Exodus Viewed from the Alt-Right

My tradition teaches a message of radical inclusion and love. Will you sit down and learn Torah with me, and learn love?

The Alt Right has many definitions. One is that it is not the conservatism ruling in the Republican party which stands for, “Invade the world, invite the world.” Another explanation is that it is an entry vehicle for white nationalism which is inherently racist, xenophobic and anti-Semitic.

Is racism, xenophobic and anti-Semitism ever rational? Ever self-interested? Or is it always crazy and destructive to the hater?

Steve Sailer writes: “There is not really that much of a market for Jewish self-awareness. It’s not as if a novelist as talented as Roth is incapable of it, but there’s simply little demand these days for Roth to go very deep into these kind of patterns.”

* The Pharoah’s daughter saves Moses. Why? Because women rarely have national or racial loyalty above and beyond their feelings. She sees this baby and her heart goes out to it, even though it is a child of her country’s enemy (in the eyes of Pharoah). And she adopts him.

* Ex. 2:12. If Moses saw a Hebrew beating an Egyptian, would he also have intervened and beat the Hebrew?

In the Book of Exodus, we have a Pharoah who wants to make Egypt great again and perhaps puts Egypt first, not Israel first. This rise in Egyptian nationalism is dangerous to residents of Egypt who don’t identify as Egyptian, such as the descendants of Jacob. The Torah uses the word “Am” to mean “blood nation” when quoting the new Pharoah about the threat of the Jews. It is one blood nation threatened by another blood nation.

The other Hebrew word for nation is “goy” which does not have the same connotation of blood ties.

The Jews apparently moved throughout Egypt, and didn’t just stick to Goshen. It could have been Hitler speaking in Ex. 1:9. From a racial perspective, a Jew can’t stop being a Jew, while from a religious perspective, Jews can convert to your religion. You could not convert to being an Egyptian or Greek (though you could become a Roman) perhaps today to being French or German.

Dennis Prager: “The Jewish dream is that the world not be based on blood ties. It is the only dream ultimately that will save humanity given the horrors of blood historically. Blood beliefs are the greatest source of cruelty in history because if you are not my blood, you are not valuable. That’s how people have lived.”

“The reason that Hitler so hated the Jews was a belief in blood. The Jews are the world’s polluters of blood purity. If you are into the purity of blood, the Jews are your quintessential enemy because wherever the Jews are, they assimilate in part and stay Jewish in part. They are part of you but not fully part of you because of their blood. If they fully assimilate, they are still dangerous… The assimilated Jew was the ultimate polluter of German purity. If you believe in the purity of the nation, the Jews are the quintessence of opposition to you.”

“The only nation to keep its identity and still be all over was the Jews.” (Dennis’s lecture on Exodus 1, as part of his Torah verse by verse project.)

“He [Pharoah] doesn’t like that the Jews are all over Egypt, maintaining their identity but also a part of Egyptian life. He was interested in blood purity.”

Another way of understanding “blood purity” is that you know who your parents are. Ninety eight percent of whites in America have no black DNA. That’s a result of “blood purity” in North America as opposed to the assimilation of Latin America.

Being against “blood ties” is being against the importance of family and relations. Family means blood ties. Family not connected by blood ties are not as close. Parents do not provide the same support for children who are not theirs biologically. Genetic similarity fuels bonds, self-sacrifice, and nationalism. The closer the genetic tie, the more likely people will get along.

I think there is a resurgence of anti-Semitism in Egypt because at this point in time Egypt and its new Pharoah had not yet learned how to be multicultural. And I think Jews were going to be part of the throes of that transformation, which had to take place. Egypt was not going to be the monolithic society they once were in the last century. Jews were going to be at the center of that. It’s a huge transformation for Egypt to make. They are now going into a multicultural mode and Jews will be resented because of our leading role. But without that leading role and without that transformation, Egypt will not survive.

As a Jew, I think of how Jews have saved gentile countries such as Joseph saving Egypt from famine. But I understand how non-Jews can read the same texts and study the same history and come to different conclusions.

From the Torah perspective, in the first chapter of Exodus, a Pharoah arises who feels no gratitude to the group that saved his country.

Jews feel the same lack of gratitude from blacks. Jews funded and led black civil rights but the more educated the black, the more likely they are today to be anti-Semitic.

Posted in Alt Right, America, Anti-Semitism, Jews | Comments Off on Exodus Viewed from the Alt-Right

Oxford Professor ‘Joshua Silver reports Home Secretary speech as ‘hate incident’ to police because she favors British workers’

REPORT:

Home Secretary Amber Rudd’s speech to the Conservative Party conference on foreign workers was treated as a “hate incident” by police.

In her speech in October 2016 the Tory minister proposed tougher rules on foreign workers to stop immigrants coming to the UK “taking jobs British people could do”.

Her comments were reported to West Midlands Police by Joshua Silver, a physics professor at the University of Oxford.

Joshua Silver serves on the editorial board of the Oxford Jewish Review.

According to Wikipedia: “In 2016, Professor Silver complained to West Midlands Police that British Home Secretary Amber Rudd had committed a hate crime while giving a political speech at the Conservative Party conference. During an interview with Andrew Neil on BBC2’s Daily Politics, Prof Silver said: “I didn’t actually see the speech but I’ve read the draft. And I’ve looked at all the feedback that there was to the speech. I’ve read the speech carefully and I’ve looked at all the feedback. It’s discriminating against foreigners, you pick on them and say we want to give jobs to British people and not to foreigners. It was interpreted that way.”.[7][8] During the subsequent discussion on the programme, former Conservative Party leader Michael Howard responded by stating: “Of course it wasn’t a hate incident… What Amber Rudd said was no different from Gordon Brown [former Labour prime minister] when he said there should be British jobs for British workers. I think Mr Silver should be thoroughly ashamed of himself because what he’s doing is to bring a well-intentioned piece of legislation into disrepute.” The BBC subsequently reported that West Midlands Police had not been formally investigated the statement, but had recorded it as a “non-crime hate incident” in accordance with police national guidelines.”

From a Lubavitch publication:

Self-Correcting Vision

Hundreds of millions of people around the globe are in need of corrective lenses to improve their vision. Poor eyesight leads to lost wages and a lower quality of life, and if not corrected early can lead to total blindness later in life. However, in many third world countries, no optometrists are available to examine their eyes and prescribe corrective lenses. Furthermore, the cost of producing the glasses is beyond the reach of the world’s poorest people.

One solution is to mass produce lenses that can be adjusted by the wearers to fit their own eyes. One type of such adjustable lenses was developed by Joshua Silver, a physics professor at Oxford University in England. Called AdSpecs, the glasses are designed to allow users to inject silicon oil, a clear fluid, into the lens. The refractive power of the lens increases as more oil is injected. Once the user adjusts the lens to a comfortable strength, the injection device is removed. AdSpecs glasses cost about $19 a pair, and 30,000 pairs have already been distributed in 3rd world countries. However, Silver’s goal is to reduce production costs down to $1 a pair and distribute them on a far wider scale—up to 1 billion needy people…

As great as the need is for physical vision adjustment, our spiritual vision is even more blurred. Under normal circumstances, the process of getting fitted for spiritual “glasses” is a prolonged one—one must find a spiritual guide, a teacher who succeeds in shaping our worldview so that we see clearly, beyond the fuzziness and confusion of the world.

Yet, very soon, we will all experience a rapid adjustment of vision without the need to consult with “experts.” Rather, each individual will have a direct experience with G-dliness, which will allow them to directly perceive spirituality. As the prophet foretells, “No man will teach his friend Torah for all will know Me, from the greatest to smallest.” All spiritual concealments and barriers will be removed, and “Our eyes will behold our teacher.” This is the state we will enter with the complete revelation of Moshiach, may it happen immediately.

Posted in Censorship, Chabad, Jews | Comments Off on Oxford Professor ‘Joshua Silver reports Home Secretary speech as ‘hate incident’ to police because she favors British workers’

Best Explanation Of The Alt Right

Comment: “Anybody seen this piece by Tablet? This is probably the best explanation of the Alt-Right from an intellectual perspective, including in its relationship to paleoconservatism and movement conservatism, that I’ve seen in a mainstream publication. It’s hostile, of course, but it’s very well-researched and nuanced. Steve gets a name-check, of course.”

Posted in Alt Right | Comments Off on Best Explanation Of The Alt Right

Homesick

Steve Sailer writes: Dr. Matt emphasizes that contemporary Americans are more stiff upper lip. Our culture doesn’t like people complaining about being homesick. For example, we emphasize to 17 year olds that they are supposed to go off to a distant college next year and live amongst strangers. Only losers go to local colleges.

Not surprisingly, lots of college freshman get depressed, but we’re not supposed to use the word “homesick” in describing them.

* Whenever I read history books on topics from 19th century and earlier that quotes personal correspondence, I’m frequently struck by the perfervid emotions routinely expressed between people who are not lovers.

* What is lost when emigrants leave their homes is unfortunately usually neglected when considering migration policy. They don’t only leave behind family, friends and community, shredding human ties and social capital in the process, they’re scarred in the process and probably doomed to never really arriving in high-trust communities where people are committed to the communities and willing to invest in their welfare.

Perhaps America’s most noteworthy freedom is the freedom from duty and obligation that its citizens feel. After leaving everything and everybody behind… so many times… uprooting for emigration, pioneering along the American frontier or relocation to chase modern ambitions of career and cosmopolitan experience, market services have liberated us Yanks to follow our bliss . instead of relying on family or neighbors in the community. The latest iteration of the dot.com fad to enable strangers to transact to provide a lift across town or a place to crash when travelling is a logical market development and probably not the last one in this line. Americans have taken reinventing ourselves to the extreme of the notion that “city air makes you free.”

At what cost came this mobility and freedom? Mr. Sailer’s grandmother in law asks an important question we should consider when reflecting on what to make of the American experience. There is no doubt about the allure of social mobility that “streets paved with gold” promised. But hardship and disappointment for so many was often more the reality than the promised fantasy. Finally I wonder if the unnatural selection that sent America the most restless unattached dreamers might be an unexamined curse?

Frequently I’m confronted with evidence of this unkind notion, “Americans don’t solve problems, we leave them behind…” Every article or report I see, “America’s best places….” “Retire here, not there…” makes me believe that so many Americans are mere “consumers” of their home community. Rather than investing and contributing their love and time to make whatever their home is better, they’re all too ready to pick up and move to whatever place looks to provide a more agreeable turnkey experience, eg. offer the greener grass, milder weather, lower tax burden, better school district, exciting bohemian lifestyle, etc. Not that I can blame them at all. I recognize this all-too-American instinct and restlessness in myself. Perhaps I’m projecting this a bit too much on my fellow citizens?

I don’t think so.

A couple weeks ago I flew back east to visit a brother who had just moved there. His new home is a few hours from the town where I (mostly) grew up and went to school. On a lark we drove down there after I hadn’t been there since I left home 20 years previously. It’s uncanny how a place I knew so well could completely empty out of everybody I knew in a few short years. I recall all the kids in school who couldn’t wait to leave… out of state… as far away if possible. Now not only are all the kids gone, the empty nester parents have left too. They only settled in the town because of the excellent schools. But once the kids were done, it was time to leave for someplace without the ridiculous tax burden necessary to finance those good schools. A peculiar unsustainable pattern follows, but not quite like with salmon, who leave the streams for the big ocean. In this case the salmon don’t much care to return to the same exact stream to spawn. Any ol’ stream will do. Whatever freedom and mobility our lifestyles have given us, I might agree with Mr. Sailer’s grandmother in law, “God damn Christopher Columbus.” For the immigrants lost a community, continuity and loyalty that as their descendants we’ve never known.

* A sad story is that of Eric Carle, the artist/children’s book author (“The Very Hungry Caterpillar”). He was born in upstate NY of German immigrant parents. In ’35 when he was 6 and a perfect little American 1st grader, grandma wrote a letter saying, “Alles ist gut!” back in the Fatherland – that Hitler fellow had made Germany great again. America was Depressed, mom was homesick, so they went back. When the war started, dad got drafted into the Wehrmacht and ended up a Russian prisoner – they didn’t send him back until ’47, at which point he was broken physically and mentally (my own grandfather was never the same after his time in the Gulag). They sent Eric out to dig trenches. As soon as he could, he went back to the US (he was a birthright citizen) but he still speaks with a German accent. I think the whole thing made him completely allergic to politics so he writes sweet childrens stories about worms and bears that don’t even have an allegorical meaning.

The same thing happened to my wife’s father’s cousin and family except they went back to Stalinist Russia in ’36 and the ones that survived didn’t get out until perestroika 50 years later.

Posted in America | Comments Off on Homesick

WEHT To The Science Reporting In The New York Times?

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* The role of Jon Mooallem at the New York Times science section is like that of the propagandists at Pravda and Red Army News who were allowed to travel abroad and/or read foreign press and report on it to the masses. Since these were the reporters most likely to realize that the propaganda the publications were espousing was entirely bogus, only the most obviously and fanatically devout communists would be selected for this role. After Nicholas Wade (the former NYTimes science editor now retired) let the cat out of the bag that Human Biodiversity is real and obvious, the powers at NYT became militant about suppressing any more public airing of the evidence. So they have chosen a reporter who is a fanatically committed leftist, someone who loves the Narrative more than he loves life itself. He would rather die than admit that the evidence supports race realism. He is the perfect choice to provide an “objective” filter for NY Times readers regarding the growing scientific evidence on human evolution, human genetic differences, and related topics.

* The Polish national communist press employed a really cool guy as a foreign correspondent in the 1970s-80s. What was his name? Witold Something?

He’d go to third world countries that the Soviets were promoting and report back that they sucked, but in such a polished style that nobody could quite convict him of heresy.

Posted in Journalism | Comments Off on WEHT To The Science Reporting In The New York Times?