH ORGANIZATIONS…hence this body has gall in the first instance in claiming it speaks for America’s Jews. It has zero mandate. Almost all of them routinely lie about their memberships — even the biggest ones — and for the religious denominations the numbers are puffed up by young children. It also contains tiny organizations — some have staffs that couldn’t make a minion — and why this strange notion that all get the same vote? But then NONE OF THEM is a democracy in the sense that policy positions on everything from Israel to immigration are made by miniscule sub-groups, usually boards or executive committees comprised of the richest donors, what one might call accurately “limousine liberals.” Quite frankly, this unrepresentative undemocratic group should disband itself. It’s also interesting that the head of the Reform Movement, always to be counted upon to be among those on the left fringe, wants to take his bat and ball and go home since he lost a vote. Given the fact that this group of self-appointed “leaders,” most with very few and almost entirely aged followers, really speaks for no one — time to go out of business. When I worked in this universe, a staff joke was that any member of a “young leadership group” was a person not on life-support. That gets it about right.”

“Unsurprisingly, this hypocritical and Machiavellian ploy is the product of yet another publicity stunt by the “rabbi to the stars” Rabbi Marc Schneier of the Hamptons, a narcissistic buffoon who craves public attention regardless of the harm it does in the real world. His efforts, whether with “black leaders” or any other group, is characterized by glitz and vacuity. I’d much prefer he continued his affairs with the married women in his congregation than waded into real world issues that count. Does he really wish to be the public relations director for this Jew-hater?”

Who are these UNELECTED limousine liberal Jewish leaders, uniformly members of the Democratic Party and many idolaters of Obama, to be involved in policy making or exerting pressure on the democratically elected government of Israel? For starters, it is absurd arrogance for them to pretend they “represent” Jews who are Americans. The Jewish-Establishment is a Potemkin village, a set of aging rapidly dwindling organizations with memberships that account for an infinitesimal fraction of American Jews. NONE of these organizations even makes its policy decisions in a remotely democratic fashion. They are plutocratic oligarchies where the richest donors have most power, and a coterie of far-left staff know-nothings push the fat cats further to the left. This whole exercise is a disgusting farce. This is America. This isn’t a ghetto in Nazi-Occupied Europe: We don’t need or want a Council of Jewish Elders, a bunch of kapos and surrender-monkeys to act as if they have some sort of mandate. Stop prostituting yourselves — and don’t think you can pimp for us — when you wag your tails when Kerry whistles.”

Dick Morris completely mischaracterizes the Mexican community. It is NOT conservative. They register Democrat 4-1. Why? Because as an overwhelmingly poor, uneducated and low-skill population they want the Nanny State. They support every entitlement program the Republicans want to cut, support affirmative action, etc. Their families are falling apart; indeed, their out-of-wedlock birthrate is coming close to that of African Americans. If another 11 million are legalized and get on a “path to citizenship” the Republican Party will be out of business. Also remember a point no one talks about: once legalized, the illegal aliens can avail themselves of the most powerful engine in the immigration system: extended family reunification. Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation estimates the 11 million will ultimately mean 66-100 million LEGAL immigrants from Mexico in 20 years. If that happens, the Democrats will become the permanent majority Party, the PRI of Mexico. Dick ought to wake up and face facts.”

Posted in Jews, Stephen Steinlight, Steve Sailer | Comments Off on Jews & Immigration Amnesty

Circumcision Is The Easiest Example To See How Jews Have Affected Your Life

Why are most non-Jewish babies in the United States circumcised? Because a large number of doctors and hospitals and medical elites are Jewish. Circumcision is rare in Europe and people are fine. They’re not dying on the streets because they’re intact.

Why is there so much circumcision in America? Because our medical establishment reads the facts completely differently from every other country? No. Because about an eighth of doctors are Jewish and they tend to work at the most powerful hospitals, which tend to be owned by Jews, and so circumcision is thought to be the way to go because it makes Jews less conspicuous.

The New Testament clearly states that circumcision is not necessary. I wonder why the goyim don’t follow that? The news media in America tend to frame circumcision as good for you and those opposed to circumcision as anti-semites. From what I’ve seen, most circumcision stories in America are written by Jews and framed as pro-circ. They rarely talk about the function of the foreskin, they talk about the pros and cons of cutting off the foreskin.

I wonder if Jewish elites think that the world will be a safer place for Jews if more goyim are circumcised.

The Jerusalem Post reports:

Circumcisions will be performed within the next five years on 20 million African men to help reduce the spread of AIDS, according to a program announced Monday night by the US government and UN and advocated by the Jerusalem-based Operation Abraham project.

UNAIDS and the Obama administration announced the initiative in Geneva, saying that the five-year program will save more than 3.4 million people from being infected with HIV, and $16.5 billion in national and international funds that would have been spent to cope with the disease.

A delegation of Israeli ritual circumcisors (mohalim) returned last week from a two-week trip to Africa, where they helped the UN write medical protocols for the mass operations according to Israel’s experience.

Israel has circumcised about 100,000 immigrants from the former Soviet Union and Ethiopia who converted to Judaism or whose religious status was not recognized without it.

Israel’s major contribution to the struggle against AIDS in the Third World, where the disease is endemic, is advocating male circumcisions and showing how it has been done here for ritual, rather than strictly medical, reasons.

Jewish boys are ritually circumcised at eight days and Muslim boys at an older age, making adult circumcisions around the world rare.

Studies from five years ago clearly proved that removing the foreskin – where the virus can hide – can reduce by 60 percent the risk of a man getting infected with the HIV virus during sex. So far, 14 targeted countries in Africa have adopted the WHO’s directive to include circumcision in their public health programs, and some of them have already started their mass surgeries.

An Israeli team from the Jerusalem AIDS Project, along with eight medical centers, launched Operation Abraham and wrote the protocols for the UNAIDS/US project. Israeli volunteer physicians and operating room nurses, funded by donations, began in 2007 to perform the circumcisions, in coordination with local medical authorities, in Swaziland.

The project continued in South Africa and is due to expand to four more countries next year.

Currently, the Israelis are giving professional advice to African medical staffers on how to set up clinics and perform the operation on teenage and adult men. So far, the Israeli organization has helped to set up three mass circumcision clinics in Swaziland and 10 in South Africa. Some 40 Israeli surgeons and nurses have participated and trained 150 local medical staff to safely and speedily do the surgery with local anesthesia. By the end of December, tens of thousands of such operations will have been performed.

Posted in Circumcision, Jews | Comments Off on Circumcision Is The Easiest Example To See How Jews Have Affected Your Life

Child Sexual Abuse In Orthodox Judaism

Benny writes: Why do I occasionally take on Rabbis and criticize their actions in the arena of CSA (Child Sexual Abuse)?
For those who are familiar with this industry, the answer is obvious. For those that don’t, maybe it isn’t so apparent. (Im excluding those that are familiar, but nevertheless justify Rabbinical action/inaction – a group Im not addressing, nor do I care for their opinion).
The Orthodox Jewish system that has been set in place for many years is one that requires Rabbinical approval for most things. As one prominent Israeli rabbi preposterously told me: “Im a rabbi and therefore the community’s leader. If they have an issue, they must seek my advice and it’s my job to remain totally informed. If they need an operation, they must seek my advice first. If they want to report a crime, they must seek my advice first.” (This post isn’t to discuss whether this system is right or wrong – its simply stating the fact and the attitude).
As a result, for many years and certainly throughout my lifetime, it was expected that any victim of abuse had to be vetted by a rabbi before going to the police. These rabbis almost never had any expertise in this area alone, and therefore, overwhelmingly chose the wrong action. This also resulted in countless cover-ups which led to further victimization.
For the past few years, many advocacy groups popped up, exposing this ugly truth. The result was that some rabbis courageously encouraged victims to go the police and took a stance on the issue. Devastatingly though, most rabbis have remained silent on this issue and many continue to maintain their myopic and misplaced beliefs on this topic. One only need to do a simple google search to read numerous articles about rabbis giving wrong/bad advice, encouraging silence, demonizing the victims, etc.
In our global community, we accept the Rabbi’s role to be one of an authority on our actions, thinking, methodologies, education and community. The Rabbi is the most important and central feature of our group, often dictating permissible and impermissible things. Accordingly, when there is a danger within a community, the Rabbi is central to the overall decision making on the matter.
Understanding this point, is understanding rabbinical criticism. Silence or inaction on an issue threatening a community is unacceptable. A Rabbi must take a stand and must have a course of action. Those that lack courage, but have Torah and learning should remain as community teachers, but not leaders. Thus, the very nature of their job and position puts them in the forefront of dealing with issues pertaining to CSA. Silence and inaction are unacceptable.
The problem, as illustrated by the attached article, is that far too often, Rabbis have said that they empathize with the victim, yet their actions revealed the opposite. In the recent Zauder case, many prominent Rabbonim wrote letters of support for an evil man, mostly out of foolishness and a lack of understanding/education on the issue. This rightfully subjected them to immense criticism and we should all demand their renouncement and apology for that.
There are countless more examples of this type of action. The Crown Heights Bes Din issued a psak two years ago that told victims of CSA that they may go to the police. Despite this being a very commonsensical and halachically required approach, only two of the three rabbis signed this edict. The holdout has continuously assisted predators to the detriment of the victims. Furthermore, one of the rabbis that signed the edict is actively working to delegitimize a victim that did go to the police!
So are Rabbis above criticism? Absolutely not. Should they be severely exposed if they take the wrong course and harm society? Absolutely.
Let’s make one thing clear: I’m not here to negotiate with children’s safety. The Rabbis can take a stance and make their opinions publicly known, or they will be forced to change by the advocates. There isn’t a middle nice ground here. This is not an arena for pleasantries and niceties…its children’s lives.
If you have a problem with that – please unfriend me and please don’t ever talk to me. I don’t want to be a part of your world.

Meira Bayar Ellias and Rahel Bayar write: We are sisters. One of us is a former child abuse and sex crimes prosecutor. One of us is a licensed social worker who has worked clinically with victims of sexual abuse and is also a victim of sexual assault. One of us is a member of the Orthodox community. One of us was a member of the Orthodox community. We are writing about the case of Evan Zauder.

For those who do not know, Evan Zauder was a teacher at Yeshivat Noam in Paramus. He worked for more than a decade with children through youth groups, including at Congregation Bnai Yeshurun in Teaneck, and in summer camps. In January 2013, Zauder pled guilty to transportation, receipt and distribution of child pornography, possession of child pornography and enticement of a minor to engage in illegal sexual activity. He admitted committing sex crimes against children.

Much has been debated regarding the multitude of letters sent on behalf of Zauder to the federal judge determining his sentence. (He was sentenced to 13 years in prison last month.) More than 50 letters were sent by rabbis, teachers, friends, and family members asking the judge for leniency. The letters came from those who are pillars of the Orthodox community, individuals who have been drawn to “helping professions.” As we looked at this list we saw many names we know, some peripherally, some personally. These are intelligent, kind, and valued members of their communities. They are not evil. Yet the words they used were not intelligent, kind, or of value. In their own words many referred to Zauder’s “mistake” when they were talking about the crimes he committed, the “struggle” he was going through, that he is a “good and decent person who lost control.” They laud the time he spent alone with students and campers, stating he was always “honorable, respectful and caring” in the time he spent with these children.

These letters, available in the public domain and on the Internet, have provoked much comment with regard to the many “big names” who wrote them on Zauder’s behalf. They asked the judge to consider all that made him an integral part of their community. They asked the judge to see him as other than his admitted crimes of pornography and molestation. They ignored the fact that he violated his own parole by accessing child pornography on a monitored computer. They argue that Zauder’s worth to the community as an educator and leader should mitigate his punishment. In making their case, they forget that the victims are more than just victims.

They are children.

It is unacceptable to call pedophilia, child molestation, or child pornography heinous “activities.” These are not “activities,” these are crimes.

Posted in Abuse | Comments Off on Child Sexual Abuse In Orthodox Judaism

Why Do They Deny The Holocaust?

People usually ask “how” instead of “why” about Holocaust deniers. We ask, how can they deny the Holocaust? The important question is why do they deny the Holocaust.

In my view, they deny the Holocaust to deny the narrative that Jews were innocent (rather than comprising a group that has interests that clash with the interests of other groups) and to signal to each other that they want to commit another genocide against Jews and other enemies.

Hating Jews is not socially acceptable in the West today so those who hate Jews usually speak in code.

Wikipedia says:

Holocaust denial is the act of and theory behind denying the genocide of Jews in the Holocaust during World War II. The key claims of Holocaust denial are that the German Nazi government had no Final Solution policy or intention of exterminating Jews, Nazi authorities did not use extermination camps and gas chambers to mass murder Jews, and the actual number of Jews killed was significantly (typically an order of magnitude) lower than the historically accepted figure of 5 to 6 million.

Holocaust deniers generally do not accept the term denial as an appropriate description of their activities, and use the term revisionism instead. Scholars use the term “denial” to differentiate Holocaust deniers from historical revisionists, who use established historical methodologies. The methodologies of Holocaust deniers are criticized as based on a predetermined conclusion that ignores extensive historical evidence to the contrary.

Most Holocaust denial claims imply, or openly state, that the Holocaust is a hoax arising out of a deliberate Jewish conspiracy to advance the interest of Jews at the expense of other peoples.[9] For this reason, Holocaust denial is generally considered to be an antisemitic conspiracy theory, and it frequently encounters criticism.

Niche construction shows how all forms of life try to change their niche to their own group’s benefit. We might even use our suffering for political leverage. Jews and blacks, for example, have used the horror of the Holocaust and of slavery to stigmatize any negative assessment of their group. Stephen Steinlight wrote in 2001:

For perhaps another generation, an optimistic forecast, the Jewish community is thus in a position where it will be able to divide and conquer and enter into selective coalitions that support our agendas.

That America has largely tolerated this dual loyalty — we get a free pass, I suspect, largely over Christian guilt about the Holocaust — makes it no less a reality.

“How can they hate us?” is not the best question for any minority group to ask right now. A better one is, “Why do they hate us?” And it’s not because we’re all so wonderful.

Different groups have different interests and these conflicts fuel conflict. We don’t hate each other because of misunderstanding. We hate because we understand.

No people is entirely innocent, and the actions of a tiny number of your own group may fuel a whirlwind of opposition.

Among Orthodox Jews, Agudah Yisrael signed on to expanding the definition of hate crimes. The OU supports immigration amnesty. In fact, almost all large American Jewish organizations support immigration amnesty, an idea that many hate.

Report:

These Jewish organizations all demanded amnesty for undocumented immigrants in the United States, invoking the language of the Torah about our obligation to do kindness to the stranger in our midst.

National Organizations
American Forum of Russian Jewry (AFRJ)
American Jewish Committee
Anti‐Defamation League
Bend the Arc: A Jewish Partnership for Justice
B’nai B’rith International
Bukharian Jewish Congress of the USA and Canada
HIAS (Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society)
Jewish Council on Public Affairs
Jewish Federations of North America
Keshet
National Council of Jewish Women
Orthodox Union
Rabbinical Assembly
Reconstructionist Rabbinical College
Tikkun Olam Commission of the Jewish Reconstructionist Movement
T’ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights
Union for Reform Judaism
Uri L’Tzedek
Women of Reform Judaism

Local Organizations
AJC Cincinnati
AJC Cleveland
AJC Houston
AJC Los Angeles
AJC New York
AJC Philadelphia/Southern New Jersey
Anti‐Defamation League of Eastern PA and Southern NJ
Congregation Meor Hachaim of Luna Park (New York, NY)
FEGS Health & Human Services (New York, NY)
Greater Philadelphia Jewish Coalition on Immigration
HIAS Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, PA)
Indianapolis Jewish Community Relations Council
Jewish Alliance for Law and Social Action (Boston, MA)
Jewish Community Action (St. Paul, MN)
Jewish Community Center at Starrett City (New York, NY)
Jewish Community Relations Council of Philadelphia
Jewish Council on Urban Affairs (Chicago, IL)
Jewish Family & Career Services (Atlanta, GA)
Jewish Family & Children’s Service (Pittsburgh, PA)
Jewish Family & Children’s Services of the East Bay (Berkeley, CA)
Jewish Family Service of Buffalo & Erie County New York
Jewish Family Service of Western Massachusetts, Inc.
Jewish Family Services (Ann Arbor, MI)
Jewish Labor Committee Western Region (Los Angeles, CA)
Jewish Social Policy Action Network (Philadelphia, PA)
Jewish Vocational Service of MetroWest (East Orange, NJ)
Jews for Racial & Economic Justice (New York, NY)
Massachusetts Board of Rabbis (Newton, MA)
National Council of Jewish Women ‐ Greater Philadelphia
National Council of Jewish Women Texas State Policy Advocates
UJA‐Federation of New York
Women of Vision (Philadelphia, PA)

Posted in Anti-Semitism, Holocaust, Jews, Whites | Comments Off on Why Do They Deny The Holocaust?

Neo-Confederates Have No Interest In Harming Jews

During the real confederacy, Jews were loyal citizens and played an important role in that society.

Steve Sailer writes:

One group of whites, however, has been immune from the blame game. Everybody knows there were no Jews in the South in 1860, and if there had been any, they no doubt would have all been fierce abolitionists standing up fearlessly for the ancient Jewish value of universalism.

Except …

I was struck by a posting on the New York Times’ blog devoted to the Civil War, “Passover in the Confederacy,” that takes a rare critical rather than kitschy approach to Jewish history.

Sue Eisenfeld writes:

“For many American Jews today, particularly those descended from immigrants coming through Northeast corridors in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the idea that Confederate Jews fought on the side of slavery offends their entire worldview, rooted so deeply in social justice. Even the idea of there being so many Jews in the American South, decades before Ellis Island opened its gates, is a strange idea.”

And yet, the more Eisenfeld digs into her subject, the more she discovers that the assumptions that come so naturally to 21st-century commentators are largely historical myths invented for their ancestors’ political purposes. The reality turns out to be richly ironic.

She turns to Rabbi Lance J. Sussman, a visiting professor of Jewish history at Princeton. Surely Jews, with their ancient regard for the rights of mankind, led the way in protesting black slavery? No, Rabbi Sussman tells her: “Southern Jews and many Northern Jews had no issue with slavery.”

For example, the most prestigious Northern rabbi of the period, Morris Raphall of New York, whose father had been banker to the King of Sweden, defended property rights in slaves as “expressly placed under the protection of the Ten Commandments.”

Indeed, the one pan-Jewish political protest of the Civil War era was their successful appeal against the anti-slavery Union general Ulysses S. Grant for cracking down on Jewish merchants who were undermining the Northern blockade on Confederate cotton exports.

What about Passover as an allegory for the fight against the enslavement of blacks? Surely 19th-century Jews viewed African-Americans much as 21st-century Jews do: as surrogate Jews, oppressed by white gentile power…

Weren’t Jews in the South more victimized by all the bigoted Southern anti-Semites? No. Actually, the slaveholding states were far ahead of the northern states in electing Jews to high office, such as Confederate Secretary of War Judah P. Benjamin.

In general, Jews were more welcomed by Southern elites. Much as in medieval Poland, where the nobles invited in Jewish merchants to provide them the financial services that their own people were too innumerate to undertake, rich Southern Protestants generally saw themselves as an agrarian warrior class. So Jewish commercial facilitators, such as the slave-owning Lehman Brothers, who founded the future investment bank in Alabama in 1855, tended to be welcomed as complementary to the landowners.

In contrast, rich Northern Protestants, who were generally descendants of literate Puritans, were more likely than their Southern counterparts to be in commerce rather than plantations. So WASP firms competed with Jewish firms on Wall Street. Relations between Jews and Protestants tended to be relatively cordial in both the North and the South, but there was more rivalry in the North, where the Yankees of New England had similar commercial and intellectual skills.

People like Jared Taylor are neo-confederates. According to Wikipedia: “Neo-Confederate is a term used by some to describe the views of various groups and individuals who view the Southern secession, the Confederate States of America, and the Southern United States in a heroic light.”

Wikipedia summarizes neo-confederates beliefs:

Honor of the Confederacy and its veterans — Much of the Neo-Confederate movement is concerned with giving honor to the Confederacy itself, to the veterans of the Confederacy and Confederate veterans’ cemeteries, to the various flags of the Confederacy, and to Southern cultural identity.[1]
Economics — neo-Confederates usually advocate a free market economy which engages in significantly less taxation than currently found in the United States, and which does not revolve around fiat currencies such as the United States Dollar.[2]
History — many neo-Confederates are openly critical of the presidency of Abraham Lincoln to varied degrees, and of the history of Reconstruction. Various authors have written critiques of Lincoln and the Union. Slavery is almost never defended, but it is usually denied as a primary cause of the American Civil War. Critics often accuse Neo-Confederates of “revisionism” and of acting as “apologists”.[3]
The Civil Rights Movement — Historian Nancy MacLean states that Neo-Confederates used the history of the Confederacy to justify their opposition to the Civil Rights Movement in the 1950s and 1960s.[4] Historian David Blight writes that current neo-Confederates are “driven largely by the desire of current white supremacists to re-legitimize the Confederacy, while they tacitly reject the victories of the modern civil rights movement”.[5]
Black Confederates — The book The Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader notes that toward the end of the Twentieth Century, in order to support the idea that the Civil War was not about slavery, Neo-Confederates began to claim that “thousands of African Americans had served in the Confederate army.” A Neo-Confederate publication, Confederate Veteran, said in 1992 that “the overwhelming majority of blacks during the War Between the States supported and defended, with armed resistance, the Cause of Southern Independence.”[6] Historian Bruce Levine says that “their [“neo-Confederates”] insistent celebration these days of ‘Black Confederates’ … seeks to legitimate that claim” that the war “had never [italics in original] been fought on behalf of slavery; loyalty to the South, southern self-government, southern culture, or states rights — rather than to slavery and white supremacy — fueled the southern war effort.”[7]
Culture — many neo-Confederates promote an unabashed Christian culture. They support, for example, public displays of Christianity, such as “Ten Commandments” monuments and displays of the Christian cross.[8] Almost all Neo-Confederates strongly support the right to keep and bear arms, present in both the United States Constitution and the Confederate States Constitution. Generally they oppose unmitigated illegal immigration of foreign nationals into Southern states.[9] Some Neo-Confederates view the Civil War as a conflict between a secular North and a Christian South.[10] Certain Neo-Confederates believe in an Anglo-Celtic identity theory for residents of the South.[11]
Secession — many neo-Confederates openly advocate the resecession of the Southern states and territories which comprised the old Confederate States of America. The League of the South, for example, promotes the “independence of the Southern people” from the “American empire”.[2] Most neo-Confederate groups do not seek violent revolution, but rather an orderly separation, such as was done in the division of Czechoslovakia.[12] With Constitution Act 542, passed on 25 November, they agreed to the dissolution of Czechoslovakia as of 31 December 1992.[12] Many Neo-Confederate groups have prepared for what they view as a possible collapse of the federal United States into its 50 separate states, much like the Soviet Union collapsed, and believe the Confederacy can be resurrected at that time.

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center:

The term neo-Confederacy is used to describe twentieth and twenty-first century revivals of pro-Confederate sentiment in the United States. Strongly nativist and advocating measures to end immigration, neo-Confederacy claims to pursue Christianity and heritage and other supposedly fundamental values that modern Americans are seen to have abandoned.

Neo-Confederacy also incorporates advocacy of traditional gender roles, is hostile towards democracy, strongly opposes homosexuality, and exhibits an understanding of race that favors segregation and suggests white supremacy. In many cases, neo-Confederates are openly secessionist.

Neo-Confederacy has applied to groups including the United Daughters of the Confederacy of the 1920s and those resisting racial integration in the 1950s and 1960s. In its most recent iteration, neo-Confederacy is used by both proponents and critics to describe a belief system that has emerged since the early-1980s in publications like Southern Partisan, Chronicles, and Southern Mercury, and in organizations including the League of the South, the Council of Conservative Citizens and the Sons of Confederate Veterans.

Overall, it is a reactionary conservative ideology that has made inroads into the Republican Party from the political right, and overlaps with the views of white nationalists and other more radical extremist groups.

Most people think that Jews are super pro-black and pro-civil rights. Leftists Jews tend to be pro-black and pro-civil rights. The more religious the Jew, the less he cares about civil rights.

Posted in Blacks, Jared Taylor, Steve Sailer, Whites | Comments Off on Neo-Confederates Have No Interest In Harming Jews

Debating Donald Sterling

Benny posts: 1) The legality of the recording is irrelevant….truly. It doesn’t change the fact.
2) The recording was done legally; I know, I’ve read the Penal Code section.
3) The real issue is the length of the ban. Ron Artest/Jermaine O’neal jumped into the stands and punched fans….during a game. This is unequivocally worse action than being a private racist. It effects the integrity of the game. Laterell Sprewell choked out his coach on the basketball court….also affecting the integrity of the game. Kendrick Perkins was recently arrested for punching a male and a female. Dante Cunningham was arrested for choking his girlfriend, punching her and then rearrested for threatening her in violation of the restraining order.

None received anything close to a lifetime ban. What Sterling did was outrageous and unacceptable, but fairness dictates another result.

Luke: What exactly was outrageous and unacceptable about what Sterling did? He did nothing. He said in a private conversation that he wished his mistress would not post photos of herself with blacks nor bring them with her to games. Those are sentiments that many perhaps most Americans would share in that situation (older man, younger mistress posting sexually provocative photos of herself draped all over studly young powerful black men). When Jay Z, part owner of the New Jersey Nets, wears a black separatist medallion to games, what should be the consequence? Sterling did not conduct his team’s business in a racist way, almost of his players are black, his coach is black, and his GM for 22 years, Elgin Baylor, was an incompetent black. Former Knicks great Larry Johnson called for an all-black basketball league. Is that worth a punishment?

Posted in Donald Sterling | Comments Off on Debating Donald Sterling

US Has Given Israel $121 Billion

Story: According to a report just released by the Congressional Research Service, a legislative branch agency of the Library of Congress that prepares policy analysis for Congress, “Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign assistance since World War II.” Since its creation, author Jeremy M. Sharp wrote, “[T]he United States has provided Israel $121 billion (noninflation-adjusted dollars) in bilateral assistance.”

Posted in Israel | Comments Off on US Has Given Israel $121 Billion

Anti-Semitism Documentary ‘Defamation’

I’m watching this great documentary “Defamation” by Yoav Shamir about the Anti-Defamation League and anti-Semitism.

About 38 minutes in, you see Abraham Foxman, head of the ADL, lecturing the president of Ukraine to not compare the Ukrainian genocide to the Holocaust.

Abe Foxman and the ADL makes my skin crawl. They are leftist ethnic activists akin to Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

Wikipedia writes:

The film examines whether anti-Semitic has become an all purpose label for anyone who criticizes Israel and the possibility that some Jews’ preoccupation with the past—i.e., the Holocaust—is preventing progress in the here and now.[1] Shamir decided to make this film after a critic of an earlier film accused him of antisemitism.[1]

Filmmaker Yoav Shamir states in the beginning of the film that as an Israeli he has never experienced antisemitism himself and wants to learn more about it since references to antisemitism in countries all over the world are common in the Israeli media.

The film includes interviews with Abraham Foxman, the head of the Anti-Defamation League, John J. Mearsheimer, co-author of New York Times Best Seller The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, Norman Finkelstein, a critic of Israeli government policy, as well as many others. The film also follows a group of Israeli high school students on a class trip to Poland where they tour Auschwitz, as well as a number of other notable Holocaust locations.

The film notes that in 2007, the ADL reported a spike in antisemitism, claiming that there were 1,500 anti-Semitic incidents in the United States, yet when Shamir contacts the ADL they can only list minor incidents such as websites with inflammatory comments, letters from employees denied time off for a Jewish holiday, or people offended by a cop’s use of the word “Jew”. A case presented concerns a group of African American boys, aged between 10 and 12, who pelted a school bus with rocks, breaking two windows.

Shamir also interviews a rabbi who says that the hypervigilance of the ADL inflames relations between Jews and non-Jews in the United States. He also finds that among his interviewees there is more sensitivity to antisemitism among secular Jews than religious ones.

Forty three minutes in, Rabbi Bleich (Chabad) in Kiev says: “For some reason, secular Jews are more worried about anti-semitism than religious Jews. Fighting anti-Semitism is not part of being Jewish for an Orthodox Jew. Part of being Jewish means practicing Judaism. There is no mitzvah in the Torah to fight anti-Semitism. Very often, people who are not practicing find their thing in fighting anti-semitism. So they’ll express their Jewish identity by fighting anti-semitism and helping the community.”

People who have a traditional identity are much more secure in general than those who don’t.

Near the end of the documentary, Norman Finkelstein, the son of Holocaust survivors, gives an ironic Nazi salute and says that Abe Foxman is worse than Hitler because Hitler didn’t do it for the money.

Norman tells the Israeli director: “The best thing for Israel will be if they get rid of these American Jews who are warmongers from Martha’s Vineyard, the Hamptoms, Beverly Hills, Miami. It’s been a disaster for Israel.”

“You’re funny. You come from a society in which everyone calls everyone a Nazi. They called Rabin a Nazi. Ben Gurion called Jabotinksy a Nazi. Jabotinsky called Ben Gurion a Nazi. Begin called Ben Gurion a Nazi. They all said each of them is worse than Hitler. That’s the whole language of your society. That’s also the language I grew up with. Everything in my house, the food, worse than Auschwitz. The clothes, worse than Auschwitz. All of a sudden, you get so pious when I go like that. Your whole society is like that.”

Posted in ADL, Anti-Semitism, Jared Taylor, Steve Sailer | Comments Off on Anti-Semitism Documentary ‘Defamation’