Sex Addiction Is Not Our Problem

Food addiction is not our problem.

Debt addiction is not our problem.

Alcohol addiction is not our problem.

These are all but symptoms of our problem (a broken attachment system). Recovery from sex addiction does not equal a life without lust. Recovery from addiction demands abstinence from the substances and behaviors of our addictions but it does not equal such abstinence. Recovery really means that you have been restored to, at minimum, a normal level of connection with yourself, with other people and with God. That means you can be alone and feel ok. That means you can be with other people and feel ok.

Due to growing up in foster care, I have loneliness embedded in my central nervous system. Just hanging out with people does not solve this problem. Abstaining from my addictions does not solve this problem. I have a lot of recovery in my various programs but I hate to be alone in silence. My mind is a dangerous neighborhood I don’t like to visit alone. So instead of silence surrounding me when I am alone, I prefer to have music going, or chanting, or a 12-step lecture, or just something healthy playing in the background. When I lie down at night to go to sleep, I like to play something relaxing and healthy in the background. When I wake up at night, I like to listen to War and Peace or some other fine literature. If I’m awake for long in the middle of the night, and I’m restless with the book I’m listening to, I’ll sit up and watch something like the Frasier sitcom to distract my mind from wandering to dark places.

When I get up at 5:30 am, my work days are usually scheduled until 7pm.

My recovery is a work in progress.

Posted in Addiction, Personal | Comments Off on Sex Addiction Is Not Our Problem

Power Corrupts

I study the incisive iSteve comments of Catholic poster Maj. Kong like they’re Torah from Heaven:

* A much higher % of billionaires are Jewish, than would be expected from their share of the population. The same is true with their representation in Congress, Academia, Hollywood and the News Media. That’s a lot of cultural power, and as Lord Acton said “power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely”.

It is unreasonable to expect that liberal Jews should be deferential to the conservative Chrisitianity of Middle America. But it is also unreasonable to continuously lie and subvert the interests of the latter, and not expect the latter to lash out in anger.

* Your community has moral weight, and this weight is being thrown around to support the invasion of our lands. None of the major Jewish organizations have called for an immigration moratorium, but almost all of them have called for censorship.

If a Rothschild (who runs the World Jewish Congress) called for stopping immigration, and importing PM Netanyahu’s policies to raise the birth rate for native European Christians, then it would assuage our concerns.

* “Meme magic” = White Identity Politics

Prior to the ’16 election, the GOP message was always called out by liberals as “dog whistling”, which was ineffective. The use of memes from /pol/ and others helped legitimize white identity politics via bloc voting. Without that, younger white Bernie voters from MI, WI and PA would not have shifted into the Trump column. (Trump also benefited from a gain among black males, and lower black turnout overall.)

* The power of the mainstream media is not what it once was. The number of journalists and circulations is locked into a secular decline. The censorship by the Silicon Dons is a reaction to the Overton Window shift that resulted from “meme magic”.

H. Clinton was planning on massive Islamic immigration, search the TiSA agreement, which was going to allow unlimited movement from Pakistan to the US, with other countries almost certainly added later. The number of refugees was being proposed at 1-2 millions per year.

During the run-up to the election, I posted that the first thing I would do in the event of H. Clinton stealing the election, was to form a “Conservatives for BDS” movement. I can’t be the only one to have put 2 and 2 together.

It is worth noting that most Latin American countries have minimal sympathies for Israel (pro-US Colombia is one of the exceptions). I think you are limited in imagining that anti-Jewish sentiment would remain on the left. Should even one-fifth of the right switch to an anti-Israel stance, it isn’t likely to cause the left to become more pro-Israel in response.

Note the rise Nation of Islam in the 90s under Farrakhan, the Jewish intellectuals spilled much ink on the “loss of the black-Jewish alliance”. Left-wing Zionists have a fundamental contradiction in that the most strongest supporters of Israel (right wing evangelical Protestants in the South), happen to be the most despised group in America.

You might also have not noticed the prominence of a certain Linda Sarsour.

* My guess would be the political costs of gentrification and its associated backlash. The gentrification of NYC under Giuliani and Bloomberg led to the DeBlasio backlash, and Red Billy campaigned on restraining the police (so his base could commit more crimes).

Many new development projects can be stonewalled unless enough payoffs are made and the buildings are made “mixed income”.

The bicoastal municipal pols face the choice between going full-dope on gentrification, which means the abandonment of their core egalitarian ideology. Or, they can resist it, but at the risk of becoming like Baltimore. For how long will the Silicon Dons tolerate open defecation on the streets of San Francisco?

Our bicoastal elite cities are based on exclusivity, not broad based prosperity. But, they need a monolithic underclass voting bloc to outvote the rural Republican hinterlands. That is the core contradiction that will define the politics of the next several decades.

* Google is rumored to be interested in taking over Walmart, thereby becoming a direct threat to the House of Bezos.

* Silicon Valley is still a major donor to the congressional GOP. Any attempt to get the DOJ to use antitrust and/or public accommodation law against the Silicon Dons will incur wrath from the corrupt in Congress. A mutiny among State Department bureaucrats ended the attempt to remove the sanctions on Russia. Career DOJ lawyers could easily do the same thing, with the promise of a seven figure in-house counsel position at the Big 5.

They already spent more than a billion dollars lobbying for amnesty since 2013. I’ve no doubt they can spend thirty times that much to defeat a push for regulation.

* The right needs to be working on a de-platforming of the SPLC from its “advisory” roles to the police. We also need coordinated boycotts against its leading sponsors.

* Leftists of the 20th Century Progressive Era were well aware of innate biological differences that cause racial disparities. But, they still supported socialism as a way to eliminate them. It is not hard to imagine future black radicals demanding state-funded genetic engineering to improve their circumstances.

* Just wait until WMD is unleashed in a major Western city. A military junta and internment camps will be right around the corner. A power struggle would ensue just like Erdogan/Gulen in Turkey.

* White identity politics are the foundation of this country. Even the citizenist rulers of Singapore would not allow a Malay Muslim majority.

* If the GOP returns to its trust-busting roots of the TR era, a substantial portion of the Bernie voters might be permanently realigned in partisan affiliation. We also need to invoke the environmentalist argument against immigration.

* This is a runaway train we are on right now. The traitorous GOP in Congress has openly glorified communist violence. If peaceful revolution is blocked, violent revolution is inevitable (a famous liberal once said this).

The left believed it was “this” close to wiping out the Real America with an H. Clinton regime. If they retake Congress in 2018, we are headed for war. If the right gets 60 Senators in 2018, we must implement mass deportations, a total immigration moratorium, and the defunding of all institutions of Cultural Marxism.

This is a street fight. No rules.

* Anglo policy since 1588 has been the refusal to accept a hegemon on the Continent. For good or ill, this explains nearly every single war up to the present including Brexit and the rampant “Russian interference” claims.

Germany was outcompeting Britain economically prior to 1914, the British ruling class despised them as noveau riche. Germany made two errrors, ending the Three Emperors Alliance, and embarking on a naval arms race they could not win (The UK maintained a minimal Army). Germany could have instead become the first mechanized army, as they started the auto industry, not Detroit. The 1914 invasion of France failed due to logistics failures, trucks would have solved this.

The EU is not a hard-left project, witness their insistence on privatization of state owned industries. When Greece elected a hard left government, the EU turned the screws. “Free movement of peoples” is not an inherently left/right issue. It is a globalist/nationalist issue. The USSR, and the PRC today, have something called “internal passports”.

* “Experts” can lie over and over, but unless its quite egregious, they almost never face being thrown out of their tenured sinecures.

Academia is our “deep state”, and it needs civilian control just as much as the military does.

* I also suspect a knock-on effect if white identity politics and bloc voting goes mainstream, it may generate more respect from some nonwhite voters than the WF Buckley crap of the last generation.

* The average white liberal Protestant, and white non-religious, are still less D voters than non-orthodox Jews.

Their community has achieved a tremendous amount of cultural capital in this country, and their politics on immigration has been ruinous to my community. The evidence has piled up that this was a deliberate plot of revenge, and these very legitimate grievances form the fuel of the alt-right’s fires.

They are always talking about being the “outsider” when they are the very pinnacle of the insider.

* GOP appointed justices are historically not as loyal as Dem appointed justices. The Dems haven’t had a nominee go the other way since JFK appointed Byron White.

* Like the Union Army at the 3rd day of Gettysburg, 8 Senate Dems are all that stands in the way of bringing Budapest to Washington.

* Bret is in America because he can make far more money here than he could in Israel. His politics is rooted in a deep animus against the native ethnoreligious peoples of the West. If he truly liked the Israeli way so much, he would have never left.

* The journalist is a dog that won’t go off the leash of their owners. Almost no Old Media outlets are profitable anymore, they need the ongoing largesse of globalist billionaires like Slim and Bezos among many others.

Get one journolist fired, there will be no shortage of replacements. But get one billionaire imprisoned, like Putin did to the Yukos boss, and it will be much harder to find a replacement.

* It is hard to tell where the State Department ends, and Soros begins. The Ford, Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations are also major players for over a century.

* With whites, we have a partisan spectrum of Liberals/Moderates/Conservatives, with blacks you have Extremists/Socialists/Blue Dogs/Self-hating.

Extremists-Louis Farrakhan, Communists, the leaders of Black Lives Matter, etc. They despise great amounts of black mainstream culture, are frequently overeducated and homosexual. Julius Malema in South Africa is a good parallel.

Socialists-Most black politicians are here, TNC is a good example, he pretends to be the first group, but he is a mainstream grifter. Not the Bernie Sanders “democratic socialists”, they are the old undemocratic ones, but are hitchiking on the Democrats to deliver largesse. The ANC in South Africa is what they’d look like if they had power.

Blue Dogs-Basically this is the largest group, but no longer a majority, of black opinion. They don’t really organize as this group, and stupidly follow the Socialists.

Self-Hating- The 10% or so of blacks that vote Republican because they don’t like black culture. They have almost no ability to attract followers on the basis of shared social conservatism because they support slashing the government (a disproportionate employer of blacks).

* DACA proves more popular than refugees. Its evidence of an elaborate con game. Somehow “children” are not “illegals”, but while some are clueing into “refugees” meaning “terrorists”, no one has remembered that refugees are supposed to be temporary, they were supposed to return to their home nations when the wars were over.

* Much of evangelical preaching style is a direct influence from the black church. Neither group wants to acknowledge such influence.

After Prohibition was repealed, what we call the “Religious Right” was almost entirely inactive in politics. When they returned in the 1970s, supporting Jimmy Carter, their style was influenced by MLK and the SCLC. Jesse Jackson even used to be a social conservative.

Most of the socon movement has been trying for years to pander to blacks, they only criticize certain black pop culture figures like JayZ, who incedentally despise Christianity.

Blacks have no real “guilt” concept, as their culture is shame-based. The only kind of guilt you see is amongst middle class blacks that feel they aren’t doing enough for the “struggle”.

* From the liberal POV, seemingly random terrorist attacks are acceptable losses rather the presumed tens of millions of deaths that would happen if anti-immigration (literally Hitler) policies were enacted.

Islamists have never pulled off a WMD attack resulting in Somme level death tolls, there are no shortage of people that will not reconsider their views until a major Black Swan happens.

* The battle was lost back in 1914, when Edward Grey signed the British Empire’s execution warrant.

* Liberals fear the far-right to a much greater degree than they fear Islamist terrorism.

The great project of our elites, the Kalergi Plan of demographic displacement, must not be allowed to be stopped by mere voters.

* Alerting people that Islam is bad isn’t enough, a compelling counter must be created, which explains the whole pan-European paganism ‘revival’.

Bin Laden was always wanting to target the ‘far enemy’ of the West, and then go after the ‘near enemy’ of Arab monarchies and secular dictators. ISIS is the reversal of that position, which is why they split.

For us, the Muslim horde is the far enemy. The near enemy is the corporate elite that are running the invade/invite paradigm. We should pay more attention to stopping the ongoing ‘refugee resettlement’ and give Russian an equal share in being the Middle East hegemon.

* BLM owes its origins to NBC doctoring the Zimmerman 911 call, and the Democrats noticed how black turnout spiked in 2012, especially amongst middle-aged women. A logical progression might be the solution to their chronic midterm turnout deficits.

The Democrats weren’t able to run the “War on Women” narrative in ’16, which we can credit to the prominent presence of Ivanka. (Romney should have relied on one of his daughters-in-law, his sons were a PR disaster)

The Russia angle is smarter than it looks to us. Most mainstream conservatives have a residual Cold War dislike of Russia, and neocons tribally hate it. It’s a good way to split the GOP camp, and it unifies the D base by creating a far more compelling social conservative threat than could ever have been envisaged by Pat Robertson &co.

And if (when) they come up with nothing, the Dems have easy rebuttal by referring to the Benghazi hearings.

There aren’t enough of Russian descent in America* to create an ethnic lobby, but the Russians could buy the existing Armenian/Irish lobbyists, and split the Jewish lobby by creating a American cousin to Avigdor Lieberman’s Russian-speaker party in Israel. That is the only long term way they can head this off.

*A larger number of this are “Old Believers” that don’t get along with the Russian Orthodox Church.

* Blacks are allowed, arguably encouraged (note the commemoration of James Baldwin), to despise YT. The only time it stops is when there is a backlash that imperils the electoral fortunes of the Democrats. That’s why you aren’t hearing about BLM anymore. Soros lost confidence in them.

* The major papers of this country haven’t been profitable for years, since Craigslist came along and wiped out classified advertising. But the uber-wealthy, like Buffet, Slim and Bezos, need to keep journalists on the payroll to curry favor in the corridors of power. And unlike lobbying, losing money in news media is tax deductible.

Posted in Jews | Comments Off on Power Corrupts

What Is Wrong With The Third World? An Indian Perspective

Jayant Bhandari writes:

For those who have not traveled and immersed themselves in formerly colonized countries, it is hard to understand that although there was piping for water and sewage in Roman days, it still isn’t available for a very large segment of the world’s population. The wheel has existed for more than 5,000 years, but a very large number of people continue to carry water in pots on their heads.

There are easily a billion or more people today, who have no concept of either the pipe or the wheel, even if they went to school. It is not the absence of technology or money that is stopping these people from starting to use some basic forms of technology. It is something else.

Sir Winston Churchill, the war-time Prime Minister of Britain, talking about the future of Palestine said:

“I do not admit… that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race… has come in and taken their place.”

On Islam, he said:

“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist…”

Talking about India he famously said:

“I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion.”

A remark often attributed to Churchill, although this remains unverified, has certainly stood the test of time so far.

“If independence is granted to India, power will go to the hands of rascals, rogues, freebooters; all Indian leaders will be of low caliber and men of straw. They will have sweet tongues and silly hearts. They will fight amongst themselves for power and India will be lost in political squabbles. A day will come when even air and water will be taxed in India.”

Europeans of that time clearly knew that there was something fundamentally different between the West and the rest, and that the colonies would not survive without the pillars and the cement European management provided.

With the rise of political correctness this wisdom was erased from our common understanding – but it is something that may well return to haunt us in the near future, as the third world fails to fulfill expectations, while people who immigrate to Europe, Canada, Australia and the US from there fail to assimilate.

The Missing Underpinnings: Reason And All That Depends On It

Until now, the hope among people in the World Bank, the IMF, and other armchair intellectuals was that once the correct incentives were in place and institutions were organized, these structures imposed from on high would put the third world on a path to perpetual growth. They couldn’t have been more wrong.

The cart has been put in front of the horse. It is institutions that emerge from the underlying culture, not the other way around. And cultural change is a process taking millennia, perhaps even longer. As soon as Europeans quit their colonies, the institutional structures they left started to crumble.

Alas, it takes a Ph.D. from an Ivy League college and a quarter of a million dollar salary at the World Bank or the IMF to not understand what the key issue with development economics and institutional failures is: the missing ingredient in the third world was and is the concept of objective, impartial reason – the basis of laws and institutions that protect individual rights.

This concept of reason took 2,500 years to develop and get infused into the culture, memes, and genes of Europeans — a difficult process that, even in Europe, was never fully completed. European institutions were at their root products of this concept.

Posted in India | Comments Off on What Is Wrong With The Third World? An Indian Perspective

The Summer Of Monumental Madness

Robert Weissberg writes:

I’m sure, but let me add a less obvious but ultimately more important hypothesis: the sudden hysteria is a result of decades of pent up exasperation over failure at achieving racial equality. In a nutshell, for at least a half-century, perhaps longer, America has struggled with its “race problem” and while proposed solutions exceed dozens, and expenditures in the trillions, progress has been scant. In fact, on at least some indicators, for example, illegitimacy and crime, race-related matters where better off in the 1950s. Not even electing a black President has cured America’s race strife despite all the assurances that Obama would be a “post-racial” President that would, once and for all, bring everybody together. What we have gotten for all our efforts is Black Lives Matter and yet even more black condemnation of whites.

This accumulated frustration can be likened to a situation where a patient with a grim prognosis grows ever more desperate as one standard treatment after the next fails to reverse the illness. These frantic patients often gravitate to quacks despite the low odds of a cure. Nevertheless, the very act of visiting a faith healer or drinking a magical herbal concoction outshines passivity. And who knows, the world abounds with testimonials to quack cures and “doing something” calms the despair.

Think of the Monumental Madness as social engineering quackery—it probably will accomplish little if anything but it feels better than doing nothing. What encourages this desperate quest for today’s “miracle” is that so many past solutions, at least according to all the learned experts, were “guaranteed” to perform as advertised and all failed. Recall when the surefire cure was improved education—ending segregation, equalizing school expenditures, hiring more black teachers and administrators, altering textbooks to make it more relevant to black youngsters, intensive pre-school (Head Start, Sesame Street) and, more recently, eradicating unconscious teacher bias and no longer disproportionately disciplining blacks. We’ve had Bush’s No Child Left Behind and Obama’s Race to the Top and countless other expensive remedies.

A similar guaranteed cure was political empowerment, that is, the Department of Justice would ensure that blacks would live in cities run by black elected officials and self-government would cure everything from crime to joblessness. The upshot, of course, have been urban disasters like Detroit and Selma, AL. And let’s not forget tough anti-discrimination laws that would ban employers from using racist job descriptions, and affirmative action programs that would temporarily give a leg up to those who began the race a few steps behind.

All and all, genuine successes are rare, typically only cosmetic, and if there were a Museum of Failed Cures for America’s Racial Problems, it would be the size of Washington’s Smithsonian.

In other words, by the summer of 2017, the frustration over repeated failures plus the lack of any more “guaranteed” solutions on the agenda had created a perfect setting for quackery. Now, as with all serious but likely intractable problems, the marketplace supplies something to meet these needs, and to continue our parallel with those suffering from incurable cancer, taking down statutes of Confederate soldiers or re-naming buildings is the equivalent of using Laetrile among countless other bogus cures. Yes, there is no scientific evidence that past crusade against “hate” has even helped African Americans, but given the sorry record of past efforts, why not give it a try? Hard to resist anything that feels so good.

Posted in Blacks | Comments Off on The Summer Of Monumental Madness

Parasha Ki Tavo

This week’s Torah portion covers Deuteronomy 26:1–29:8. Listen here.

* The eternal lament of my goy cohosts: “I should have been more prepared.” I’m amazed when they simply show up sober.

* The Puritans who came to America saw themselves as following in the footsteps of the Israelites.

* 26: “When you have entered the land the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance and have taken possession of it and settled in it…Then you shall declare before the Lord your God: “My father was a wandering Aramean, and he went down into Egypt with a few people and lived there and became a great nation, powerful and numerous. 6 But the Egyptians mistreated us and made us suffer, subjecting us to harsh labor. 7 Then we cried out to the Lord, the God of our ancestors, and the Lord heard our voice and saw our misery, toil and oppression. 8 So the Lord brought us out of Egypt with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm, with great terror and with signs and wonders. 9 He brought us to this place and gave us this land, a land flowing with milk and honey; 10 and now I bring the firstfruits of the soil that you, Lord, have given me.”

In this ritual, there’s the recapitulation of suffering at the hands of the goyim and then rejoicing that Jews have their own state. Any group can do this. They can remember their suffering at the hands of outsiders, and then rejoin at their autonomy. All victimologies contain a nationalism and all nationalisms contain the capacity for genocide. Imagine if white America regain controlled of their nation. They could recount the thousands of white victims raped and murdered by blacks, they could remember how vast swathes of the land they created became unfriendly to them, they could remember how low IQ immigrants debased everything they touched, they could remember how high IQ non-white immigrants ruled over them, they could remember the trillions of dollars of tax dollars transferred from whites to help low-achieving black and latinos, and they could rejoice that things have changed.

* 27:14 The Levites shall recite to all the people of Israel in a loud voice:

15 “Cursed is anyone who makes an idol—a thing detestable to the Lord, the work of skilled hands—and sets it up in secret.”

Then all the people shall say, “Amen!”

16 “Cursed is anyone who dishonors their father or mother.”

Then all the people shall say, “Amen!”

17 “Cursed is anyone who moves their neighbor’s boundary stone.”

Then all the people shall say, “Amen!”

18 “Cursed is anyone who leads the blind astray on the road.”

Then all the people shall say, “Amen!”

19 “Cursed is anyone who withholds justice from the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow.”

Then all the people shall say, “Amen!”

20 “Cursed is anyone who sleeps with his father’s wife, for he dishonors his father’s bed.”

Then all the people shall say, “Amen!”

21 “Cursed is anyone who has sexual relations with any animal.”

Then all the people shall say, “Amen!”

22 “Cursed is anyone who sleeps with his sister, the daughter of his father or the daughter of his mother.”

Then all the people shall say, “Amen!”

23 “Cursed is anyone who sleeps with his mother-in-law.”

Then all the people shall say, “Amen!”

24 “Cursed is anyone who kills their neighbor secretly.”

Then all the people shall say, “Amen!”

25 “Cursed is anyone who accepts a bribe to kill an innocent person.”

Then all the people shall say, “Amen!”

26 “Cursed is anyone who does not uphold the words of this law by carrying them out.”

Then all the people shall say, “Amen!”

* KC writes: “Sorry I can’t join today. Boy, Deuteronomy 28 is a light unto the gentiles… My contribution would be to ask what is more likely: that Hashem sees American Jews as keeping the law and staying faithful, or that’s he sees them as idol worshippers under the spell of another culture? If the latter, we can expect destruction very soon, a reversal of power & servitude… I hope that doesn’t happen because I’m cheering for the Jews.”

If a goy wrote these curses, they’d be called anti-semitic. Which anti-semites in history were more anti-semitic than the Torah?

28:15 However, if you do not obey the Lord your God and do not carefully follow all his commands and decrees I am giving you today, all these curses will come on you and overtake you:

16 You will be cursed in the city and cursed in the country.

17 Your basket and your kneading trough will be cursed.

18 The fruit of your womb will be cursed, and the crops of your land, and the calves of your herds and the lambs of your flocks.

19 You will be cursed when you come in and cursed when you go out.

20 The Lord will send on you curses, confusion and rebuke in everything you put your hand to, until you are destroyed and come to sudden ruin because of the evil you have done in forsaking him.[a] 21 The Lord will plague you with diseases until he has destroyed you from the land you are entering to possess. 22 The Lord will strike you with wasting disease, with fever and inflammation, with scorching heat and drought, with blight and mildew, which will plague you until you perish. 23 The sky over your head will be bronze, the ground beneath you iron. 24 The Lord will turn the rain of your country into dust and powder; it will come down from the skies until you are destroyed.

25 The Lord will cause you to be defeated before your enemies. You will come at them from one direction but flee from them in seven, and you will become a thing of horror to all the kingdoms on earth. 26 Your carcasses will be food for all the birds and the wild animals, and there will be no one to frighten them away. 27 The Lord will afflict you with the boils of Egypt and with tumors, festering sores and the itch, from which you cannot be cured. 28 The Lord will afflict you with madness, blindness and confusion of mind. 29 At midday you will grope about like a blind person in the dark. You will be unsuccessful in everything you do; day after day you will be oppressed and robbed, with no one to rescue you.

30 You will be pledged to be married to a woman, but another will take her and rape her. You will build a house, but you will not live in it. You will plant a vineyard, but you will not even begin to enjoy its fruit. 31 Your ox will be slaughtered before your eyes, but you will eat none of it. Your donkey will be forcibly taken from you and will not be returned. Your sheep will be given to your enemies, and no one will rescue them. 32 Your sons and daughters will be given to another nation, and you will wear out your eyes watching for them day after day, powerless to lift a hand. 33 A people that you do not know will eat what your land and labor produce, and you will have nothing but cruel oppression all your days. 34 The sights you see will drive you mad. 35 The Lord will afflict your knees and legs with painful boils that cannot be cured, spreading from the soles of your feet to the top of your head.

36 The Lord will drive you and the king you set over you to a nation unknown to you or your ancestors. There you will worship other gods, gods of wood and stone. 37 You will become a thing of horror, a byword and an object of ridicule among all the peoples where the Lord will drive you.

38 You will sow much seed in the field but you will harvest little, because locusts will devour it. 39 You will plant vineyards and cultivate them but you will not drink the wine or gather the grapes, because worms will eat them. 40 You will have olive trees throughout your country but you will not use the oil, because the olives will drop off. 41 You will have sons and daughters but you will not keep them, because they will go into captivity. 42 Swarms of locusts will take over all your trees and the crops of your land.

43 The foreigners who reside among you will rise above you higher and higher, but you will sink lower and lower. 44 They will lend to you, but you will not lend to them. They will be the head, but you will be the tail.

45 All these curses will come on you. They will pursue you and overtake you until you are destroyed, because you did not obey the Lord your God and observe the commands and decrees he gave you. 46 They will be a sign and a wonder to you and your descendants forever. 47 Because you did not serve the Lord your God joyfully and gladly in the time of prosperity, 48 therefore in hunger and thirst, in nakedness and dire poverty, you will serve the enemies the Lord sends against you. He will put an iron yoke on your neck until he has destroyed you.

49 The Lord will bring a nation against you from far away, from the ends of the earth, like an eagle swooping down, a nation whose language you will not understand, 50 a fierce-looking nation without respect for the old or pity for the young. 51 They will devour the young of your livestock and the crops of your land until you are destroyed. They will leave you no grain, new wine or olive oil, nor any calves of your herds or lambs of your flocks until you are ruined. 52 They will lay siege to all the cities throughout your land until the high fortified walls in which you trust fall down. They will besiege all the cities throughout the land the Lord your God is giving you.

53 Because of the suffering your enemy will inflict on you during the siege, you will eat the fruit of the womb, the flesh of the sons and daughters the Lord your God has given you. 54 Even the most gentle and sensitive man among you will have no compassion on his own brother or the wife he loves or his surviving children, 55 and he will not give to one of them any of the flesh of his children that he is eating. It will be all he has left because of the suffering your enemy will inflict on you during the siege of all your cities. 56 The most gentle and sensitive woman among you—so sensitive and gentle that she would not venture to touch the ground with the sole of her foot—will begrudge the husband she loves and her own son or daughter 57 the afterbirth from her womb and the children she bears. For in her dire need she intends to eat them secretly because of the suffering your enemy will inflict on you during the siege of your cities.

58 If you do not carefully follow all the words of this law, which are written in this book, and do not revere this glorious and awesome name—the Lord your God— 59 the Lord will send fearful plagues on you and your descendants, harsh and prolonged disasters, and severe and lingering illnesses. 60 He will bring on you all the diseases of Egypt that you dreaded, and they will cling to you. 61 The Lord will also bring on you every kind of sickness and disaster not recorded in this Book of the Law, until you are destroyed. 62 You who were as numerous as the stars in the sky will be left but few in number, because you did not obey the Lord your God. 63 Just as it pleased the Lord to make you prosper and increase in number, so it will please him to ruin and destroy you. You will be uprooted from the land you are entering to possess.

64 Then the Lord will scatter you among all nations, from one end of the earth to the other. There you will worship other gods—gods of wood and stone, which neither you nor your ancestors have known. 65 Among those nations you will find no repose, no resting place for the sole of your foot. There the Lord will give you an anxious mind, eyes weary with longing, and a despairing heart. 66 You will live in constant suspense, filled with dread both night and day, never sure of your life. 67 In the morning you will say, “If only it were evening!” and in the evening, “If only it were morning!”—because of the terror that will fill your hearts and the sights that your eyes will see. 68 The Lord will send you back in ships to Egypt on a journey I said you should never make again. There you will offer yourselves for sale to your enemies as male and female slaves, but no one will buy you.

* This seems to be the position of many whites in the West today: “You will be pledged to be married to a woman, but another will take her and rape her.” Women want a strong man. They’re sexually attracted to refugees who seem stronger than the domestic men they’ve known.

* Most of the curses in Deut. 28 seem like the consequences of multiculturalism. There’s confusion, attrition and worry. There will be strange diseases. “The foreigners who reside among you will rise above you higher and higher, but you will sink lower and lower.”

Posted in Torah | Comments Off on Parasha Ki Tavo

Why Are Europe’s Jews To The Right Of American Jews?

From Steve Sailer:

From commenter Irish Paleo:

Seeing things, as I do, from the Eastern side of the Atlantic, it’s fascinating the degree to which the different demographic vectors in Europe and America have driven the political priorities of: (a) ethno-masochistic white political correctness; and (b) Jews, in each place. The key differences can be summarised as follows:

1. While Jews in America earn like Episcopalians and vote like Puerto Ricans, Jews in Europe are, if anything, even more politically conservative than their earnings would suggest (and have become more so even as high earners have been moving gradually leftwards).

Tory Theresa May won about 75% of the Jewish vote in the British election last June.

2. Jews in America are honorary non-whites (for now) and, thus far, nobody in the mainstream media has cottoned on to the fact that “unbearable whiteness” in professionally and financially desirable fields is almost invariably accompanied by an even more “unbearable” Jewishness in those self-same fields.

3. By contrast, in Europe, Jews are considered white. While European demographics are not such as to allow for the almost feral degree of anti-white hatred that consumes the American left, the European left is pretty anti-white and seems to admire (and envy) the extent to which the American left can indulge its passion for anti-white signalling. Be that as it may, outside a few shrinking pockets of the London leftie set, Europe’s respectable left accords no special protected status to Jews when it comes to the allocation of stigma arising from the historical corruption of white blood.

4. Indeed, on the less respectable left, Jews are now quite close to attaining the status of whitey squared. Of course, Europe’s hard left (which is far to the left of Sanders or Nader in the US) still insists that its problem is with “Zionists” and not Jews. However, as the European left’s voting base is increasingly dominated by Muslim and African-descended voters for whom the distinction is not terribly resonant, Jews are drawing less and less comfort from it.

The above naturally raises the questions of: (a) how Jews and leftists so markedly diverged on either side of the Atlantic; (b) what the consequences of this divergence are for politics in Europe and America; (c) whether we might see some future convergence; and (d) what such a convergence would look like.

To take the first question, we must analyse the key demographic differences between Europe and the United States:

1. Due to a combination of mass migrations from Europe to the United States in the 19th and early 20th centuries and certain unpleasant events in Central and Eastern Europe in those centuries, a disproportionate share of Europe’s Jewish population emigrated to America, meaning that the Jewish population is smaller and thus less politically influential in Europe that in America. This meant that the pro-Zionist politics that dominated the left in the mid-2oth century largely operated at a poseur level in Europe, where relatively few of the influential left wing thinkers were Jewish. As a result, when Zionism lost its chic on the left, it had no natural critical mass of champions to defend it, in contrast to the US.

2. A higher proportion of European Jews would be Yekke and Sephardic Jews rather than Eastern European Ashkenazim. The former are, generally speaking, more politically conservative than the latter. This probably gave European Jews a slightly more right-ish lean than Jews in the United States.

3. Geographically and demographically speaking, Europe’s Mexicans are Middle Eastern and North African Muslims and its Puerto Ricans and Dominicans are Pakistanis and Bangladeshis – i.e. the Muslim world is the major proximate source of mass third world immigration in Europe. Unlike Hispanics, who have almost zero political cohesion outside of the fantasy world in which Washington political consultants live, Muslims have their religion, which acts as a very effective political glue.

4. Whilst Hispanics play second fiddle to blacks in the US, European Muslims have the advantage of being much more numerous than blacks and having been so for quite a long time. By contrast, Europe’s much smaller black population lacks cohesion compared with America’s. Most blacks in continental Europe are or are descended from African immigrants who came in the 1950s or later. The only substantial slave-descended black populations in Europe are the Afro-Caribbeans in the UK. However, they came as free immigrants from Jamaica, Trinidad, etc. The only unifying romance that European blacks have is imported from the US via Hollywood and rap music and while the European left does plenty to encourage black grievance culture, it is constrained by the relatively low political profitability that relatively small black numbers accord them.

5. Imagine a US with a hyper aggressive Hispanic population most of which has converted to Islam and then imagine a black population a third the size of what it is and consisting 50% of African immigrants who are not descended from slaves. Then imagine 75-80% fewer Jews. That’s pretty close to what we have in Europe. In such a scenario, the largely poseur-level (for now) anti-Semitism of blacks would give way to the genuine and visceral anti-Semitism of Muslims and the left would be faced with an increasingly burdensome carry-cost for retaining Jews as a protected group. Well that’s more or less what we have in Europe, with young leftists wearing Arafat scarves (and I’m talking about white leftists here).

So that’s the why. What’s the result? Well, like all things in life, it rather depends upon perspective.

1. European leftists are disgusted at the American left’s lack of “solidarity” with the Palestinians and, at a grassroots level, many if not most lefties would see Jewish influence on the left as being an example of Goldman Sachs money corrupting the left and driving it away from economic populism and third world solidarity – and remember, to the European leftist who has lacked the narcotic high of attacking colonialism and Apartheid for some decades now, the real importance of the Israel-Palestine conflict is that it’s one of the few remaining examples of a white v. non-white struggle taking place in the realm of geopolitics.

2. That said, while the European left is more economically populist than the American left, one cannot ignore two other factors.

3. The first is that the European left is nowhere near as powerful as the American left. The Democratic Party has now won the popular vote (or at least the popular vote including fraudulent votes) in every presidential election bar one since 1988. By contrast, without the alliance of (disproportionately Jewish) plutocrats and third world flash mobs that constitutes the Democratic base, the European left struggles to maintain influence. For example, the British Labour Party hasn’t won an election since 2005, the German Social Democrats haven’t won one since 2002 and the French Socialists have won the Elysee Palace once since 1988 (in what looks like the rather anomalous 2012 election).

4. While it is more economically populist than the US left, the European left’s priorities are fundamentally the same as the Democratic Party’s. Its concern for the working class now largely involves looking after discrete client groups like public sector unions and it is generally much more motivated by identity politics, bathroom wars and that ever-lengthening LGBTQWERTYUIOP acronym.

5 Looked at in the context of 4 and 5 above, the American left’s continued message discipline in relation to Jews looks more like an intelligent trade-off – albeit one which probably isn’t open to European leftists due to the less favourable demographics it faces.

Third and fourth questions. Will there be a convergence between Europe and America and what does such a convergence look like?

1. The basic difference between the US and Europe is that history and geography gerrymandered the former a lot more than they did the latter. Hispanics are inert and indisciplined. Jews are neither. (American) Blacks are indisciplined but are far from inert. This means that the Hispanics disappoint those who expect them to turn into shock troops for the Democratic Party but it also means that their support for the Democratic Party comes at a price that it would, in any event, have already had to pay in order to maintain black support (keep the welfare cheques coming) and elite white support (keep the immigrants coming). This means that the mediocre political support that Hispanics give the Dems costs them nothing, which dramatically raises its de facto value. Meanwhile, blacks have inherited the African “big man” system of political organisation, one of the features of which is that black voters are often as interested in delivering power and prestige to their community’s elites as they are in their own welfare. This means that they vote for Hispanic immigration that hurts their own interests because it increases the size of the political coalitions that make their leaders (Obama, Sharpton, Holder, Lynch, Harris etc.) more powerful. Jews and other elite whites have the habit of elite whites everywhere – namely that of accepting rhetorical excesses they don’t like in return for policies they do. This kind of gerrymander is just too good to plan and even for manipulators like the Democrats, they had to rely on about 70% dumb luck.

2. However, gerrymandered systems keep working until they don’t and when that point comes, the gerrymander massively amplifies the effect of any backlash. Fundamentally, it’s a numbers game. Like a power plant that is at is most efficient generation capacity when it’s 1 Watt away from causing a transformer explosion, the marginal returns on gerrymandering suddenly go negative just moments after they were at their peak. The election of Donald Trump gives us a clue as to how this works in practice.

3. The rise of Trump surprised those of us familiar with European politics a lot less than it did Americans with an insular worldview. Why? Because since the 1980s, every region of the west outside of North America has had regular conservative nationalist eruptions. In the 1980s, the Front National came on the scene in France. Already, 20 years ago, we had the FPO in Austria and the Lega Nord, Alleanza Nationale and Fiama di Tricolore in Italy, the Vlaams Belang in Belgium, One Nation in Australia and New Zealand First. Now we also have Wilders in the Netherlands, the Sweden Democrats etc. as well. However, American politics maintained utterly boring and conventional post 1945 centrist politics. Indeed, 10 years ago, mainstream Republicans and DLC Democrats regularly used to lecture Europeans on why America had avoided the “far-right” trap.

4. Of course, it was all down to demographics and electoral systems. America’s first past the post electoral system prevented small parties from developing and her demographics meant that the type of anti-white cultural Marxism against which European voters were reacting was such a politically powerful force in America that it was able to crush national conservatism. Then what happened? Size, my dear boy, size. Eventually the anti-white ethnic blocs in America became too large and unruly and catalysed an opposable cohesion and the American electoral system that had protected both parties from dissent suddenly found itself assailed. Until you get roughly a quarter of America, you are stuck on the margins. However, once you get to that magic number, that’s it: one of the parties (in this case the GOP) becomes yours. So, never having had a nationalist political movement, in one fell swoop, America ended up passing Europe out and going straight to a nationalist president.

5. My prediction is that (at the very latest), once the 34-49 year old age group reaches a critical mass of non-whiteness, the Democrats’ white establishment will suddenly find itself unable to avoid the type of pandering that European leftists have been doing since the 1970s to typical third world non-white sentiment re Jews, namely as being not just whites but the worst and most irredeemable kind of whites – and then the dam will break.

6. What will a sign of such break look like? In my view, look for a Jim Clancy moment with the opposite ending. Remember that Clancy went onto Twitter not to engage in Jew bashing but to indulge in pro-Islamic virtue signalling. Clancy is, of course, Irish American and (in my considerable experience of dealing with Irish people) the Irish are slightly less uptight about Jews than other white ethnics. My guess is that, as an Irish American, he overestimated the speed with which Jews were falling out of favour on the left and thought that he could use “Hasbara” as a synonym for white racist. I reckon that Unlucky Jim got it a few years premature. My prediction: There will be a Jim Clancy-Hasbara-type moment some time in the not-too-distant future and that will be the sign that American Jews will be about to travel further and faster in the direction of European Jews and without the intellectual coherence that they give what Steve calls the “coalition of the fringes”, it will, as the old Chinese saying goes, crumble like dry tofu.

COMMENTS:

* With ‘conservatives’ like May & Merkel and with ‘centrists’ like Macron, who needs the Right in Europe?
They are all globalist crazy. The ‘right’ in Europe is meaningless and totally cucked. As for the real right, like LePen, they never seem to win anything.

In the struggle between Jihad and Jungle, the latter will win because black Africa has the highest birthrates and keep coming and because white women got jungle fever.

* Holocaust Mythology made Jews the perfect people, the eternal victims, the new saints.
So, when Jews oppress Palestinians, many Europeans see it as Jews betraying their saint status.

Old antisemitism was premised on hating Jews.
New ‘antisemitism’ is predicated on loving Jews. Europeans love Jews so much that they cannot bear the idea of Jews acting anything other than saintly. The idea of Anne Frank as part of IDF bullying Palestinians is too much for the EU imagination.
So, EU is totally servile to Jews as Holy Icons, and it leads to perplexity when Jews in Middle East(and America) act as such aggressors around the world.

* Jews everywhere outside North America are more similar to Israeli Jews than to American Jews. French Jewry is basically an outgrowth of Israel. Russian Jewry, which was once its own culture, has been absorbed into Israel and even the ones who went to America voted Trump. The increasingly Orthodox Jews of the UK are probably somewhere in the middle.

* The Silent Majority of young Jewish American couples is emotionally ready to prep their kids with the foundations needed to exercise a fallback plan to emigrate to Israel in the early late 2020′s to early 2030 years. These American Jews don’t want their kids to end up in tent camps, sitting at the mercy of Israeli second-tier sleepy bureaucrats. And of course, the Russians have seized the levers of power at the actual Ministry of Immigrant Absorption. To be fair to the Russkies, they seem tolerable enough. They’re doing am ok job with an Orderly Transfer of the “Tribe of Menashe” people out of Mizoram into Galilee. Of course, Mizoramese are a good 10 IQ points above the Ethiopians. A Mizoramese kid could be trusted to do a repair on a (eg) fire-control radar at an Air Force base.

* First of all, there just aren’t many Jews in Europe. There are more in New York alone than in Britain, France and Italy combined. We can blame Hitler for this. He is probably also responsible for the political differences between European and American Jews.

In the 1930s and 40s, European Jews who fled Europe for other places, including the U.S., were disproportionately left-wing rather than right-wing because they understood, right from the start, the ideological threat of Nazism. These people are the ancestors of modern American Jews.

Conservative/religious Jews OTOH just thought Hitler was another Kaiser and that being ruled by Nazis was going to be like being ruled by WWI-era Germans. They didn’t attempt to flee and were killed in large numbers. The survivors were the ancestors of modern European Jews.

* Worth noting the Conservative candidate for mayor [of London], James Goldsmith’s son, tried to maximise the Hindu and Jewish vote share by whipping up anti Muslim sentiment, didn’t work much and there just aren’t enough white voters left in London, which is left leaning naturally anyway. That Bojo won twice was reflective of his electoral prowess, and the then still highly white suburban vote. Interesting to note that old white leftie Ken Livingstone, mayor before Bojo, was a lot more active on the Palestine issue than Khan is. Old white lefties tend to be motivated by idealism, the likes of Khan by money, power and resentments directed at your humble European burgher. The great Jewish hate figures of the left are ‘Gorgeous’ George Galloway, ‘Red’ Ken Livingstone and Jeremy Corbyn,

* It is worth noting that most Latin American countries have minimal sympathies for Israel (pro-US Colombia is one of the exceptions). I think you are limited in imagining that anti-Jewish sentiment would remain on the left. Should even one-fifth of the right switch to an anti-Israel stance, it isn’t likely to cause the left to become more pro-Israel in response.

Note the rise Nation of Islam in the 90s under Farrakhan, the Jewish intellectuals spilled much ink on the “loss of the black-Jewish alliance”. Left-wing Zionists have a fundamental contradiction in that the most strongest supporters of Israel (right wing evangelical Protestants in the South), happen to be the most despised group in America.

* In Europe, traditional Right versus traditional Left is increasingly irrelevant in the face of a threatened takeover of the major cities by Muslim and African immigrant populations. The key fight, which might determine the future of European society, is alt-right versus globalist. So for example Le Pen is a traditional leftist, but alt-right on immigration control so she is on the alt-right side, on the issues that matter. Many traditional leftists are alt-right and very many traditional rightists are globalist.

* As Samuel Johnson is often quoted, “Depend upon it, sir, when a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully.”

Jews in Europe live every day with the intolerance of Europe’s new Chosen People and the renewed prospect of their own extermination. American Jews have a cream-puff life at worst.

* In Munich, a gentleman posting a photo of a Nazi official shaking hands with the grand mufti of Jerusalem to illustrate his article on parallels between Islam and fascism has just been sentenced to a six-month prison term (suspended for three and a half years) plus 100 hours of community service.

The judge used Germany’s prohibition against publishing Nazi imagery (the swastika armband on the Nazi official) while ignoring the explicit exemption in the law for scholarly and information purposes.

* As Kennerly noticed in his classic 37 years ago :

“…One of the ironies of the history of the Jews in America was that their long championship of black civil liberties had begun to backfire so badly in the late 1960s.

As Seymour Lipset has put it, “The integrationist movement was largely an alliance between Negroes and Jews (who, to a considerable extent, actually dominated it).

Many of the interracial civil-rights organizations have been led and financed by whites, and the majority of their white members have been Jews.

Insofar as a Negro effort emerged to break loose from involvement with whites, from domination of the civil-rights struggle by white liberals, it meant concretely a break with Jews, for they were the whites who were active in these movements.

The Black Nationalist leadership had to push whites (Jews) ‘out of the way,’ and to stop white (Jewish) ‘interference’ in order to get whites (Jews) ‘off their backs.’”

Meanwhile, Black Power groups such as SNCC and the Black Panthers were voicing support for the Arabs against Israel.

This sometimes looked like a mere matter of black nationalism; after all, Egypt was a part of Africa, and black nationalist literature sometimes seemed to identify the Arabs as blacks fighting the white Israelis.

Or else it looked like merely a commitment to world socialism; the Soviet Union and China supported the Arabs against the imperialist tools, the Israelis.

But many Jewish leaders regarded the anti-Zionist stances of groups like the Panthers as a veiled American-brand anti-Semitism, tied up with such less theoretical matters as extortion, robbery and mayhem by blacks against Jews in ghetto areas.

They cited things like the August 30, 1969, issue of Black Panther, which carried an article entitled “Zionism (Kosher Nationalism) + Imperialism = Fascism” and spoke of “the fascist pigs.”

The June, 1967, issue of another Panther publication, Black Power, had carried a poem entitled “Jew-Land,” which said:

Jew-Land, On a summer afternoon, Really, Couldn’t kill the Jews too soon,
Now dig. The Jews have stolen our bread
Their filthy women tricked our men into bed
So I won’t rest until the Jews are dead . . .
In Jew-Land, Don’t be a Tom on Israel’s side
Really, Cause that’s where Christ was crucified.”

* The key issue for organised American Jewry is Israel. Trump was initially equivocal, but it seems he is going to continue with the two state solution, which is official (and bipartisan) US policy. Israel as a Jewish state is doomed, unless it withdraws from the west bank or expels the Palestinians from the occupied territories. American Jews individually deeply resent white gentiles being a majority in the West.

Individually Jews want immigration to displace the white gentiles, but they also want America to preserve Israel as a Jewish state. These are mutually incompatible objectives, and so the American Jews will go right or left depending on whether Jewish group interests (organisation) or personal aggrandisement (individual feelings) dominate the lives of Jews in the future.

* What baffles me about Jews is there is more naked anti-semitism on the left with figures like Jeremy Corbyn in UK and Linda Sarsour in the US. And many right wing figures like Donald Trump or even Ted Cruz are completely friendly to Jews. Yet, many prominent Jews seem determined to reverse the perception from the reality and turn pro-Jewish right wing figures into anti-semitic monsters and turn these anti-semitic left wing monsters into benevolent progressives.

* I’d bet that most American Jews are descended from Russian empire emigres at the turn of the 20th century. There are some Hasidic sects that left after WW2 and have now turned parts of Brooklyn into 19th-century-looking burgs. Those neighborhoods are the only spots of red in a largely-blue NYC 2016 electoral map.

Story: in WW1, according to Ron Chernow writing about the house of Morgan, the WASP banks were strongly aligned with the U.K., largely having to do with Junius Morgan, JP’s father, having made the family fortune by running a bank in the City. The Jewish banks were largely pro-German, having funded German industry before the war. When Woodrow Wilson declared neutrality, JP Morgan tried to syndicate a loan for non-armaments. KUhn, Loeb would not go along with it, as the Jewish head of the bank would have nothing to do with any loans that might benefit Tsarist Russia.

Germany, by replacing the Tsar’s replacement Kerensky with Lenin thus secured unanimity in the NY financial scene for financial support of the Allied Powers.

* The US was always naturally nationalistic, and indeed Americans have been ridiculed and belittled for generations by Europeans for what they regard as excessive patriotism, flag-waving and attachment to nation.

We came by our globalism in a fit of absence of mind. The 1965 change in our immigration laws to open the borders to third world populations was obtained by Jewish interest groups and the far left, sold with deception and was not based on popular support.

The door to our present globalism was opened by the ascendance of descendants of the wave of Eastern Europe Jews in the media. The agenda of this socially radical and anti-American group became the agenda of the national media, and their dominance was cemented with their victory over Nixon and the election of the Watergate Congress and then Carter.

The basic nationalism of the American people re-emerged with the victory of Ronald Reagan, who was loathed by the national (Jewish) media. The globalist George H.W. Bush was not elected as such, but rather on Reagan’s coattails. But Bush and his backers were enthusiastic about cheap immigrant labor and new trade arrangements that incentivized industry to access American markets from cheaper locations abroad rather than domestically. Clinton came out of the New Left but posed as a centrist and embraced globalism as politically advantageous to Democrats. Labor unions that had not theretofore been captured by the hard left moved from nationalistically-sympathetic leaders concerned narrowly with protecting American workers to control by left-wing ideologues open to globalism.

The election of George W. Bush was not intended by the American people as a vote for globalism, but that’s what we got. The deleterious economic effects on the native-born American middle and working classes of out-of-control cheap-labor immigration and offshoring production during Bush-Obama was disguised by the real estate bubble and then by massive government debt and money creation.

The victory of Trump signaled not the rise of a new European-style nationalist party, but rather a desperate attempt by the American people to remove the death grip of globalists on American policy and return it to government responsive to the interests of the native-born middle and working classes.

* Growing up in NYC as a non-white, notion that Jews are honorary people of color seems ridiculous to me.

All the Jews I know are more pale-skinned than the average white, wealthier than the average white, more bookish than the average white and eat blander than the average white.

In other words Jews are the whitest of all the white people we know!

* American Jews have controlled the broad culture for a half century now, and have used it to give themselves a special, saintly, victim position that transcends any attempt to characterize them as “white.” (I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve seen Jewish torches-and-pitchforks paranoia about Trump from somebody who grew up in the San Fernando Valley or Cheviot Hills accorded some special credence by others because “Jews have seen this all before.”)

* Michael Medved says that “for most American Jews, the core of their Jewish identity isn’t solidarity with Israel; it’s rejection of Christianity.”

This observation may help to explain the otherwise puzzling political preferences of the Jewish community explored in Norman Podhoretz’s book.

Jewish voters don’t embrace candidates based on their support for the state of Israel as much as they passionately oppose candidates based on their identification with Christianity—especially the fervent evangelicalism of the dreaded “Christian Right.” . . .

Those who seek to liberate the bulk of American Jews from their reflexive and self-defeating liberalism must do more than show the logic of conservative thinking.

They should recognize that Jews, like all Americans, vote not so much in favor of politicians they admire as they vote against causes and factions they loathe and fear.

Jews fear the GOP as the “Christian party,” and as the sole basis of Jewish identity involves rejection of Christianity,

Jews will continue to reject -Republicans and conservatism.

Podhoretz poignantly describes the way many Jewish Americans have adopted liberalism as a substitute religion.

* Until very recently in most Europe white was not a category. You could live whole life and not once had a thought related to your race. Europeans had zero racial identity. But Jews were Jews as opposed to everybody else who was normal, i.e., Christian. Jews were standing out. With immigrants from exotic places the otherness of Jews diminished on relative scale and the Anglo-American concept of whiteness began to spread. European elites (this include Jews) discovered benefits of American multi-ethnic model.

* When have blacks EVER dominated non-blacks, in any society at any point in history? Black prominence in pop culture is ENTIRELY a gift from the Jewish dominated entertainment industry to blacks.

* Right wing antisemites in Europe and the USA as a group are small, weak, poor, disorganized, stupid and very unpopular. The left tries to scare Jews with them, but the number of Jews killed by right wing antisemites in the entire West most years is ZERO, and in the past 50 years under 100 total. More Jews die from random NAM street violence, probably by a factor of 200 or more.

Left wing BDSers really are not antisemites for the most part. Rather, left wing BDS is really just hatred of whites generally. Israel is the focus of left wing antiwhite hate because it is the only place in the entire world where whites are growing demographically at the expense of non whites. Every other white country in the world, more than 50 of them, is rapidly dying out due to fertility far below replacement plus third world invadors. At current trends Israel will be the only country in the entire world with a larger white population in 2040 than it does today. And virtually all of Western Europe/Anglosphere will have a non-white majority of under 40s.

Trump and Putin may defy the left’s antiwhite line with their words. And that is better than nothing, and earns them the hate of the left. But neither have actually stopped much less reversed white demographic decline. Every single year of Putin’s long tenure Russia’s non elderly white population declined and its Muslim population increased. Every single year of Trump’s presidency the non elderly white population of the USA will also decline while its African and Muslim population grows.

Israel is the only government in the world that is securing its borders and making white children for the future. That, not any animus specific to Jews, is why the left of the entire world wants to destroy it.

* Russian Jewish American community is very right wing. But Russian Jews who managed to achieve any kind of prominence in the media (like Ioffe and others listed) are all cookie-cutter globalibs. Funny how that works.

* I agree that the American Jewish newfound love affair with Muslims and Muslim immigration is downright bizarre. I have seen it in my own family. My cousin, an elite lawyer, regularly posts on Facebook about how he favors Muslim immigration, especially Syrian refugees. He also is passionately against Trump’s travel ban . Not that long ago he never talked or thought about Muslims at all, these days he is very defensive of all things Islam.

Two questions come to mind. Are European Jews as pro-Muslim as American Jews have become? I guess I already know the answer…no way. Also I wonder if Muslims love American Jews back? My guess is no this is a case of unrequited love.

* I’m not so sure about Europe’s Jews being much better than the American Jews when it comes to pushing mass immigration. Maybe better in the sense that they have far less power.

We have a very small Jewish minority here in Finland. Almost all of the Jewish celebrities are pushing mass immigration, most of them also simultaneously being proud supporters of Jewish nationalism.

Actually, a far bigger problem here is the much more sizeable and influential Swedish minority. They have been pushing mass immigration fanatically. Minorities that don’t want to assimilate seem to massively resent that there is a majority, and want to dismantle it.

Posted in Jews | Comments Off on Why Are Europe’s Jews To The Right Of American Jews?

ESPN 30 For 30: What Carter Lost

This documentary begins by talking about what fine folks attended the black Carter High School in Dallas. How the community was comprised of doctors, PhDs, professionals and the like. All good folks.

In 1988, Carter High School (eight of these players go on to the NFL and many regard this program as the best high school football team ever) is suspected of fudging the academic requirements to play football (the school ranks at or near the bottom of all high schools in Texas in test scores and low test scores correlate with low IQ, high impulsivity, weak family structures, and limited success in life). All the Carterites interviewed blame this allegation on white racism. They seem to blame all their problems on white racism. Yet the kids who went to Carter on average go on to lead the lives that you would have predicted from simply looking at their test scores.

Before they are arrested for crime, many of the players do no homework, feel like they can get away with anything, and spend their school days gambling in the girls’ bathroom.

Shockingly, after Carter wins the state championship, six of the football players are convicted of committing a string of armed robberies (two of them go on to be Christian clergy). None of the six are convicted of any further crimes.

Many white kids were bussed to Carter High School to enjoy the black experience.

From Awful Announcing:

The next 30 for 30 will cover one of the most famous high school football seasons ever, but from the other side. The Permian Panthers (from Odessa, Texas)’ 1988 season was immortalized in Buzz Bissinger’s book Friday Night Lights: A Town, a Team, and a Dream, which went on to become a 2004 movie and then spawn the (fictionalized) TV series of the same name, which ran from 2006-2011.

That season ended with a controversial semifinal loss to Dallas Carter (Dallas’ David W. Carter High School), a team that went on to win the championship but was later stripped of it amidst a grade-fixing controversy and a robbery committed by several players. Now, ESPN will be looking at their side of the story in more detail with new 30 for 30 What Carter Lost, which is set to air August 24 following a Little League World Series game.With 21 players who were offered college scholarships and several who went on to the NFL, Carter took on the best that Texas had to offer, including the Odessa Permian team that inspired Friday Night Lights, as well as the worst: in a racially charged state-wide dispute over one player’s algebra grade and Carter’s legitimacy. Somehow, the team won the championship that year. Yet not too long after, the legacy they worked so hard for was thrown away after a group of players made a terrible decision. With personal interviews with players, coaches and family members, as well as glimpses of their lives today, “What Carter Lost” is ultimately about what Carter found.

“The movie Friday Night Lights showed the world a skewed and fictionalized version of one of the best high school football teams in Texas history, the 1988 Dallas Carter Cowboys, but very few of the players, coaches, parents, and teachers involved in that controversial season ever had a chance to speak for themselves,” said director Adam Hootnick. “In ‘What Carter Lost,’ I was honored to help bring the Carter saga to life in the words of the people who lived it, even as I struggled to make sense of everything that had happened. Nearly three decades on, there still aren’t any simple answers, but I hope everyone who encounters these unforgettable people and events will walk away asking hard questions about what it means to be a teammate or a leader.”

What actually happened in 1988? Well, there was a long court case over the algebra grade of a key Dallas Carter player, receiver Gary Edwards, with the University Interscholastic League and the Texas Education Agency trying to remove Carter from the playoffs and the Dallas Independent School District fighting that. Carter was allowed to play, and they beat Permian 14-9 in that semifinal.

You wouldn’t know from that 2004 movie, though, which made it a 34-28 win for Carter in the state final (and in front of 55,000 inside Houston Astrodome, not 10,000 in the rain at the University of Texas’ stadium in Austin):

Carter then beat Converse Judson 31-14 to win the state title. However, Edwards and other teammates were arrested for armed robbery in Dallas in May 1989, then later found to be part of 21 different armed robberies, and Edwards was sentenced to 16 years in prison. The court battle over Edwards’ algebra grade continued, and the school was eventually stripped of the title for using an ineligible player; the title was later awarded to Judson.

Interestingly enough, there was a 2015 movie about their 1988 team, Carter High, which prompted a lawsuit from Edwards. That whole movie is on YouTube:

The Carter team’s story is also explored in detail in this 2015 Dallas Morning News piece. So there’s lots of information out there about them, but it’s a story that isn’t necessarily known on the national level, unlike their Friday Night Lights opponents. And that could make for quite an interesting 30 for 30. Hootnick has a solid sports background, too, previously directing the 30 for 30 short Judging Jewell (about the security guard initially accused of the bombing at the 1996 Atlanta Olympics), as well as Son of the Congo (on Serge Ibaka) and Destination: Team USA.

We’ll see how this one turns out, and if there’s enough national interest in it, but it certainly sounds promising.

Posted in Blacks, Football, Texas | Comments Off on ESPN 30 For 30: What Carter Lost

Suzi At Yale

Mark Oppenheimer writes about the original American campus sex scandal starring a Jewess named Suzi who gave a ton of blowjobs at age 14:

News that Yale boys had been getting blowjobs from a townie—a freshman townie—was bad news indeed. It could have been worse: She could have been an Italian or Irish girl from New Haven proper, which would have been a ferocious species of kindling for the local anti-Yale element. Better, for local amity, that it was a middle-class Jewish girl from the suburbs. The respectable suburban Jews weren’t likely to riot. Still, this was the kind of thing that Yale might want to cover up. The Yale Daily News insinuated as much in an editorial of Jan. 28, the same day the students’ court appearance appeared on page 1. “We are all too aware,” read the editorial, “that the principal concern of the deans and everyone involved in the investigation of the incident was to protect the careers and reputations of students who had, by their complete lack of judgment as shown by their actions, forfeited their right to any such consideration.

“Nevertheless,” continued the editorial, mercilessly, “no successful relationship can be maintained between Yale and the city of New Haven if the chief of New Haven police must be informed of Yale’s ‘hidden scandal’ by an out-of-town newspaper of more than dubious journalistic reputation.”

I have not been able to track down the specifics of this charge—the “out of town newspaper” that first brought the story to the city attorney’s attention, nor the evidence that this is how the city learned about what happened. But this charge, along with the evidence that Yale knew what was happening before Jan. 15, suggests that Yale would have preferred to resolve the matter internally. It was not a paramount concern that the men who had received oral sex from an adolescent be prosecuted or even shamed. On this matter, it was left to their fellow students, including those on the newspaper, to be the university’s conscience.

Of the men I located, Campbell is the one I’d most like to be friends with, I think. Like Frank, he went to architecture school, but his interest is urban planning, which he has taught and written a book about. He’s spent his life trying to improve neighborhoods and revitalize cities, in part by getting cars out of people’s way. His first job in architecture was during the semester he was suspended from Yale, before he was readmitted.

“This was a young girl who was going around campus giving blowjobs,” Campbell said. “Nobody knew anything about her. The rumor was she visited 800 guys. I am sure that was off by a factor of 20 or something. … The word was, she was going to somebody’s room in one of the colleges. So I went over there, stupidly, in the middle of the afternoon. It sounded like a great idea. She started to take my pants down, and she had her underwear on, and I decided it wasn’t a good idea. I don’t think I ever touched her.”

Campbell said that they had a conversation and that he suggested she get some help. “It was evident to me as soon as I met her that she was a little confused. And she was young.” Some time later, she called him on the telephone in his room. “She wanted to chat,” he remembered.

When he heard that men were being pulled before the administration, Campbell went to talk with William Sloane Coffin Jr., the university chaplain. He told Coffin that he was thinking he ought to turn himself in. “I said, ‘This is what I’m thinking about doing.’ He heartily agreed, said that made sense.” He found a campus cop he knew and told the cop that he needed to talk to a dean about what was going on. “The dean wanted me to implicate others, and I didn’t really know anybody. I had a roommate involved. I didn’t name my roommate.”

“It wasn’t fun,” Campbell said, summing up. “But worse than that was having the Harvard side of the stadium singing, ‘If You Knew Susie.’ ”

…Gambrill, a retired lawyer and Episcopal priest, lives in Maine with his second wife. He speaks with the soft, attuned cadences of a pastor. He never met Suzi. But, as he tells it, she changed his life.

“Two of them were my roommates,” Gambrill told me. “I lost two roommates out of that deal.” One of them was Jake Blaisdell, the bitchin’ Californian who tore out of town in his VW bus, never to return. The other was the man I’ve called Campbell, the urban planner. It surprised me, although perhaps it shouldn’t have, that Gambrill, the roommate, the bystander, had the most vivid memories of all.

“I didn’t get involved in it,” Gambrill said. “I am very thankful I didn’t. I think what sticks in my mind is we all knew it was coming. I remember quiet conversations on the phone with this poor Suzi. And they couldn’t wait to have this happen.”

When it was over, Gambrill and other men who had stayed away would make fun of the men who had been with Suzi. But for Gambrill, anyway, it wasn’t funny, not really.

“It’s one of the things I feel worst about,” he said. “It changed my life, in a way. I know in my heart that if I had told the two guys I roomed with that this was a bad thing, they probably wouldn’t have done it. I always felt bad I didn’t try to tell them. I felt I failed them. Nobody I know said anything about it beforehand, but afterward, we sort of ganged up on them. And afterward she went to her father, and all hell broke loose.”

Gambrill remembers a terrifying week on campus, arrests coming every couple of days.

“That was very ugly, them sweating, waiting to see what would happen to them,” he said. “For a lot of us, it really consumed us. … Some double-digit number were involved in this thing, went out in the car with this girl and got their fellatio, for lack of a grosser word. This was over the course of two or three weeks or something. And it was a source of merriment at first, and ‘Isn’t this amazing this could happen?’ and ‘Wow, what a lucky break’ to all of a sudden mockery and remorse.

“It was a bad time, a bad time. The worst part of my life. I wasn’t really affected. But these poor guys had to go home. They were children, 18 or 19 years old. They didn’t know what they were doing. And a 19-year-old now knows a shitload more than a 19-year-old in 1959.”

Gambrill seemed certain that he was no better than his friends. Just lucky, that’s all. “I think it was offered to me,” he said, “but I was sort of naïve—a moralistic child, I suppose. Didn’t appeal to me at all. I’m very glad I didn’t do it. It wasn’t any credit to me. Just that I was scared of my own shadow.”

As Gambrill remembers it, Jake was too upbeat a guy to spend much time second-guessing his actions—“Everything was ‘cherry’ or ‘bitchin’’ if it was good. He said that. He was not an introspective person.” Campbell, on the other hand, “was haunted afterward.” He remembers sitting in their rooming suite, in Davenport College, while Campbell waited for his father to arrive, before the court appearance. “I remember his father strutting up the path to the room, past the window … and their shaking hands in a very somber way. He had been awake the whole night before, and he had said to me, ‘Can you lend me some money so I can help pay for my father’s trip?’ I didn’t have any money.”

Gambrill had entered college planning to be a lawyer, but the chaplain Coffin’s Sunday sermons in Battell Chapel spoke to him, and they got him thinking about ministry. And the Suzi episode, his failure to stop his friends from going through with it, pushed him in that direction, too. “This incident made me feel I was more connected with other people than I had acted on,” he said, “and maybe the way to go was to be a priest. So, I became an Episcopal priest and served in churches for 20 years.”

…Most of the people I have told about Suzi are sure that she was “seriously unbalanced,” to borrow the words that dripped from the pen of Carlos Stoddard, President Griswold’s aide. And maybe she is, or was; it is important to remember that she was only 14, and the men involved were only slightly, if significantly, older, and still in school. All we can know is that she is a secure, unrepentant woman, in a longer, more stable marriage, as far as I can tell, than any of the men I talked to who were arrested for being with her. Insofar as she thinks about her mental state, she judges herself to be well.

“I’m kind of ‘be here now,’ ” Suzi said to me, just before I got in my rental car and drove off. “You can say, ‘Yes, I’m happy I did that.’ Or, ‘I’m happy I went somewhere.’ Or, ‘I’m happy I met someone.’ But it’s a characteristic of mine—I’m here, it’s a beautiful day, let’s enjoy.”

This is Oppenheimer’s best work by some distance, and it clarifies why his other work disappoints.

The difference is that here he follows the subject rather than managing it. He goes to find Suzi expecting one story, a tale of white male privilege and female victimhood, and he finds something that refuses that frame entirely. He is honest enough to report what he actually found rather than the story his coalition would have preferred. That is journalistic integrity and it produces writing that feels alive in a way the Holocaust denial series does not.

The piece also works because the tacit knowledge problem dissolves. He does not need to explain or broker anything. The characters explain themselves. Suzi is so completely herself, the line about being not just the black sheep but the whole herd, the Berkeley Barb personal ad, the absolute absence of retrospective victimhood, that Oppenheimer barely needs to interpret. He just has to get out of the way. His instinct for scene and character, which is genuinely good, has material worthy of it.

The Gambrill section is remarkable. The roommate who watched, did nothing, lost two friends, became a priest partly out of guilt, and says with complete honesty that his non-participation was not virtue but fear, that is a fully rendered human being. The line about a 19-year-old in 1959 knowing a shitload less than a 19-year-old today is one of those observations that is simple, accurate, and worth more than most sociology.

What is interesting is where his instincts still show their limits even here. His framing device, comparing Suzi to Emma Sulkowicz and the Rolling Stone UVA story, is the brokerage move reasserting itself at the end. He feels he needs to situate the piece within the contemporary discourse about campus sexual assault, to demonstrate that he knows the approved framework even while reporting something that complicates it. The piece would be stronger without that scaffolding. It does not need permission from current moral fashion to be what it is.

The detail that Suzi noticed he was Jewish and immediately opened up about Purim and Jewish identity is doing quiet work that he does not press. She chose him partly because he was Jewish, which meant something to her about how he might read her story. That is worth a paragraph he does not write.

But those are minor complaints. The piece succeeds because reality was stronger than his usual impulse to soften it, and he had the discipline to let that happen. It suggests that when the right subject finds him, he is a better writer than his career profile implies.

Posted in Jews, Mark Oppenheimer, Sex, Yale | Comments Off on Suzi At Yale

Jewish Hebdo

I don’t see much significance to this accomplishment:

“Asked to name highlights of his tenure, Eshman pointed to two. In 2015, Islamic terrorists in Paris massacred the staff at Charlie Hebdo magazine for printing cartoons they found offensive. The Journal renamed the Jan. 16 masthead of the paper, “Jewish Hebdo,” and ran the offending cartoons inside.”

By contrast, Taki wrote: “I am not Charlie, nor will I ever be. Wearing a Je suis Charlie badge is one sure way of getting attention, but I will leave that to others. And another thing: Obscenity has no redeeming social value, and Charlie Hebdo was and is one long obscenity.”

Steve Sailer wrote:

I never published on my blog any of the cartoons of Muhammad created in Denmark a decade ago, probably because I’m a coward. Getting murdered by a furious holy man sounds like a pointless way to go.

I’m perfectly willing to abide out of courtesy with Islamic strictures against drawing pictures of Muhammad, since it seems like something that gets them very agitated without doing anything for me at all. I’ve never wanted to draw a picture of Muhammad and can’t think of any reason I’d want to.

In contrast, my politeness doesn’t extend to, say, ignoring the facts that are absolutely central to understanding the contemporary world, such as racial differences in average IQ (which can’t get you killed, hopefully, but can get you fired very quickly in our witch-sniffing era).

Obviously, publishing cartoons insulting Muhammad is a turf-marking step, a way for Europeans to say, “This is our country. We do things our way here.”

My view, though, is that Muhammad cartoons are a distraction from what really matters: you shouldn’t let a lot of people with Iron Age barbarian prejudices into your country in the first place, and if you make that mistake, you should rectify it by persuading most of them to leave.

This is another example of why the Alt Right is more interesting and more profound than the MSM.

Posted in Alt Right, Jewish Journal | Comments Off on Jewish Hebdo

John Podhoretz Calls Steve Sailer “a Loathsome, Reprllent Racist Filth”

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* If Sailer applied Sailerism to Israel alone, Pod would be his greatest fan.

What people like Pod fear most is Independence. Independence means a people will put their interests first and at center. Pod wants all white Americans to put their own identity/interests in the back-burner to serve the greater ‘good’ of globalism dominated by Elysium Club that allows ethno-centrism only for Israel.

When Hindus began to put their identity and interests first, they no longer wanted to serve the ‘higher’ interests of the British Empire.

If a people want to opt out of globalist supremacism, they are attacked as ‘supremacist’.

* For years you’ve been blaming John Podhoretz for having you been kicked out of NR.

But in all that time you’ve never explained your absence from TAC for whom you once wrote.

I suppose this is as good a time to ask as any.

* /pol/ is the politics board on 4chan. It followed the example of the netoyo from Japan’s 2ch (a site launched in Conway, Arkansas!) who were notorious as anonymous online ultranationalists who blame Koreans for all of the nation’s ills, with Jews swapped in as villains instead. It’s been the breeding ground for lots of memes, of which cuck/cuckservative is probably the most famous right now. The insult took off sleuths discovered site owner Christopher ‘moot’ Poole’s gawker-employed girlfriend was cheating on him during gamergate.

* /pol/ is the politics board of 4chan (hence the white nationalism/anime connection), and it’s relevant because it’s basically where the alt-right was born. It’s where bored young white men (like my friends in high school) went to waste time online by talking anonymously about politics, without fear that “controversial” opinions would get censored. (I’ve seen Steve very favorably referenced a few times there, incidentally.)

* Podhoretz, also known as J.P. Normans-son, either believes:

1. our Steve is secretly a Daily-Stormer-reading NatSoc, sharpening his bayonet as he awaits the Day of the Rope.

-or-

2. Steve’s mild-mannered civic nationalism is “a loathsome, reprllent filth” tantamount to the Holocaust, Part II.

I am honestly unsure which it is. In any case, it’s probably safe to say that Twitter accounts with blue checkmarks and parentheses are some of the biggest recruiting tools that the Alt Right has.

* At The Weekly Standard, one staff member said, Podhoretz’s “arrogance and egotism had a psychological effect people can’t quite believe.” At The Washington Times a colleague reported, he was “permanently frozen in juvenalia.” Glenn Garvin, the Central American bureau chief of the Miami Herald, once said that at the Times, Podhoretz “constantly complained that his brilliance wasn’t appreciated.”

Podhoretz is emphatic in his defense of Israel in its conflicts with its Arab neighbors. When pundit Pat Buchanan called Israel’s actions in the 2006 Lebanon War “un-Christian”, Podhoretz wrote: “You want to know what anti-Semitism is? When Pat Buchanan calls Israel’s military action ‘un-Christian.’ That’s anti-Semitism.”

Podhoretz has supported the Iraq War from its inception until the present. In his book, Bush Country, he wrote, “The natural terrorist hunger to acquire WMDs, and Saddam Hussein’s desire to humiliate the United States, combined to make Iraq a new kind of threat to America and the world.” In a July 25, 2006 column for the New York Post that discussed the Israel-Lebanon conflict, Podhoretz advocated a more Machiavellian policy in Iraq, writing: “What if the tactical mistake we made in Iraq was that we didn’t kill enough Sunnis in the early going to intimidate them and make them so afraid of us they would go along with anything? Wasn’t the survival of Sunni men between the ages of 15 and 35 the reason there was an insurgency and the basic cause of the sectarian violence now?”

* I cannot figure why his mother (who is a capable essayist) and father (who could assemble an interesting magazine) did not dissuade him from a career in opinion journalism. He produces satisfactory book reviews, but is otherwise mediocre. He’s a graduate of the University of Chicago, so a deficit of brains per se is not his problem; he just lacks the necessary verbal agility.

* In the early days of NRO, I really enjoyed the Corner, which at that time was sort of a conservative proto-twitter. It had a heady, fun, friendly vibe. Then they let JPod in, and all of a sudden the whole thing went to hell as he would have these bizarre, unprovoked rage attacks. It was really odd.

* The Weinsteins are synonymous with Oscarbait movies. Nobody else is close to them. I couldn’t have chosen anybody else without confusing readers. It would be like referencing somebody other than Meryl Streep as an Oscar-honored actress.

* Never been to /pol/?

Uh oh. I’m afraid that Steve is about to undergo some very dramatic changes.

* JPod doesn’t believe a damn thing.

He knows what’s left of his power depends on leveraging SWPL/Jewish paranoia/status anxiety to keep more capable writers like Sailer in the ghetto on trumped up charges pour enourager les autres.

* I thought intermarriage with Gentiles was considered Holocaust, Part II. Perhaps civic nationalism is constantly undermined because it is seen as creating favorable conditions for intermarriage.

* Podhoretz’s argument about why it was the fault of the Palestinians that Mossad assassinated by mistake a Palestinian waiter in Norway is like saying it’s the fault of black people that the LAPD, when hunting frantically for black rogue cop Chris Dorner, shot up those two Mexican ladies delivering newspapers.

* Maybe he should take character lessons from David Brooks.

* Sigh. Am I the only one who fails to grasp what Podhoretz found so offensive here?

Is he objecting to the joke about how Hollywood insists on awkwardly cramming “diversity” into every story, no matter how out of place it is? I thought that the right — the WHOLE right, from the craziest radicals to the most cowardly cucks — pretty much universally agreed this was stupid.

Or maybe JPod sees “Weinstein” and it causes his Jew-baiting alarm to immediately go off. Sigh. If that’s what he’s worried about, let me assure him it went right over the heads of about 99 percent of Gentiles. The Jewish angle on Steve’s comment didn’t even register with me until JPod got his undies in a wad over it.

Hey, John, it’s not always about the Jews. The typical Gentile doesn’t see “Weinsteins” and think “Joooooooos!” They see it and think, “those are the annoying guys who are always trying to suck up to Oscar voters.” Ethnicity and religion never enter into it.

* The most famous, and popular, is 4chan’s:

http://boards.4chan.org/pol/catalog

It’s more free-wheeling and tolerant of fun, gets more traffic, probably half the population is non-white, though you wouldn’t think it.

Less famous and less populated, the more hardcore 8ch(an):

https://8ch.net/pol/catalog.html

… ‘nazis’ split off from 4chan over ideology. I mention them because they’re more effective at scheming and autistically putting together photos to dox people.

People go back and forth, from 8ch for plans, to 4chan to recruit help (mostly). When people want to scheme privately, they’ll open a ‘discord’, a free, all-purpose live communication platform originally developed for gamers.

* Podhoretz’s rhetoric is the verbal equivalent of Antifa throwing feces.

* I don’t know that he cheats on his wife or cheats on his taxes. I’ve no reason to believe he’s ever advocated anything he didn’t actually believe, although the opinion-monger trade does induce people to play particular stereotyped roles. He does have a sense of himself and his social circle that tends to inflate their importance and sophistication. (See the obituary of his sister in which he chuffers about how accomplished his brother-in-law was at age 36; his brother-in-law was a lawyer with a fund of liberal education who had certain connections and certain modest administrative talents; he wasn’t any more accomplished than a mid-level business executive of a sort you can find in any small city in America).

Whatever dynamic which prevailed between JP and his parents after 1982 was the wrong one. He never acquired any post-baccalaureate schooling or worked in a trade for which you could say he was suitable. Instead, he wrote mediocre newspaper columns for the New York Post, ate too much, dressed badly, married very late in life, had no children until he was nearly 40, and ended up taking over the dregs of his father’s magazine when the American Jewish Committee and his father’s puppy dog Neil Kozodoy decided they were done with it. He seems like a character who might be skewered or pitied in a short story by Joan Didion or John Updike.

* Steve’s citizenism is the core of what pisses JPod off. Along no doubt with Steve’s “noticing” and in particular contrasts of what’s kosher in Israel versus here.

But this is still a bit off. “Sailerism”–i.e. citizenism–which Steve advocates is not what Israel practices/what JPod approves of. Israel is openly an ethno-nationalist state and not just in a nodding “this is our culture” sort of way, but in a policy specific sort of way (e.g. selective immigration).

More accurate would be to say that if Richard Spencer applied “Spencerism” to Israel alone JPod would be his greatest fan.

While JPod is pretty much a loon–often seeming to be no more than a crude caricature of Jewish ethnic resentments–his particular line of thought on these sorts of issues seems quite common among a whole slew of Jewish commentators from center-left through right:

Israel is … Israel, a nation, the homeland of the Jewish people. And Israel must do anything that is necessary to preserve itself as the homeland of the Jewish people.

All other nations, however, are in the category of “host nations”. They must be “open”. They in particular must be ever open to the Jews or else they are “anti-Semitic”. And white nations in particular must be deconstructed to be open to all and “multicultural” so that minorities–like Jews–can always feel welcome. And super-specifically the United States is the ultimate “host nation” and has no legitimate native character–it’s a “nation of immigrants”–and must have open immigration to utterly drown those racist rednecks who somehow think they have some claim on it.

* Per published captions, the rescuer is Daryl Hudeck, and the rescuee is Catherine Pham and child (i.e. Southeast Asian).

Outside of this particular corner of commentary, the big controversy about this picture was when blogger Matt Walsh made a commonsensical observation:

“Woman cradles and protects child. Man carries and protects both. This is how it ought to be, despite what your gender studies professor says.”

And lo, the wrath of the harpies did descend upon him. Out of the many pointings and shriekings, the official curators of Twitter instructed Tweeters to read the Tweet thread by Christina Wolbrecht, whom they identified as a “Real Professor,” explaining interminably why Walsh’s Tweet was Problematic.

* To understand the tangled history of the feud between Conservatism Inc. and the Dissident Right, it helps to see just how hysterically the likes of JPod react to even the most mild challenges to the Proposition Nation:

7/11/2005 – JPod triggered by Derb’s criticism of birthright citizenship

http://www.unz.com/isteve/pod-lesser-birthright-pundit/

7/13/2005 – JPod calls Sailer “a scum”

https://www.unz.com/isteve/please-keep-attacking-me/

7/17/2005 – Sailer cites Norman Podhoretz contra JPod

http://www.vdare.com/articles/podhoretz-junior-vs-steve-sailer

9/3/2005 – Sailer commits an act of Unauthorized Noticing

http://www.vdare.com/articles/racial-reality-and-the-new-orleans-nightmare

9/5/2005 – JPod triggered; early use of “point ‘n’ sputter”

https://www.unz.com/isteve/thou-shalt-know-him-by-his-enemies/

9/7/2005 – Sailer cites Commentary and AEI contra JPod

http://www.unz.com/isteve/john-podhoretz-averts-his-maidenly/

Posted in John Podhoretz | Comments Off on John Podhoretz Calls Steve Sailer “a Loathsome, Reprllent Racist Filth”