HOW TO DESTROY THE ALT-RIGHT

J. Arthur Bloom writes:

A good rule of thumb for hard-right, Nazi or Nazi-adjacent groups is that one-third of its members are petty criminals, one-third are gay, and one-third are informants. The nature of such groups makes it hard to come up with firm numbers, so you’ll have to trust me. Comprised of often no more than a dozen or so individuals, from which people are constantly drifting in and out, makes attempting an actual count difficult if not impossible, but there is abundant evidence that this breakdown is closer than not to the truth. It is certainly true for now-defunct groups like the American Nazi Party and the National Renaissance Party, and nothing in the mountains of post-Charlottesville coverage and doxxing has given me any reason to update the general assumption for hard-right groups today.

Many individuals fall into more than one category. Patrik Hermansson, the most recent alt-right infiltrator, has a bit of a honeypot vibe. It’s probably not a coincidence that the most revealing scoop he produced pertained to Greg Johnson, editor of the rather gay-friendly fascist imprint Counter Currents. There are some individuals that fall into all three categories. Frazier Glenn Miller is now awaiting execution in El Dorado Prison outside of Wichita, for killing three outside a Kansas Jewish Community Center in 2014. Miller turned state’s evidence to testify in the Fort Smith Trial in 1988, a botched attempt by the Department of Justice to apply a seditious conspiracy charge to a slew of racist groups, some of which had never had any contact with one another prior to the trial. In exchange, he was rewarded with a reduced sentence and probably admission into a witness protection program (the government neither confirms nor denies this, but he was assigned a new Social Security number). Some years earlier Miller, an alcoholic and deeply troubled man, was arrested after being caught in flagrante with a male transvestite prostitute. He is an instructive example, because despite his informing, there is no reason to doubt he believed in what he was doing.

The phenomenon of the true-believing informant, strange as it may sound, is relatively common. George Lincoln Rockwell, the founder of the American Nazi Party, regularly telephoned the ADL’s man in Washington, Jason Silverman, to update him on party activities. Guy Banister, a former FBI agent-turned activist who was involved in Louisiana’s White Citizens Councils and the Minutemen, was regularly in touch with his former colleagues, which may have helped to shield him when a man who rented space in a building he owned, one Lee Harvey Oswald, came under posthumous scrutiny…

One interesting example that bears mentioning in relation to the Republic of Florida debacle is Roy Bullock, the ADL’s West Coast fact-finding director, who worked for the organization for about four decades. Bullock nearly kicked off an espionage scandal in the early 1990s when it was revealed that he had been handing over information on anti-apartheid activists to the South African government, and being paid for his services. When his houseboat was raided, authorities found files on hundreds of organizations and almost ten thousand individuals, some of which had been stolen from the San Francisco Police Department after they shut down their political intelligence operations. (There is also circumstantial evidence that his files on Palestinian activists were ending up in the hands of the Israeli government.)

The ADL settled several lawsuits out of court with people who had been spied upon, though they claim no wrongdoing. Bullock is germane to today’s case because, in the course of infiltrating a wide variety of Arab-American groups, he was accused of doing things like leaving holocaust denial literature on their tables. This is a common theme of watchdog activities: they will try to equate, tarnish, or otherwise associate a legitimate disagreement with bigotry. It would be useful to the ADL to associate Palestinian rights with holocaust denial, and if there isn’t enough evidence to actually support the connection, what’s a little ratfucking for a good cause?

From 1991 to 1993 the FBI briefly was involved in infiltrating militia groups in Texas, setting up a front organization called the Veterans Aryan Militia which was used to make inroads in the Texas Light Infantry, among others. The VAM was intentionally modeled after The Order, a white nationalist criminal organization famous for several robberies and the assassination of Denver radio host Alan Berg, and according to J.M. Berger’s report for the New America Foundation, it consisted of at least one agent provocateur, and worked to strengthen links between militias and groups like the Aryan Nations, which, up to that point, had been virtually nonexistent…

By organizing the Charlottesville white nationalist rally that turned deadly last fall, former Occupy activist Jason Kessler provided the watchdog organizations their greatest fundraising coup in years. And now, the Robespierre of the Republic of Florida seems to think it would be good PR to associate his group with a school shooter.

Posted in Alt Right | Comments Off on HOW TO DESTROY THE ALT-RIGHT

JTA: This Jewish lawyer defends America’s most infamous Nazi

Ron Kampeas writes:

WASHINGTON (JTA) — Jay Marshall Wolman, like a thousand other lawyers on Twitter, is wry, maybe a little coarse and, well, Jewish, peppering his tweets with Hebrew blessings and other Jewish references.

He gets deadly serious, though, if you ask him why he is the lead attorney representing Andrew Anglin, America’s most notorious Nazi.

Wolman was in the headlines this week for his attempt to dismiss a lawsuit against Anglin alleging the Daily Stormer founder harassed a Jewish real estate agent in Montana. Tanya Gersh’s suit claims Anglin caused her “emotional distress” last year when he called for a “troll storm” against her and published her personal information.

Wolman, according to the Missoulian, a Montana daily, argued that Anglin was living abroad at the time and therefore is out of the court’s jurisdiction. (Lawyers for Gersh and the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is assisting her, have been unable to find Anglin. A U.S. magistrate in Missoula has given Anglin until Friday to prove his whereabouts.)

Wolman is not shy in his social media profile about being Jewish, so I asked him why he thought it was a good idea to represent Anglin, who heads an online clearinghouse of extreme anti-Semitic and racist thought.

Wolman, 41, declined an interview, but wrote me the following: “As a Jewish member of the team representing Andrew Anglin, I can understand why you are interested in talking with me about why I represent him and how that relates to my identity. However, I must, politely, decline the invitation. Although I do not shy away from media inquiries, I do not tend to make myself a subject of reporting.

“That said, as you will, undoubtedly, be reporting on me, I would direct your attention to our reference to the Aaron Sorkin film, “The American President.”

Wolman included a quote from that 1995 film in which the titular president says “America isn’t easy. America is advanced citizenship. You’ve gotta want it bad, ’cause it’s gonna put up a fight. It’s gonna say, ‘You want free speech? Let’s see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who’s standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours.’”

Added Wolman:

“I would spend a lifetime opposing what was said, but I will never allow anti-Semitism to derail my commitment to freedom of speech. In the words of Justice Holmes, ‘hard cases make bad law.’ Any restrictions the courts might set on the speech of a person whose speech you oppose will be undoubtedly applied, at some point down the road, to the speech of a person whose speech you support. If Andrew Anglin does not have freedom of speech, then neither does the JTA.”

The popular culture reference to a 1990s film was not a surprise: Wolman’s Twitter feed reveals his affection for films of that decade and the 1980s (he’s a fan of “Say Anything,” the classic 1989 John Cusack angsty teen drama). Wolman was a contestant on “Jeopardy” in 2004 — not the best period because he was up against Ken Jennings, the quiz show’s all-time champ.

Wolman and his law partner, Marc Randazza, consistently cast their decision to defend Anglin in not-easy-but-someone’s-gotta-do-it terms.

Posted in Andrew Anglin | Comments Off on JTA: This Jewish lawyer defends America’s most infamous Nazi

Haaretz: “The Link Between Jews and Money Is No Longer Taboo”

I am currently compiling a list of everything I was taught about money growing up such as:

* Money is hard to get and easy to lose.
* The more money you have, the more problems.
* The more stuff you have, the more that can go wrong.
* The more high tech, the more complicated and expensive the problems.
* You get nothing for nothing and very little for sixpence.

Suffice to say, attitudes to money are different among Jews than among Protestants. One thing I love about Judaism and Jews is that they are relaxed about the natural passions. Torah takes it for granted that people want money, sex, power, prestige, fame, honor and the like and it simply seeks to channel those drives towards good ends. When Jimmy Carter said he lusted in his heart, Protestants were traumatized and Jews yawned (Dennis Prager).

Steve Sailer blogs:

From Haaretz in Israel:


Opinion: The Link Between Jews and Money Is No Longer Taboo

After years of focusing on anti-Semitism, more and more historians are daring to deal with a subject long considered untouchable

Ofri Ilany Feb 14, 2018 9:35 PM

… This anecdote exemplifies the centuries-old stereotype according to which the Jews have an innate knack for dealing with money. It’s an image that clung to the Jews even when they were paupers.

The original title for the blockbuster Fiddler on the Roof showstopper song “If I Were a Rich Man” was “If I Were a Rothschild.” After Fiddler, Harnick and Bock created the musical The Rothschilds, which was something of a hit at the time around 1970 but has mostly been forgotten.

Evidently, you could make a lot more money telling Jews they were poor than telling Jews they were rich.


… But today it is perfectly clear that the “Jew and money” stereotype is almost as potent as it was a century ago. Suffice it to recall President Donald Trump’s remark to Jewish leaders during the election campaign, “You’re not going to support me, because I don’t want your money.”

Considering the dark history of the subject of the connection between Jews and money, the actual economic history of the Jews is a highly sensitive issue. Jewish history has been described as “a head without a body.” As the historian Jonathan Karp notes, the character of Shylock – the notorious usurer in Shakespeare’s “The Merchant of Venice” – has cast “a long shadow of defensiveness over Jewish self-perceptions.” Nevertheless, over the past decade, historians have been increasingly focusing on the economic life of the Jews and trying to dispel the mystery and the myths that envelop the subject. Karp has termed this an “economic turn” in the field of Jewish studies.

Until not long ago, most historians preferred to delve deeply into the history of anti-Semitism, or to study the origins of kabbala or analyze Jewish philosophy – and not dwell, for example, on the story of the Jewish trading and banking empires. That subject was largely neglected by Jewish historians themselves; they left it for thinkers who possessed anti-Semitic inclinations.

A striking example is German sociologist Werner Sombart, who in 1911 published the influential book “The Jews and Modern Capitalism” (English edition, 2001, translated by M. Epstein). In response to sociologist Max Weber, Sombart argued that it was the Jews, not the Protestants, who invented capitalism. The Jews’ compatibility with capitalism, he thought, was related to substantive traits in Judaism, which, from the dawn of history, trained the Jews in “the subjugation of the merely animal instincts in man.” …

Actually, Jewish scholars have often sought to emphasize the socialist elements of their culture, a tendency that was consistent with the leftist bent of many Jewish intellectuals in the mid-20th century. But that situation seems to be changing. Not a few contemporary Jewish intellectuals have embraced capitalism as a legitimate economic approach, and are not ashamed of it. As such, they are proud to present their co-religionists as pioneers of capitalism.

One of the latter group is the historian Jerry Z. Muller. In his 2010 book “Capitalism and the Jews,” Muller homes in on the Jewish financiers who established the Deutsche Bank and the Dresdner Bank. A similar approach is taken in “The Chosen Few” (2012), by Maristella Botticini and Zvi Eckstein. Their book describes usurious moneylending as a Jewish trade, one in which Jews specialized of their own volition, in order to exploit their relative advantages over the uneducated general population. In this way, the authors maintain, the Jews brought prosperity to the countries in which they were active.

The past decade has also seen the publication of many studies that promote less sweeping claims, but describe global networks of commerce in which the Jews played a crucial role throughout the modern era. …

UC Berkeley historian Yuri Slezkine’s book The Jewish Century, which springs from his mother’s side of the family’s experience working for the Bolshevik state, argues that Jews were attracted to Marxism because they were discriminated against because of religion, nationality, and that they were good at capitalism. So, get rid of religion, nations, and capitalism and no more discrimination against Jews! What could possibly go wrong?

***

PHILIP HENSHER WRITES:

Insults, inadvertent offence and anti-Semitism

John Updike is an unlikely controversialist, and may have been surprised to find himself labelled an anti-semite by the New York Observer. His offence came in a review of Peter Carey’s new novel, My Life as a Fake, in which he referred to one of Carey’s characters, Peter Weiss, as a “rich Jew”. The New York Observer took exception to the phrase, which was Updike’s, and not Carey’s, and explained “To say that the expression ‘rich Jew’ is loaded with historical anti-Semitism is an understatement.”

Would Mr Updike describe someone as “a rich Catholic” or “a rich Protestant”?’ The situation immediately became more complex. Timothy Noah, a more industrious fellow than me, or indeed, the leader writers of the New York Observer, swiftly searched through Mr Updike’s vast output, and, indeed, found instances where he had described Catholics and Protestants as rich.

From a 1985 short story, “You loved my family, the idea of there being so many of us, rich and Episcopalian”; from Couples, “[T]here was little in her religious background – feebly Presbyterian; her father, though a generous pledger, had been rather too rich”; from an essay on Graham Greene, “In this rich and glamorous American Greene met his spiritual match; like him, she was a promiscuous, frisky, hard-drinking Catholic.”

TIMOTHY NOAH WRITES:

But Amazon’s “search inside” feature informs us that the phrase “rich Jew” gets used all the time to no particular anti-Semitic effect. Rabbi Arthur Hertzberg used it in The Jews in America. Sholem Aleichem used it in Tevye the Dairyman. Philip Roth used it in American Pastoral. Robert Caro used it in The Power Broker. In none of these instances did the author imply anything derogatory or imply that some other person who used the phrase was expressing anti-Semitism.

Chatterbox doesn’t deny that the phrase “rich Jew” can sometimes be used in a way that reinforces a harmful ethnic stereotype. Quite often, though, it’s used simply to indicate that somebody is, well, rich and Jewish. Kaplan told Chatterbox that a New Yorker editor should have kicked the story back to Updike and asked him to find another phrase. But he admitted no substitute came immediately to mind. What was Updike supposed to do, scribble in “rich person who happens to be Jewish”? That sounds like something you’d hear from the sort of plodding Jewish authority figure that Philip Roth loves to send up in his novels.

What happened here, Chatterbox guesses, is that the Observer had on its mind the recent incident in which the journalist Gregg Easterbrook (full disclosure: a Chatterbox friend) stumbled into some much more vivid phrasing along these lines (“Jewish executives to worship money above all else”) that was genuinely anti-Semitic, though clearly not intended as such. (Easterbrook is nobody’s idea of an anti-Semite.) Easterbrook and the magazine he writes for, the New Republic, immediately recognized and apologized for the legitimate offense they caused, and the Anti-Defamation League was appeased. In Updike’s case, though, the offense seems entirely imaginary. The Observer is fighting the last war.

COMMENTS AT STEVE SAILER:

* I notice the tendency to constantly and unreasonably negotiate: the stereotype isn’t that Jews are good with money, it’s that they use forms of cheating to exclude competition and then claim a closed process to be meritocratic. One is effectively praise and the other is the entirety of the Semitic-Western issue and hundreds of years of history in one line. Witness this journalist in slipping in this little mitigation. I try to tell the other awful racists on the deep web, leave the federal reserve bank alone, pay attention to how they cannot sit down to tea without a strategem. Look at the way this sentence I refer to resembles the old joke about the kid asking his dad for ten dollars: “FIVE DOLLARS? Am I made of money? What on Earth does anyone need three dollars for? I just gave you money, and now you ask me for two dollars.” The point here isn’t stinginess (with which I have no objection), it’s brazen goalpost-moving. The unapologetically unreasonable man generally defeats the lone opponent who feels an obligation to be reasonable.

* I do find it rather ironic that modern day White nationalists and Alt Rightists are such huge proponents of bitcoin and other crypto currencies, given that such abstract and complex financial instruments would have historically been associated with Jews. Needless to say, making money by speculating on the price of Magic Internet Coins would have been diametrically opposed to the nationalist/fascist/Catholic reactionary/national socialist ideal.

* Jewish Rothschilds were about as common as American Rockefellers – not very. This, to me is the great irony of the Holocaust – Hitler aimed his wrath at international bankers and Bolshevik revolutionaries but ended up murdering guys like my grandfather who didn’t have 5 zlotys to his name and knew nothing of Marx (neither Karl nor Groucho). It would be like going after Carlos Slim and Carlos the Jackal but instead killing a million versions of Carlos the guy who cuts your lawn.

Jews who were good at capitalism didn’t become Communists. The minority who became Communists were guys like Lenin and Stalin (and Trotsky) – people with enough education to understand that they were smarter than the people who were then in charge (or thought they were) but who thought that were not being rewarded by that system in the manner that they deserved (and that the masses were being screwed even more). University students, failed poets, philosophers, dreamers, NOT good at capitalism. The masses themselves (Jewish and non-Jewish) were not educated enough to have a clue, nor ideological enough to think that some German guy wrote a book with the solution to their problems.

* Do those who were labeled as anti-semites for violating the taboo when it was still a taboo have a legal recourse now when this is no longer a taboo? Reparations for anti-semites?

Posted in Jews | Comments Off on Haaretz: “The Link Between Jews and Money Is No Longer Taboo”

What Does It Feel Like To Be Selfish?

When I am in my character defects of dishonesty, self-seeking, selfishness, inconsideration and fear, I tighten, compress and narrow. When I am tall and free and easy, I am serene, open and happy.

When I want something so badly that I think of nobody else’s needs, I tighten and compress and my worldview narrows. I’m like a monkey putting his hand in a trap to grab something shiny but then finds he can only get his arm out by releasing the shiny trinket.

When I am dishonest, my stomach feels queasy and my body tenses up because I know there are likely to be consequences I won’t like. When I put satisfaction of my basic instincts above their appropriate place, I tighten as I realize I’m stepping on other people and they’re going to retaliate.

All ideological beliefs are just unnecessary body tension. You can’t believe anything (as opposed to a state of awareness) without tightening and compressing your neck and torso.

When you read Paul in the New Testament, you can tell he could never read Hebrew. No clue. Good to read Alt Right in original context. I feel like there is nobody I can’t understand, can’t empathize with, from Hitler to Caesar to Napoleon to Mao to Stalin.

>Empathize with Hitler? How exactly?

Understand why he felt he had to do hard things to protect his people.

>But both his justifications (“jewish conspiracy”) and methods were appalling. Or are you concerned only with the vague goal of “protecting his people”? And let’s not forget he was the greatest butcher of Germans in history, and >showed no empathy for them at the end.

I’m interested in understanding where people come from. How they see the world. Judging people is an entirely different thing. Both perspectives have their place. All moral judgments depend upon a subjective leap of faith.

>So you don’t believe in objective and universal moral imperatives, such as “don’t willfully kill children”?

Sure, but those imperatives are based upon a subjective leap of faith (which I make as an Orthodox Jew). Everything has its use, even atheism, because that perspective enables one to view the world as different life forms competing for survival and you can let go of the need to categorize some groups as good and others as bad.

There’s a famous Hasidic story about a rebbe who taught that everything has its place in God’s world. “Even atheism?” asked one student. “Even atheism,” said the rebbe, “because when you see a poor person, you should give to him as though there were no God in the universe to help.”

Most Jewish orgs think that if the Alt Right comes to town, you fight them. I say that as long as they desist from criminal behavior, you take them to lunch, you get to know them, you help them with accommodation, you offer to show them around town, you offer them help with medical and dental care, job hunting, etc. You support their right to free speech and to free assembly. You identify with their desire for the white equivalent of Zionism. You read their sacred texts. You learn their language. You speak to them in their language. You try to find common ground. And you don’t seek anything in return.

That’s how the Mennonites roll. They don’t compete with other groups. They only seek to love others and to be of service. As a result, there’s not a lot of anti-Mennonite sentiment.

Posted in Addiction, Personal | Comments Off on What Does It Feel Like To Be Selfish?

What’s The Palestinian Perspective?

I asked a Jewish friend to give me the Palestinian point of view. He responded:

It is very hard to get an accurate perspective without an honest historical perspective. Unfortunately, neither the Israelis nor the Palestinians are able to be honest about it.

For a recent historical perspective of the relations between the Jews and Arabs from just before WWI up through the end of the British Mandate, Tom Segev’s book: One Palestine Complete is very good. Ari Shavit published a book, My Promised Land, in 2013, which was a compilation of articles he had written over the years. His interviews with Israeli soldiers who participated in forcibly removing Palestinian Arabs from towns during the 1948 war was shocking to the Israelis. He also has some interesting history because members of his family first went to Palestine in the 1890’s. I forgot the name of his book.

The first Western book which really brought the plight of the Palestinians home was called: They are human too, and was a photography book, by Per Anderson, about the Palestinian refugee camps outside of Israel (it came out in 1957 and so many of the refugees were actually living in the West Bank) I bought another book of photographs of Arabs in Palestine (The Palestinians: Photographs of a Land and its People from 1839 to the Present Day by Elias Sanbar) to show what a thriving community they had. One point to remember is that until 1948 there were roughly equal numbers of Christians and Moslems in Lebanon, Syria and the area of Palestine but today in Palestine the number is less than 10% as most have emigrated to America.

When analyzing Israel from the Palestinian perspective, it is important to be aware of the biases of the author. Many are neo Marxists who see the Jews as European colonialists or Imperialists, rather than as invaders who don’t necessarily want to exploit the native population, but rather to supplant it. Some of these are sincere Religious zealots such as Meir Kahane who believed God promised Israel to the Jewish People, others non religious believed that because of anti Semitism Jews deserved a state of their own, even as the ethnic state becomes less and less accepted in our multicultural world.

If you read anything, read Shavit’s chapter on the forced dispossession of Arabs in 1948. It can only be justified if you are a religious fanatic. The expulsion from towns was purely political. The Arabs of these communities did not pose any threat to the Jews.

Posted in Israel | Comments Off on What’s The Palestinian Perspective?