What if the Trump-Putin Connection Turns Out to be Kushner’s Chabad?

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* Chabad were always czarist supporters. In fact the “Alter Rebbe” -literally the old rabbi, Shneur Zalman of Liadi who was the founder of Chabad strongly supported the Czar against Napoleon. This despite having been imprisoned by the Czarist government not long before the French invasion. There are even Chabad legends that the Alter Rebbe had a spy in Napolean’s camp and would pass on his reports to the Czarist authorities. Chabad was also very skeptical of Communism and supported the Czarist and later the White government against the Bolsheviki. The 6th Rabbi of Chabad (Rabbi Y.Y. Shneerson) was imprisoned by the Bolsheviks and sentenced to death for counter revolutionary activities. His sentence was reduced after a international campaign.

* Chabad-Lubavitch is one of the most remarkable examples of the tendency of some Ultra-Orthodox Jewish organizations to turn from anti-Zionist to de facto pro-Zionist (sometimes fanatically so) without ever actually officially amending their ideology.

* My family attended a chabad-run synagogue for a year or two. They definitely were a very welcoming group. It was a much nicer experience than the reform and conservative ones I had been to. To be honest, all the stereotypical American Jewish traits were on full display at those places, especially extremely conspicuous donations to the synagogue. In contrast, Chabad felt like a much more genuine community.

* The Chabad Rabbis were mainly interested in having a joyous worship service, whereas the Reform and Conservative Rabbis were obsessed with the Holocaust and defending Israel.

* I have heard that the Chabad people run boarding houses for Jewish backpackers/hippies in many places around the world, and that these places are known for their good food and inexpensive lodgings.

* I’m no expert on the alignment-of-forces of judaists here, but it halfway looks like Chabad maintains its office here to harvest dollars from religious kids who come for the 1-2 year study-in-Israel schtick.

Let’s be clear about something: the Chabad is NOT Old Line Modern Orthodox, like Lookstein who did Ivanka’s conversion.

The religious establishment here made an exploratory press release about not recognizing Ivanka because her papers came from Lookstein; but Netanyahu read them the riot act; they folded RIGHT QUICK.

NEtanyahu, like all his predecessors, has always been able to call the religious parties bluff (to withdraw their support during a Knesset vote-of-confidence) by threatening to turn off the tap of State funding. NEtanyahu knows that because they’re’s so MANY rabbis competing for votes, he can successfully divide-&-conquer, merely by putting an individual one into “redpill dread” that his camp followers would jump to another rabbi’s campfires relatively quickly, once the first rabbi can no longer pay salaries, supply apartments,underwrite matchmakings, etc etc etc.

* I disagree with the poster who said that the Chabad Worldwide Empire is completely independent of 770 Empire Parkway, It’s like the Pope. He can take a bishop down if the bishop causes too much bad press. But most of the time, he choses his battles very carefully.

Chabad has like 2-3 houses in Philippines, who (on paper) shouldn’t be so accepting of these retired 70 year old Israeli and American Jewish guys who are shacked up & making babies with 21-year-old Filipina Catholics. But these guys are the the only target audience the local rebbe has in his “territory”. The rebbe does what he has to do. “Go along to get along” is how the rebbe is gonna get promoted up the hierarchy.

In Thailand, it’s less of a “red loine”. The Thai chicks are Bhuddists, who (from the outside world’s point of view) are not pagans. Christianity is straight up pagan.

But, ya know…. King Solomon himself was willing to tolerate pagan temples when they came attached to shiksa hotties, so I guess chabad rebbo’nim can ALSO learn to hold their nose and wait for a promotion back to the Big Leagues.

* Trump is an American phenomenon. Even the change of the name from Drumpf to Trump is very American. Only in America, for good and ill.

Alt Right is pissed with the recent ‘betrayal’, but then Trump would be nothing without betrayal. He’s been about Deals, not Ideals. He’s played all sides and then some. He’s been all over the map his entire life. He has said everything, meant everything, meant nothing.

He’s a phony but he can sometimes get excited enough to believe in whatever he is excited about… until the thrill runs out, and then he’s onto other stuff. Just look at his history with women.
The ONLY way he could in 2016 was by connecting with the Deplorables, and their votes were indeed gold to him. But in office, they can’t do him any good anymore. The power is with Congress, Deep State, Wall Street, Pentagon, and etc, and they have no use for his nationalism-than-globalism.

Also, Trump is a promoter, a showman, a circus master. He gets bored easily when he has to do nitty gritty stuff. He needs splash, pizzazz, once in a while, so why not lob some bombs at Syria? Fireworks. A bit of Kilgore in him that will blow up a village to go surfing. He has to sow his wild oates, which he has in endless supply.

Howard Roarks, the men of unshakable conviction, exist in fantasy. Even if they did exist in reality, they win only in fantasy. In real life, they never win. Or, their victory comes with huge price. During the Soviet Era, the Soviet government was filled with men of power and privilege. They had the connections, dachas, and caviar. Who knows or cares about any of them now? They are all forgotten. Who, from the Soviet era, looms as a giant? Solzhenitsyn, who stuck to his truth. But what price did he have to pay. Gulag, persecution, exile. In the end, he won, but most people are not willing to pay that kind of price, not least because for every Solzhenitsyn who finally triumphed, 1000 others died in silence and in vain.

NO ONE wants to pay that kind of price. Only in the Ayn-Randian universe does a man of iron principle like Roark defy, triumph, and realize his dream easy succession. The real world belongs to Gail Wynands, Tooeys, and Keatings. Those are the three basic types in the world of wealth and power.

Some people compared Trump to Howard Roark, but he was more like Wynand. When push comes to shove, Trump folds and goes along, just like Wynand who realizes he hasn’t the will go all the way. All said and done, Wynand is all about wealth and connections. Without those, he is nothing. In contrast, Roark has the power of vision that his solid gold in his mind regardless of his condition in life. Trump is all about wealth, connections, and making deals. If he can’t do that, he has nowhere to go. And besides, democratic politics is about compromise with the Power. It’s not about dictatorial will, no matter noble it may be.
Depressingly however, political compromise in the US means shilling out for the globalists. It’s one thing to compromise for the good of the people but quite another when the compromise mainly serves the GLOB elites. When FDR came up with New Deal, he made compromises with labor, not with the capitalist elites. But labor isn’t powerful enough to exert the kind of pressure necessary to tear Trump away from the GLOB.
As for military guys, some of them just want ANY excuse to play ball. They see it as a sports. Any reason to play the game and fight the ‘enemy’. Always a need for one.
Or maybe, Trump is thinking of the WWII option. It’s been said that WWII, more than the New Deal, ended the Great Depression. FDR’s economic theory came down to creating the military-industrial complex. As the US mainland is free from attack, what does it matter if the US war machine goes into high gear and creates jobs and makes bombs to destroy other nations? Under FDR, guns were butter.

Trump is a phenom, and he reveled in the campaign. That was his element. Entertainer, showman, comedian, provocateur, clown, big personality, salesman, demagogue, and etc. He’s been promoting fights and running a TV Show. But when it comes to running something like government, he’s at a loss. Trump is used to running his own businesses. Also, anything in business can be solved with money and settlements. Profits are the only thing that matters in business. In government, there are Other Interests, and some of these are tribal, ideological, and personal, and Trump cannot solve this problem by greasing hands.
Also, Deep State are different from politicians. Trump once said politicians came to him for handouts, and that’s all that most politicians or prostitucians are interested in. For them DC is Hollywood for ‘ugly people’. It’s their ticket to the Good Life and Respectability. But Deep State operatives, globo-tribalists, and entrenched ideologues are different. Some of them care about the power, not the money. Some of them are ideologues and grand visions. And others got more money than Trump and can’t be bought.
So, Trump must be flustered dealing with these types. They are unlike any other people he’d worked with before. They have their own agendas and try to bend Trump to their will. Money cannot solve his problems with them. And on most things, they are more informed than Trump even if they twist the facts to push the agenda, as with Syria.

This Trump phenom is symptomatic of America as a spectacular but silly country. The US reinvents everything into a fantasy, a circus, a new religion. Mormonism is almost proto-Hollywood in its cheesy and Pirates-of-Penzance-like reinvention of the Bible. Mormonism’s combination of opportunism & materialism AND puritanism & moralism is part of the kitschy delusion. Hollywood reinvented Christianity with ET with an outerspace messiah who befriends lonely children, dies, is resurrected, and returns to heaven. All the western mythology(and then some) was reinvented as STAR WARS. And the themes of revolution and radicalism of the 20th century was reinvented into a Calvin Klein fantasy of MATRIX.
The Founding Fathers were lately reinvented as a bunch of rappers.
So, Trump’s nationalism is another fantasy, a show, a musical. It’s not the real thing but a reinvention worthy for Las Vegas extravaganza. Trump has real power, but he cannot be taken seriously or soberly. He has to be approached as a Cecil B. DeMille production. He’s the santa or the fake santa of nationalism, but then, is there such a thing as a real santa? Hoping for a true nationalist in Trump is like wishing that a store santa is the real thing. Given the system that allowed his rise, real nationalism is hard to come by.

Trump pulled off a fun opening act as the would-be-Moses of the Deplorables, but the whole idea now seems rather silly. Trump as the deliverer? The man most famous for saying ‘you’re fired’ is going to create an America where everyone is hired. LOL.
But even if there is some sincerity in Trump as leader of long-forgotten Deplorables, the question is how far is he willing to go even if he succeeds on the economic front? After all, there were two Moses in the movie. There was Moses I, the Egyptian who served the empire. And Moses II, the one who regained his identity and led his people to the Promised Land.

Trump’s vision doesn’t go beyond Moses I. In other words, he remains the servant of the Empire, the Glob. And his nationalism is really a means to serve the GLOB even better.
Moses I defies the System and pushes ‘reforms’ that lead to better treatment for slaves, better food, and more human conditions. He sees it as a kind of triumph of justice, and it is. He has improved the lot of the Jewish slaves, but the fact is they remain slaves, and he is still serving the Pharaoh. If anything, one could say he has empowered the empire even more by making the slaves more productive, more hardworking, and improved in morale. So, paradoxically, his justice for the slaves has made the tyranny over them even more powerful. After all, an empire needs hard workers. (Communism failed in part because work ethic crumbled.)

Thus the moral victory of Moses I was delusional. He did bring some measure of justice to the slaves, but turning them into better and more willing workers, he has also empowered the Egyptian Empire that will conquer and enslave more peoples. The slaves were part of something bigger. They were just cogs in the system.

For Moses to truly free the slaves, he must become Moses II, the man who awakens to his true identity and embarks on the exodus to lead his people from bondage. As long as the empire exists, Jews will just be slaves and servants to it no matter how much their lot is improved with better working conditions and better food. (Likewise, Hitler fattened Germany up in the 30s to embark on empire. Had he improved the lives of Germans for the sake of German nation itself, he would have been a decent leader. But his mind was infected with dream of empire, and that meant the Germans, once made strong and healthy again, would be used as cannon fodder to expand the empire. But if Hitler pursued his own mad dreams, Trump is beholden to the Imperial Vision of the Anglo-Zionists who are intoxicate with power and hegemony like college coaches with winning the Rose Bowl.) Trump isn’t up to playing Moses II, and he knows it, and we know it. And even if he wanted to, it’s not possible under the current system.

So, we really need to think about the ultimate meaning and worth of Trumpian nationalism. If it’s not true nationalism, what is it? Is it just a means to improve the morale, productivity, and patriotism of Americans so that they can be harnessed to serve the Empire better? After all, there has been an erosion of patriotism under Bush and Obama. Bush’s wars even made Conservatives feel sorry they supported him. Obama’s homo-worshiping supporters do not make red blooded patriots who will not only chant USA USA USA but fight and die for the empire. Most people in the US military didn’t want to die for Obama.

Without the gungho support of Red State America, the empire seems ever wobbly, all head and no body, as the body feels disconnected to the head that is all about homos and trannies in the military.

So, Trump is useful for recharging patriotism and national pride among white Americans. But is it about national independence from globalism/empire(like how the US was founded in the first place) OR is it about national servitude to the empire? “Trump fattened you real good and returned you back to health. USA USA USA. Now, go out and win one for the globber.”

Trump defies the globalist Pharaoh only to serve him better. He brings back American pride and optimism… but he doesn’t break the chains that holds the US in bondage to the GLOB. US may be the lone superpower, but there is a power bigger than the US. The GLOB is a made up of networks from US to Canada to EU to Australia to Japan to China to Latin America, and etc. It is the world of super-globalist-elites, the superpower over the superpower. The GLOB plays the entire world. It’s like one horse among those pulling a carriage maybe the biggest and strongest. The super-power horse. So, it is the biggest power? No, there is a power above it: the combined energies of all the horses harnessed by the rider who hold the reins. America is the biggest and strongest horse of the GLOB but one of many horses harnessed together to stampede around the world.

Trump is the man to demand better treatment for the big horse. Better food and new horse-shoes. But he’s not the one to cut the horse loose and ride it to freedom like in ELECTRIC HORSEMAN. In the end, it must remain a WAR HORSE.

BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI, which came out one yr after TEN COMMANDMENTS, tell more or less the same moral tale. British soldiers are held captive, and the commander Nicholson(Guinness) is an honorable and courageous man. He has a deep sense of responsibility for all his men, and he expects humane treatment for all of them.
Japanese want to use them for slave labor to build a bridge. And the Saito promises good treatment for Nicholson and officers IF they collaborate with Japanese in working prisoners like slaves. Nicholson refuses and pays a heavy price, and his men appreciate his defiance and sabotage the work until Saito relents and promises humane treatment to all the men. So, like Moses I, Nicholson triumphs and earns a measure of justice for his men.

The irony is that, with improve productivity and morale, the men are serving the Japanese Empire, the evil enemy, even better than they might have otherwise. But Nicholson so savors his moral victory over Saito and the improved lot of his men that he becomes blind to the larger context of what’s happening. No matter what his men do — work as slaves treated inhumanly or prison-laborers treated well — , they are serving the Japanese war machine to expand, kill more innocents, and kill more British soldiers. (But then, Nicholson, despite his concern for his men, is first and foremost, a man of hierarchy and blinded by class distinctions and all their vanities, which makes one wonder if he was motivated more by personal pride or morality.)

In the end, Nicholson does come to his senses and blows up the bridge that was built by his men with great effort. However magnificent it is, it was built to serve the Japanese Empire.
Blowing up the bridge is the only way he can free himself and his men from the Japanese empire.
And in the TEN COMMANDMENTS, Moses is truly the deliverer of his people ONLY WHEN the split-sea-bridge is closed between his people and the Egyptians.
You can’t be part of an empire and still be free. The chains must be broken. Bridge must blow, the sea must close.

In the case of the US, breaking the chains of empire is tricky. When Vietnam and Algeria threw out the French(and when Indians kicked out the Brits), it was nations yearning to be free and cutting the chains of imperialism. Those under imperial power can do this by sending the imperialists home.
But US is the main imperial power in the world. Why would the US empire want to cut off the chains when it is the master over vassal states? America owns the chains.

The reasons are threefold. (1) Empire is morally dubious, for both master power and servant nations. (2) Empire is costly and often bloody, and sometimes risks something like WWI (3) The current empire is less about American domination than the Glob domination over the US. The GLOB is a worldwide network. US is its main asset but the US is only of the its assets. So, the American Empire is really part of a bigger empire. Soros and his ilk play the whole world. Trans-national corporations have no loyalty to any nation. It’s all about those at the top, and the elites of the world now attend same schools — Harvard and Yale — and plot the helot-ization of all peoples. GLOB has zero interest at heart when it comes to most Americans. If anything, the GLOB sees all nationals as replaceables.

Anyway, for there be true freedom, we need someone to blow up the bridge or close the sea.

There can no half-measures, like the guy finds out in PRINCE OF THE CITY. The poison has to be purged completely, and globalism is this vile evil force in the world. It is not good ole internationalism, a good thing that’s about various nations trading and respecting one another’s sovereign autonomy. Globalism is about the erasure of all borders, all identities, all sovereignties. It is about mass amnesia, homomania as world religion, endless Wars for Israel, Pentagon’s insatiable hunt for new crises, demographic imperialism, and degradation of all native rooted identities and cultures(with the exception of Israel). Globalism is evil and must go. Trump is not the one to blow up the bridge. He will play showbiz version of Moses I but not Moses II who came to realize that the only way Jews can be free is to make a clean break with the Egyptians.

Trump is fun and made a big splash and ruffled feathers, but I think the most he can offer is the hope of Deplorables being turned into good workers again so as to become better minions of the Empire. One thing for sure, Trump is not a serious man, nor should he be approached as such. He has to be seen for what he is. The hustler who plays everyone. To be upset with Trump is to be upset that one’s playboy father is cheating on the mother.

The true nationalist? He will come up with a way to blow up the bridge.

Posted in Chabad | Comments Off on What if the Trump-Putin Connection Turns Out to be Kushner’s Chabad?

L.A. rabbis arrested at ICE protest

Jewish Journal:

Several area rabbis were among more than 30 protesters arrested April 13 in downtown Los Angeles for an act of civil disobedience to call attention to the treatment of undocumented immigrants.

The group was taken away after blocking a driveway to the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) Los Angeles, booked at Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) headquarters and released by mid-afternoon.

Bend the Arc Rabbi-in-Residence Aryeh Cohen said the act of civil disobedience demonstrated a refusal to accept Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) treatment of undocumented immigrants.

“What it says to ICE, the institution, is that we are intending to put our bodies in between them and … deportations and detentions of people who have been in this country for a long time,” Cohen said in a phone interview. “I think what it said to LAPD is our fight is not with them but with ICE.”

The protest, which began around 10 a.m. several blocks away, brought together Jewish, Muslim and Christian faith leaders and community members who chanted, “Exodus from detention!” as they marched toward the Detention Center, from where vans leave to round up immigrants. The center, itself, is a federal jail downtown that holds individuals for immigration-related crimes, among other offenses.

Participants in the protest, which came on the third day of Passover, drew parallells between the Israelites’ Exodus story from bondage to liberation and the plight of undocumented immigrants who live in fear of being detained.

“I’m standing with my brothers and sisters in faith … on behalf of the undocumented and the refugee and immigrant communities that are being targeted now. Especially now during Passover, it is time we remember our own liberation,” Rabbi Sarah Bassin, associate rabbi at Temple Emanuel of Beverly Hills, told the Journal, as she was locking arms with Wilshire Boulevard Temple Rabbi Susan Goldberg, before their arrest.

Approximately 200 members of Bend the Arc: A Jewish Partnership for Justice, Clergy and Laity United for Economic Justice (CLUE) and other faith-based social organizations turned out.

Among those arrested were Bassin, Goldberg, Cohen; Rabbi Chaim Seidler-Feller, director emeritus at Hillel at UCLA; and Rabbi Susan Laemmle, dean of religious life at USC.

Goldberg said the purpose of blocking the entrance to the detention center was to prevent ICE vehicles from doing roundups.

I don’t recall these rabbis going to Israel and getting arrested preventing Israeli law enforcement from rounding up and expelling illegal immigrants.

Posted in Immigration, Rabbis | Comments Off on L.A. rabbis arrested at ICE protest

Politico, Trump, Chabad and the new anti-Semitism

Rabbi Dovid Elezrie writes:

Not every day do you wake up to find you run the world. That’s what I discovered reading Politico the day before Passover. According to the long article, the key link between Putin and Trump is Chabad. You see, those Chassidim tentacles reach out everywhere. They are the cabal that binds Washington and Moscow. According to Politico, Jewish Russian oligarchs are buddies with Chabad rabbis in Russia who are connected in some convoluted fashion to Jared Kushner and others in the Trump orbit.

For centuries Jews would tremble before Passover, fearing a new blood libel that they were using Christian blood to bake matzahs. This went out style after the Mendel Beilis trial in 1914 in Czarist Russia. Next the Protocols of the Elders of Zion declared the Jews run the world. This too fell out a favor after the Holocaust. Now Politico has created a new version of the old story, only this time it’s not all Jews. The new kind of anti-Semitism is only against those guys in the black hats and the beards, the ultras, or Chassidim. And it’s not just Politico, CNN took a shot at the “ultra-orthodox” in hour long special a day before Passover. The production was so off base that even Israeli’s ultra-left publication, the anti-orthodox Haaretz, lampooned CNN for its bizarre depiction of orthodox Jews.

Politico’s theory is if you follow the connections — built over an abundance of lox and bagels served at a bris in New York, weddings in Mar-a-Lago and meetings in Trump Tower—they all lead to Chabad. To make these connections, Politico creates its own facts, distorting the development of the Jewish communal structure in Russia after the fall of Communism as having been orchestrated by Putin. It fails to reveal that Chabad sustained Judaism during the anti-religious Soviet Regime. Many of its rabbis sent off to Siberia and even death for keeping Judaism alive. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, Chabad emerged from the underground to continue its leadership. It wasn’t “brought in” by Putin. It was there, serving at a time of great danger, all along.

Politico claims it’s the Chabad connections that cement the bond between Putin and Trump. But why stop there? The article could have revealed the true depth of the Chassidic conspiracy. It didn’t mention the links between Chabad and the Democrats. Former Obama Chief of Staff Jack Lew, an observant Jew, attended the same synagogue that the Kushners do. Bernie Sanders’ closest friend and college roommate is a Chabad Chassid, beard and all. And what about Hollywood? Steven Spielberg dedicated a Chabad synagogue in LA , Beis Bezalel, in memory of his stepfather. His late mother was a member there. Mark Zuckerberg was caught dancing with the Chabad Rabbi at Purim party in Harvard. It’s even the New York Times! Tom Friedman recently attended the wedding of his niece in the Chassidic bastion of Crown Heights in Brooklyn.

If Politico had done the most basic fact checking it would have discovered that Chabad is unique amongst major Jewish groups — it never gets involved in politics. While others are busy with press releases on everything from immigration to who should be the US Ambassador to Israel, Chabad never says a word. Not in the US and not in the 90 countries around the world where it has centers. Chabad’s mission is Jewish education, outreach and social service. Its stays out of politics. It does not endorse anyone for any political position, even if it’s just for dog catcher in Iowa.

As a Chabad rabbi, I find Politico’s contentions bittersweet. Over forty years ago when I started as a young campus rabbi, we were viewed as a quaint cultural relic. Liberal Judaism was triumphant, those Chassidim from Brooklyn a bit like a gaggle of Tevyes from Fiddler on the Roof. However, Chabad taught as its central tenet the love of all mankind, the responsibility for Jewish destiny, the return of Jewish scholarship and spirituality as the foundation of Jewish life. Slowly Jews around the world were receptive to that message, and today Chabad is a global phenomenon. With size comes the lies and distortions. This Passover we have learned that not only are we popular, we are the secret cabal between the world powers.

Posted in Anti-Semitism, Chabad | Comments Off on Politico, Trump, Chabad and the new anti-Semitism

What’s wrong with Jews’ emphasis on intellect?

Dennis Prager writes:

The fact is, there is no correlation between intellect and goodness. In fact, a disproportionate number of intellectuals, in the 20th century and today, have been, to put it bluntly, moral idiots — and therefore disproportionately supported the greatest evils of their time. Almost all the support in the West for Soviet Communism came from intellectuals, not hard hats. Within Germany, the university was one of the most passionate pro-Nazi institutions. In America today, a Christian plumber is far more likely to support Israel than a Ph.D. in sociology, or in any other subject (including Judaic studies). And the number of bright, even “brilliant,” college students whose moral compass is broken is enormous.

Finally, intelligence not only is not as important as goodness, it is not nearly as important as common sense. A person of average intelligence with common sense will navigate life far better, by making far more intelligent decisions, than a brilliant person who lacks common sense. According to Satoshi Kanazawa, an evolutionary psychologist at the London School of Economics, in at least one important area — binge drinking and getting drunk — more intelligent people actually have less common sense. They do both more.

Parents who overemphasize brains to the detriment of other positive values, such as character, common sense and the ability to deal with life’s vicissitudes (think of all the bright college students who need “safe spaces” because they can’t deal with speakers with whom they disagree) are doing long-term damage to their child. And, to return to my opening question about looks and brains, they are not doing their daughter any favor if they neglect looks. In real life, they matter, too. But you need common sense to acknowledge that.

I don’t think he is right. Morality boils down to the ability to empathize. Empathy is a form of abstract thought and it basically correlates to brai power aka IQ. Civilization is only possible with an average IQ above 97.

Philosopher Gedaliah Braun writes:

My first inklings about what may be a deficiency in abstract thinking came from what I began to learn about African languages. In a conversation with students in Nigeria I asked how you would say that a coconut is about halfway up the tree in their local language. “You can’t say that,” they explained. “All you can say is that it is ‘up’.” “How about right at the top?” “Nope; just ‘up’.” In other words, there appeared to be no way to express gradations.

A few years later, in Nairobi, I learned something else about African languages when two women expressed surprise at my English dictionary. “Isn’t English your language?” they asked. “Yes,” I said. “It’s my only language.” “Then why do you need a dictionary?”

They were puzzled that I needed a dictionary, and I was puzzled by their puzzlement. I explained that there are times when you hear a word you’re not sure about and so you look it up. “But if English is your language,” they asked, “how can there be words you don’t know?” “What?” I said. “No one knows all the words of his language.”

I have concluded that a relative deficiency in abstract thinking may explain many things that are typically African.
“But we know all the words of Kikuyu; every Kikuyu does,” they replied. I was even more surprised, but gradually it dawned on me that since their language is entirely oral, it exists only in the minds of Kikuyu speakers. Since there is a limit to what the human brain can retain, the overall size of the language remains more or less constant. A written language, on the other hand, existing as it does partly in the millions of pages of the written word, grows far beyond the capacity of anyone to know it in its entirety. But if the size of a language is limited, it follows that the number of concepts it contains will also be limited and hence that both language and thinking will be impoverished.

African languages were, of necessity, sufficient in their pre-colonial context. They are impoverished only by contrast to Western languages and in an Africa trying to emulate the West. While numerous dictionaries have been compiled between Euro­pean and African languages, there are few dictionaries within a single African language, precisely because native speakers have no need for them. I did find a Zulu-Zulu dictionary, but it was a small-format paperback of 252 pages.

My queries into Zulu began when I rang the African Language Department at the University of Witwatersrand in Johannesburg and spoke to a white guy. Did “precision” exist in the Zulu language prior to European contact? “Oh,” he said, “that’s a very Eurocentric question!” and simply wouldn’t answer. I rang again, spoke to another white guy, and got a virtually identical response.

So I called the University of South Africa, a large correspondence university in Pretoria, and spoke to a young black guy. As has so often been my experience in Africa, we hit it off from the start. He understood my interest in Zulu and found my questions of great interest. He explained that the Zulu word for “precision” means “to make like a straight line.” Was this part of indigenous Zulu? No; this was added by the compilers of the dictionary.

But, he assured me, it was otherwise for “promise.” I was skeptical. How about “obligation?” We both had the same dictionary (English-Zulu, Zulu-English Dictionary, published by Witwatersrand University Press in 1958), and looked it up. The Zulu entry means “as if to bind one’s feet.” He said that was not indigenous but was added by the compilers. But if Zulu didn’t have the concept of obligation, how could it have the concept of a promise, since a promise is simply the oral undertaking of an obligation? I was interested in this, I said, because Africans often failed to keep promises and never apologized—as if this didn’t warrant an apology.

A light bulb seemed to go on in his mind. Yes, he said; in fact, the Zulu word for promise—isithembiso—is not the correct word. When a black person “promises” he means “maybe I will and maybe I won’t.” But, I said, this makes nonsense of promising, the very purpose of which is to bind one to a course of action. When one is not sure he can do something he may say, “I will try but I can’t promise.” He said he’d heard whites say that and had never understood it till now. As a young Romanian friend so aptly summed it up, when a black person “promises” he means “I’ll try.”

The failure to keep promises is therefore not a language problem. It is hard to believe that after living with whites for so long they would not learn the correct meaning, and it is too much of a coincidence that the same phenomenon is found in Nigeria, Kenya and Papua New Guinea, where I have also lived. It is much more likely that Africans generally lack the very concept and hence cannot give the word its correct meaning. This would seem to indicate some difference in intellectual capacity.

Note the Zulu entry for obligation: “as if to bind one’s feet.” An obligation binds you, but it does so morally, not physically. It is an abstract concept, which is why there is no word for it in Zulu. So what did the authors of the dictionary do? They took this abstract concept and made it concrete. Feet, rope, and tying are all tangible and observable, and therefore things all blacks will understand, whereas many will not understand what an obligation is. The fact that they had to define it in this way is, by itself, compelling evidence for my conclusion that Zulu thought has few abstract concepts and indirect evidence for the view that Africans may be deficient in abstract thinking.

Abstract thinking

Abstract entities do not exist in space or time; they are typically intangible and can’t be perceived by the senses. They are often things that do not exist. “What would happen if everyone threw rubbish everywhere?” refers to something we hope will not happen, but we can still think about it.

Everything we observe with our senses occurs in time and everything we see exists in space; yet we can perceive neither time nor space with our senses, but only with the mind. Precision is also abstract; while we can see and touch things made with precision, precision itself can only be perceived by the mind.

How do we acquire abstract concepts? Is it enough to make things with precision in order to have the concept of precision? Africans make excellent carvings, made with precision, so why isn’t the concept in their language? To have this concept we must not only do things with precision but must be aware of this phenomenon and then give it a name.

How, for example, do we acquire such concepts as belief and doubt? We all have beliefs; even animals do. When a dog wags its tail on hearing his master’s footsteps, it believes he is coming. But it has no concept of belief because it has no awareness that it has this belief and so no awareness of belief per se. In short, it has no self-consciousness, and thus is not aware of its own mental states.

It has long seemed to me that blacks tend to lack self-awareness. If such awareness is necessary for developing abstract concepts it is not surprising that African languages have so few abstract terms. A lack of self-awareness—or introspection—has advantages. In my experience neurotic behavior, characterized by excessive and unhealthy self-consciousness, is uncommon among blacks. I am also confident that sexual dysfunction, which is characterized by excessive self-consciousness, is less common among blacks than whites.

Time is another abstract concept with which Africans seem to have difficulties. I began to wonder about this in 1998. Several Africans drove up in a car and parked right in front of mine, blocking it. “Hey,” I said, “you can’t park here.” “Oh, are you about to leave?” they asked in a perfectly polite and friendly way. “No,” I said, “but I might later. Park over there”—and they did.

While the possibility that I might want to leave later was obvious to me, their thinking seemed to encompass only the here and now: “If you’re leaving right now we understand, but otherwise, what’s the problem?” I had other such encounters and the key question always seemed to be, “Are you leaving now?” The future, after all, does not exist. It will exist, but doesn’t exist now. People who have difficulty thinking of things that do not exist will ipso facto have difficulty thinking about the future.

It appears that the Zulu word for “future”—isikhati—is the same as the word for time, as well as for space. Realistically, this means that these concepts probably do not exist in Zulu thought. It also appears that there is no word for the past—meaning, the time preceding the present. The past did exist, but no longer exists. Hence, people who may have problems thinking of things that do not exist will have trouble thinking of the past as well as the future.

This has an obvious bearing on such sentiments as gratitude and loyalty, which I have long noticed are uncommon among Africans. We feel gratitude for things that happened in the past, but for those with little sense of the past such feelings are less likely to arise.

Why did it take me more than 20 years to notice all of this? I think it is because our assumptions about time are so deeply rooted that we are not even aware of making them and hence the possibility that others may not share them simply does not occur to us. And so we don’t see it, even when the evidence is staring us in the face.

Posted in Africa, Ethics, IQ | Comments Off on What’s wrong with Jews’ emphasis on intellect?

Jewish leaders owe an apology to Trump and America

I cover similar ground in my essay on “Jews for Consistency.”

Dennis Prager writes:

Last month, I wrote a column under the headline, “There Is No Wave of Trump-Induced Anti-Semitism or Racism.” I was right. But my being right is not what matters. What matters is that the mainstream media and the Jewish left — which is now essentially almost all of Jewish life outside of Orthodoxy — were wrong. So wrong that it was morally inexcusable.

Some Jewish leaders need to either publicly apologize — to the Jewish community, to conservatives, to America and to President Donald Trump — or be fired from their positions.

The entire claim that America was engulfed in a rising tide of anti-Semitism was a lie — “fake news.” And the claim that Trump’s election is what aroused all this anti-Semitism was not merely a lie, it was malicious libel.

No Jew has disseminated this libel as much as Steven Goldstein, executive director of the Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect in New York, part of a worldwide network. The man has engaged in chillul Anne Frank — a desecration of the name of Anne Frank.

Here are a few examples of Goldstein’s public comments:

“The cancer of Antisemitism has infected his [Trump’s] own Administration.”

“Make no mistake: The Antisemitism coming out of this Administration is the worst we have ever seen from any Administration.”

“The most vicious antisemites in America are looking at you [Trump] and your administration as a nationalistic movement granting them permission to attack Jews, Jewish institutions, and sacred Jewish sites.”

If the organization doesn’t fire this man, it is complicit in his radical politicization of an institution calling itself a center for “Mutual Respect,” and in the misuse of Anne Frank’s name to disseminate political hate.

More important than Goldstein and his so-called Center for Mutual Respect is Jonathan Greenblatt, the CEO of what is supposed to be the leading American-Jewish organization dedicated to exposing and combating anti-Semitism, the Anti-Defamation League. He has played a leading role in disseminating the narrative that since the Trump election, America has been drenched in anti-Semitism — even comparing its levels to those of Nazi Germany.

As reported by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz in December:

“ ‘Anti-Semitic rhetoric in the United States has reached levels unprecedented since 1930s Germany,’ Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt warned a gathering of Israeli lawmakers in Jerusalem on Monday.

“ ‘Anti-Semitism has wound its way into mainstream conversations in a manner that many Jews who lived through Nazi Germany find terrifying,’ he said at the Knesset meeting, which was convened to discuss the plight of American Jewry under the incoming Trump administration.”

Greenblatt’s allusion to Nazi Germany cheapened the evil of Nazism and of the Holocaust; I wrote about left-wing Jews doing this very thing in another column in mid-February.

And note Haaretz’s inflammatory description — “the plight of American Jewry under the incoming Trump administration” — made six weeks before there was a Trump administration!

In December, Greenblatt told NPR:

“We found it so deeply problematic when some of the images and some of the rhetoric [from Trump] seemed to evoke longstanding anti-Semitic conspiracies.”

Greenblatt repeated this charge in February in an op-ed he wrote for The Washington Post:

“Last year, we watched as the Trump campaign repeatedly tweeted and shared anti-Semitic imagery and language, allowing this poison to move from the margins into the mainstream of the public conversation.”

That whole charge — made by the left within and outside of Jewish life — was false. But the left has always believed it is OK to falsely accuse conservatives of racism, misogyny, anti-Semitism, bigotry, xenophobia, hate, etc. It’s effective, after all.

Greenblatt also wrote in that Washington Post column:

“Trump could have said he condemns anti-Semitism and takes incidents, such as the dozens of threats made to Jewish Community Centers, seriously. But instead, he lashed out against those asking the question.”

It turns out that President Trump was right: There was no eruption of anti-Semitism in America, let alone in the White House. And “those asking the question” did indeed deserve the contempt the president showed them.

It turns out that some disturbed American-Jewish kid in Israel was the source of nearly all these threats against Jewish Community Centers (JCCs). And the handful of other threats to JCCs came from a Black radical.

So, it turns out, as I wrote here four weeks ago: “[T]here is no wave of Trump-induced anti-Semitism or racism in America. This is only one more example of left-wing hysteria. … ”

And, it turns out that the conclusion to my column was also valid:

“Jews who think there is such a wave do so because they hate Donald Trump so much, they want to believe it. In other words, a lot of Jews want to believe that Jews are hated in America more than ever. Yet another way in which leftism has poisoned Jewish life.”

That’s the “poison” that ought to concern Jonathan Greenblatt.

In the meantime, he owes the president of the United States and the American people an apology.

Posted in Anti-Semitism, Dennis Prager | Comments Off on Jewish leaders owe an apology to Trump and America