The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersRussian Reaction Blog
Quantified JQ: Grasping ZOG by the Horns
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

zog

Are you an anti-Semite? Wonder no longer! Take the poll here: https://darussophile.polldaddy.com/s/are-you-anti-semite-adl

Am I an anti-Semite? The SPLC and RationalWiki both seem to think so. But there are also those who believe I am a hasbara shill, or even Jewish myself. Either way, I don’t appear to be a particularly enthusiastic philo/anti-Semitic propagandist – of the 1,200+ posts to date at my Unz.com archive, only about 15 are actually mainly about Jews (and I hope this will be the last one for some time).

map-world-jews-antisemitism

Percentage anti-Semites according to the ADL (i.e. believe in 6+/11 of popular stereotypes about Jews).

Fortunately, the ADL has attempted to make at least a minimal attempt at quantification. You qualify as an anti-Semite if you answer Probably True to six or more of the following questions:

  1. Jews are more loyal to Israel than to [this country/to the countries they live in]
  2. Jews have too much power in the business world
  3. Jews have too much power in international financial markets
  4. Jews still talk too much about what happened to them in the Holocaust
  5. Jews don’t care what happens to anyone but their own kind
  6. Jews have too much control over global affairs
  7. Jews have too much control over the United States government
  8. Jews think they are better than other people
  9. Jews have too much control over the global media
  10. Jews are responsible for most of the world’s wars
  11. People hate Jews because of the way Jews behave

In this post I will try to systemically answer each of these statements, but before I finalize my excommunication from ZOG, there’s a couple of caveats that I wish to make.

First, many of these combine an observation – often a statistically correct one – with a normative judgment. Of course Jews have many more billionaires and elite journalists per capita than any other major ethnicity. Is this good or bad – or even more ambiguously, “too much”? Difficult to say. For a committed blank slatist, the answer should be “Probably True”. Hence, the “anti-Semitism” of the more honest and consistent Leftists. Then again, knowledge of race differences in IQ, and the correlation of IQ with economic success, explains most if not all of the residual. But even though it annuls many of the more extreme anti-Semitic arguments, this form of argumentation is itself racist – and ironically, it was overwhelmingly Jews, e.g. Franz Boas, Leon Kamin, Gould, Lewontin, etc. – to a degree disproportionate even to their IQ advantage – who developed the modern blank slatism that tabooed such perspectives (although I have mixed opinions about his work, I think Kevin McDonald demonstrates this pretty conclusively). In other words, it was the Jews themselves who torpedoed the single most succinct and powerful argument against anti-Semitism; hence, also, the “anti-racist” IQ denialism amongst some of the more overt anti-Semites. Very amusing and ironic.

Second, these are also all negative stereotypes and perceptions. There are many things one may admire in Jewry. For instance, it is pretty much impossible for any educated person not to hold a considerable degree of appreciation for Jewish cultural and scientific accomplishments. As a “Russian alt-right, white nationalist anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist”, I will also admit to a no lesser degree of appreciation for the Jews’ verbal IQ-powered political acumen – simultaneously running a nationalist regime in Israel that is the envy of the Alt Right and exerting an inordinate degree of influence over US foreign policy via the Lobby, while somehow managing to maintain a reputation for erudite, tolerant, progressivism. Although normies will consider this as more of a negative stereotype. Oops. There go the paradoxes, again.

But this does go to show how fluid the boundaries are. For instance, the South Koreans are highly anti-Semitic by the ADL’s schema, but it’s a sort of anti-Semitism through philo-Semitism: “The idea of emulating Jews in order to get ahead in the world has gotten other people’s backs up as well. On the blog +972, Mairav Zonszein wrote: “I can’t blame the South Koreans for being interested, and it is indeed a compliment of sorts—but it brings up a point that I have written about before: the fetishization of Jews, whereby singling Jews out for greatness is the same as discriminating against them or stereotyping them.”

Conversely, just as there is much to like and praise, there is also much to dislike and criticize in all peoples. On the pages of this blog I have made fun of the Amerimutt, the Britbong, the Eternal Kraut, Sweden Yes, and the Butthurt Belt of Europe. I have called for kebab removal and named the Mongoloids soulless drones. Paradoxically, I am also one of the most hardcore Russophobes out there; anyone who has read me long enough has probably figured out that I consider my own people to be no better than White Negroes. Probably the only ethnicity I haven’t called subhuman scum at some time or other are Gypsies – and only because it is so self-evident in their case. So bear this in mind before consigning me to the ranks of hardcore anti-Semites – I actually hate all ethnicities, to some extent. Except the Czechs.

So with these preliminary comments out of the way, let’s answer the ADL survey point by point.

***

1. Jews are more loyal to Israel than to [this country/to the countries they live in]

The dual loyalties of the Jews is a popular stereotype, so much so that around a third of Americans and half of Europeans believe that they are more loyal to Israel than to their own country.

This isn’t just a goyim stereotype. Even America’s premier Jewish mag openly speaks of the “burden” of having one’s loyalties “inevitably divided” for Diaspora Jews. The Jews are themselves inordinately obsessed with this issue. For instance, several years ago, the Israeli immigration absorption and foreign ministries polled tens of thousands of Jewish Americans on where their loyalties would lie in the event of a crisis between Israel and the US. Unfortunately, this polling project was halted when it came to light, so as far as I know, we do not have any hard numbers on what Jews think themselves.

israel-stalinbus-1949

Israel, 1949. The world’s first Stalinbus. Now the Jews pretend they always hated Stalin, just like Balts like to think that they had nothing to do with Communists coming to power in Russia.

Historically, it seems to me Jewish loyalty was highly contingent on what best served Jewish interests (opposite example: Germans, who have tended to be remarkably loyal to their host countries, even when they were at war with Germany).

Consider Russian history. Jews were strongly hostile to the Russian Empire – Minister of the Interior Vyacheslav von Plehve estimated that 40% of its revolutionaries in the early 1900s were Jews. That said, I am not one of those people who ascribe the Bolshevik Revolution to Jews – the Bolsheviks were a predominantly ethnic Russian party, and it was the Balts, not Jews, who were instrumental in terrorizing central Russia into submission in the critical early months of the Civil War. Still, Jewish loyalty to the new, highly philo-Semitic early USSR soon picked up, and they ended up manning 40% of the NKVD for most of the 1930s and procuring Stalin the secrets of the atomic bomb from America – where WASP elites largely barred Jews from social (if not economic) advancement.

But as Brezhnev’s USSR instituted pro-majority affirmative action - which is all that late Soviet “anti-Semitism” amounted to – the Jews started joining dissident circles, emigrating, and lobbying for anti-Soviet sanctions in the US. Meanwhile, as America itself became a much nicer place for the Jews and the world’s foremost champion of Israel, the most visible face of Jewish political activism transitioned from Trotskyist internationalism to that weird form of Jewish-American nationalism called neoconservatism.

Today, Russia is one of Europe’s more pro-Israel countries, and according to the ADL, it is more philo-Semitic than almost any other East European nation. Putin’s daughter married a Jewish minigarch, just like Trump’s. Consequently, there are plenty of Jewish-Russian “conservative/patriots” types both in Russia – Soloviev (Shapiro), Khinshtein come to mind – and in Israel – Lieberman, Eskin, and even a few odd nationalists (mostly prominently the “son of a lawyer” Zhirinovsky, though he is half-Russian and does not identify as Jewish). Even so, Russia is in a new cold war with the United States, which is a much more dedicated – and powerful – champion of global Jewish interests, so Jews are likewise considerably overrepresented in the ranks of the Russian pro-Western liberal opposition (Khodorkovsky, half of the Echo of Moscow crowd) and massively overrepresented in the ranks of the Western Russophobes (Ioffe, Elder, Applebaum, Nemtsova, Weiss, etc). It is certainly telling that this resurgence of Jewish hostility came at just the point when Russia became something approximating a sovereign state, even if it is more philo-Semitic today than at any other point in its history since at least the 1920s.

Now obviously, the Jews don’t constitute a hive mind, and there exists a wide range of opinions among them, as Winston Churchill eloquently argued in his 1920 article Zionism vs. Bolshevism. Even so, it appears to me that Jewish practice of and rationalization of dual loyalty is central to their own view of themselves to an extent unseen with any other major people, and it has been that way since at least the age of the Pharaohs and ancient Babylonia.

So, that’s at least Probably True.

2. Jews have too much power in the business world

There is no question that Jews are massively overrepresented amongst the ranks of the world’s super-rich. They are the world’s “market dominant minority,” to borrow Amy Chua’s terminology.

Jews constituted 36% of the Forbes 400 in 2010, and 21% of the 200 richest Russians (down from 6/7 of the Semibankirschina oligarch cabal that as good as ruled Russia in the late 1990s).

In the meantime, they constituted about 2% of the US population, and less than 0.2% in Russia.

jewish-billionaires

Source: Pumpkin Person – Does IQ explain racial differences in extreme wealth?

Note that this is something that Jews themselves talk about and are understandably proud of, though G-d forbid the goys notice.

Admittedly, a large (though far from total) percentage of this overrepresentation is crisply explained by higher Jewish IQ, and I have speculated that Mediterranean peoples – Greeks, Levantines, and yes, Jews – might be especially talented at making money, even relative to IQ.

However, as I have already pointed out, this is where progressive Leftism faces a major paradox – their dogmatic blank slatism precludes IQ-based arguments, while their postmodern relativism also rules out traditional conservative arguments ascribing Jewish success to superior culture, such as propensity for thrift, hard work, etc. Consequently, the only route left open to them is to go the full mile and ascribe Jewish economic success to, well, Jewish privilege. Hence why the more honest and committed – or more socially autistic – leftists, e.g. Corbynites and ethnic minority SJWs in the US, tend to veer into “anti-Semitism”, drawing the ire of neoliberal ZOG.

So it’s ultimately pretty hard to say. Although I was initially slightly inclined to say Probably False, the fact that a lot of this privilege-speak was developed by Jews in the first place annoys me and tilts me towards Probably True.

3. Jews have too much power in international financial markets

Obviously if Jews are overrepresented in the business world, then they will also be overrepresented in financial markets, since there is a great degree of overlap between these two spheres.

But there are a few critical caveats that make my assessment Probably False.

First, this question is largely an extension of the previous one, and I am averse to double counting – especially given the ambiguities I express on the last question.

Second, this question is too distinctly evocative of the Rothschild conspiracy theory, whereby the eponymous family cabal controls most of the world’s wealth and institutions along with the Rockefellers. This is complete nonsense. While the Rothschilds were Europe’s premier oligarchs in the 19th century, a century of inflationary defaults and dilution by inheritance have grinded them down, and today they constitute just a few small investment banks that are pretty much irrelevant next to the Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgans of this world.

Third, Israel is a minnow in global financial terms. Its stock market capitalization is less than 20% that of Switzerland’s, despite having similar populations.

4. Jews still talk too much about what happened to them in the Holocaust

This is not just Probably True – it is obviously, objectively true.

poll-jewish-identity

Source: PEW – What Does It Mean to Be Jewish?

I mean I don’t even fault them for it. I would probably go on about the Holocaust if I was a Jew myself.

Even pushing Holocaust denial laws serves Jewish ethnic interests by pushing extreme anti-Semitism to the margins and thereby reducing the probability of it getting repeated.

Note that Israel doesn’t rush to recognize other genocides – e.g., that of the Armenians. Then again, trying to maintain a monopoly on victimhood makes cynical sense.

5. Jews don’t care what happens to anyone but their own kind

This is just an absurd exaggeration of #1. Probably False.

Jews played a huge role in the US civil rights movement, and ultimately I don’t think it was wholly or even primarily driven by racial hostility to the majority European population. Charity is a constituent part of traditional Judaism, with Jews obligated to give up 10% of their income to the needy – and not all of that goes to other Jews.

The Jews might be more clannish than North-West Europeans, but not more so than typical Mediterraneans – and a great deal less so than Sicilians or Caucasians.

As the commenter MawBTW noted on Greg Cochran’s blog, Eliezer Shlomo Yudkowsky – one of the core people behind Effective Altruism, possibly the most inherently universalistic ideology out there – is one of the most Jewish Jews around: “Eliezer Shlomo Yudkowsky has a comically Jewish name and a comically Jewish face. He’s an atheist, but that’s a Jewish stereotype too. On the female side, you have Shula Firestone, who’s full name is Shulamith Bath Shmuel Ben Ari Feuerstein and who Wikipedia describes as “a central figure in the early development of radical feminism”. By some miracle she contrived to be born in Canada instead of the first synagogue from Ellis Island.

6. Jews have too much control over global affairs

I don’t think so. Even though the US is somewhat under their thumb (see #7), it’s not like Israel was exactly getting its way under Obama. And Jews have far less influence in the rest of the world.

Besides, the flip side of the US vetoing all the anti-Israel UN resolutions is that an absurd percentage of those resolutions are made against Israel in the first place.

So that’s Probably False.

7. Jews have too much control over the United States government

This, on the other hand, is not just Probably True – it is obviously, glaringly true.

Consider the following.

It was supported by 9/172 countries. It was opposed by 63% of US voters, including 44% of Republicans. Even so, 90-0(/100) US Senators, including Bernie Sanders, voted to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

All this happened under an American President with well-known financial and familial ties to Jewish oligarchs and Chabad, whom many liberal American Jews nonetheless believe to be the second coming of Hitler.

Oh, and even speculating about the Jewish Lobby in the US is anti-Semitic – just ask Stephen Walt/John Mearsheimer or Philip Giraldi about how their careers fared after they started talking about this subject.

Incidentally, I say all this as someone who has no dog in the fight over Israel and Palestine. So far as I’m concerned, these are two tribes locked in their tribal struggle – admittedly, one is far more intelligent and dominant than the other – but since neither is particularly pro-Russian or anti-Russian, I see no reason to favor one or the other independently of objective geopolitical calculations. I don’t go on about the “AngloZionists” as one columnist here does, nor do I particularly care about “Israeli apartheid” and the travails of the Palestinians – that’s the job of Israel (Shamir), not mine.

Still, that does not mean ZOG is entirely a figment of the anti-Semitic imagination.

Case in point: The taboo against even noticing the Jewish Lobby has reached such heights that there is now a bipartisan consensus in the US to effectively do away with the First Amendment in order to… criminalize advocacy of BDS. The American political elites are happy to scrap the very Constitution that they otherwise worship for make benefit of Israel.

8. Jews think they are better than other people

I think the only people who think otherwise are people who have not met many Jews. For instance, jokes like this about incompetent goyim are hardly atypical:

Ivan: What if we have to fight China? They have more than a billion people!
Pyotr: We’ll win with quality over quantity, just like the Jews with the Arabs.
Ivan: But do we have enough Jews?

This sense of superiority extends to Jewish religious texts.

For instance, Deuteronomy 14:2 – “For you are a people holy to the Lord your God. Out of all the peoples on the face of the earth, the Lord has chosen you to be his treasured possession.

And this is tame. Some kabbalistic texts go as far as to describe non-Jews as “beasts in human form”.

Conclusion: Probably True.

Now admittedly, one might argue that the superiority complex is justified.

murray-jewish-accomplishment

Source: Charles Murray – Human Accomplishment

After all, it is an objective fact that Jews are far wealthier, more successful, better educated (more than can be explained by IQ, as Ron Unz showed!), and higher achieving than the goyim.

This, as Richard Nixon correctly noted, engenders a certain arrogance on the part of certain Jews. Which I suppose can be looked over, if they could just keep it to themselves.

Unfortunately, that’s not always the case. Here’s the thing. Israel happens to be far more of a “national state” than any other Western country or even the Russian “Putlerreich” (that exists only in Western imaginations). Israel has a big wall, it deports Black African illegals en masse, and opinion polls suggest that half of Israeli school children oppose equal legal rights for Arab-Israeli citizens. Most importantly, Israel is The Jewish State. Even though ethnic Russians constitute a higher percentage of the Russian population than do Jews in Israel, they can only dream of a “Russia for Russians” in the Putlerreich.

No wonder, then, that many in the Alt Right, such as Richard Spencer, cite Israel as the sort of ethnostate that they themselves aspire to for their own people. Good luck with that, though – any European leader who aspires to a quarter of what Israel managed will immediately become a Second Hitler. Thanks in large if not exclusive part to…

Well, Jews.

What knowing goyim notice and dislike is that too many of their (((fellow white people))) combine progressive, pro-minority agendas with aggressive support of Israel across virtually all countries where they have a substantial demographic presence.

The US: While the Jewish Lobby supports Israel and influence the US to an extent that ROG can only dream of (see #7), other Jewish activist organizations – which substantially overlap with the Jewish Lobby – have played outsized role in promoting Marxism, feminism, anti-racism, etc., present immigration as a “core Jewish value”, and have been outspoken in trying to discredit Trump, the closest the US has ever had or might ever have to a Netanyahu.

France: Guillaume Durocher has written a lot on Jewish ethnic lobbies who propagandize the poz and hate speech laws in France while aggressively shilling for Israel.

Russia: As soon as the anti-extremist Article 282 was brought against the Russian liberal/Jewish nationalist Anton Nossik for advocating the extermination of Syrians, on the basis that it was good for Israel, the entire Echo of Moscow crowd suddenly became ardent proponents of absolute free speech, even though they had previously been at the forefront of writing Russia’s hate speech laws in the first place.

ioffe-putin-is-antisemite Perhaps the ultimate “Jewish spy” archetype is Julia Ioffe: From being an Israel First activist at university, wall and all (!), she seamlessly transitioned into condemning Americans who want the same for their own country: “Je Suis Refugee“, therefore you need Infinity Immigrants! (Ioffe was not, of course, a “refugee” from the USSR in any meaningful sense of the word). She has also castigated Russian “cattle” who had the temerity to vote for the Vladimir Putin, who she believes hates Jews because he once said that Russians sacrificed more than anybody to save Jews from the Holocaust – no, really!

I can’t think of any other major market-dominant minority that has a substantial percentage of people who push “nationalism for me, not for thee” on their host countries.

For instance, the Chinese in South-East Asia, though economically dominant, do not translate it into political power, or a “culture of critique” against their host societies. On the other hand, the locals also organize the occasional pogrom against them, so perhaps it is the Chinese who are doing it wrong?

Ironically, George Soros – despite his Emmanuel Goldstein status amongst anti-globalists – isn’t really a Jewish spy. He has gotten high on his own supply and trafficks to Israel too, with the result that Israel has disavowed him. (There were reports that he stopped financing FEMEN when they attempted to open an Israeli affiliate, but AFAIK that was fake news).

9. Jews have too much control over the global media

Jewish overrepresentation (even relative to IQ) in media, journalism, and Hollywood is too obvious to deny. However, is it “too much”?

On /pol/ you have memes floating by every so often suggesting that Jewish dominance in the media is near total. Here is one such example:

jewish-control-media

I don’t know to what extent this table is accurate and/or cherry-picked. It seems to be too extreme to be true, but who knows. Maybe we can establish that in the comments.

Anyhow, my rejoinder to the idea that Jews control the media and that this is a bad thing, which I employed in a email discussion with an Alt Right intellectual who is deep into the JQ, went as follows:

… According to Wikipedia, there are 15,000 Jews in Sweden. That’s <0.2% of the population. Even you would surely agree that this isn’t anywhere big enough to seize control of any significant institution, even for a people as intelligent and apparently wily as the Jews. (If it is then resistance is futile, assimilation is inevitable).

If France, Germany, and the UK are cuck countries, then Sweden is the cucklord supreme. It has by far the highest Third World immigration per capita of any major EU country (100k+/year), and it is also the only one where a majority of people continues to favor the opens doors approach!

In short, it appears that the Swedish people are perfectly fine with voting themselves out of existence and electing another. That is despite (or because?) the media, political, and business scenes in Sweden are dominated by ethnic Swedes. And it has the strongest political correctness culture in all of Europe, with transgressions against it being punished not only by ostracism, as in the US and much of Europe, but also by the real threat of prison time.

And it’s all almost entirely Judenfrei! ;)

So, anyway… you’re probably anticipating my question/criticism here. How would Kevin MacDonald/Culture of Critique and the other propagators of the theory that there is are strong Jewish Ethnic Genetic Interests that unwaveringly works against Whites explain Sweden – a white country that is doing away with itself with the willing and happy connivance of not only its (ethnically Swedish) journalists and politicians but a strong majority of the (ethnic Swedish) population themselves?

Problem: That 0.1% includes the Bonniers:

jewish-control-media-sweden

My interlocutor replied:

Sweden is a bit of a mystery. The Jewish factor is not completely absent there however. The Jewish Bonnier family apparently owns several publishing companies, the private channel TV4 (with as many viewers as the main state TV channel), various other channels, a film company, cinema theaters, magazines, and newspapers, including two leading dailies.

From that alone, punching above one’s weight as ever! (In Poland, perhaps the most homogeneous country in Europe, the leading liberal daily constantly shaming the Poles for not being international and “modern” enough is owned by . . . Adam Michnik.)

Lack of country specific knowledge led me down a dead end, and forces me to acknowledge Probably True.

There used to be a site called J-DAR that scraped movie databases to calculate a “jewdar” score for Hollywood movies and “celebrate the Jewish contribution to the film industry.” Unfortunately, the site seems to have been folded, presumably because not everyone was celebrating. It would be interesting to revive the project and do some statistical analysis.

10. Jews are responsible for most of the world’s wars

First, this is simply not the case historically.

Jews had nothing to do with World War I (nor as Niall Ferguson showed did bankers want that war, later Communist propaganda regardless).

Jews only provoked World War II in Nazi propaganda.

Jews had nothing to do with the Cold War.

Nor did Jews have much to do with most post-Cold War conflicts. The only major recent war that could conceivably be somewhat-somehow attributed to Jewish influence is the invasion of Iraq, but there were lots of other, more important factors in play there. Otherwise, they were at best only incidental at most. The Syrian Civil War is primarily a Syrian conflict, stoked along by the US to be sure, but not incited by it. The main responsibility for the War in the Donbass ultimately lies on Russia; if not for Russian support, the rebellion would have been crushed in summer 2014.

For the other perspective, see Philip Giraldi: America’s Jews Are Driving America’s Wars.

That said, my own position is Probably False.

I might change my assessment if the US ever does end up seriously bombing Iran, but the Jewish Lobby has had no luck with that – and I doubt that will change any time soon.

Second, ultimately only 6% of Congressmen are Jews, and the most prominent and aggressive warhawks (e.g. John McCain) don’t seem to be Jews.

The most visible face of ZOG in the current administration, the Kushnerites, might be more aggressive than isolationist Bannonites, but they are less aggressive than McMaster.

Jews figure prominent in the Russiagate conspiracy theory, to a greater extent than can be explained just by IQ, but they are nowhere near as uniformly Russophobic as other East European emigres (Brzezinski, Ros-Lehtinen, etc.). The Jew Stephen Cohen is probably the most eminent “Russophile” in the US, and there are no end of Jewish anti-war/anti-imperialist commenters (Greenwald, Chomsky, Blumenthal, Chapo Trap House).

Jews are significantly more hostile to Iran, but they don’t have a monopoly on it (e.g. Michael Flynn). Besides, it’s more understandable than with respect to Russia, since Iran actually is deeply hostile to Israeli interests.

Jews don’t seem to be hostile to China at all.

Third, while Israel itself is a relatively belligerent country, it’s not any kind of wild outlier by global standards.

11. People hate Jews because of the way Jews behave

Explanation 1: Pretty much everyone’s ancestors were evil anti-Semitic scumbags who loved to persecute and fleece Jews.

jewish-expulsions

Source: /pol/

Explanation 2: The fact that everyone and their dog ended up deporting Jews at some time or other indicates that it might also have something to do with Jewish behavior.

Standard explanation is #1, but maybe, just maybe, #2 also came into play at times. Here are some arguments in favor of the goyim:

1. The plural of anecdotes might not be data, but it surely is stereotype, and Shylock didn’t emerge from a blank canvass.

2. Jewish dual loyalties and culture of critique.

map-adl-antisemitism

Source: ADL – Global 100

3. Poland – epicenter of the “Paradisus Iudaeorum” under the Commonwealth, eagerly welcoming in Jews exiled from the rest of Europe – is now the most anti-Semitic region of Europe, even more than half a century after the Nazis genocided the Jews out of Poland.

4. Israel’s neighbors hating Jews more than anyone else. Including 58% of Armenians, who are some of their closest relatives.

Though in fairness everyone in the Middle East hates each other anyway, and they quite reasonably all view each other with suspicion: “Beware Greeks bearing gifts”; regional variations on “It takes two [A] to deceive one [B]; two [B] to deceive one [C]“, …, in which A, B, C… = Turks, Greeks, Persians, Jews, Armenians, …

Conclusion: It takes two to tango, but since the politically correct position is to avoid blaming Jews at all, I suppose this would be Probably True.

FINAL RESULTS: 7/11. Anti-Semite!

I suppose I deserve my “accolades” from the SPLC and RationalWiki after all.

But then again, so does this rabbi, who scored 6/11 in a similar article for the Jewish mag The Forward. As I said at the start, things are complicated.

 
Hide 653 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Randal says:

    Lot’s of good info and stuff for discussion here.

    But in the end accepting the definition of “anti-whateverism” put forward by the identity lobby for “whatevers” is always a mug’s game. The only response to the pernicious crap put around by the likes of the ADL is to say that either their broad definition of antisemitism is correct, in which case anti-Semitism self-evidently is just a legitimate and widely held political position of no particular demerit, or anti-Semitism is as noxious as they claim in which case it doesn’t mean what they claim it means – it means actually hating jews just for being jews (and almost nobody is actually an anti-Semite).

    They want to have it both ways, for obvious reasons, and they should never be allowed to. The same, mutatis mutandis, applies to all the politically correct smear terms used in this mendacious way by self-serving minority identity lobbies – racist, homophobe, islamophobe etc.

    I suppose I deserve my “accolades” from the SPLC and RationalWiki after all.

    Might as well embrace it, since guilt by association is a foundational principle of identity lobbies such as the jewish one. You are an anti-whateverist if you merely allow real or supposed anti-whateverists to speak freely on your blog or in your publication anyway.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    hating jews just for being jews

    People write this nonsensical line all the time and do you know why?

    Violà!

    (and almost nobody is actually an anti-Semite).

    See no anti-Semites, hear no anti-Semites, speak of no anti-Semites.

    There are no anti-Semites!

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Randal says:

    Second, ultimately only 6% of Congressmen are Jews, and the most prominent and aggressive warhawks (e.g. John McCain) don’t seem to be Jews.

    The issue of jewish influence on US foreign policy cannot honestly be addressed without taking account of the protestant Christian factor, which hugely leverages jewish political power on issues related to Israel (and therefore the whole of the ME and often surrounding areas – see Israeli/US involvement in eg Georgia).

    It’s easy and commonplace to criticise muslims for advocating policies based upon idiosyncratic religious obsessions, but Evangelical ideas about Israel are every bit as dangerously irrational and mass murderous as Islamic jihadism, and their political power enables the already strong jewish lobby in its ruthless suppression of any dissent to judeophilia.

    Many of the most eager advocates of pro-Israeli policies and the keenest witch-finders, smearers, haters and informants of the modern anti-Semitism Inquisitional movement are evangelical Christian in their background and core motivation.

    The Armageddon Lobby: Dispensationalist Christian Zionism and the Shaping of US Policy Towards Israel-Palestine

    Is this a problem with Christianity or with judaism? Both, I’d suggest.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig
    This idea that Protestant fundamentalists in the US drive policy in the ME (rather than merely provide political cover for it within the Republican Party) is an old canard put forth by--who else?--the Jews themselves.

    Think about it: if the Fundies were really all that politically powerful, then why is it that, after 40-plus years of continuous lobbying and selecting ostensibly anti-abortion Supreme Court justices, Roe vs. Wade is still the law of the land? How is it that this all-powerful Christian lobby failed to halt the drive toward homosexual marriage--even though polls showed that the majority Americans were still against it right up until the moment it became legal nation-wide? I could adduce a number of other issue where this supposedly all-powerful Christian lobby has failed miserably, ranging from restoring prayer in school to keeping shops closed on Sundays. But you get the point: quite mysteriously, Israel seems to be the only issue where they have ever gotten 'their' way.

    Don't misunderstand me: I am totally opposed to all the Zio-mongering that goes on among US protestants. I personally wish they would wake up and realize how pathetic this whole thing is, but they won't. They are not driving the agenda, however; they are simply being used as cover so that 'liberal, moderate' Jewish Zionists can point to them and say, 'See! It's not us--it's them! They're the ones pushing an extremist agenda in the ME. '
    , @Macon Richardson
    Thank you for the point you make. You imply (and I agree) that Christian Zionism is a far bigger issue than Jewish Zionism, both in number and in influence. If there were not such a large Christian Zionist movement in America, Jewish Zionism would a be relatively trivial issue in American politics.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. I mildly disagree or nitpick on a number of points.

    First, a general principle is that Jewish influence is largely bad for gentile whites, so if there is an over-representation anywhere, it is “too much.” But then again, IQ (or the proposed “money making talent”) does explain a lot, so maybe we can say something was “normal” if the over-representation is not more than expected.

    #3 it’s not double counting. Finance happens to be one of the industries where Jews are concentrated. Not as much as media and entertainment, but still. One of the two big banks you mention (Goldman Sachs) is itself largely Jewish. So #3 must be largely true. It is probably more true than #2, in my opinion, since #2 talks about their general over-representation while #3 is about one specific industry where they are more concentrated than elsewhere.

    #5 is a totally dishonest exaggeration. But I’m less charitable than you about their altruism, which seems to be almost exclusively aimed at perceived victims of their hated enemies. So they are much more altruistic towards blacks in the Jim Crow South than whites in South Africa. But of course all humans have the capacity to feel empathy towards total strangers or even enemies. I don’t imagine Jews to be exceptions. So I’d probably also answer “no” to that one.

    #6 since you agree that #7 is true, you only need to add disproportionate Jewish influence in the UK, France (that’s already three UNSC permanent members), Germany, and some other countries (Putin or Orbán both have a court rabbi each, while Jobbik is now trying – so far, unsuccessfully – to court some Jewish organizations; it’s also little wonder the V4 leaders needed to have a common press conference with Netanyahu), and you end up with considerable Jewish influence. It’s not absolute rule, but a very large influence.

    #10 is the only one unambiguously false, but I think there is a large disproportionate influence over some other wars besides Iraq you mention. Syria would have long ended without US involvement, and Libya can also only be understood in the context of neocon influence on western strategic thinking (or, in that case, “thinking”).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. “A lobby is like a night flower: It thrives in the dark and dies in the sun.”

    The words of Steve Rosen, former AIPAC macher and tried for espionage (guess for which country).

    Ultimately, it doesn’t matter how much facts you have. In some ways, the more you have the more dangerous you become, because it is harder to dismiss you. That is why the Jewish lobbies in the US worked overtime to crush John Mearsheimer and Steve Walt’s seminal book on the Israel lobby(which is just a subset of the Jewish lobby, the Christian elements in the former are figleafs)

    Why? Because they as Ivy League professors were much harder to dismiss than some random crank. I guess it is useful for AK to make one major Blogpost To End All Blogposts on the JQ, so he doesn’t have to repeat himself later on. Nevertheless, in some ways I just feel it is redundant. No matter how much you try to nuance yourself, they will always go after you. Look at Jared Taylor. Has avoided the JQ surgically throughout his life. He has still been harassed by essentially Jewish organisations like the $PLC throughout his life to the point he now has to host AmRen conferences in the parks of Tennessee.

    Ultimately the problem for white Christians is that so many of them are conflict-averse and prone to always seek common ground. You rarely see this reciprocated. You see this in the recent Polish-Israel spat as well. Polish media is desperate to seek common ground whereas the Israelis are just shouting obscenities.

    As for Russia and the Jews, Steve Sailer still wrote the best primer on what actually happened in the 1990s and how Jewish oligarchs were being helped by their tribal kin inside the Clinton administration.

    https://isteve.blogspot.com/2013/06/marc-rich.html

    Read and don’t ever forget.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. So seems jews use their own natural divisions [a natural weaknesses for any group] against their hosts, instead divide themselves, a natural trends for any group specially with demographic growing /increasing of diversity [without artificial interventions].

    Mister Borhing-Obvious attacks again…

    Or also, they are HYPER-practical/pragmatic and use any available psycho/cultural weapon to weaken their ”perceived” enemies.

    But insist to fight for that little and semi-desertic country b’cause ”religion” [mythology/metaphysical bizarrology] when they have entire western world in their dirty and pale hands AND kill the chicken of golden eggs [whites] replacing them with [adapted] mentally retarded or primitive human groups, look very stupid, even worse, crazily dumb.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. One of the most fundamental difference between le goys and le juifs is:

    naivety levels…

    MOST normies are considerably naivettes specially about governments, elites attitudes ”openess to obedience”, ;)

    Normies, specially the uber-normies believe too much and distrust too little, SPECIALLY about their elites. Instead one of the fundamental reasons why so many europeans and co-ethnics are marching to their own sacrifice is that they TRULLY believe that ”OUR elites know what they are doing”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  7. szopen says:

    Poland – epicenter of the “Paradisus Iudaeorum” under the Commonwealth, eagerly welcoming in Jews exiled from the rest of Europe – is now the most anti-Semitic region of Europe more than half a century after having helped the Nazis genocide them.

    WHAT THE F*?!

    AK: Okay, my bad, that was very poorly phrased. Rewritten.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    after having helped the Nazis genocide them
     
    I guess Anatoly was being sarcastic. But it’s the official truth now anyway, you holocaust-denying antisemitic bastard!
    , @Lex
    To be fair to Karlin Poland did sign Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact with itself and invaded itself in false flag operation on 01.09.1939 and 17.09.1939 and then proceded to simulate 50 years of occupation - all that just to rid itself of Jews and be able to avoid blame.
    , @Wally
    "after having helped the Nazis genocide them"

    Except there was no 'genocide of Jews', period. Unless you count the other fake ones from 1869.



    Don't be fooled again.
    Facts & science over Zionist propaganda now a religion.

    www.codoh.com

    http://balder.org/judea/billeder-judea/Scan-New-York-Times-Six-Million-Since-1869-Composite.jpg
    http://balder.org/judea/New-York-Times-Six-Million-Jews-Since-1869.php
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. @szopen

    Poland – epicenter of the “Paradisus Iudaeorum” under the Commonwealth, eagerly welcoming in Jews exiled from the rest of Europe – is now the most anti-Semitic region of Europe more than half a century after having helped the Nazis genocide them.
     
    WHAT THE F*?!

    AK: Okay, my bad, that was very poorly phrased. Rewritten.

    after having helped the Nazis genocide them

    I guess Anatoly was being sarcastic. But it’s the official truth now anyway, you holocaust-denying antisemitic bastard!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    I should clarify. I didn't edit carefully, and when writing that, I was loosely thinking of how some European countries collaborated to a greater or lesser extent with the Nazis when implementing the Holocaust.

    So, Danes, Greeks went out of their way to protect their Jews; the French were somewhere in the middle; Poles and Ukrainians were at the more indifferent end.

    However, describing it as "helped" is clearly overdoing, so thanks to szopen for catching that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. @reiner Tor

    after having helped the Nazis genocide them
     
    I guess Anatoly was being sarcastic. But it’s the official truth now anyway, you holocaust-denying antisemitic bastard!

    I should clarify. I didn’t edit carefully, and when writing that, I was loosely thinking of how some European countries collaborated to a greater or lesser extent with the Nazis when implementing the Holocaust.

    So, Danes, Greeks went out of their way to protect their Jews; the French were somewhere in the middle; Poles and Ukrainians were at the more indifferent end.

    However, describing it as “helped” is clearly overdoing, so thanks to szopen for catching that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    The Blue Police clearly did participate in rounding the Jews up. Arguably they were compelled to serve the Germans, being threatened with the death penalty if they failed to take up service in fall 1939. The Polish government in exile accepted it, because they agreed that Poland did need some kind of law enforcement under German occupation, even if it meant carrying out German orders like rounding up Jews. The Blue Police I think mostly just joined the resistance in 1944, and throughout they were in contact with them. Their appointed commander asked the local Home Army commanders if he should accept, and they told him yes. It was a difficult job. I think a case can be made that the Poles and Ukrainians participating in the holocaust were not much different from the Jews participating in the same, like Jewish Council or Jewish Police members. They participated to avoid near certain death.
    , @utu

    So, Danes [...] went out of their way to protect their Jews
     
    A time will come when Danes will be accused for the worst kind of anti-semitism for making their country Judenrein under the pretense of saving Jews by expediting them to Sweden on which they even made money by making Jews to pay for the passage. It is a matter of time. The Eye of Sauron is busy with Poland right now but time will come when it will cast its sight on Slovakia, Czechia, Hungary.

    Assad laughing at Gaddafi
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6syr1tjbgA
    , @Szopen
    Thanks. There is so much sh*t being thrown at us recently (with rudderman foundation infamous video) that i also reacted more emotionally than usual.
    , @polaco
    When compared to Poland, the war in Greece, France- which collaborated with Germany openly, and especially in Denmark was a garden party. I'd also say Ukrainians were more than indifferent. Zofia Kossak wrote how even during the Bolshevik Revolution, in a certain Polish locality (today's Western Ukraine), Ukrainians would threaten a pogrom and demand a payoff, at which point the town's Jews' representatives would literally prostrate themselves before Petliura and offer half the demanded amount, while pleading to have no more money left. Yet the Ukrainian envoys, ridiculously dressed in stolen Polish funeral home livery, would come galloping on horseback across town to the Jewish quarters to again make an offer. This happened several times and millions of rubles were extorted. We did not engage in comparable stunts then, or later.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Lex says:
    @szopen

    Poland – epicenter of the “Paradisus Iudaeorum” under the Commonwealth, eagerly welcoming in Jews exiled from the rest of Europe – is now the most anti-Semitic region of Europe more than half a century after having helped the Nazis genocide them.
     
    WHAT THE F*?!

    AK: Okay, my bad, that was very poorly phrased. Rewritten.

    To be fair to Karlin Poland did sign Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact with itself and invaded itself in false flag operation on 01.09.1939 and 17.09.1939 and then proceded to simulate 50 years of occupation – all that just to rid itself of Jews and be able to avoid blame.

    Read More
    • LOL: utu
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. @Anatoly Karlin
    I should clarify. I didn't edit carefully, and when writing that, I was loosely thinking of how some European countries collaborated to a greater or lesser extent with the Nazis when implementing the Holocaust.

    So, Danes, Greeks went out of their way to protect their Jews; the French were somewhere in the middle; Poles and Ukrainians were at the more indifferent end.

    However, describing it as "helped" is clearly overdoing, so thanks to szopen for catching that.

    The Blue Police clearly did participate in rounding the Jews up. Arguably they were compelled to serve the Germans, being threatened with the death penalty if they failed to take up service in fall 1939. The Polish government in exile accepted it, because they agreed that Poland did need some kind of law enforcement under German occupation, even if it meant carrying out German orders like rounding up Jews. The Blue Police I think mostly just joined the resistance in 1944, and throughout they were in contact with them. Their appointed commander asked the local Home Army commanders if he should accept, and they told him yes. It was a difficult job. I think a case can be made that the Poles and Ukrainians participating in the holocaust were not much different from the Jews participating in the same, like Jewish Council or Jewish Police members. They participated to avoid near certain death.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    I would add that the Blue Police participation in the holocaust was quite minimal compared to other police forces in German occupied Europe. For example I think in Warsaw they refused German orders and had to be withdrawn from the ghetto before the start of the deportations.

    But there clearly was some participation.
    , @someone
    im glad u finally admitting jewish involvment in the carnage of WW2 ' I think a case can be made that the Poles and Ukrainians participating in the holocaust were not much different from the Jews participating in the same, like Jewish Council or Jewish Police members. They participated to avoid near certain death.'
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. I think part of the problem in measuring Jewish influence is that it is not just direct but also indirect.

    Ex. A gentile race-traitor advocates for the importation of ‘Syrians’ and eradication of ‘White privilege’, it gets counted as gentile suicidal behaviour. But what if the race-traitor only developed those due to being exposed to Jewish-influenced media or education system?

    In Europe, particularly Western Europe, it is common to adopt deleterious American social and political doctrines. Does the fault lies with the gentile Americans who pushed these doctrines onto Europeans, or with the Jews who warped the American psyche?*

    This way even a drop of Jewish influence can cause pernicious ripples that spread very far with tragic consequences.

    *Although I consider America as a classical-liberal creation to be born with original sin, at least there were redeemable aspects to it then, unlike now.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  13. @reiner Tor
    The Blue Police clearly did participate in rounding the Jews up. Arguably they were compelled to serve the Germans, being threatened with the death penalty if they failed to take up service in fall 1939. The Polish government in exile accepted it, because they agreed that Poland did need some kind of law enforcement under German occupation, even if it meant carrying out German orders like rounding up Jews. The Blue Police I think mostly just joined the resistance in 1944, and throughout they were in contact with them. Their appointed commander asked the local Home Army commanders if he should accept, and they told him yes. It was a difficult job. I think a case can be made that the Poles and Ukrainians participating in the holocaust were not much different from the Jews participating in the same, like Jewish Council or Jewish Police members. They participated to avoid near certain death.

    I would add that the Blue Police participation in the holocaust was quite minimal compared to other police forces in German occupied Europe. For example I think in Warsaw they refused German orders and had to be withdrawn from the ghetto before the start of the deportations.

    But there clearly was some participation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    But there clearly was some participation.
     
    I think that with this post along with past posts you have probably rendered yourself potentially subject to arrest in both Germany and Poland.

    A hazard inherent to discussing history honestly in a world in which, in some countries, honestly discussing particular aspects of history is criminalised and truth is no defence, I suppose.
    , @someone
    im glad u finally admitting jewish involvment in the carnage of WW2 ' I think a case can be made that the Poles and Ukrainians participating in the holocaust were not much different from the Jews participating in the same, like Jewish Council or Jewish Police members. They participated to avoid near certain death.'there was no Blue Police in getto.Getto had its own -very strict &cruel jewish police in there
    , @utu
    Years ago I read Raul Hilberg's "Perpetrators, Victims, and Bystanders" and as far as I remember that Poles were in the Bystanders category and furthermore he did not have anything harsh to say about the Blue police. This is what I found in Wiki:

    Scholars disagree about the degree of involvement of the Blue Police in the rounding up of Jews.[15][16] Although policing inside the Warsaw Ghetto was a responsibility of the Jewish Ghetto Police, a Polish-Jewish historian Emmanuel Ringelblum, chronicler of the Warsaw Ghetto, mentioned Polish policemen carrying out extortions and beatings.[17] The police did also take part in street roundups,[9] but not in the killings of Jews. On June 3, 1942 during a prison execution of 110 Jews in Warsaw, members of the Blue Police stood and wept, while the Germans themselves executed the victims, after the Poles refused to obey the orders of their overseers to carry out the shooting.[14] According to Raul Hilberg, "Of all the native police forces in occupied Eastern Europe, those of Poland were least involved in anti-Jewish actions.... They [the Polish Blue Police] could not join the Germans in major operations against Jews or Polish resistors, lest they be considered traitors by virtually every Polish onlooker."[18] Holocaust historian Gunnar S. Paulsson agrees that the role of the Blue Police was minimal: "Keep this in mind – wrote Paulsson – the Jews in Poland were isolated in ghettos. They were rounded up by German police with the aid of Ukrainian and Baltic collaborators, and the enforced co-operation of the Jewish ghetto police, but very little participation by Polish police (mainly in the smaller centres). They were taken to killing centres staffed again by Germans, Ukrainians and Balts."[19]
     
    But Raul Hilberg was the old school Holocaust historian. His yet unpublished manuscript was used by Hannah Arendt in her "Eichmann in Jerusalem" where she wrote extensively on the role of Jews and Judenrats that made the holocaust as we know it possible. For this her book was not translated into Hebrew for several decades. Israel kids who undergo the mandatory Holocaust indoctrination with trips to Auschwitz know nothing about it. Holocaust historians from the "new school" borrowed scientific apparatus and methodology form modern social studies departments (or perhaps the borrowing was were other way around ) and seem to be on the constant warpath just like the SJW's in search of new enemies and perpetrators. Jewish participation and their role in Holocaust is not a subject of research anymore.

    Personally I believe that the decisions made in Israel in 1950's to abandon prosecuting of Jewish collaborators was correct with stipulation that similar consideration should be given to some gentile collaborators who often acted under similar levels of duress. This however is not happening in narratives that are being created anew by the "new school" Holocaust researchers.
    , @RobinG
    Re. deportations from Warsaw ghetto..... They brought in Lithuanians to do it, then killed all the Lithuanians.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. inertial says:

    Still, Jewish loyalty to the new, highly philo-Semitic early USSR soon picked up

    A small number of Jews, perhaps 10-20 thousand, benefited from the revolution. But the general Jewish population was hit hard by the new regime. Harder on average than the majority.

    According to wiki, between 1.63% and 4.27% of the general population had been the lishentsi, the “former people” who were stripped of their rights and much discriminated against (and in the later purges often targeted for elimination.)

    Among Jews, more than a third had been lishentsi! It was so bad that even the Soviet government recognized that they had a problem. So they came up with typical Bolshevik “solutions,” such as sending these extraneous Jews to “voluntary” collective farms (that was several years before the general collectivization.)

    So yes, the Jews, aside from the few privileged ones, have little reason to love the Soviet power.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Jews at the gulag were less than their share of the general population, at least that’s what I found at the appendix in Oleg Khlevniuk’s book. (He gives data by ethnicity.) They were underrepresented among the victims of collectivization and the manufactured famines. They were probably not harder hit than others during the great terror. The only time they were targeted for mass killings was during the doctors’ plot and anti-Zionist campaigns, when a few hundred of them were killed. But it’s peanuts compared to other mass killings.*

    I don’t know about lishentsi, but in a regime killing several millions you cannot seriously argue for a minority being harder hit than others, unless they had proportionally more of them killed or at least imprisoned. That is clearly not the case with Jews in the USSR.

    *Ironically it appears that Stalin’s power was already on the wane and he couldn’t get his (now largely Russian, supposedly anti-Semitic) security services to just start a mass execution campaign on false charges. The security services were dragging their feet and argued that there was no evidence (!), as if that had mattered anytime before. They knew the fate of the previous eager executioners like Yezhov and weren’t keen on getting their rewards.
    , @Lemurmaniac
    people like to bring up the 'jew on the street'. Or even better, jews who were victims of other Jews.

    Since we don't live in a caste society, there will be average Jews hanging around. But they function as the social trampoline that bounces the ambitious/cognitive elite into the controlling citadels in society. By way of analogy, consider the claim only 10% of a scorpion is dedicated to his sting. What's wrong, bigot? He's 90% harmless. Stop stereotyping. Stop committing the fallacy of reification, and making his stinger essential to his definition.

    An average Jew is an altitude triggered Poz Bomb. When he's sufficiently high up the hierarchy of power within a society, he'll start his tricks.
    , @Sam J.
    "...A small number of Jews, perhaps 10-20 thousand, benefited from the revolution. But the general Jewish population was hit hard by the new regime..."

    Boo hoo hoo. The Jews take over Russia and kill multi-millions and...some Jews weren't happy. Next you'll be telling us,"well it really wasn't the Jews, it was the Bolsheviks or some other such nonsense.".
    , @Art
    A small number of Jews, perhaps 10-20 thousand, benefited from the revolution. But the general Jewish population was hit hard by the new regime. Harder on average than the majority.

    Oh my' -- classic Big Jew - Little Jew story.

    Big Jews do the bad - Little Jews back them up -- things hit the fan - Big Jews skip the country - Little get the hell kicked out of them. This has been going on for thousands of years.

    Is there any group of people on the planet that is dumber than the Little Jews?

    Think Peace --- Art
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. (opposite example: Germans, who have tended to be remarkably loyal to their host countries, even when they were at war with Germany).

    True, obviously a grave problem from a German perspective. One of the things I find most irritating about the US is that there isn’t a German lobby there…there are all those Americans of German descent, with German names (one of the largest groups of white Americans, probably second only to those of British isles descent), and yet they’re doing almost nothing for Germany or German interests.

    What knowing goyim notice and dislike is that too many of their (((fellow white people))) combine progressive, pro-minority agendas with aggressive support of Israel across virtually all countries where they have a substantial demographic presence.

    Exactly…this obvious hypocrisy and mendacity which one isn’t supposed to notice is increasingly hard to tolerate, and is the main reason why I have no tolerance for right-wingers in Europe who make a show of being pro-Israel.

    – have played outsized role in promoting Marxism, feminism, anti-racism, etc., resent immigration as a “core Jewish value”, and have been outspoken in trying to discredit Trump, the closest the US has ever had or might ever have to a Netanyahu.

    Should be “represent” here.

    Anyway, good post, thanks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    I think Raul Hilberg mentioned that after 1945, when the question of accepting European refugees came up, Jewish representatives were arguing for accepting predominantly Jewish refugees in light of the horrors just visited upon them, but the ethnic German lobby (apparently such a thing existed), consisting of impeccably anti-German (during the war) and anti-Nazi politicians, argued that there was a need to accept German refugees as well, because of the starvation in Germany and because of the ethnic cleansing of Germans from large territories formerly inhabited by Germans, like the Sudeten or East Prussia. They even argued it would be racist to exclude them merely on account of their ethnicity. Raul Hilberg, who clearly disapproved of this argument, wrote that many such ethnic Germans from these areas were actually perpetrators of the holocaust, so that the compromise eventually accepted by the Jewish organizations meant that the price of accepting Jewish refugees was also accepting many of the perpetrators as well.
    , @Anonymous
    At the beginning of the 20th century, New York City was one of the world's largest "German" cities, third after Berlin and Vienna. And until the 1930s, you had the German-American Bund:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_American_Bund

    But WW1 and WW2 promoted anti-German sentiments and pressured German Americans to assimilate more completely.
    , @iffen
    and yet they’re doing almost nothing for Germany or German interests.

    Not true. We got rid of the commies for you.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. @inertial

    Still, Jewish loyalty to the new, highly philo-Semitic early USSR soon picked up
     
    A small number of Jews, perhaps 10-20 thousand, benefited from the revolution. But the general Jewish population was hit hard by the new regime. Harder on average than the majority.

    According to wiki, between 1.63% and 4.27% of the general population had been the lishentsi, the "former people" who were stripped of their rights and much discriminated against (and in the later purges often targeted for elimination.)

    Among Jews, more than a third had been lishentsi! It was so bad that even the Soviet government recognized that they had a problem. So they came up with typical Bolshevik "solutions," such as sending these extraneous Jews to "voluntary" collective farms (that was several years before the general collectivization.)

    So yes, the Jews, aside from the few privileged ones, have little reason to love the Soviet power.

    Jews at the gulag were less than their share of the general population, at least that’s what I found at the appendix in Oleg Khlevniuk’s book. (He gives data by ethnicity.) They were underrepresented among the victims of collectivization and the manufactured famines. They were probably not harder hit than others during the great terror. The only time they were targeted for mass killings was during the doctors’ plot and anti-Zionist campaigns, when a few hundred of them were killed. But it’s peanuts compared to other mass killings.*

    I don’t know about lishentsi, but in a regime killing several millions you cannot seriously argue for a minority being harder hit than others, unless they had proportionally more of them killed or at least imprisoned. That is clearly not the case with Jews in the USSR.

    *Ironically it appears that Stalin’s power was already on the wane and he couldn’t get his (now largely Russian, supposedly anti-Semitic) security services to just start a mass execution campaign on false charges. The security services were dragging their feet and argued that there was no evidence (!), as if that had mattered anytime before. They knew the fate of the previous eager executioners like Yezhov and weren’t keen on getting their rewards.

    Read More
    • Replies: @inertial

    Jews at the gulag were less than their share of the general population
     
    Well of course. 75% of the GULag inmates were common criminals; and among the political prisoners, a significant percentage (I think the majority) after WWII were Nazi collaborators. Jews are underrepresented in the former category and non-existent in the latter.

    They were underrepresented among the victims of collectivization and the manufactured famines.
     
    Members of the Russian aristocracy were also underrepresented among the victims of collectivization and famines but no one doubts that they were targeted.

    There is no question that Jews were hit disproportionately hard by Soviet economic and social policies. To be sure, they were not persecuted as Jews but as former members of "abolished" classes (after having their property stolen from them.) Some Jews rose high under the new regime; but for every one of those there were many more like Ayn Rand (had she not escaped from the Soviet Russia.) So saying (like Karlin does) that Jews "pretended" to hate Stalin is... stupid.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Does anyone have a chart of Forbes 400 richest (world, us, Russia, uk) ethnic percentage over time? Would be interesting to see if Jews are gaining or stagnant. I know in academic achievements, Jews are losing out to Asians of various types, but I don’t know which direction things are going in the business world.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. The fact that everyone and their dog ended up deporting Jews at some time or other indicates that it might also have something to do with Jewish behavior.

    The standard argument against that is there isn’t much of an anti-Jewish tradition in China or India, and that obsessive hostility towards Jews has been mostly a phenomenon in Christian, and to a lesser degree in Islamic societies…Christians and Muslims must find the continued refusal of Jews to acknowledge that their religion is obsolete offensive, whereas Jews must regard Christianity and Islam as some sort of bizarre cultural appropriation. The mutual hostility isn’t surprising.
    So the “Jews have been kicked out everywhere” argument by itself probably isn’t that persuasive unless one can demonstrate it also applies to non-Christian/non-Islamic societies.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Jews have been totally assimilated in China. Their presence in China and India was in any event minimal. You have to accept that the data points basically consist of Christian and Muslim societies.

    But Jews were privileged in Christian societies: they weren’t forced to convert most of the time. Unlike pagans or basically everyone else. Like Muslims in medieval Hungary were forced to convert and marry previously Christian (i.e. not fresh convert) Hungarians, and also to move to Christian villages. They were not to have a separate identity.

    Being kicked out was in line with the norm for non-Christian groups, the anomaly is the tolerance in between the pogroms and expulsions.
    , @TelfoedJohn
    If you look at the list, there are plenty of places where Jews were kicked out of which pre-dated Christianity, and a fair number of athiest states which also kicked Jews out. Even the Chinese kicked them out in 845. Mayan villagers expelled Jews a couple of years ago.
    , @songbird
    Lesser degree in Islamic societies? I must disagree vehemently. That is just the Jewish cultural narrative, not born out by simple math.

    The vast majority of Jews worldwide are European offshoots, in particular Ashkenazim. Based on mathematical DNA models, Ashkenazi had a starting population of about 350 about 600-800 years ago. This represents an average increase of at least 10% per generation. Fertility is an old measure of prosperity, and Ashkenazim today are fantastically wealthy. The most prosperous people in the world.
    No one else even close, and they achieved that wealth only in European societies.

    Contrast that to Islamic societies. Paltry numbers. Not much real wealth. Many Jews were, in relation to Islam, endemic to the Middle East. They were ethnically cleansed from the area surrounding Mecca by Muhammad himself. Christians did not ethnically cleanse Jews from Israel. After a few generations in Islamic Spain, Jews began migrating north into the Christian kingdoms.

    Christianity just isn't as militant and as strategically tribal as Islam, or Judaism, for that matter. This is also born out by Christianity having been endemic to much of the Islamic expansion. You can count the native Christians in Anatolia using the fingers on your hands. And just like the Jews, they have declined everywhere.
    , @Sam J.
    "...The standard argument against that is there isn’t much of an anti-Jewish tradition in China or India, and that obsessive hostility towards Jews has been mostly a phenomenon in Christian,,,:''

    That's only because not many of them have lived there.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. @German_reader

    (opposite example: Germans, who have tended to be remarkably loyal to their host countries, even when they were at war with Germany).
     
    True, obviously a grave problem from a German perspective. One of the things I find most irritating about the US is that there isn't a German lobby there...there are all those Americans of German descent, with German names (one of the largest groups of white Americans, probably second only to those of British isles descent), and yet they're doing almost nothing for Germany or German interests.

    What knowing goyim notice and dislike is that too many of their (((fellow white people))) combine progressive, pro-minority agendas with aggressive support of Israel across virtually all countries where they have a substantial demographic presence.

     

    Exactly...this obvious hypocrisy and mendacity which one isn't supposed to notice is increasingly hard to tolerate, and is the main reason why I have no tolerance for right-wingers in Europe who make a show of being pro-Israel.

    – have played outsized role in promoting Marxism, feminism, anti-racism, etc., resent immigration as a “core Jewish value”, and have been outspoken in trying to discredit Trump, the closest the US has ever had or might ever have to a Netanyahu.
     
    Should be "represent" here.

    Anyway, good post, thanks.

    I think Raul Hilberg mentioned that after 1945, when the question of accepting European refugees came up, Jewish representatives were arguing for accepting predominantly Jewish refugees in light of the horrors just visited upon them, but the ethnic German lobby (apparently such a thing existed), consisting of impeccably anti-German (during the war) and anti-Nazi politicians, argued that there was a need to accept German refugees as well, because of the starvation in Germany and because of the ethnic cleansing of Germans from large territories formerly inhabited by Germans, like the Sudeten or East Prussia. They even argued it would be racist to exclude them merely on account of their ethnicity. Raul Hilberg, who clearly disapproved of this argument, wrote that many such ethnic Germans from these areas were actually perpetrators of the holocaust, so that the compromise eventually accepted by the Jewish organizations meant that the price of accepting Jewish refugees was also accepting many of the perpetrators as well.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    the ethnic German lobby (apparently such a thing existed)
     
    Never heard of that and I doubt it really existed at that time. My impression is that Germans were largely crushed as a distinctive cultural force in the US during WW1 (the Nazi Bund people in the 1930s were a marginal phenomenon) and meekly accepted their absorption into Anglo-America. I've seen numerous comments by Americans of some German descent who claim being told by grandparents and the like that 1917/1918 was a real watershed, with people sometimes stopping talking German even in private...seems plausible to me.
    So I don't buy the arguments by Jewish lobbyists who come up with arguments like "Oh, in America it's normal for ethnic groups to have lobbies, everyone does it!"...clearly not true.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. @German_reader

    The fact that everyone and their dog ended up deporting Jews at some time or other indicates that it might also have something to do with Jewish behavior.
     
    The standard argument against that is there isn't much of an anti-Jewish tradition in China or India, and that obsessive hostility towards Jews has been mostly a phenomenon in Christian, and to a lesser degree in Islamic societies...Christians and Muslims must find the continued refusal of Jews to acknowledge that their religion is obsolete offensive, whereas Jews must regard Christianity and Islam as some sort of bizarre cultural appropriation. The mutual hostility isn't surprising.
    So the "Jews have been kicked out everywhere" argument by itself probably isn't that persuasive unless one can demonstrate it also applies to non-Christian/non-Islamic societies.

    Jews have been totally assimilated in China. Their presence in China and India was in any event minimal. You have to accept that the data points basically consist of Christian and Muslim societies.

    But Jews were privileged in Christian societies: they weren’t forced to convert most of the time. Unlike pagans or basically everyone else. Like Muslims in medieval Hungary were forced to convert and marry previously Christian (i.e. not fresh convert) Hungarians, and also to move to Christian villages. They were not to have a separate identity.

    Being kicked out was in line with the norm for non-Christian groups, the anomaly is the tolerance in between the pogroms and expulsions.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    Being kicked out was in line with the norm for non-Christian groups, the anomaly is the tolerance in between the pogroms and expulsions.
     
    True, and in that sense Jews were privileged in Christian Europe...unlike pagans or Muslims (who weren't tolerated at all or eventually expelled) they were to some extent allowed to exist as a distinctive community.
    , @Anonymous
    It's not clear if the Jews were actually assimilated in China. At any rate, their numbers would have been very small and China is so far away that they would have been completely cut off from other Jewish communities to the west.

    Jews in China were part of a Middle Eastern foreign merchant community that included Muslims, Christians, Persians, etc. There were massacres against these merchants so it's possible that they were massacred or driven away rather than being assimilated, or in addition to being assimilated in small numbers:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guangzhou_massacre
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. Gordo says:

    Darkest green: US, UK, Sweden. Comments write themselves.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  22. @reiner Tor
    I think Raul Hilberg mentioned that after 1945, when the question of accepting European refugees came up, Jewish representatives were arguing for accepting predominantly Jewish refugees in light of the horrors just visited upon them, but the ethnic German lobby (apparently such a thing existed), consisting of impeccably anti-German (during the war) and anti-Nazi politicians, argued that there was a need to accept German refugees as well, because of the starvation in Germany and because of the ethnic cleansing of Germans from large territories formerly inhabited by Germans, like the Sudeten or East Prussia. They even argued it would be racist to exclude them merely on account of their ethnicity. Raul Hilberg, who clearly disapproved of this argument, wrote that many such ethnic Germans from these areas were actually perpetrators of the holocaust, so that the compromise eventually accepted by the Jewish organizations meant that the price of accepting Jewish refugees was also accepting many of the perpetrators as well.

    the ethnic German lobby (apparently such a thing existed)

    Never heard of that and I doubt it really existed at that time. My impression is that Germans were largely crushed as a distinctive cultural force in the US during WW1 (the Nazi Bund people in the 1930s were a marginal phenomenon) and meekly accepted their absorption into Anglo-America. I’ve seen numerous comments by Americans of some German descent who claim being told by grandparents and the like that 1917/1918 was a real watershed, with people sometimes stopping talking German even in private…seems plausible to me.
    So I don’t buy the arguments by Jewish lobbyists who come up with arguments like “Oh, in America it’s normal for ethnic groups to have lobbies, everyone does it!”…clearly not true.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    As I mentioned, those politicians were all quite strictly anti-Nazi, but they were largely of German extraction themselves. So probably they weren’t really a “German lobby” at all, just universalist politicians of German descent, who didn’t understand why Jewish refugees were to have privileges over German refugees, when their lives clearly weren’t in danger anymore, while the Germans had arguably lost their homes and so were in a comparably desperate situation.
    , @Randal

    Never heard of that and I doubt it really existed at that time. My impression is that Germans were largely crushed as a distinctive cultural force in the US during WW1 (the Nazi Bund people in the 1930s were a marginal phenomenon) and meekly accepted their absorption into Anglo-America.
     
    That was my impression as well.

    In fairness, you must admit that Germans are clearly uniquely evil - almost as bad as Russians. The horror and the suffering never ends. See for instance the latest outrage wilfully committed by a German:

    Winter Olympics 2018: German figure skater condemned after dancing to soundtrack from Schindler’s List

    I'm sure we can all agree that disqualification and a humble apology, plus substantial payments to jewish advocacy groups, is the least we should expect. Or there should be consequences.

    [This story was linked from MSN as - I kid you not: "Horror as German skater dances to Schindler’s List soundtrack". Horror! Yet it's a sign of antisemitism if you think that "4.Jews still talk too much about what happened to them in the Holocaust".]
    , @Dmitry

    Never heard of that and I doubt it really existed at that time. My impression is that Germans were largely crushed as a distinctive cultural force in the US during WW1 (the Nazi Bund people in the 1930s were a marginal phenomenon) and meekly accepted their absorption into Anglo-America. I’ve seen numerous comments by Americans of some German descent who claim being told by grandparents and the like that 1917/1918 was a real watershed, with people sometimes stopping talking German even in private…seems plausible to me.
    So I don’t buy the arguments by Jewish lobbyists who come up with arguments like “Oh, in America it’s normal for ethnic groups to have lobbies, everyone does it!”…clearly not true.
     
    It's related to partly to German assimilation levels.

    Once in America, the Germans were trying to assimilate to the dominant English identity, and intermarrying with other European races straight away. The Jews, with religious motivation, had tried to do the opposite for several generations and maintained their separateness.

    German identity wasn't adapted to exist outside Germany, whereas Jewish identity was more portable and internalized the idea that staying separate was a value.

    Although that has its limits, and in the current generation (with majority intermarriage), the American Jews are starting to dissolve, as happened in the Soviet Union. In America, the rapidness of this dissolution of their separate identity will be aided by the lack of discrimination, whereas in the Soviet Union it occurred more through a process of hazing them.

    , @Thorfinnsson
    It's normal for inferior races to have ethnic lobbies in America, which is quite logical. If you can't compete in the marketplace, it's sensible to organize politically. Jews are highly unusual being more than successful yet still having an ethnic lobby.

    Some of the more "ethnic" whites have weak lobbies. Irish-American politicians have periodically pushed Anglophobic foreign policies (Congressman Peter King of New York is an example), Italian-Americans are very touchy about Columbus Day, Armenians whinge about the Armenian genocide and want it recognized in law, etc.

    , @fnn
    He may be referring to Lutheran Church organizations in the Midwest.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. @reiner Tor
    Jews have been totally assimilated in China. Their presence in China and India was in any event minimal. You have to accept that the data points basically consist of Christian and Muslim societies.

    But Jews were privileged in Christian societies: they weren’t forced to convert most of the time. Unlike pagans or basically everyone else. Like Muslims in medieval Hungary were forced to convert and marry previously Christian (i.e. not fresh convert) Hungarians, and also to move to Christian villages. They were not to have a separate identity.

    Being kicked out was in line with the norm for non-Christian groups, the anomaly is the tolerance in between the pogroms and expulsions.

    Being kicked out was in line with the norm for non-Christian groups, the anomaly is the tolerance in between the pogroms and expulsions.

    True, and in that sense Jews were privileged in Christian Europe…unlike pagans or Muslims (who weren’t tolerated at all or eventually expelled) they were to some extent allowed to exist as a distinctive community.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. @German_reader

    The fact that everyone and their dog ended up deporting Jews at some time or other indicates that it might also have something to do with Jewish behavior.
     
    The standard argument against that is there isn't much of an anti-Jewish tradition in China or India, and that obsessive hostility towards Jews has been mostly a phenomenon in Christian, and to a lesser degree in Islamic societies...Christians and Muslims must find the continued refusal of Jews to acknowledge that their religion is obsolete offensive, whereas Jews must regard Christianity and Islam as some sort of bizarre cultural appropriation. The mutual hostility isn't surprising.
    So the "Jews have been kicked out everywhere" argument by itself probably isn't that persuasive unless one can demonstrate it also applies to non-Christian/non-Islamic societies.

    If you look at the list, there are plenty of places where Jews were kicked out of which pre-dated Christianity, and a fair number of athiest states which also kicked Jews out. Even the Chinese kicked them out in 845. Mayan villagers expelled Jews a couple of years ago.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    The expulsions by Assyrian and Babylonian kings and by Roman emperors like Hadrian are just standard imperial relocations of defeated peoples...happened to plenty of other groups. And sure, there were conflicts between Jews and Greeks in places like Alexandria...again, that's hardly unique imo, just standard conflict in multiethnic/multicultural societies. You could also compile a list of anti-Germanic xenophobic incidents in late antiquity (like the killing of Germanic soldiers in Italy after the death of the partly Germanic general Stilicho in 408).
    The atheist societies that expelled Jews mostly had a Christian background.
    Anyway, this is a minor nitpick, just wanted to show some possible counter-arguments.
    , @Twodees Partain
    "a fair number of athiest states "

    I assume you mean the very athiest ones out there. Like some were athi, then some were athier and some were athiest, right?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Randal says:
    @reiner Tor
    I would add that the Blue Police participation in the holocaust was quite minimal compared to other police forces in German occupied Europe. For example I think in Warsaw they refused German orders and had to be withdrawn from the ghetto before the start of the deportations.

    But there clearly was some participation.

    But there clearly was some participation.

    I think that with this post along with past posts you have probably rendered yourself potentially subject to arrest in both Germany and Poland.

    A hazard inherent to discussing history honestly in a world in which, in some countries, honestly discussing particular aspects of history is criminalised and truth is no defence, I suppose.

    Read More
    • Agree: reiner Tor
    • Replies: @Szopen
    Not in Poland. In Poland there is proposed law to penalize people accusing Polish State or Nation, ie all Poles as contrasted with some Poles, with exception of artists and historians and with proviso "against the facts"
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. @German_reader

    the ethnic German lobby (apparently such a thing existed)
     
    Never heard of that and I doubt it really existed at that time. My impression is that Germans were largely crushed as a distinctive cultural force in the US during WW1 (the Nazi Bund people in the 1930s were a marginal phenomenon) and meekly accepted their absorption into Anglo-America. I've seen numerous comments by Americans of some German descent who claim being told by grandparents and the like that 1917/1918 was a real watershed, with people sometimes stopping talking German even in private...seems plausible to me.
    So I don't buy the arguments by Jewish lobbyists who come up with arguments like "Oh, in America it's normal for ethnic groups to have lobbies, everyone does it!"...clearly not true.

    As I mentioned, those politicians were all quite strictly anti-Nazi, but they were largely of German extraction themselves. So probably they weren’t really a “German lobby” at all, just universalist politicians of German descent, who didn’t understand why Jewish refugees were to have privileges over German refugees, when their lives clearly weren’t in danger anymore, while the Germans had arguably lost their homes and so were in a comparably desperate situation.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. @TelfoedJohn
    If you look at the list, there are plenty of places where Jews were kicked out of which pre-dated Christianity, and a fair number of athiest states which also kicked Jews out. Even the Chinese kicked them out in 845. Mayan villagers expelled Jews a couple of years ago.

    The expulsions by Assyrian and Babylonian kings and by Roman emperors like Hadrian are just standard imperial relocations of defeated peoples…happened to plenty of other groups. And sure, there were conflicts between Jews and Greeks in places like Alexandria…again, that’s hardly unique imo, just standard conflict in multiethnic/multicultural societies. You could also compile a list of anti-Germanic xenophobic incidents in late antiquity (like the killing of Germanic soldiers in Italy after the death of the partly Germanic general Stilicho in 408).
    The atheist societies that expelled Jews mostly had a Christian background.
    Anyway, this is a minor nitpick, just wanted to show some possible counter-arguments.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    The expulsions by Assyrian and Babylonian kings and by Roman emperors like Hadrian are just standard imperial relocations of defeated peoples…happened to plenty of other groups. And sure, there were conflicts between Jews and Greeks in places like Alexandria…again, that’s hardly unique imo, just standard conflict in multiethnic/multicultural societies. You could also compile a list of anti-Germanic xenophobic incidents in late antiquity (like the killing of Germanic soldiers in Italy after the death of the partly Germanic general Stilicho in 408).
    The atheist societies that expelled Jews mostly had a Christian background.
    Anyway, this is a minor nitpick, just wanted to show some possible counter-arguments.
     
    In human history, it is usually an expropriation of the wealth of a minority group by the sovereign.

    If you look at Africa today, the process is very undisguised.

    Mugabe does similar actions towards white farmers today.

    And formerly Idi Amin does it with the Asians:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_Asians_from_Uganda

    In medieval and early modern Europe, it was an expropriation by monarchs of supernormal wealth obtained by Jews in banking, and it results in personal enrichment of the sovereign.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_of_Lincoln
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exchequer_of_the_Jews

    , @Sam J.
    "...The expulsions by Assyrian and Babylonian kings and by Roman emperors like Hadrian are just standard imperial relocations of defeated peoples…happened to plenty of other groups..."

    This is dishonest because we are talking about the Jews. The Jews have been kicked out every single country they've been in any numbers in all of their history.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. utu says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    I should clarify. I didn't edit carefully, and when writing that, I was loosely thinking of how some European countries collaborated to a greater or lesser extent with the Nazis when implementing the Holocaust.

    So, Danes, Greeks went out of their way to protect their Jews; the French were somewhere in the middle; Poles and Ukrainians were at the more indifferent end.

    However, describing it as "helped" is clearly overdoing, so thanks to szopen for catching that.

    So, Danes [...] went out of their way to protect their Jews

    A time will come when Danes will be accused for the worst kind of anti-semitism for making their country Judenrein under the pretense of saving Jews by expediting them to Sweden on which they even made money by making Jews to pay for the passage. It is a matter of time. The Eye of Sauron is busy with Poland right now but time will come when it will cast its sight on Slovakia, Czechia, Hungary.

    Assad laughing at Gaddafi

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Hungary has long been accused of complicity in the holocaust. Not entirely without justification, unfortunately, but of course the mitigating circumstances are never taken into account. The Hungarian police and gendarmerie did round up the Jews, but only after the Germans did occupy the country and replaced its government and the upper echelons of the civil service and police command. Until then, the Hungarian government steadfastly refused to hand over the Jews to the Germans.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. Randal says:
    @German_reader

    the ethnic German lobby (apparently such a thing existed)
     
    Never heard of that and I doubt it really existed at that time. My impression is that Germans were largely crushed as a distinctive cultural force in the US during WW1 (the Nazi Bund people in the 1930s were a marginal phenomenon) and meekly accepted their absorption into Anglo-America. I've seen numerous comments by Americans of some German descent who claim being told by grandparents and the like that 1917/1918 was a real watershed, with people sometimes stopping talking German even in private...seems plausible to me.
    So I don't buy the arguments by Jewish lobbyists who come up with arguments like "Oh, in America it's normal for ethnic groups to have lobbies, everyone does it!"...clearly not true.

    Never heard of that and I doubt it really existed at that time. My impression is that Germans were largely crushed as a distinctive cultural force in the US during WW1 (the Nazi Bund people in the 1930s were a marginal phenomenon) and meekly accepted their absorption into Anglo-America.

    That was my impression as well.

    In fairness, you must admit that Germans are clearly uniquely evil – almost as bad as Russians. The horror and the suffering never ends. See for instance the latest outrage wilfully committed by a German:

    Winter Olympics 2018: German figure skater condemned after dancing to soundtrack from Schindler’s List

    I’m sure we can all agree that disqualification and a humble apology, plus substantial payments to jewish advocacy groups, is the least we should expect. Or there should be consequences.

    [This story was linked from MSN as - I kid you not: "Horror as German skater dances to Schindler’s List soundtrack". Horror! Yet it's a sign of antisemitism if you think that "4.Jews still talk too much about what happened to them in the Holocaust".]

    Read More
    • LOL: renfro
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. Dmitry says:

    Jews have a disproportionate influence relative to population size, but it is still not a very big influence in the world of 8 billion. There are 16 million Jews in the world – and probably their influence is more than triple their population. In countries like Russia, obviously this disproportionate influence goes much higher.

    But in the great scheme of things, this influence is small compared to any of the larger nationalities, which can be seen at the UN voting sessions, where Israel does even far worse than a large country like Russia does.

    As for antisemitism – generally it relies on using Jews as a ‘Theory of Everything’. It seems to have a kind of theological structure, and becomes quite ridiculous in its theory of media – denying agency to consumers of products. So because the conspiracy theorist found capitalist families who 100 years had Jewish origin, like the Bonnier Group – then Jews are suddenly responsible for contemporary Swedish liberalism. There’s an issue of supply and demand here, and newspaper circulation numbers in a market reflect very much the popularity of the product there, just like music and fashion brands do.

    Within the liberal milieu, liberal newspaper will sell out, and likewise within a conservative one, conservative newspaper will be far more popular (as you can see in Israel).

    In Israel, the oldest newspaper is this left-wing paper called Haaretz (partly owned by a German, ex-Nazi publisher, M. DuMont Schauberg). They have in Israel various conspiracy theories about the paper – but the reality is that people just don’t read it because it doesn’t match their intrinsic views (where much of the population think like rednecks), and this is reflected in circulation numbers. On the other hand, if liberalism was more popular there, then Haaretz would be a best seller in that market, like the NYT is in a liberal milieu like New York.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dmitry

    Problem: That 0.1% includes the Bonniers:

     

    And I doubt they had maintained the Jewish identity they had a century ago.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%85ke_Bonnier

    The other issue in the conspiracy theory is that Swedish media is very anti-Israel, so the theory of Swedish liberalism being Jewish is rather failing as a "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", when the product they sell on the market is an anti-Israel slanted coverage.

    , @iffen
    (where much of the population think like rednecks)

    Thinking like a redneck is more difficult, but we usually get better results.
    , @reiner Tor

    Within the liberal milieu, liberal newspaper will sell out, and likewise within a conservative one, conservative newspaper will be far more popular (as you can see in Israel).
     
    Even this could be a question, but for example with entertainment it clearly doesn’t work like this. You watch movies for special effects, action scenes, the main characters, or similar, and you don’t care for the number of black judges and top scientists or ass-kicking babes etc. shown in them, but they do have a subconscious effect on you. It sounds very good in theory that I could watch a Star Wars movie without an ass-kicking babe and African hijabi rebel leaders, but it’s not like I actually have much of a choice except not watching any Star Wars movies, or rather, no space operas or sci-fi movies at all.

    Now there’s clearly no such competition with TV channels either, you only have a few of those with big budget quality entertainment. It’s also probably not too difficult to debase and corrupt culture without losing entertainment value. So pushing any such agenda should be rather easy, though of course any agenda could be pushed if you are smart enough not to get overly political. Goebbels had a lot of light entertainment be produced without much political agenda, but peppered with some little propaganda snippets (and the occasional propaganda blockbuster) he could easily change Germans in a more and more anti-Semitic direction.

    the conspiracy theorist found capitalist families who 100 years had Jewish origin, like the Bonnier Group – then Jews are suddenly responsible for contemporary Swedish liberalism
     
    You don’t seem to understand the argument here. It’s not really a conspiracy theory in that it doesn’t postulate any kind of coordination between the Bonniers, Soros, Netanyahu, and Chuck Schumer. In fact, they (some of them) could even hate each other.

    The theory of your opponents is that people not rooted in the Swedish people, but living there among Swedes, will have a sense of alienation and not really thinking of the well-being of the Swedish people or community, and instead they will often have an inclination to deconstruct the community (the Swedish people itself) from which they are alienated. This is not only true of Jews, but it is always true of them anywhere except in Israel. As an example, in the original Swedish push for multiculturalism, Jewish voices were vastly disproportionate, but for example there was a Hungarian author (refugee from communism) and some other non-Jewish non-Swedes as well. To give another example, in 1930s Romania, Jews and Hungarians were both overrepresented among Communist Party members. Obviously, both had reasons to dislike Romania (Hungarians were forced to join Romania just a couple decades earlier, and clearly had no attachment to it), Jews are simply such outsider minorities in every white gentile country, and usually with huge chips on their shoulders.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. @utu

    So, Danes [...] went out of their way to protect their Jews
     
    A time will come when Danes will be accused for the worst kind of anti-semitism for making their country Judenrein under the pretense of saving Jews by expediting them to Sweden on which they even made money by making Jews to pay for the passage. It is a matter of time. The Eye of Sauron is busy with Poland right now but time will come when it will cast its sight on Slovakia, Czechia, Hungary.

    Assad laughing at Gaddafi
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6syr1tjbgA

    Hungary has long been accused of complicity in the holocaust. Not entirely without justification, unfortunately, but of course the mitigating circumstances are never taken into account. The Hungarian police and gendarmerie did round up the Jews, but only after the Germans did occupy the country and replaced its government and the upper echelons of the civil service and police command. Until then, the Hungarian government steadfastly refused to hand over the Jews to the Germans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    Hungary's case is interesting because it clearly demonstrates that being an ally of Germany in WWII may increase Jewish survival rate. Jews realized it and were against renouncing the alliance with Germany by Hungary which indeed resulted in Jewish deportations once German occupied and took over in 1944. If Hungary resisted Germany in 1941 as Yugoslavia did or as Poland did in 1939 Hungarian Jews most likely would be annihilated like Polish Jews by the end of 1943 because there would be no protective umbrella offered by the semi sovereign Hungary.

    Italy's case in 1943/44 is similar to that of Hungary. By giving up they made the fate of Italian Jews worse. The exception is Slovakia. While and ally of Germany (provided few divisions to invade Poland in 1939) Slovakia paid the transportation costs to Germans to have them take Slovak Jews of their hands.

    In the Judeocentric moral world where what is bad for Jews is universally bad in an absolute sense the attempt of Hungary to extricate itself from the alliance with Germany in 1944 was bad even though it (1) might have weaken German war effort and thus shorten the war and (2) improve Hungary's position in post WWII under Soviet occupation including saving lives of Hungarians.

    If Poland in 1939 rejected British alliance and joined Hitler or at least played for time the Jewish survival in Eastern Europe could have been much higher.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. dmitry says:
    @Dmitry
    Jews have a disproportionate influence relative to population size, but it is still not a very big influence in the world of 8 billion. There are 16 million Jews in the world - and probably their influence is more than triple their population. In countries like Russia, obviously this disproportionate influence goes much higher.

    But in the great scheme of things, this influence is small compared to any of the larger nationalities, which can be seen at the UN voting sessions, where Israel does even far worse than a large country like Russia does.

    As for antisemitism - generally it relies on using Jews as a 'Theory of Everything'. It seems to have a kind of theological structure, and becomes quite ridiculous in its theory of media - denying agency to consumers of products. So because the conspiracy theorist found capitalist families who 100 years had Jewish origin, like the Bonnier Group - then Jews are suddenly responsible for contemporary Swedish liberalism. There's an issue of supply and demand here, and newspaper circulation numbers in a market reflect very much the popularity of the product there, just like music and fashion brands do.

    Within the liberal milieu, liberal newspaper will sell out, and likewise within a conservative one, conservative newspaper will be far more popular (as you can see in Israel).

    In Israel, the oldest newspaper is this left-wing paper called Haaretz (partly owned by a German, ex-Nazi publisher, M. DuMont Schauberg). They have in Israel various conspiracy theories about the paper - but the reality is that people just don't read it because it doesn't match their intrinsic views (where much of the population think like rednecks), and this is reflected in circulation numbers. On the other hand, if liberalism was more popular there, then Haaretz would be a best seller in that market, like the NYT is in a liberal milieu like New York.

    Problem: That 0.1% includes the Bonniers:

    And I doubt they had maintained the Jewish identity they had a century ago.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%85ke_Bonnier

    The other issue in the conspiracy theory is that Swedish media is very anti-Israel, so the theory of Swedish liberalism being Jewish is rather failing as a “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”, when the product they sell on the market is an anti-Israel slanted coverage.

    Read More
    • Replies: @j
    When intelligent people like K. MacDonald speaks about Jewish influence on Sweden, I am astonished suspect some mental disorder. Yes, I know MacD is a professor in psychology and I know that it was the Frankfort School that first floated the idea that antisemitism is a mental problem. Only a few hundred Jews live in Sweden, they are mostly first and second generation and not rich, and live in fear of Muslim and local violence. They have zero influence on Swedish public life or politics. Regarding the Bonnier family, I do not know by what criterion they can be considered Jews, since no Bonnier has much Jewish blood at all and none practices Judaism or know what it may be. On the other hand, there is real, ongoing, open and public Jewish effort to influence Sweden, and that is Israel trying to moderate Sweden extreme anti-Israeli position. Israel is unhappy with the Swedish government support of the Palestinian extremists and the Swedish boycott of some Israeli products, artists , etc. It goes without saying that Israeli - Jewish - efforts are failing miserably. If Jews had a hundredth of the influence and power the antisemites like MacD attribute to us, Sweden would be our best friend and supporter in the United Nations.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. Dmitry says:
    @German_reader

    the ethnic German lobby (apparently such a thing existed)
     
    Never heard of that and I doubt it really existed at that time. My impression is that Germans were largely crushed as a distinctive cultural force in the US during WW1 (the Nazi Bund people in the 1930s were a marginal phenomenon) and meekly accepted their absorption into Anglo-America. I've seen numerous comments by Americans of some German descent who claim being told by grandparents and the like that 1917/1918 was a real watershed, with people sometimes stopping talking German even in private...seems plausible to me.
    So I don't buy the arguments by Jewish lobbyists who come up with arguments like "Oh, in America it's normal for ethnic groups to have lobbies, everyone does it!"...clearly not true.

    Never heard of that and I doubt it really existed at that time. My impression is that Germans were largely crushed as a distinctive cultural force in the US during WW1 (the Nazi Bund people in the 1930s were a marginal phenomenon) and meekly accepted their absorption into Anglo-America. I’ve seen numerous comments by Americans of some German descent who claim being told by grandparents and the like that 1917/1918 was a real watershed, with people sometimes stopping talking German even in private…seems plausible to me.
    So I don’t buy the arguments by Jewish lobbyists who come up with arguments like “Oh, in America it’s normal for ethnic groups to have lobbies, everyone does it!”…clearly not true.

    It’s related to partly to German assimilation levels.

    Once in America, the Germans were trying to assimilate to the dominant English identity, and intermarrying with other European races straight away. The Jews, with religious motivation, had tried to do the opposite for several generations and maintained their separateness.

    German identity wasn’t adapted to exist outside Germany, whereas Jewish identity was more portable and internalized the idea that staying separate was a value.

    Although that has its limits, and in the current generation (with majority intermarriage), the American Jews are starting to dissolve, as happened in the Soviet Union. In America, the rapidness of this dissolution of their separate identity will be aided by the lack of discrimination, whereas in the Soviet Union it occurred more through a process of hazing them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. Dmitry says:
    @German_reader
    The expulsions by Assyrian and Babylonian kings and by Roman emperors like Hadrian are just standard imperial relocations of defeated peoples...happened to plenty of other groups. And sure, there were conflicts between Jews and Greeks in places like Alexandria...again, that's hardly unique imo, just standard conflict in multiethnic/multicultural societies. You could also compile a list of anti-Germanic xenophobic incidents in late antiquity (like the killing of Germanic soldiers in Italy after the death of the partly Germanic general Stilicho in 408).
    The atheist societies that expelled Jews mostly had a Christian background.
    Anyway, this is a minor nitpick, just wanted to show some possible counter-arguments.

    The expulsions by Assyrian and Babylonian kings and by Roman emperors like Hadrian are just standard imperial relocations of defeated peoples…happened to plenty of other groups. And sure, there were conflicts between Jews and Greeks in places like Alexandria…again, that’s hardly unique imo, just standard conflict in multiethnic/multicultural societies. You could also compile a list of anti-Germanic xenophobic incidents in late antiquity (like the killing of Germanic soldiers in Italy after the death of the partly Germanic general Stilicho in 408).
    The atheist societies that expelled Jews mostly had a Christian background.
    Anyway, this is a minor nitpick, just wanted to show some possible counter-arguments.

    In human history, it is usually an expropriation of the wealth of a minority group by the sovereign.

    If you look at Africa today, the process is very undisguised.

    Mugabe does similar actions towards white farmers today.

    And formerly Idi Amin does it with the Asians:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_Asians_from_Uganda

    In medieval and early modern Europe, it was an expropriation by monarchs of supernormal wealth obtained by Jews in banking, and it results in personal enrichment of the sovereign.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_of_Lincoln

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exchequer_of_the_Jews

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. I long resisted acknowledging the negative effects of Jewish “success”. What has driven it home more than anything for me, apart from neocon influence on US foreign policy, has been the disproportionate amount of support for “open borders” coming from Jewish politicians.

    Take Ireland and the UK, two countries with which I am reasonably familiar. The individual perhaps most directly responsible for “opening the door” to Ireland was Alan Shatter, who just happened to be the second Jewish cabinet minister in the country’s history.

    And who was Tony Blair’s major ally in “Conman Blair’s cynical conspiracy to deceive the British people and let in 2 million migrants against the rules”, to quote the Daily Mail in its review of a new (2016) biography of Tony Blair?

    The most incredible revelations concern Barbara Roche, a little-known [Jewish] MP who was immigration minister between 1999 and 2001. During this period, she quietly adopted policies – with Mr Blair’s approval – that changed the face of the UK.

    Upon her appointment, she told a senior immigration official: ‘Asylum seekers should be allowed to stay in Britain. Removal takes too long and it’s emotional.’

    She changed the rules to allow more work permits to be issued, especially to people who would previously have been considered asylum seekers. Stephen Boys Smith, who was then head of the Home Office’s immigration directorate, said: ‘It was clear that Roche wanted more immigrants to come to Britain. She didn’t see her job as controlling entry into Britain, but by looking at the wider picture in a “holistic way” she wanted us to see the benefit of a multicultural society.’

    Clearly this is a bit of cherry-picking, but what are the odds of this?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal
    Of course the Blair regime's treason on immigration (and the way subsequent Blairite leaders Brown, Cameron and May have continued it) is a scandal of literally historic proportions. And the consequences are not small - as has been pointed out, in the course of a few decades we have thrown away something that was constructed over a millennium.

    As you point out, there's clear justification for seeing jewish influence as playing its part in this, not least Barbara Roche's dire personal actions, and in recognising the perceived self-interest on the part of many jews in diluting the racial and cultural cohesion of their host countries to make themselves feel less foreign and less vulnerable as a minority, but as with the neocons in the US they were not alone in pushing for policies against the national interests of their host countries. In the case of mass immigration there was plenty of non-Jewish big business money behind the policy of importing cheap labour, and plenty of non-Jewish leftist ideological opinion behind the idea of "rubbing the right's noses in diversity".

    In other words, there's more than enough culpability to go around.

    The most incredible revelations concern Barbara Roche, a little-known [Jewish] MP who was immigration minister between 1999 and 2001.
     
    Worth noting that the identification of Roche as Jewish was not in the original. The Daily Mail is quite prepared to be transgressive in some taboo areas, but there are lines even it fears to cross.
    , @Bill jones
    What are the odds?
    About 100%
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. utu says:
    @reiner Tor
    Hungary has long been accused of complicity in the holocaust. Not entirely without justification, unfortunately, but of course the mitigating circumstances are never taken into account. The Hungarian police and gendarmerie did round up the Jews, but only after the Germans did occupy the country and replaced its government and the upper echelons of the civil service and police command. Until then, the Hungarian government steadfastly refused to hand over the Jews to the Germans.

    Hungary’s case is interesting because it clearly demonstrates that being an ally of Germany in WWII may increase Jewish survival rate. Jews realized it and were against renouncing the alliance with Germany by Hungary which indeed resulted in Jewish deportations once German occupied and took over in 1944. If Hungary resisted Germany in 1941 as Yugoslavia did or as Poland did in 1939 Hungarian Jews most likely would be annihilated like Polish Jews by the end of 1943 because there would be no protective umbrella offered by the semi sovereign Hungary.

    Italy’s case in 1943/44 is similar to that of Hungary. By giving up they made the fate of Italian Jews worse. The exception is Slovakia. While and ally of Germany (provided few divisions to invade Poland in 1939) Slovakia paid the transportation costs to Germans to have them take Slovak Jews of their hands.

    In the Judeocentric moral world where what is bad for Jews is universally bad in an absolute sense the attempt of Hungary to extricate itself from the alliance with Germany in 1944 was bad even though it (1) might have weaken German war effort and thus shorten the war and (2) improve Hungary’s position in post WWII under Soviet occupation including saving lives of Hungarians.

    If Poland in 1939 rejected British alliance and joined Hitler or at least played for time the Jewish survival in Eastern Europe could have been much higher.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. MarkinLA says:

    Given those questions and how they can be interpreted, what will the ADL do when everybody taking that quiz is an anti-Semite according to them?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    Given those questions and how they can be interpreted, what will the ADL do when everybody taking that quiz is an anti-Semite according to them?

     

    They want to scare their donor demographic as much as possible, as it means more fundraising and benefits packages for themselves. I wonder what the salary is of people working there.
    , @Hibernian
    Dissolve the people and elect another.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. inertial says:
    @reiner Tor
    Jews at the gulag were less than their share of the general population, at least that’s what I found at the appendix in Oleg Khlevniuk’s book. (He gives data by ethnicity.) They were underrepresented among the victims of collectivization and the manufactured famines. They were probably not harder hit than others during the great terror. The only time they were targeted for mass killings was during the doctors’ plot and anti-Zionist campaigns, when a few hundred of them were killed. But it’s peanuts compared to other mass killings.*

    I don’t know about lishentsi, but in a regime killing several millions you cannot seriously argue for a minority being harder hit than others, unless they had proportionally more of them killed or at least imprisoned. That is clearly not the case with Jews in the USSR.

    *Ironically it appears that Stalin’s power was already on the wane and he couldn’t get his (now largely Russian, supposedly anti-Semitic) security services to just start a mass execution campaign on false charges. The security services were dragging their feet and argued that there was no evidence (!), as if that had mattered anytime before. They knew the fate of the previous eager executioners like Yezhov and weren’t keen on getting their rewards.

    Jews at the gulag were less than their share of the general population

    Well of course. 75% of the GULag inmates were common criminals; and among the political prisoners, a significant percentage (I think the majority) after WWII were Nazi collaborators. Jews are underrepresented in the former category and non-existent in the latter.

    They were underrepresented among the victims of collectivization and the manufactured famines.

    Members of the Russian aristocracy were also underrepresented among the victims of collectivization and famines but no one doubts that they were targeted.

    There is no question that Jews were hit disproportionately hard by Soviet economic and social policies. To be sure, they were not persecuted as Jews but as former members of “abolished” classes (after having their property stolen from them.) Some Jews rose high under the new regime; but for every one of those there were many more like Ayn Rand (had she not escaped from the Soviet Russia.) So saying (like Karlin does) that Jews “pretended” to hate Stalin is… stupid.

    Read More
    • Replies: @fnn
    Slezkine, in his book, The Jewish Century: "The Jews, who were not numerous among the -nonelite victims, were underrepresented in the Great Terror as a whole. In 1937-38 about 1 percent of all Soviet Jews were arrested for political crimes, as compared to 16 percent of all Poles and 30 percent of all Latvians. By early 1939, the proportion of Jews in the Gulag was about 15.7 percent lower than their share of the total Soviet population."

    You have to assume that (at least during the period of the Great Purge/Terror) Jews were perceived by the regime as being more loyal than the Soviet norm. Maybe understandable given the geo-political context preceding the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. Dmitry says:

    Putin’s daughter married a Jewish minigarch, just like Trump’s.

    This is not really substantiated. It’s highly possible, as the surname of the husband is from Central Asia (and he is clearly from Central Asia or Caucasus), but surname itself is found in different nationalities so there is no direct evidence to pin down his nationality.

    One point though is that Putin’s ex-wife is definitely of a part Jewish background, but this has been censored/deleted from the internet.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  40. I scored 9 out of 11. :) Jews dominate the United States culturally and politically. Since US is world’s sole superpower, that gives the Jews disproportionate influence over world affairs.

    To give you an example, look at what is happening across the Middle East: the “Israeli lobby” manipulated the US into a series of costly, unwinnable wars to overthrow governments and destroy entire countries, hostile to the Zionist project. The result was increase in terrorism and a “refugee crisis”, that’s transforming European demographics. All to enable Jewish settlers in Palestine to steal land in peace.

    Read More
    • Agree: Druid
    • Replies: @inertial

    “Israeli lobby” manipulated the US into a series of costly, unwinnable wars to overthrow governments and destroy entire countries, hostile to the Zionist project.
     
    Right, countries such as Somalia, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan - really central to the Zionist project. North Korea is soon to come, possibly. Yet another country whose destruction is extremely important for the Israeli lobby.

    I have a different theory. America's wars are merely post-Cold War mopping up operations.
    , @Ace
    I agree but only wish to point out that the "refugee crisis" is not transforming European demographics. European elites (traitors) are.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Dmitry says:
    @MarkinLA
    Given those questions and how they can be interpreted, what will the ADL do when everybody taking that quiz is an anti-Semite according to them?

    Given those questions and how they can be interpreted, what will the ADL do when everybody taking that quiz is an anti-Semite according to them?

    They want to scare their donor demographic as much as possible, as it means more fundraising and benefits packages for themselves. I wonder what the salary is of people working there.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. Randal says:
    @for-the-record
    I long resisted acknowledging the negative effects of Jewish "success". What has driven it home more than anything for me, apart from neocon influence on US foreign policy, has been the disproportionate amount of support for "open borders" coming from Jewish politicians.

    Take Ireland and the UK, two countries with which I am reasonably familiar. The individual perhaps most directly responsible for "opening the door" to Ireland was Alan Shatter, who just happened to be the second Jewish cabinet minister in the country's history.

    And who was Tony Blair's major ally in "Conman Blair's cynical conspiracy to deceive the British people and let in 2 million migrants against the rules", to quote the Daily Mail in its review of a new (2016) biography of Tony Blair?


    The most incredible revelations concern Barbara Roche, a little-known [Jewish] MP who was immigration minister between 1999 and 2001. During this period, she quietly adopted policies – with Mr Blair’s approval – that changed the face of the UK.

    Upon her appointment, she told a senior immigration official: ‘Asylum seekers should be allowed to stay in Britain. Removal takes too long and it’s emotional.’

    She changed the rules to allow more work permits to be issued, especially to people who would previously have been considered asylum seekers. Stephen Boys Smith, who was then head of the Home Office’s immigration directorate, said: ‘It was clear that Roche wanted more immigrants to come to Britain. She didn’t see her job as controlling entry into Britain, but by looking at the wider picture in a “holistic way” she wanted us to see the benefit of a multicultural society.’

     

    Clearly this is a bit of cherry-picking, but what are the odds of this?

    Of course the Blair regime’s treason on immigration (and the way subsequent Blairite leaders Brown, Cameron and May have continued it) is a scandal of literally historic proportions. And the consequences are not small – as has been pointed out, in the course of a few decades we have thrown away something that was constructed over a millennium.

    As you point out, there’s clear justification for seeing jewish influence as playing its part in this, not least Barbara Roche’s dire personal actions, and in recognising the perceived self-interest on the part of many jews in diluting the racial and cultural cohesion of their host countries to make themselves feel less foreign and less vulnerable as a minority, but as with the neocons in the US they were not alone in pushing for policies against the national interests of their host countries. In the case of mass immigration there was plenty of non-Jewish big business money behind the policy of importing cheap labour, and plenty of non-Jewish leftist ideological opinion behind the idea of “rubbing the right’s noses in diversity”.

    In other words, there’s more than enough culpability to go around.

    The most incredible revelations concern Barbara Roche, a little-known [Jewish] MP who was immigration minister between 1999 and 2001.

    Worth noting that the identification of Roche as Jewish was not in the original. The Daily Mail is quite prepared to be transgressive in some taboo areas, but there are lines even it fears to cross.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. @German_reader

    the ethnic German lobby (apparently such a thing existed)
     
    Never heard of that and I doubt it really existed at that time. My impression is that Germans were largely crushed as a distinctive cultural force in the US during WW1 (the Nazi Bund people in the 1930s were a marginal phenomenon) and meekly accepted their absorption into Anglo-America. I've seen numerous comments by Americans of some German descent who claim being told by grandparents and the like that 1917/1918 was a real watershed, with people sometimes stopping talking German even in private...seems plausible to me.
    So I don't buy the arguments by Jewish lobbyists who come up with arguments like "Oh, in America it's normal for ethnic groups to have lobbies, everyone does it!"...clearly not true.

    It’s normal for inferior races to have ethnic lobbies in America, which is quite logical. If you can’t compete in the marketplace, it’s sensible to organize politically. Jews are highly unusual being more than successful yet still having an ethnic lobby.

    Some of the more “ethnic” whites have weak lobbies. Irish-American politicians have periodically pushed Anglophobic foreign policies (Congressman Peter King of New York is an example), Italian-Americans are very touchy about Columbus Day, Armenians whinge about the Armenian genocide and want it recognized in law, etc.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. inertial says:
    @Felix Keverich
    I scored 9 out of 11. :) Jews dominate the United States culturally and politically. Since US is world's sole superpower, that gives the Jews disproportionate influence over world affairs.

    To give you an example, look at what is happening across the Middle East: the "Israeli lobby" manipulated the US into a series of costly, unwinnable wars to overthrow governments and destroy entire countries, hostile to the Zionist project. The result was increase in terrorism and a "refugee crisis", that's transforming European demographics. All to enable Jewish settlers in Palestine to steal land in peace.

    “Israeli lobby” manipulated the US into a series of costly, unwinnable wars to overthrow governments and destroy entire countries, hostile to the Zionist project.

    Right, countries such as Somalia, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan – really central to the Zionist project. North Korea is soon to come, possibly. Yet another country whose destruction is extremely important for the Israeli lobby.

    I have a different theory. America’s wars are merely post-Cold War mopping up operations.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Felix Keverich
    I didn't say that everything US does is a product of Jewish influence, but their ME wars certainly are.
    , @renfro

    I have a different theory.
     
    Well your theory is wrong.Were you old enough to read and use the net in 2003? Everyone knew the JEWS were pushing it.


    *January 2003, The New York Sun’s David Twersky reported:

    According to Mr. Kohr, AIPAC’s successes over the past year also include guaranteeing Israel’s annual aid package and “quietly” lobbying Congress to approve the use of force in Iraq.”

    *And that’s not the only instance in which AIPAC’s support of the Iraq War has been reported.
    In April 2003, Nathan Guttman reported for Haaretz:
    AIPAC is wont to support whatever is good for Israel, and so long as Israel supports the war, so too do the thousands of the AIPAC lobbyists who convened in the American capital.

    *That same April, The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank reported that AIPAC’s Steve Rosen, serving as a panel moderator during the group’s annual conference, exclaimed, “God willing, we’re going to have a great victory in Iraq.”

    *Jeffrey Goldberg, writing in The New Yorker in 2005, reported that AIPAC “lobbied Congress in favor of the Iraq war, but Iraq has not been one of its chief concerns.”

    *In 2007, then-Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA), told Tikkun Magazine that AIPAC has pushed [the Iraq war] from the beginning. I don’t think they represent the mainstream of American Jewish thinking at all, but because they are so well organized, and their members are extraordinarily powerful—most of them are quite wealthy—they have been able to exert power.”

     

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. neutral says:

    I was born anti semitic, as long as I can remember I had a natural aversion to jews, after learning more about them I realized that there was a good reason for it. Many talk about how the Askenazi rapidly evolved into what they are now because of the stresses living amongst whites in Europe, this then raises the question if some whites could also have rapidly evolved with anti semitic instincts because of the stresses of living amongst jews.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  46. @inertial

    “Israeli lobby” manipulated the US into a series of costly, unwinnable wars to overthrow governments and destroy entire countries, hostile to the Zionist project.
     
    Right, countries such as Somalia, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan - really central to the Zionist project. North Korea is soon to come, possibly. Yet another country whose destruction is extremely important for the Israeli lobby.

    I have a different theory. America's wars are merely post-Cold War mopping up operations.

    I didn’t say that everything US does is a product of Jewish influence, but their ME wars certainly are.

    Read More
    • Replies: @inertial
    Separating the US wars into ME and non-ME is contrary to Occam's razor.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. Randal says:

    The Nixon Tapes- Jew Spies vs. Negro Spies

    It’s always refreshing to hear conversations from before political correctness and the power of minority lobbies muzzled free discussion and forced everyone to speak in codes, pretend to believe in dogmas and not to believe in taboo truths, and use politically correct euphemisms instead of speaking honestly.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  48. inertial says:
    @Felix Keverich
    I didn't say that everything US does is a product of Jewish influence, but their ME wars certainly are.

    Separating the US wars into ME and non-ME is contrary to Occam’s razor.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Felix Keverich
    From Wikipedia:

    Occam's razor is the problem-solving principle that, when presented with competing hypothetical answers to a problem, one should select the one that makes the fewest assumptions.
     
    There is only one assumption behind my theory of Iraq invasion: the Jews, who ran US foreign policy did it for Israel's benefit. That Jews run American foreign policy is not an assumption, but a well-documented fact.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. songbird says:

    That’s an interesting theory about Med people being good at business. Rivers are probably too choke pointed or feudalistic compared to a small sea.

    In the past, I’ve wondered something like this about art. You can find impressive works of art in many places. But nobody has ever had art like Europe. Not in classical times. Not during the Renaissance or really afterward. It is also seems stylistic influences radiated out of Europe to the Middle East and China and not so much the other way around.

    Of course, Northern Europe also had its Renaissance, but perhaps that is due to the North Sea. Perhaps a big flaw in the theory would be Jews and North Africans don’t seem to be particularly good visual artists. Maybe, it is cultural but not genetic. A lot of art had religious themes. Prohibition for North Africans. Possibly less of a market for Jews, even though many old testament themes, it would be kind of unholy to employ a Jew in a church.

    Read More
    • Replies: @melanf

    n the past, I’ve wondered something like this about art. You can find impressive works of art in many places. But nobody has ever had art like Europe. Not in classical times. Not during the Renaissance or really afterward.
     
    This is strange, but in the Paleolit, Europe was also a world leader in the field of high art.
    https://profilib.net/reader/37/28/b22837/011.jpg
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. @inertial
    Separating the US wars into ME and non-ME is contrary to Occam's razor.

    From Wikipedia:

    Occam’s razor is the problem-solving principle that, when presented with competing hypothetical answers to a problem, one should select the one that makes the fewest assumptions.

    There is only one assumption behind my theory of Iraq invasion: the Jews, who ran US foreign policy did it for Israel’s benefit. That Jews run American foreign policy is not an assumption, but a well-documented fact.

    Read More
    • Replies: @inertial
    So you have a bespoke explanation for each war. Iraq is explained by the Jewish lobby. Serbia I suppose by the Albanian lobby (which actually did exist and was quite powerful at one point; but its power was derivative.)

    And if Iraq War was run for the benefit of Israel then you should be able to point the benefit. Iraq and Israel have no common border, so the only way Iraq could be a threat to Israel was if Saddam Hussein had WMD. Are you saying he did? You can't have it both ways.

    The usual rejoinder to this is the claim that Israel wants to create chaos in the Arab world. This argument reminds me of the ongoing "Russian interference" saga where numerous "experts" are saying that evil Putin did whatever it was that he did in order to "sow chaos and undermine Western democracy." This is what happens when you try to fit the square peg of your favorite theory into the round hole of reality.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. I wouldn’t comment on author’s particular ideas on various matters (with most of them I agree & disagree with some of them). But, I don’t agree with his, in my opinion, focus on IQ-ism & too high regard of Jewish accomplishment. Although not as ahistorical as most JQ comments, this is not historical enough-at least for my taste.

    Like sex & taxes, Jews seem to be a perennial theme.

    As far as Jewish ethnocentrism goes- it’s the cornerstone of their religion & identity (which has been formed from, roughly, 700 BC to 100 AD). It is not a reaction, but the very essence of self- definition of that ethno-religious group & culture. Judaism is an imaginative refurbishing of other Near Eastern religions; it does not possess its own mythology. Normative Judaism- unlike Kabbalah- is a Platonized religion in many respects similar to early Confucianism: life’s fulfillment is achieved through learning, study & mostly mental work- and not piety, nor supernatural yearnings. Early Judaism, as recorded in the Pentateuch, had not possessed that idea. Somewhere around 100-300 A.D. Jews adopted Plato’s ethic of self-cultivation through intellectual work & produced a vast literature of almost completely dated & sterile Behemoth nitpicking trivialities (Talmud, Responsa, ..).

    As for accomplishment: now, Jews, this old & talented ethno-religious group is in the great creative period of their existence, which lasts as yet ca. 150 years. Many other groups or peoples have had such periods- Italians, say, 1300-1600; English up and down, but let’s take a look at 1550-1750 period. During this time, the English had produced: Tallis, Byrd, Purcell- composers, Boyle (Irish extraction)- father of chemistry, Shakespeare, Milton, Donne, …-literature, Bacon, Hobbes, Locke, Berkeley-philosophy, Gilbert- discovered magnetism, Harvey- physiology, blood circulation, Newton- the greatest scientist ever, Halley- astronomy, Cavendish- physics & chemistry, discovered hydrogen, ..

    So, just in this 200 years span the English had created enormously more than Jews in past 200 years. And- what does this have to do with IQ & other stuff ? Nothing.

    Periods of creativity & influence come & go.

    Jews last for ca. 3000 yrs; English, French & Germans for ca. 1000 (even less, as definitely crystallized groups). Germans are recognizable for ca. 700 years; English, in more or less current shape for 600-700 years.

    Almost all historical figures, from ancient Greece & Rome to Goethe and Voltaire, had castigated Jews as vulgar, unoriginal, barbaric, sneaky, cunning but without nobility of spirit; essentially not creative & parasitic. Not some Christian fanatics, but enlightened spirits. Until 1933. the only philo-Semitic creative persons were, as I recall, George Eliot and James Joyce. All others (Marx, Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Wittgenstein, Wagner, Voltaire, Proust, Henry James, Nietzsche (a complex question), Chesterton, ..) were, to say the least, not very sympathetic towards Jews. Ludwig Wittgenstein, one of the greatest 20th C philosophers-partly of Jewish extraction- complained about what he (wrongly) perceived as his creative sterility as having something to do with Jewishness: “Amongs Jews, “genius” is found only in the holy man. Even the greatest of Jewish thinkers is no more than talented. (Myself, for instance). I think there is some truth to the idea I only think reproductively. I don’t think I have ever invented a single line of thinking. I have always taken one from someone else ..”
    Now, that’s too harsh, but has an element of truth.

    In more recent times: enormously influential & erudite Marx was a sort of Talmudist (he was not technically Jewish, but..), reworking other people’s ideas (Ricardo, Hegel, Hess, Guizot, …) into one big clunky synthesis; Freud was a mixture of Janet, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer and Shakespeare; Einstein’s SR was almost completely done in works of Lorentz, Poincare and others, and his GR was actually devised parallel with Hilbert; Feynman’s graph approach was invented by Dirac (Feynman said so himself).

    I don’t want to denigrate Jewish creativity in past 150 years in various fields, just- it could flourish only in the broader context of Gentile creativity & frequently- not always- after it. Jews’ creative accomplishments last some 150 years & are, mostly, the result of complete assimilation into host cultures, with characteristic traits of these cultures.

    Even in past 100-150 years, it was Gentiles -with a few exceptions like Einstein- who produced most enduring science, technology & culture in all fields (Diesel, Edison, Ziolkowski and Goddard, Loggie Baird, Joyce and Proust, Picasso and Stravinsky, Planck, Heisenberg, Dirac and Schrodinger, Morgan and Watson, Darwin and Ronald Fisher,…). I admire very much Kafka, Mahler, Marvin Minsky, Otto Lilienthal, Salman Waksman, John Von Neumann, Hermann Broch, Karl Landsteiner, …(I included converts)- but evidently their accomplishment was & is a spin-off of German Enlightenment.

    As for supposed numerical disparity: Jews were, prior to WW2, comparable to other peoples (20 M Jews; 45 M British; 65 M Germans, ..); in past 500 -1000 years enormous “Gentile” energies went to warfare & various blood lettings (100 yrs war; 30 yrs war- 60% of Germans perished; conquest of Americas & the Orient; Napoleonic wars; WW1 and WW2,.. ). At the same time, British had the energy to:
    a) begin Industrial revolution
    b) wage wars against Napoleon
    c) make discoveries in mathematics, chemistry, physics (Hamilton, Young, Davy,..)
    d) begin sweeping social reforms

    Now, that’s something.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    Loggie Baird, Joyce and Proust
     
    Wasn't Proust Jewish? Other than that I think most of their achievements are in science and maths. This is largely a reflection of the fact that most of the community only secularized from their heavy (almost Salafi Islam like) religious restrictions in the 20th century - so they missed the whole period of painting, literature, and so on. Most of the talent has gone into mathematics and physics - nowadays in computer science as well. Also the global Jewish population peaked at 17 million in the 1930s, and will probably never recover from that.

    Currently with 16 million people, out of a world population of almost 8 billion - I find the level of attention and attribution of influence to this group, to be rather disproportionate.

    , @AaronB
    I find myself in the strange position of almost completely agreeing with your most intelligent comment, Bardon, and find your ideas about Jews and Confucuanism and Platonism to be fascinating and suggestive.

    And you've stolen my idea of how each people has a creative striving period, and Jews are in theirs now! I say that all the time - but you've said it much better, and fleshed it out in detail. Of course, I got the idea from Sir John Glubb's study of the rise and fall of empires.

    But really, it's an idea that needs much wider dissemination. It's the most intelligent way to view the larger arc of history and so much more compelling than the silly "timeless essences" view.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. Szopen says:
    @Randal

    But there clearly was some participation.
     
    I think that with this post along with past posts you have probably rendered yourself potentially subject to arrest in both Germany and Poland.

    A hazard inherent to discussing history honestly in a world in which, in some countries, honestly discussing particular aspects of history is criminalised and truth is no defence, I suppose.

    Not in Poland. In Poland there is proposed law to penalize people accusing Polish State or Nation, ie all Poles as contrasted with some Poles, with exception of artists and historians and with proviso “against the facts”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    with proviso “against the facts”
     
    Fair enough, I wasn't aware the new Polish law had that proviso.

    I'm happy to stand corrected, and that rT can safely book a trip to Krakow any time he wants.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Szopen says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    I should clarify. I didn't edit carefully, and when writing that, I was loosely thinking of how some European countries collaborated to a greater or lesser extent with the Nazis when implementing the Holocaust.

    So, Danes, Greeks went out of their way to protect their Jews; the French were somewhere in the middle; Poles and Ukrainians were at the more indifferent end.

    However, describing it as "helped" is clearly overdoing, so thanks to szopen for catching that.

    Thanks. There is so much sh*t being thrown at us recently (with rudderman foundation infamous video) that i also reacted more emotionally than usual.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    with rudderman foundation infamous video
     
    Hadn't heard about that, so I googled it:
    https://forward.com/news/national/394956/foundation-pulls-video-urging-us-to-sever-ties-to-poland-and-accused-poles/

    Ruderman said that his video was meant to be controversial. “The point we were trying to make in a very forward manner was Poles had a role in the Holocaust,” he said. “I’m not saying they created the Holocaust. But they were part of the Holocaust.”

    Ruderman bristled at the critique of his video leveled by the AJC’s Harris. “There were hundreds of thousands of Jews killed by Poles. What does David Harris have to say about that? Does he want to dismiss that?” Ruderman said. “Is he working behind the scenes with the Polish government to make everything better?”
     


    Ruderman said that he had thought that the issue of the Polish law had not received as much attention in the United States as it had in Israel, and he wanted to raise awareness among American Jews. “I didn’t see the outrage in the United States among the American Jewish community that I saw in Israel,” he said. “Our whole message in terms of this issue is that American Jews and Israelis are together as one Jewish people and that American Jews matter to Israel. I’m not sure Israelis felt that over the past few months.”
     
    Interesting.
    , @Anon 2
    Jewish power is declining in the United States, as seen in (1)
    the declining numbers of Jewish senators and congressmen.
    Those numbers reached their peak in the early 2000s. Senator
    Al Franken was the latest casualty; (2) rapidly dwindling numbers
    of Evangelicals, Israel's biggest supporters. Few people read the Bible
    anymore. E.g., most readers today encountering Faulkner's novel, "Absalom,
    Absalom!" have no idea who Absalom was. That would have been unthinkable
    in the 1950s. (3) The numbers of movie goers and TV watchers on a per
    capita basis, where the Jewish propaganda is one of the strongest, have
    sharply declined in recent years, but (4) what really did the greatest damage
    to the Jewish reputation in the U.S. were the recent Hollywood scandals with
    Weinstein, and so many other Jewish figures heavily overrepresented among them. By
    the way, Lawrence Krauss, a famous physicist, is the latest disgraced figure. Jewish
    reputation is now permanently tarnished in the U.S. And Israel, with all the corruption and
    the scandals besetting Netanyahu, is no longer taken as seriously as it once
    was. When the Jews were at the height of their power in the days leading to
    the Iraqi invasion, they still had the power to cover up what was going on
    in Hollywood, etc. Not anymore.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. @Szopen
    Thanks. There is so much sh*t being thrown at us recently (with rudderman foundation infamous video) that i also reacted more emotionally than usual.

    with rudderman foundation infamous video

    Hadn’t heard about that, so I googled it:

    https://forward.com/news/national/394956/foundation-pulls-video-urging-us-to-sever-ties-to-poland-and-accused-poles/

    Ruderman said that his video was meant to be controversial. “The point we were trying to make in a very forward manner was Poles had a role in the Holocaust,” he said. “I’m not saying they created the Holocaust. But they were part of the Holocaust.”

    Ruderman bristled at the critique of his video leveled by the AJC’s Harris. “There were hundreds of thousands of Jews killed by Poles. What does David Harris have to say about that? Does he want to dismiss that?” Ruderman said. “Is he working behind the scenes with the Polish government to make everything better?”

    Ruderman said that he had thought that the issue of the Polish law had not received as much attention in the United States as it had in Israel, and he wanted to raise awareness among American Jews. “I didn’t see the outrage in the United States among the American Jewish community that I saw in Israel,” he said. “Our whole message in terms of this issue is that American Jews and Israelis are together as one Jewish people and that American Jews matter to Israel. I’m not sure Israelis felt that over the past few months.”

    Interesting.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian

    Ruderman said that he had thought that the issue of the Polish law had not received as much attention in the United States as it had in Israel, and he wanted to raise awareness among American Jews. “I didn’t see the outrage in the United States among the American Jewish community that I saw in Israel,” he said. “Our whole message in terms of this issue is that American Jews and Israelis are together as one Jewish people and that American Jews matter to Israel. I’m not sure Israelis felt that over the past few months.”
     
    What's so new about it?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7SoKJwyGM8

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuI533vTqQk
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. songbird says:
    @German_reader

    The fact that everyone and their dog ended up deporting Jews at some time or other indicates that it might also have something to do with Jewish behavior.
     
    The standard argument against that is there isn't much of an anti-Jewish tradition in China or India, and that obsessive hostility towards Jews has been mostly a phenomenon in Christian, and to a lesser degree in Islamic societies...Christians and Muslims must find the continued refusal of Jews to acknowledge that their religion is obsolete offensive, whereas Jews must regard Christianity and Islam as some sort of bizarre cultural appropriation. The mutual hostility isn't surprising.
    So the "Jews have been kicked out everywhere" argument by itself probably isn't that persuasive unless one can demonstrate it also applies to non-Christian/non-Islamic societies.

    Lesser degree in Islamic societies? I must disagree vehemently. That is just the Jewish cultural narrative, not born out by simple math.

    The vast majority of Jews worldwide are European offshoots, in particular Ashkenazim. Based on mathematical DNA models, Ashkenazi had a starting population of about 350 about 600-800 years ago. This represents an average increase of at least 10% per generation. Fertility is an old measure of prosperity, and Ashkenazim today are fantastically wealthy. The most prosperous people in the world.
    No one else even close, and they achieved that wealth only in European societies.

    Contrast that to Islamic societies. Paltry numbers. Not much real wealth. Many Jews were, in relation to Islam, endemic to the Middle East. They were ethnically cleansed from the area surrounding Mecca by Muhammad himself. Christians did not ethnically cleanse Jews from Israel. After a few generations in Islamic Spain, Jews began migrating north into the Christian kingdoms.

    Christianity just isn’t as militant and as strategically tribal as Islam, or Judaism, for that matter. This is also born out by Christianity having been endemic to much of the Islamic expansion. You can count the native Christians in Anatolia using the fingers on your hands. And just like the Jews, they have declined everywhere.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    They were ethnically cleansed from the area surrounding Mecca by Muhammad himself.
     
    It's not even clear if that's historical (Muhammad himself may never have existed like he's presented in Islamic tradition after all...we don't know). And there was a continuous Jewish presence throughout much of the Mideast until the mid-20th century...e.g. in Iraq Jews persisted from antiquity until the 1940s/1950s (Saddam Hussein's mother was friends with a Jewish woman iirc). It's true that there were episodes of anti-Jewish violence in the Islamic world like the massacre of Granada in 1066, but they were much less common than in the Christian world.
    Nowadays the Islamic world is of course much more anti-Jewish than today's (post-)West, but that seems to be a fairly recent development over the last century or so.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @German_reader

    (opposite example: Germans, who have tended to be remarkably loyal to their host countries, even when they were at war with Germany).
     
    True, obviously a grave problem from a German perspective. One of the things I find most irritating about the US is that there isn't a German lobby there...there are all those Americans of German descent, with German names (one of the largest groups of white Americans, probably second only to those of British isles descent), and yet they're doing almost nothing for Germany or German interests.

    What knowing goyim notice and dislike is that too many of their (((fellow white people))) combine progressive, pro-minority agendas with aggressive support of Israel across virtually all countries where they have a substantial demographic presence.

     

    Exactly...this obvious hypocrisy and mendacity which one isn't supposed to notice is increasingly hard to tolerate, and is the main reason why I have no tolerance for right-wingers in Europe who make a show of being pro-Israel.

    – have played outsized role in promoting Marxism, feminism, anti-racism, etc., resent immigration as a “core Jewish value”, and have been outspoken in trying to discredit Trump, the closest the US has ever had or might ever have to a Netanyahu.
     
    Should be "represent" here.

    Anyway, good post, thanks.

    At the beginning of the 20th century, New York City was one of the world’s largest “German” cities, third after Berlin and Vienna. And until the 1930s, you had the German-American Bund:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_American_Bund

    But WW1 and WW2 promoted anti-German sentiments and pressured German Americans to assimilate more completely.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. iffen says:
    @Dmitry
    Jews have a disproportionate influence relative to population size, but it is still not a very big influence in the world of 8 billion. There are 16 million Jews in the world - and probably their influence is more than triple their population. In countries like Russia, obviously this disproportionate influence goes much higher.

    But in the great scheme of things, this influence is small compared to any of the larger nationalities, which can be seen at the UN voting sessions, where Israel does even far worse than a large country like Russia does.

    As for antisemitism - generally it relies on using Jews as a 'Theory of Everything'. It seems to have a kind of theological structure, and becomes quite ridiculous in its theory of media - denying agency to consumers of products. So because the conspiracy theorist found capitalist families who 100 years had Jewish origin, like the Bonnier Group - then Jews are suddenly responsible for contemporary Swedish liberalism. There's an issue of supply and demand here, and newspaper circulation numbers in a market reflect very much the popularity of the product there, just like music and fashion brands do.

    Within the liberal milieu, liberal newspaper will sell out, and likewise within a conservative one, conservative newspaper will be far more popular (as you can see in Israel).

    In Israel, the oldest newspaper is this left-wing paper called Haaretz (partly owned by a German, ex-Nazi publisher, M. DuMont Schauberg). They have in Israel various conspiracy theories about the paper - but the reality is that people just don't read it because it doesn't match their intrinsic views (where much of the population think like rednecks), and this is reflected in circulation numbers. On the other hand, if liberalism was more popular there, then Haaretz would be a best seller in that market, like the NYT is in a liberal milieu like New York.

    (where much of the population think like rednecks)

    Thinking like a redneck is more difficult, but we usually get better results.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @songbird
    Lesser degree in Islamic societies? I must disagree vehemently. That is just the Jewish cultural narrative, not born out by simple math.

    The vast majority of Jews worldwide are European offshoots, in particular Ashkenazim. Based on mathematical DNA models, Ashkenazi had a starting population of about 350 about 600-800 years ago. This represents an average increase of at least 10% per generation. Fertility is an old measure of prosperity, and Ashkenazim today are fantastically wealthy. The most prosperous people in the world.
    No one else even close, and they achieved that wealth only in European societies.

    Contrast that to Islamic societies. Paltry numbers. Not much real wealth. Many Jews were, in relation to Islam, endemic to the Middle East. They were ethnically cleansed from the area surrounding Mecca by Muhammad himself. Christians did not ethnically cleanse Jews from Israel. After a few generations in Islamic Spain, Jews began migrating north into the Christian kingdoms.

    Christianity just isn't as militant and as strategically tribal as Islam, or Judaism, for that matter. This is also born out by Christianity having been endemic to much of the Islamic expansion. You can count the native Christians in Anatolia using the fingers on your hands. And just like the Jews, they have declined everywhere.

    They were ethnically cleansed from the area surrounding Mecca by Muhammad himself.

    It’s not even clear if that’s historical (Muhammad himself may never have existed like he’s presented in Islamic tradition after all…we don’t know). And there was a continuous Jewish presence throughout much of the Mideast until the mid-20th century…e.g. in Iraq Jews persisted from antiquity until the 1940s/1950s (Saddam Hussein’s mother was friends with a Jewish woman iirc). It’s true that there were episodes of anti-Jewish violence in the Islamic world like the massacre of Granada in 1066, but they were much less common than in the Christian world.
    Nowadays the Islamic world is of course much more anti-Jewish than today’s (post-)West, but that seems to be a fairly recent development over the last century or so.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    There's certainly much more evidence for Mohamed than the Moses caricature.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @reiner Tor
    Jews have been totally assimilated in China. Their presence in China and India was in any event minimal. You have to accept that the data points basically consist of Christian and Muslim societies.

    But Jews were privileged in Christian societies: they weren’t forced to convert most of the time. Unlike pagans or basically everyone else. Like Muslims in medieval Hungary were forced to convert and marry previously Christian (i.e. not fresh convert) Hungarians, and also to move to Christian villages. They were not to have a separate identity.

    Being kicked out was in line with the norm for non-Christian groups, the anomaly is the tolerance in between the pogroms and expulsions.

    It’s not clear if the Jews were actually assimilated in China. At any rate, their numbers would have been very small and China is so far away that they would have been completely cut off from other Jewish communities to the west.

    Jews in China were part of a Middle Eastern foreign merchant community that included Muslims, Christians, Persians, etc. There were massacres against these merchants so it’s possible that they were massacred or driven away rather than being assimilated, or in addition to being assimilated in small numbers:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guangzhou_massacre

    Read More
    • Replies: @songbird
    I agree. Chinese philo-Semitism and lack of Jewish antipathy to China is very easy to explain.

    Firstly, lack of Jews in China. Mostly, by reason of geography. But partly due to natural Chinese cohesiveness. When the Boxer Rebellion happened there were <20,000 foreigners in the whole of China, and they were a motley mix of seven or eight nationalities, including many racially similar Japanese. Europe being made of small nations always had a certain level of cosmopolitanism, not true historically for the Chinese. Foreigners while present were always few. Far easterners have a Confucian mindset. Much more difficult to subvert, because they think of the good of society. Not easy prey for victimhood narratives. Historically extremely xenophobic to the point of burning their own ships and any foreign sailors who set foot on their land.

    Meanwhile, lack of Jewish antipathy to China is also explained by there having been so few Jews in China. The dominant cultural narrative of European Jews has always been extreme Europhobia. There isn't room for anything else. And it is easy to see this in the way so many European Jews are foolishly embracing Islam.

    BTW, I think Bruce Lee had a Jewish great grandfather. Many of the Jews that entered China probably married Chinese women.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. Randal says:
    @Szopen
    Not in Poland. In Poland there is proposed law to penalize people accusing Polish State or Nation, ie all Poles as contrasted with some Poles, with exception of artists and historians and with proviso "against the facts"

    with proviso “against the facts”

    Fair enough, I wasn’t aware the new Polish law had that proviso.

    I’m happy to stand corrected, and that rT can safely book a trip to Krakow any time he wants.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    He wouldn't get in trouble for that in Germany either, bashing Poles is all right among progressives here (as long as you bash them for the right reasons like antisemitism).
    Anyway, I thought the Polish right was exaggerating (and I still dislike them and think they're pretty dumb about a lot of issues)...but the reactions to that law by Israel, the US, France and probably other countries as well have been illuminating...apparently the Polish right-wingers do have a point, there clearly are groups who want to foist some sort of collective Holocaust guilt on Poland.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. Dmitry says:
    @Bardon Kaldian
    I wouldn't comment on author's particular ideas on various matters (with most of them I agree & disagree with some of them). But, I don't agree with his, in my opinion, focus on IQ-ism & too high regard of Jewish accomplishment. Although not as ahistorical as most JQ comments, this is not historical enough-at least for my taste.

    Like sex & taxes, Jews seem to be a perennial theme.

    As far as Jewish ethnocentrism goes- it's the cornerstone of their religion & identity (which has been formed from, roughly, 700 BC to 100 AD). It is not a reaction, but the very essence of self- definition of that ethno-religious group & culture. Judaism is an imaginative refurbishing of other Near Eastern religions; it does not possess its own mythology. Normative Judaism- unlike Kabbalah- is a Platonized religion in many respects similar to early Confucianism: life's fulfillment is achieved through learning, study & mostly mental work- and not piety, nor supernatural yearnings. Early Judaism, as recorded in the Pentateuch, had not possessed that idea. Somewhere around 100-300 A.D. Jews adopted Plato's ethic of self-cultivation through intellectual work & produced a vast literature of almost completely dated & sterile Behemoth nitpicking trivialities (Talmud, Responsa, ..).

    As for accomplishment: now, Jews, this old & talented ethno-religious group is in the great creative period of their existence, which lasts as yet ca. 150 years. Many other groups or peoples have had such periods- Italians, say, 1300-1600; English up and down, but let's take a look at 1550-1750 period. During this time, the English had produced: Tallis, Byrd, Purcell- composers, Boyle (Irish extraction)- father of chemistry, Shakespeare, Milton, Donne, ...-literature, Bacon, Hobbes, Locke, Berkeley-philosophy, Gilbert- discovered magnetism, Harvey- physiology, blood circulation, Newton- the greatest scientist ever, Halley- astronomy, Cavendish- physics & chemistry, discovered hydrogen, ..

    So, just in this 200 years span the English had created enormously more than Jews in past 200 years. And- what does this have to do with IQ & other stuff ? Nothing.

    Periods of creativity & influence come & go.

    Jews last for ca. 3000 yrs; English, French & Germans for ca. 1000 (even less, as definitely crystallized groups). Germans are recognizable for ca. 700 years; English, in more or less current shape for 600-700 years.

    Almost all historical figures, from ancient Greece & Rome to Goethe and Voltaire, had castigated Jews as vulgar, unoriginal, barbaric, sneaky, cunning but without nobility of spirit; essentially not creative & parasitic. Not some Christian fanatics, but enlightened spirits. Until 1933. the only philo-Semitic creative persons were, as I recall, George Eliot and James Joyce. All others (Marx, Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Wittgenstein, Wagner, Voltaire, Proust, Henry James, Nietzsche (a complex question), Chesterton, ..) were, to say the least, not very sympathetic towards Jews. Ludwig Wittgenstein, one of the greatest 20th C philosophers-partly of Jewish extraction- complained about what he (wrongly) perceived as his creative sterility as having something to do with Jewishness: "Amongs Jews, "genius" is found only in the holy man. Even the greatest of Jewish thinkers is no more than talented. (Myself, for instance). I think there is some truth to the idea I only think reproductively. I don't think I have ever invented a single line of thinking. I have always taken one from someone else .."
    Now, that's too harsh, but has an element of truth.

    In more recent times: enormously influential & erudite Marx was a sort of Talmudist (he was not technically Jewish, but..), reworking other people's ideas (Ricardo, Hegel, Hess, Guizot, ...) into one big clunky synthesis; Freud was a mixture of Janet, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer and Shakespeare; Einstein's SR was almost completely done in works of Lorentz, Poincare and others, and his GR was actually devised parallel with Hilbert; Feynman's graph approach was invented by Dirac (Feynman said so himself).

    I don't want to denigrate Jewish creativity in past 150 years in various fields, just- it could flourish only in the broader context of Gentile creativity & frequently- not always- after it. Jews' creative accomplishments last some 150 years & are, mostly, the result of complete assimilation into host cultures, with characteristic traits of these cultures.

    Even in past 100-150 years, it was Gentiles -with a few exceptions like Einstein- who produced most enduring science, technology & culture in all fields (Diesel, Edison, Ziolkowski and Goddard, Loggie Baird, Joyce and Proust, Picasso and Stravinsky, Planck, Heisenberg, Dirac and Schrodinger, Morgan and Watson, Darwin and Ronald Fisher,...). I admire very much Kafka, Mahler, Marvin Minsky, Otto Lilienthal, Salman Waksman, John Von Neumann, Hermann Broch, Karl Landsteiner, ...(I included converts)- but evidently their accomplishment was & is a spin-off of German Enlightenment.

    As for supposed numerical disparity: Jews were, prior to WW2, comparable to other peoples (20 M Jews; 45 M British; 65 M Germans, ..); in past 500 -1000 years enormous "Gentile" energies went to warfare & various blood lettings (100 yrs war; 30 yrs war- 60% of Germans perished; conquest of Americas & the Orient; Napoleonic wars; WW1 and WW2,.. ). At the same time, British had the energy to:
    a) begin Industrial revolution
    b) wage wars against Napoleon
    c) make discoveries in mathematics, chemistry, physics (Hamilton, Young, Davy,..)
    d) begin sweeping social reforms

    Now, that's something.

    Loggie Baird, Joyce and Proust

    Wasn’t Proust Jewish? Other than that I think most of their achievements are in science and maths. This is largely a reflection of the fact that most of the community only secularized from their heavy (almost Salafi Islam like) religious restrictions in the 20th century – so they missed the whole period of painting, literature, and so on. Most of the talent has gone into mathematics and physics – nowadays in computer science as well. Also the global Jewish population peaked at 17 million in the 1930s, and will probably never recover from that.

    Currently with 16 million people, out of a world population of almost 8 billion – I find the level of attention and attribution of influence to this group, to be rather disproportionate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    Proust's mother was Jewish, but he was not. Don't conflate ancestry & identity.

    As for asymmetries in various fields & periods, they've always existed. They cannot be explained: why an incomparable explosion of creativity has happened in German-speaking lands from, say, 1770-1830 (Hamann, Herder, Euler, Kant, Gauss, Baader, Goethe, Schiller, Novalis, Schelling, Hegel, Mozart, Beethoven, Haydn, Schubert, Clausewitz, Kleist, Bernoullis, Scheele, Schopenahuer, brothers Grimm, brothers Humboldt, …)?

    So, among generally illiterate Germans, in just a few decades & among small segments of society, marginal with regard to world population, a gigantic endeavor has happened that forever changed mathematics, physics, philosophy, political ideologies, music, the art of warfare, natural sciences, chemistry, philology, literature, ...

    Why & how? Nobody knows. But, this over-representation is far more impressive than Jewish in any period of history.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. @Randal

    with proviso “against the facts”
     
    Fair enough, I wasn't aware the new Polish law had that proviso.

    I'm happy to stand corrected, and that rT can safely book a trip to Krakow any time he wants.

    He wouldn’t get in trouble for that in Germany either, bashing Poles is all right among progressives here (as long as you bash them for the right reasons like antisemitism).
    Anyway, I thought the Polish right was exaggerating (and I still dislike them and think they’re pretty dumb about a lot of issues)…but the reactions to that law by Israel, the US, France and probably other countries as well have been illuminating…apparently the Polish right-wingers do have a point, there clearly are groups who want to foist some sort of collective Holocaust guilt on Poland.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    He wouldn’t get in trouble for that in Germany either
     
    My post was unclear - I was referring in that regard to other past posts of his discussing the "Holocaust" which would likely be regarded as "denial" - even though they clearly aren't.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  64. Randal says:
    @German_reader
    He wouldn't get in trouble for that in Germany either, bashing Poles is all right among progressives here (as long as you bash them for the right reasons like antisemitism).
    Anyway, I thought the Polish right was exaggerating (and I still dislike them and think they're pretty dumb about a lot of issues)...but the reactions to that law by Israel, the US, France and probably other countries as well have been illuminating...apparently the Polish right-wingers do have a point, there clearly are groups who want to foist some sort of collective Holocaust guilt on Poland.

    He wouldn’t get in trouble for that in Germany either

    My post was unclear – I was referring in that regard to other past posts of his discussing the “Holocaust” which would likely be regarded as “denial” – even though they clearly aren’t.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    I don't really see how reiner tor could be classified as a Holocaust denier...indeed he has argued against Holocaust deniers here on Unz review. I guess he'd be classed as a "racist" or "antisemite" though, but that isn't a crime in a legal sense in Germany so far...he'd "only" suffer social ostracism, maybe lose his job...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. songbird says:
    @Anonymous
    It's not clear if the Jews were actually assimilated in China. At any rate, their numbers would have been very small and China is so far away that they would have been completely cut off from other Jewish communities to the west.

    Jews in China were part of a Middle Eastern foreign merchant community that included Muslims, Christians, Persians, etc. There were massacres against these merchants so it's possible that they were massacred or driven away rather than being assimilated, or in addition to being assimilated in small numbers:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guangzhou_massacre

    I agree. Chinese philo-Semitism and lack of Jewish antipathy to China is very easy to explain.

    Firstly, lack of Jews in China. Mostly, by reason of geography. But partly due to natural Chinese cohesiveness. When the Boxer Rebellion happened there were <20,000 foreigners in the whole of China, and they were a motley mix of seven or eight nationalities, including many racially similar Japanese. Europe being made of small nations always had a certain level of cosmopolitanism, not true historically for the Chinese. Foreigners while present were always few. Far easterners have a Confucian mindset. Much more difficult to subvert, because they think of the good of society. Not easy prey for victimhood narratives. Historically extremely xenophobic to the point of burning their own ships and any foreign sailors who set foot on their land.

    Meanwhile, lack of Jewish antipathy to China is also explained by there having been so few Jews in China. The dominant cultural narrative of European Jews has always been extreme Europhobia. There isn't room for anything else. And it is easy to see this in the way so many European Jews are foolishly embracing Islam.

    BTW, I think Bruce Lee had a Jewish great grandfather. Many of the Jews that entered China probably married Chinese women.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. @Randal

    He wouldn’t get in trouble for that in Germany either
     
    My post was unclear - I was referring in that regard to other past posts of his discussing the "Holocaust" which would likely be regarded as "denial" - even though they clearly aren't.

    I don’t really see how reiner tor could be classified as a Holocaust denier…indeed he has argued against Holocaust deniers here on Unz review. I guess he’d be classed as a “racist” or “antisemite” though, but that isn’t a crime in a legal sense in Germany so far…he’d “only” suffer social ostracism, maybe lose his job…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal
    It's a matter of interpretation - the law criminalises "downplaying" any acts relating to the "Holocaust". rT's posts often question the accuracy of official versions whilst not actually "denying the Holocaust" outright. If a prosecutor wanted to get him on that, he probably could imo. Certainly he could easily face a lot of harassment before the charges were ultimately dropped or quashed.

    In these situations, the process is a large part of the punishment.


    I guess he’d be classed as a “racist” or “antisemite” though, but that isn’t a crime in a legal sense in Germany so far
     
    It is if it's classed as "inciting hatred" on the basis of race religion or ethnicity, I believe.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. Randal says:
    @German_reader
    I don't really see how reiner tor could be classified as a Holocaust denier...indeed he has argued against Holocaust deniers here on Unz review. I guess he'd be classed as a "racist" or "antisemite" though, but that isn't a crime in a legal sense in Germany so far...he'd "only" suffer social ostracism, maybe lose his job...

    It’s a matter of interpretation – the law criminalises “downplaying” any acts relating to the “Holocaust”. rT’s posts often question the accuracy of official versions whilst not actually “denying the Holocaust” outright. If a prosecutor wanted to get him on that, he probably could imo. Certainly he could easily face a lot of harassment before the charges were ultimately dropped or quashed.

    In these situations, the process is a large part of the punishment.

    I guess he’d be classed as a “racist” or “antisemite” though, but that isn’t a crime in a legal sense in Germany so far

    It is if it’s classed as “inciting hatred” on the basis of race religion or ethnicity, I believe.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    It is if it’s classed as “inciting hatred” on the basis of race religion or ethnicity, I believe
     
    Yes, you're right, Volksverhetzung (the equivalent of "incitement to racial hatred" in the UK) is indeed a "crime", and the definition has become progressively more extensive and elastic over the decades.
    Anyway, I don't really disagree with you in principle, contemporary Germany certainly is developing into some kind of "soft totalitarianism" like many other Western societies (and in some ways is probably worse, especially regarding the de facto tolerance for and support of violent left-wing extremists by the political establishment).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    The thing is to be an Anti-Philosemite.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    Anti-Philosemite

    Counter-Semitism.

    Counter is so much nicer than Anti, No?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. @Dmitry

    Loggie Baird, Joyce and Proust
     
    Wasn't Proust Jewish? Other than that I think most of their achievements are in science and maths. This is largely a reflection of the fact that most of the community only secularized from their heavy (almost Salafi Islam like) religious restrictions in the 20th century - so they missed the whole period of painting, literature, and so on. Most of the talent has gone into mathematics and physics - nowadays in computer science as well. Also the global Jewish population peaked at 17 million in the 1930s, and will probably never recover from that.

    Currently with 16 million people, out of a world population of almost 8 billion - I find the level of attention and attribution of influence to this group, to be rather disproportionate.

    Proust’s mother was Jewish, but he was not. Don’t conflate ancestry & identity.

    As for asymmetries in various fields & periods, they’ve always existed. They cannot be explained: why an incomparable explosion of creativity has happened in German-speaking lands from, say, 1770-1830 (Hamann, Herder, Euler, Kant, Gauss, Baader, Goethe, Schiller, Novalis, Schelling, Hegel, Mozart, Beethoven, Haydn, Schubert, Clausewitz, Kleist, Bernoullis, Scheele, Schopenahuer, brothers Grimm, brothers Humboldt, …)?

    So, among generally illiterate Germans, in just a few decades & among small segments of society, marginal with regard to world population, a gigantic endeavor has happened that forever changed mathematics, physics, philosophy, political ideologies, music, the art of warfare, natural sciences, chemistry, philology, literature, …

    Why & how? Nobody knows. But, this over-representation is far more impressive than Jewish in any period of history.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RudyM
    Wir war Könige.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. @Randal
    It's a matter of interpretation - the law criminalises "downplaying" any acts relating to the "Holocaust". rT's posts often question the accuracy of official versions whilst not actually "denying the Holocaust" outright. If a prosecutor wanted to get him on that, he probably could imo. Certainly he could easily face a lot of harassment before the charges were ultimately dropped or quashed.

    In these situations, the process is a large part of the punishment.


    I guess he’d be classed as a “racist” or “antisemite” though, but that isn’t a crime in a legal sense in Germany so far
     
    It is if it's classed as "inciting hatred" on the basis of race religion or ethnicity, I believe.

    It is if it’s classed as “inciting hatred” on the basis of race religion or ethnicity, I believe

    Yes, you’re right, Volksverhetzung (the equivalent of “incitement to racial hatred” in the UK) is indeed a “crime”, and the definition has become progressively more extensive and elastic over the decades.
    Anyway, I don’t really disagree with you in principle, contemporary Germany certainly is developing into some kind of “soft totalitarianism” like many other Western societies (and in some ways is probably worse, especially regarding the de facto tolerance for and support of violent left-wing extremists by the political establishment).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. songbird says:

    I think the lack of support for the Armenian genocide is mainly geopolitics. They do not want to get on Turkey’s bad side. Of course, this is obviously self-serving but with the excuse that it is also existential.

    However, it is still very bad for appearances, as originally Zionists hijacked the Armenian genocide to service their independence movement. There were claims that Jews had been massacred in Haifa, and that they soon all would be.

    Really, they were just being removed from a sensitive area. It’s understandable why they got antsy after what happened to the Armenians. But there were lies about individual Jews being killed. These were investigated by an international committee and found to be false. Men who were supposedly hung were alive and well. BTW, the suspicions of the Turks in this case were obviously well founded. Indeed, it could be said that they were very naive about certain individual Zionists.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  72. polskijoe says:

    Those are all stereotypes and I consider most of those not hatred.
    You will find that numbers of “anti-semitic” and actually antiJewish views are different.
    “antisemitic” numbers (lets say according to ADL) will be larger.

    Anyway I scored around 6/7 out of 11. My conclusions are slightly different from the article.

    Zbig was antiRussian, but actually not the worse type.

    The biggest haters (from elites):
    Jews mostly from Eastern Europe living in various places. (Anne Applebaum, Christia Freeland, etc).
    Neocon/Trotskyist in the US, some portions of Anglo Military Complex,
    Liberal media owners, And Liberals within the Democrats and Republicans. (Mccain is an example of Liberal Republican, but also connected to MIC).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  73. @German_reader

    with rudderman foundation infamous video
     
    Hadn't heard about that, so I googled it:
    https://forward.com/news/national/394956/foundation-pulls-video-urging-us-to-sever-ties-to-poland-and-accused-poles/

    Ruderman said that his video was meant to be controversial. “The point we were trying to make in a very forward manner was Poles had a role in the Holocaust,” he said. “I’m not saying they created the Holocaust. But they were part of the Holocaust.”

    Ruderman bristled at the critique of his video leveled by the AJC’s Harris. “There were hundreds of thousands of Jews killed by Poles. What does David Harris have to say about that? Does he want to dismiss that?” Ruderman said. “Is he working behind the scenes with the Polish government to make everything better?”
     


    Ruderman said that he had thought that the issue of the Polish law had not received as much attention in the United States as it had in Israel, and he wanted to raise awareness among American Jews. “I didn’t see the outrage in the United States among the American Jewish community that I saw in Israel,” he said. “Our whole message in terms of this issue is that American Jews and Israelis are together as one Jewish people and that American Jews matter to Israel. I’m not sure Israelis felt that over the past few months.”
     
    Interesting.

    Ruderman said that he had thought that the issue of the Polish law had not received as much attention in the United States as it had in Israel, and he wanted to raise awareness among American Jews. “I didn’t see the outrage in the United States among the American Jewish community that I saw in Israel,” he said. “Our whole message in terms of this issue is that American Jews and Israelis are together as one Jewish people and that American Jews matter to Israel. I’m not sure Israelis felt that over the past few months.”

    What’s so new about it?

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    I just find it bizarre that people like Jay Ruderman can write something like this...and then would probably complain if someone raises the issue of possible dual loyalties.
    The whole "Poles killed hundreds of thousands of Jews" (which is just slander) is worse though. I don't have much sympathy for Polish right-wingers, but reactions like that by Jay Ruderman prove they're basically right on this issue.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    You qualify as an anti-Semite if you answer Probably True to six or more of the following questions.

    That’s a shockingly low bar. Everyone who knows anything about Jews, including many Jews themselves, is anti-Semite by that measure. I too scored 7/11 and I am half Jewish.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  75. @Bardon Kaldian

    Ruderman said that he had thought that the issue of the Polish law had not received as much attention in the United States as it had in Israel, and he wanted to raise awareness among American Jews. “I didn’t see the outrage in the United States among the American Jewish community that I saw in Israel,” he said. “Our whole message in terms of this issue is that American Jews and Israelis are together as one Jewish people and that American Jews matter to Israel. I’m not sure Israelis felt that over the past few months.”
     
    What's so new about it?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7SoKJwyGM8

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuI533vTqQk

    I just find it bizarre that people like Jay Ruderman can write something like this…and then would probably complain if someone raises the issue of possible dual loyalties.
    The whole “Poles killed hundreds of thousands of Jews” (which is just slander) is worse though. I don’t have much sympathy for Polish right-wingers, but reactions like that by Jay Ruderman prove they’re basically right on this issue.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    The video was even worse. They just used the expression “Polish Holocaust” and mentioned the 3.5 million Jews killed in Poland (“hundreds of thousands of them were kids”) without ever clarifying that the vast majority of those (basically, all of them) were killed by others (almost all by Germans) and not by Poles.
    , @utu

    Poles killed hundreds of thousands of Jews
     
    I saw 200k number in Haaretz or JP in an article about historian Jan Grabovski. I do not know how he arrived at this number but I suspect it is just some demographic inference.

    In my opinion Poles w/o protest should accept this number and make the following offer not to Israel but to Germany:

    Dear Germany,

    how much since the WWII did you pay to Israel and Jews all over the world? Is it $100 billions more or less? It seems that you have over paid by about 3.3%. We are being told that it is us, the Poles, who are responsible for the 200,000 deaths out of the 6 millions. So we would like to compensate it for you, Please give us your bank account number on which we can transfer the money.

    Yours truly,

    Poland
     
    Now, being serious this is the best opportunity for Poland to return under the wings of Angela Merkel and forget about fantasies of being the Trojan horse of the US and Israel in Europe. The Uncle Sam is not going to protect Poland from Israel regardless of the accomplishments of the Trojan Horse on the behalf of the Empire.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. @German_reader
    I just find it bizarre that people like Jay Ruderman can write something like this...and then would probably complain if someone raises the issue of possible dual loyalties.
    The whole "Poles killed hundreds of thousands of Jews" (which is just slander) is worse though. I don't have much sympathy for Polish right-wingers, but reactions like that by Jay Ruderman prove they're basically right on this issue.

    The video was even worse. They just used the expression “Polish Holocaust” and mentioned the 3.5 million Jews killed in Poland (“hundreds of thousands of them were kids”) without ever clarifying that the vast majority of those (basically, all of them) were killed by others (almost all by Germans) and not by Poles.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    The phrase “Polish Holocaust” used in the video instead of being objected to should have been adopted in aikido like move by Poles and turned around: Thank you for reminding everybody that there was a Polish Holocaust: 6 millions Poles lost their lives in WWII. 3 millions of them besides being Polish were also Jewish so we lent them to Jews so they can also have their 6 millions lost in the WWII. Poland weeps equally for their lost citizen regardless of their religion.
    , @songbird
    Back in January, PBS (American public television) aired a documentary called the "The Saint and the Sultan" about the Crusades. I was shocked at it because it was very thinly veiled, Anti-Christian and anti-European propaganda.

    It was low-brow stuff. Cheap video reenactments. Very little informational content. Few words in the script. It was pure vehicle. Positive about Jews and Muslims. Almost all negative about Euros. It would show a Crusader swinging a sword, and the narrator would say "Lizard hindbrain". It was nakedly built around that one phrase, which was repeated.

    It was obvious it was designed for one purpose only: to try to disarm any resistance to the ethnic transformation of Europe. Surprisingly (to me, at least) it was not funded by a Jew, even though it was positive about Jews, but by a wealthy Muslim foundation. They know who their allies are though, like in Spain.

    I put it down mostly as agenda though, impersonal. The Polish Holocaust video though is just dripping with naked malice. I think it is rather awe-inspiring that someone could feel that way toward Poland. And be hot-headed long enough to produce the video. It would not surprise me in the least, if they next made a video about Ireland.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. Ilya says:

    Rumor has it that Karlin, smoking a cigarette, “bumped into” Berel Lazar, tugged on his beard, and told him that Judaism’s tenure in Russia was about to end. Hence Karlin’s rocketing up the list of redoubtable anti-Semites.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  78. inertial says:
    @Felix Keverich
    From Wikipedia:

    Occam's razor is the problem-solving principle that, when presented with competing hypothetical answers to a problem, one should select the one that makes the fewest assumptions.
     
    There is only one assumption behind my theory of Iraq invasion: the Jews, who ran US foreign policy did it for Israel's benefit. That Jews run American foreign policy is not an assumption, but a well-documented fact.

    So you have a bespoke explanation for each war. Iraq is explained by the Jewish lobby. Serbia I suppose by the Albanian lobby (which actually did exist and was quite powerful at one point; but its power was derivative.)

    And if Iraq War was run for the benefit of Israel then you should be able to point the benefit. Iraq and Israel have no common border, so the only way Iraq could be a threat to Israel was if Saddam Hussein had WMD. Are you saying he did? You can’t have it both ways.

    The usual rejoinder to this is the claim that Israel wants to create chaos in the Arab world. This argument reminds me of the ongoing “Russian interference” saga where numerous “experts” are saying that evil Putin did whatever it was that he did in order to “sow chaos and undermine Western democracy.” This is what happens when you try to fit the square peg of your favorite theory into the round hole of reality.

    Read More
    • Replies: @redmudhooch
    "The most important difference between North Korea and Iraq is that economically we just had no choice in Iraq. The country swims on a sea of oil."
    -Dual Citizen Zionist Paul Wolfowitz, 31 May 2003.

    The Zionist plan for the Middle East - Yinon, Oded. Strategy for Israel https://archive.org/download/TheZionistPlanForTheMiddleEast/MicrosoftWord-TheZionistPlanForTheMiddleEas1.pdf

    The Life of an American Jew in Racist Marxist Israel
    Written in 1985 by Jack Bernstein
    http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/israel.htm
    , @German_reader

    Iraq and Israel have no common border, so the only way Iraq could be a threat to Israel was if Saddam Hussein had WMD.
     
    Saddam's regime sent money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers during the 2nd intifada, you can still find statements by the Israeli ministry of foreign affairs online about this:
    http://mfa.gov.il/MFA/ForeignPolicy/Terrorism/Palestinian/Pages/Iraqi%20Support%20for%20and%20Encouragement%20of%20Palestinian.aspx

    http://mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFA-Archive/2003/Pages/Iraq-s%20Involvement%20in%20the%20Palestinian%20Terrorist%20Ac.aspx

    I can remember this was mentioned in the run-up to the Iraq war...there was a lot of hysterical commentary by Jews along the lines of "opposition to war against Iraq is antisemitic, once again the world does nothing while we're being killed by a mad dictator".
    And American neoconservatives who pushed for the war are disproportionately Jewish.
    It's of course true that the Iraq war can't be attributed solely to Jewish/Israeli machinationa, and iirc there were polls at the time that a majority of American Jews actually opposed the war (which is more than can be said for retarded redneck Bush supporters).
    , @Felix Keverich
    LOL@"Albanian lobby". Are you serious?

    I don't recall US presidential candidates paying visits to Albanian "Public Affairs Comittee" to pledge fealty to Albanian state. They do pledge fealty to the Jewish state. It's a quadrennial ritual in the United States.

    If you're unaware of how US domestic politics operates, how you can claim to understand the motivations for US foreign wars? Foreign policy is always the extention of domestic politics and in America, it is the Jews (not Albanians LMAO), who dominate both.

    The so-called "Russian inteference" in US politics does happen to be a conspiracy theory, but the Jewish domination of America is an unfortunate reality, created by billions of dollars in campaign donations and a near total media control.

    , @renfro

    And if Iraq War was run for the benefit of Israel then you should be able to point the benefit. Iraq and Israel have no common border, so the only way Iraq could be a threat to Israel was if Saddam Hussein had WMD. Are you saying he did? You can’t have it both ways
     
    Are you stupid ?? Or just another Jewish troll ??

    ''Moving to a Traditional Balance of Power Strategy
    TEXT:
    We must distinguish soberly and clearly friend from foe. We must make sure that our friends across the Middle East never doubt the solidity or value of our friendship.
    Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq — an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right — as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions. Jordan has challenged Syria's regional ambitions recently by suggesting the restoration of the Hashemites in Iraq. This has triggered a Jordanian-Syrian rivalry to which Asad has responded by stepping up efforts to destabilize the Hashemite Kingdom, including using infiltrations. Syria recently signaled that it and Iran might prefer a weak, but barely surviving Saddam, if only to undermine and humiliate Jordan in its efforts to remove Saddam. ''

    The paper set out a plan by which Israel would “shape its strategic environment”, beginning with the removal of Saddam Hussein and the installation of a Hashemite monarchy in Baghdad....the plan was to take Iraq first, then Syria and then Iran...and that would also neutralize Lebanon.....Israel would then be the supreme power of the ME.

    ''Committee For A New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000:"

    Richard Perle, American Enterprise Institute, Study Group Leader ..... Jew
    James Colbert, Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs................ Jew
    Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Johns Hopkins University/SAIS
    Douglas Feith, Feith and Zell Associates ..............................................................................Jew
    Robert Loewenberg, President, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies......Jew
    Jonathan Torop, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy..................................Jew
    David Wurmser, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies.......................Jew
    Meyrav Wurmser, Johns Hopkins University................................................................Jew
    , @Vojkan
    Actually no, the war against Serbia too was in great part the work of the jewish lobby. Krauthammer, Friedman, Kristol & the rest of jewish neocons, the late William Safire, in the USA, Bernard-Henry Levy, Kouchner in France, quite a cohort of zionists, isn't it? For how many Albanians? It doesn't all come down to Israel, a lot is about the khazarian hatred for Russia.
    , @Sam J.
    "... if Iraq War was run for the benefit of Israel then you should be able to point the benefit. Iraq and Israel have no common border, so the only way Iraq could be a threat to Israel was if Saddam Hussein had WMD. Are you saying he did? You can’t have it both ways..."

    Same farcical Jewish clouding of the issue and lying. Saddam was a threat to Israel because he was providing financial support to it's enemies the Palestinians. The Jews are mentally ill and want no opposition at all. Any opposition they consider a threat no matter what. By acting like this they of course eventually create threats that didn't even exist before. So yes you can not only have one way but another and another and another. Your picks of history do fit the actual history.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. ADL/AIPAC, and the many others are the racists, hate groups, terrorists. No different from JDL, FBI already classified them as terrorists.
    They only make themselves look more guilty and irresponsible with all the denial…
    People are waking up though, even in the deep south, I used to see lots of those “I stand with Israel” or “I Support Israel” bumper stickers, not any more, Bush and Netanyahu have been the worst enemy of Israeli PR in history. 0bama and Trump aren’t doing them any favors either.
    The ethnic cleansing, murder and genocide of Christians in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Palestine are hard to hide for long. Even people that used to be hardcore Chrisian Zios are starting to see Israel/USSA for what it is.
    I think 2020 is gonna be real interesting, I don’t think folks are gonna go along with another Israel/Zionist hand picked candidate, thats if we make it to 2020, I don’t think we will.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  80. AaronB says:
    @Bardon Kaldian
    I wouldn't comment on author's particular ideas on various matters (with most of them I agree & disagree with some of them). But, I don't agree with his, in my opinion, focus on IQ-ism & too high regard of Jewish accomplishment. Although not as ahistorical as most JQ comments, this is not historical enough-at least for my taste.

    Like sex & taxes, Jews seem to be a perennial theme.

    As far as Jewish ethnocentrism goes- it's the cornerstone of their religion & identity (which has been formed from, roughly, 700 BC to 100 AD). It is not a reaction, but the very essence of self- definition of that ethno-religious group & culture. Judaism is an imaginative refurbishing of other Near Eastern religions; it does not possess its own mythology. Normative Judaism- unlike Kabbalah- is a Platonized religion in many respects similar to early Confucianism: life's fulfillment is achieved through learning, study & mostly mental work- and not piety, nor supernatural yearnings. Early Judaism, as recorded in the Pentateuch, had not possessed that idea. Somewhere around 100-300 A.D. Jews adopted Plato's ethic of self-cultivation through intellectual work & produced a vast literature of almost completely dated & sterile Behemoth nitpicking trivialities (Talmud, Responsa, ..).

    As for accomplishment: now, Jews, this old & talented ethno-religious group is in the great creative period of their existence, which lasts as yet ca. 150 years. Many other groups or peoples have had such periods- Italians, say, 1300-1600; English up and down, but let's take a look at 1550-1750 period. During this time, the English had produced: Tallis, Byrd, Purcell- composers, Boyle (Irish extraction)- father of chemistry, Shakespeare, Milton, Donne, ...-literature, Bacon, Hobbes, Locke, Berkeley-philosophy, Gilbert- discovered magnetism, Harvey- physiology, blood circulation, Newton- the greatest scientist ever, Halley- astronomy, Cavendish- physics & chemistry, discovered hydrogen, ..

    So, just in this 200 years span the English had created enormously more than Jews in past 200 years. And- what does this have to do with IQ & other stuff ? Nothing.

    Periods of creativity & influence come & go.

    Jews last for ca. 3000 yrs; English, French & Germans for ca. 1000 (even less, as definitely crystallized groups). Germans are recognizable for ca. 700 years; English, in more or less current shape for 600-700 years.

    Almost all historical figures, from ancient Greece & Rome to Goethe and Voltaire, had castigated Jews as vulgar, unoriginal, barbaric, sneaky, cunning but without nobility of spirit; essentially not creative & parasitic. Not some Christian fanatics, but enlightened spirits. Until 1933. the only philo-Semitic creative persons were, as I recall, George Eliot and James Joyce. All others (Marx, Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Wittgenstein, Wagner, Voltaire, Proust, Henry James, Nietzsche (a complex question), Chesterton, ..) were, to say the least, not very sympathetic towards Jews. Ludwig Wittgenstein, one of the greatest 20th C philosophers-partly of Jewish extraction- complained about what he (wrongly) perceived as his creative sterility as having something to do with Jewishness: "Amongs Jews, "genius" is found only in the holy man. Even the greatest of Jewish thinkers is no more than talented. (Myself, for instance). I think there is some truth to the idea I only think reproductively. I don't think I have ever invented a single line of thinking. I have always taken one from someone else .."
    Now, that's too harsh, but has an element of truth.

    In more recent times: enormously influential & erudite Marx was a sort of Talmudist (he was not technically Jewish, but..), reworking other people's ideas (Ricardo, Hegel, Hess, Guizot, ...) into one big clunky synthesis; Freud was a mixture of Janet, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer and Shakespeare; Einstein's SR was almost completely done in works of Lorentz, Poincare and others, and his GR was actually devised parallel with Hilbert; Feynman's graph approach was invented by Dirac (Feynman said so himself).

    I don't want to denigrate Jewish creativity in past 150 years in various fields, just- it could flourish only in the broader context of Gentile creativity & frequently- not always- after it. Jews' creative accomplishments last some 150 years & are, mostly, the result of complete assimilation into host cultures, with characteristic traits of these cultures.

    Even in past 100-150 years, it was Gentiles -with a few exceptions like Einstein- who produced most enduring science, technology & culture in all fields (Diesel, Edison, Ziolkowski and Goddard, Loggie Baird, Joyce and Proust, Picasso and Stravinsky, Planck, Heisenberg, Dirac and Schrodinger, Morgan and Watson, Darwin and Ronald Fisher,...). I admire very much Kafka, Mahler, Marvin Minsky, Otto Lilienthal, Salman Waksman, John Von Neumann, Hermann Broch, Karl Landsteiner, ...(I included converts)- but evidently their accomplishment was & is a spin-off of German Enlightenment.

    As for supposed numerical disparity: Jews were, prior to WW2, comparable to other peoples (20 M Jews; 45 M British; 65 M Germans, ..); in past 500 -1000 years enormous "Gentile" energies went to warfare & various blood lettings (100 yrs war; 30 yrs war- 60% of Germans perished; conquest of Americas & the Orient; Napoleonic wars; WW1 and WW2,.. ). At the same time, British had the energy to:
    a) begin Industrial revolution
    b) wage wars against Napoleon
    c) make discoveries in mathematics, chemistry, physics (Hamilton, Young, Davy,..)
    d) begin sweeping social reforms

    Now, that's something.

    I find myself in the strange position of almost completely agreeing with your most intelligent comment, Bardon, and find your ideas about Jews and Confucuanism and Platonism to be fascinating and suggestive.

    And you’ve stolen my idea of how each people has a creative striving period, and Jews are in theirs now! I say that all the time – but you’ve said it much better, and fleshed it out in detail. Of course, I got the idea from Sir John Glubb’s study of the rise and fall of empires.

    But really, it’s an idea that needs much wider dissemination. It’s the most intelligent way to view the larger arc of history and so much more compelling than the silly “timeless essences” view.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. @Dmitry
    Jews have a disproportionate influence relative to population size, but it is still not a very big influence in the world of 8 billion. There are 16 million Jews in the world - and probably their influence is more than triple their population. In countries like Russia, obviously this disproportionate influence goes much higher.

    But in the great scheme of things, this influence is small compared to any of the larger nationalities, which can be seen at the UN voting sessions, where Israel does even far worse than a large country like Russia does.

    As for antisemitism - generally it relies on using Jews as a 'Theory of Everything'. It seems to have a kind of theological structure, and becomes quite ridiculous in its theory of media - denying agency to consumers of products. So because the conspiracy theorist found capitalist families who 100 years had Jewish origin, like the Bonnier Group - then Jews are suddenly responsible for contemporary Swedish liberalism. There's an issue of supply and demand here, and newspaper circulation numbers in a market reflect very much the popularity of the product there, just like music and fashion brands do.

    Within the liberal milieu, liberal newspaper will sell out, and likewise within a conservative one, conservative newspaper will be far more popular (as you can see in Israel).

    In Israel, the oldest newspaper is this left-wing paper called Haaretz (partly owned by a German, ex-Nazi publisher, M. DuMont Schauberg). They have in Israel various conspiracy theories about the paper - but the reality is that people just don't read it because it doesn't match their intrinsic views (where much of the population think like rednecks), and this is reflected in circulation numbers. On the other hand, if liberalism was more popular there, then Haaretz would be a best seller in that market, like the NYT is in a liberal milieu like New York.

    Within the liberal milieu, liberal newspaper will sell out, and likewise within a conservative one, conservative newspaper will be far more popular (as you can see in Israel).

    Even this could be a question, but for example with entertainment it clearly doesn’t work like this. You watch movies for special effects, action scenes, the main characters, or similar, and you don’t care for the number of black judges and top scientists or ass-kicking babes etc. shown in them, but they do have a subconscious effect on you. It sounds very good in theory that I could watch a Star Wars movie without an ass-kicking babe and African hijabi rebel leaders, but it’s not like I actually have much of a choice except not watching any Star Wars movies, or rather, no space operas or sci-fi movies at all.

    Now there’s clearly no such competition with TV channels either, you only have a few of those with big budget quality entertainment. It’s also probably not too difficult to debase and corrupt culture without losing entertainment value. So pushing any such agenda should be rather easy, though of course any agenda could be pushed if you are smart enough not to get overly political. Goebbels had a lot of light entertainment be produced without much political agenda, but peppered with some little propaganda snippets (and the occasional propaganda blockbuster) he could easily change Germans in a more and more anti-Semitic direction.

    the conspiracy theorist found capitalist families who 100 years had Jewish origin, like the Bonnier Group – then Jews are suddenly responsible for contemporary Swedish liberalism

    You don’t seem to understand the argument here. It’s not really a conspiracy theory in that it doesn’t postulate any kind of coordination between the Bonniers, Soros, Netanyahu, and Chuck Schumer. In fact, they (some of them) could even hate each other.

    The theory of your opponents is that people not rooted in the Swedish people, but living there among Swedes, will have a sense of alienation and not really thinking of the well-being of the Swedish people or community, and instead they will often have an inclination to deconstruct the community (the Swedish people itself) from which they are alienated. This is not only true of Jews, but it is always true of them anywhere except in Israel. As an example, in the original Swedish push for multiculturalism, Jewish voices were vastly disproportionate, but for example there was a Hungarian author (refugee from communism) and some other non-Jewish non-Swedes as well. To give another example, in 1930s Romania, Jews and Hungarians were both overrepresented among Communist Party members. Obviously, both had reasons to dislike Romania (Hungarians were forced to join Romania just a couple decades earlier, and clearly had no attachment to it), Jews are simply such outsider minorities in every white gentile country, and usually with huge chips on their shoulders.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    Even this could be a question, but for example with entertainment it clearly doesn’t work like this. You watch movies for special effects, action scenes, the main characters, or similar, and you don’t care for the number of black judges and top scientists or ass-kicking babes etc. shown in them, but they do have a subconscious effect on you. It sounds very good in theory that I could watch a Star Wars movie without an ass-kicking babe and African hijabi rebel leaders, but it’s not like I actually have much of a choice except not watching any Star Wars movies, or rather, no space operas or sci-fi movies at all.

    Now there’s clearly no such competition with TV channels either, you only have a few of those with big budget quality entertainment. It’s also probably not too difficult to debase and corrupt culture without losing entertainment value. So pushing any such agenda should be rather easy, though of course any agenda could be pushed if you are smart enough not to get overly political. Goebbels had a lot of light entertainment be produced without much political agenda, but peppered with some little propaganda snippets (and the occasional propaganda blockbuster) he could easily change Germans in a more and more anti-Semitic direction.

    You don’t seem to understand the argument here. It’s not really a conspiracy theory in that it doesn’t postulate any kind of coordination between the Bonniers, Soros, Netanyahu, and Chuck Schumer. In fact, they (some of them) could even hate each other.

    The theory of your opponents is that people not rooted in the Swedish people, but living there among Swedes, will have a sense of alienation and not really thinking of the well-being of the Swedish people or community, and instead they will often have an inclination to deconstruct the community (the Swedish people itself) from which they are alienated. This is not only true of Jews, but it is always true of them anywhere except in Israel. As an example, in the original Swedish push for multiculturalism, Jewish voices were vastly disproportionate, but for example there was a Hungarian author (refugee from communism) and some other non-Jewish non-Swedes as well. To give another example, in 1930s Romania, Jews and Hungarians were both overrepresented among Communist Party members. Obviously, both had reasons to dislike Romania (Hungarians were forced to join Romania just a couple decades earlier, and clearly had no attachment to it), Jews are simply such outsider minorities in every white gentile country, and usually with huge chips on their shoulders.
     

    In the particular case cited, it's clear from a few minutes research on their lives that they had assimilated to the Sweden long ago - becoming bishops of the country's religion and appearing as stereotype (to me as foreigner) of that culture itself.

    As for the general point, about the possibility of brainwashing via media. Of course, this can be and is done - the example is quite clear that newspapers try to persuade you to their view in every edition they print.

    But again, contemplate the case of Haaretz. It had the most prestigious newspaper in the country, and they publish as much as they want, with a liberal slant. And as a result, ten times less people buy the newspaper, than the comparable conservative one - because it is located in a country where the majority of the population think like red-necks, rather than New Yorkers. People are not so stupid or lacking agency as these conspiracies claim, and where newspaper do not accord with readership slant on these issues, they will leave a gap in the market for those that do. This is how CNN continuously loses its viewership to Fox News, or we are posting on this blog, instead of on Rationalwiki page. When there is enough of an appetite for a certain slant on issues - then even poorly written media like Breitbart could become the most popular website.

    Your example in relation to Star Wars is a little different, as this supposedly a film for non-political content, and it is using subliminal messaging. But again, it's a case where if you add content that is not appreciated by the viewers, the film will be less popular than otherwise - and that means 'leaving money on the table'. It would be bad business, and this kind of bad business is possible when someone doesn't mind losing money (which is possible when a wealthy person buys a newspaper, or in the case of people like Soros who are doing it for 'philanthropy'), but will not be appreciated by shareholders, or those for whom it is the media is a source of income. In reality - there is likely to be an appetite for it. There are 40 million African Americans, there are 170 million women in America, there are tens of millions of sexual minorities. A lot of the diversity introduction in American media, is clearly good business. Showing that women are good at fighting, or that African Americans are the heroes - one might perceive that it is fantasy, but I would probably advocate their introduction, regardless of personal views for or against, if I worked in the entertainment industry.

    Your Goebbels point is interesting - but the conclusion I draw is the importance of a free media, where all kinds of films can be shown. The ones which succeed, will be those which appease the tastes of the public for good or worse.

    What actually pushes an educated and free public in different directions politically, has rather much deeper and more personal roots, than the latest Star Wars movie. What pushed the Russian-public away from simple-minded Westernization policy? Personal experience of the 1990s. What has pushed the Israeli public so far to the right, that they perceive liberal media as being traitors? Personal experience of weekly suicide bombings in the Second Intifada. And do you really consider that Star Wars could change their views.

    And what has pushed Scandinavian liberal utopian views? The fact they lived the 20th century as exactly such liberal utopias (how do people of happy and cosseted childhood tend to approach political questions?). Here I see a national case of affluenza.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. @inertial
    So you have a bespoke explanation for each war. Iraq is explained by the Jewish lobby. Serbia I suppose by the Albanian lobby (which actually did exist and was quite powerful at one point; but its power was derivative.)

    And if Iraq War was run for the benefit of Israel then you should be able to point the benefit. Iraq and Israel have no common border, so the only way Iraq could be a threat to Israel was if Saddam Hussein had WMD. Are you saying he did? You can't have it both ways.

    The usual rejoinder to this is the claim that Israel wants to create chaos in the Arab world. This argument reminds me of the ongoing "Russian interference" saga where numerous "experts" are saying that evil Putin did whatever it was that he did in order to "sow chaos and undermine Western democracy." This is what happens when you try to fit the square peg of your favorite theory into the round hole of reality.

    “The most important difference between North Korea and Iraq is that economically we just had no choice in Iraq. The country swims on a sea of oil.”
    -Dual Citizen Zionist Paul Wolfowitz, 31 May 2003.

    The Zionist plan for the Middle East – Yinon, Oded. Strategy for Israel https://archive.org/download/TheZionistPlanForTheMiddleEast/MicrosoftWord-TheZionistPlanForTheMiddleEas1.pdf

    The Life of an American Jew in Racist Marxist Israel
    Written in 1985 by Jack Bernstein

    http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/israel.htm

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. utu says:
    @reiner Tor
    The video was even worse. They just used the expression “Polish Holocaust” and mentioned the 3.5 million Jews killed in Poland (“hundreds of thousands of them were kids”) without ever clarifying that the vast majority of those (basically, all of them) were killed by others (almost all by Germans) and not by Poles.

    The phrase “Polish Holocaust” used in the video instead of being objected to should have been adopted in aikido like move by Poles and turned around: Thank you for reminding everybody that there was a Polish Holocaust: 6 millions Poles lost their lives in WWII. 3 millions of them besides being Polish were also Jewish so we lent them to Jews so they can also have their 6 millions lost in the WWII. Poland weeps equally for their lost citizen regardless of their religion.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon 2
    Actually there really was a Polish "Holocaust" already,
    and that was back in the 1650s. Over 50% of the Polish
    population was killed by the invading Swedes in what
    the Nobel-winning writer Henryk Sienkiewicz called the Deluge
    (although he didn't invent the term). If that's not genocide,
    then I don't know what is. So Poland experienced two genocides
    in its history. The reason is that Poland is situated at the great
    border between the Germanics and the Slavs, and therefore it
    fell to Poland to bear the brunt of defending Slavia against the Germanic
    expansionism. As I posted here before, much of the 1200-year history of
    east Central Europe can be understood as a great battle between 120
    million Germanics and 240 million Slavs (to use current population
    figures - Germanics include primarily the German states and Sweden).
    It's a battle the Germanics could not win because of the lopsided
    populations. Nevertheless, they tried, and Hitler's aggression can be
    seen as the last desperate attempt in this struggle. Of course, the Germanics
    were summarily defeated, and hopefully they learned their lesson, and the
    lesson is that the SLAVS ARE INVINCIBLE, both territorially and populationwise.
    The Jews were simply collateral damage. Naturally, I'm omitting a lot of
    details, but I think my model gives what the mathematicians call a zero-order
    approximation, i.e., a useful starting generalization.

    By the way, because at the time of the first Polish Holocaust (or genocide if you
    will) in the 1650s, 90% of the world's Ashkenazi Jews lived in the Polish-Lithuanian
    Commonwealth, it's quite probable that the Swedes also killed thousands
    of Jews, thus producing the first mini-Holocaust in Europe. Israel (as well as
    Poland) should go after Sweden and start demanding reparations. The historians
    could crunch the numbers to see if what I'm saying is true.
    , @Bill Jones
    Except the Poles actually died.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. @inertial
    So you have a bespoke explanation for each war. Iraq is explained by the Jewish lobby. Serbia I suppose by the Albanian lobby (which actually did exist and was quite powerful at one point; but its power was derivative.)

    And if Iraq War was run for the benefit of Israel then you should be able to point the benefit. Iraq and Israel have no common border, so the only way Iraq could be a threat to Israel was if Saddam Hussein had WMD. Are you saying he did? You can't have it both ways.

    The usual rejoinder to this is the claim that Israel wants to create chaos in the Arab world. This argument reminds me of the ongoing "Russian interference" saga where numerous "experts" are saying that evil Putin did whatever it was that he did in order to "sow chaos and undermine Western democracy." This is what happens when you try to fit the square peg of your favorite theory into the round hole of reality.

    Iraq and Israel have no common border, so the only way Iraq could be a threat to Israel was if Saddam Hussein had WMD.

    Saddam’s regime sent money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers during the 2nd intifada, you can still find statements by the Israeli ministry of foreign affairs online about this:

    http://mfa.gov.il/MFA/ForeignPolicy/Terrorism/Palestinian/Pages/Iraqi%20Support%20for%20and%20Encouragement%20of%20Palestinian.aspx

    http://mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFA-Archive/2003/Pages/Iraq-s%20Involvement%20in%20the%20Palestinian%20Terrorist%20Ac.aspx

    I can remember this was mentioned in the run-up to the Iraq war…there was a lot of hysterical commentary by Jews along the lines of “opposition to war against Iraq is antisemitic, once again the world does nothing while we’re being killed by a mad dictator”.
    And American neoconservatives who pushed for the war are disproportionately Jewish.
    It’s of course true that the Iraq war can’t be attributed solely to Jewish/Israeli machinationa, and iirc there were polls at the time that a majority of American Jews actually opposed the war (which is more than can be said for retarded redneck Bush supporters).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. utu says:
    @German_reader
    I just find it bizarre that people like Jay Ruderman can write something like this...and then would probably complain if someone raises the issue of possible dual loyalties.
    The whole "Poles killed hundreds of thousands of Jews" (which is just slander) is worse though. I don't have much sympathy for Polish right-wingers, but reactions like that by Jay Ruderman prove they're basically right on this issue.

    Poles killed hundreds of thousands of Jews

    I saw 200k number in Haaretz or JP in an article about historian Jan Grabovski. I do not know how he arrived at this number but I suspect it is just some demographic inference.

    In my opinion Poles w/o protest should accept this number and make the following offer not to Israel but to Germany:

    Dear Germany,

    how much since the WWII did you pay to Israel and Jews all over the world? Is it $100 billions more or less? It seems that you have over paid by about 3.3%. We are being told that it is us, the Poles, who are responsible for the 200,000 deaths out of the 6 millions. So we would like to compensate it for you, Please give us your bank account number on which we can transfer the money.

    Yours truly,

    Poland

    Now, being serious this is the best opportunity for Poland to return under the wings of Angela Merkel and forget about fantasies of being the Trojan horse of the US and Israel in Europe. The Uncle Sam is not going to protect Poland from Israel regardless of the accomplishments of the Trojan Horse on the behalf of the Empire.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    I've never heard about Jan Grabovski...I assume that refers to this book:
    https://www.amazon.com/Hunt-Jews-Betrayal-Murder-German-Occupied/dp/0253010748

    From one of the reviews cited there:

    ...[A] grim, compelling work of research...The author followed the fates of 337 Jews who tried to survive in the county, of which 51 managed to hide until liberation, while 286 died between 1942 and 1945. Grabowski breaks down each group with meticulous research. (Kirkus Reviews)
     
    I'm unconvinced a study about a few hundred Jews is proof Poles killed 200 000 Jews...

    being serious this is the best opportunity for Poland to return under the wings of Angela Merkel
     
    lol, what's it with you and Angela Merkel, do you feel some kind of sexual attraction to her or what? Hint: She isn't some great stateswoman, and never was. Unless you've got some sort of death wish, you'd do well to do everything to avoid being "under her wings".
    , @songbird
    I read that letter first as signed by Israel, and thought it was brilliant satire.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. @utu

    Poles killed hundreds of thousands of Jews
     
    I saw 200k number in Haaretz or JP in an article about historian Jan Grabovski. I do not know how he arrived at this number but I suspect it is just some demographic inference.

    In my opinion Poles w/o protest should accept this number and make the following offer not to Israel but to Germany:

    Dear Germany,

    how much since the WWII did you pay to Israel and Jews all over the world? Is it $100 billions more or less? It seems that you have over paid by about 3.3%. We are being told that it is us, the Poles, who are responsible for the 200,000 deaths out of the 6 millions. So we would like to compensate it for you, Please give us your bank account number on which we can transfer the money.

    Yours truly,

    Poland
     
    Now, being serious this is the best opportunity for Poland to return under the wings of Angela Merkel and forget about fantasies of being the Trojan horse of the US and Israel in Europe. The Uncle Sam is not going to protect Poland from Israel regardless of the accomplishments of the Trojan Horse on the behalf of the Empire.

    I’ve never heard about Jan Grabovski…I assume that refers to this book:

    https://www.amazon.com/Hunt-Jews-Betrayal-Murder-German-Occupied/dp/0253010748

    From one of the reviews cited there:

    …[A] grim, compelling work of research…The author followed the fates of 337 Jews who tried to survive in the county, of which 51 managed to hide until liberation, while 286 died between 1942 and 1945. Grabowski breaks down each group with meticulous research. (Kirkus Reviews)

    I’m unconvinced a study about a few hundred Jews is proof Poles killed 200 000 Jews…

    being serious this is the best opportunity for Poland to return under the wings of Angela Merkel

    lol, what’s it with you and Angela Merkel, do you feel some kind of sexual attraction to her or what? Hint: She isn’t some great stateswoman, and never was. Unless you’ve got some sort of death wish, you’d do well to do everything to avoid being “under her wings”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Moreover, the study seems to heavily rely on postwar Stalinist trials against supposed collaborators, which it takes at face value. Also on testimonies by Germans in postwar (1960s) German trials, which it also takes at face value, though obviously the Germans testifying there had an interest in deflecting blame to the Poles.
    , @utu

    what’s it with you and Angela Merkel
     

    April 2015 phone call:
    Bibi Netanyahu: Hi Victor, I have a favor to ask you. You must start building a fence on the border with Serbia.
    Victor Orban: Why do I need a fence? There are no Palestinians or Arab terrorists in Serbia.
    Bibi Netanyahu: Soon there will be. We are taking care of it. Sorry that it will give you bad publicity but we must to push Angela Merkel's hand on Syria. We want to see mayhem on this border. That's where you come in. Europe is dragging its feet. Three years of our efforts and there is still no no-fly zone over Syria. The gas attack was not enough, ISIS was not enough, so perhaps when we scare Europeans with invasion finally they will do something.
    Victor Orban: But what do I get in return?
    Bibi Netanyahu: You can talk about Soros all day long. You can even call him a dirty Jew. You have my permission. Nobody will call you an anti-semite. Even in Brooklyn.
    Victor Orban: How soon you want this wall?
    Bibi Netanyahu: Soon. Make a big announcement in May or in June the latest.

    May 2015 phone call:
    Bibi Netanyahu: Hi Donald, you are running as we agreed, right?
    Donald Trump: But what is my program? What will I talk during my announcement speech? You told me it suppose to be in June, next months.
    Bibi Netanyahu: Don't worry. We have people working on it. It is almost ready. You will talk about ISIS and building a fence on the border. Or even better, building a wall. To protect America form the invasion. Believe me it will work. You talk about ISIS and the wall. Soon they will see Dantean scenes on Hungarian border.
    Donald Trump: But we don't have ISIS on the border. And what it has to do with Hungary?
    Bibi Netanyahu: Americans don't know geography. Don't worry. You just talk about rapists and drug traffickers invading from Mexico and they will see pictures from Hungary. They do not know the difference. Just do not forget talking a lot about ISIS.

    August 2015 phone call:
    Vladimir Putin: Angela, I am still not ready I need several more weeks to prepare the mission.
    Angela Merkel: Vlad, they are really pressuring me. Those picture from Hungary are killing me.
    Vladimir Putin: So make those pictures go away.
    Angela Merkel: How?
    Vladimir Putin: You know I am a judoka. You need to make the judo move. Instead of resisting give in. Don't push but pull.
    Angela Merkel: Are you crazy, you want me to open borders?
    Vladimir Putin: That's the only option, Angela. We need to defuse the trap the fuckers Bibi's and Victor's set up for you.

     

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. songbird says:
    @reiner Tor
    The video was even worse. They just used the expression “Polish Holocaust” and mentioned the 3.5 million Jews killed in Poland (“hundreds of thousands of them were kids”) without ever clarifying that the vast majority of those (basically, all of them) were killed by others (almost all by Germans) and not by Poles.

    Back in January, PBS (American public television) aired a documentary called the “The Saint and the Sultan” about the Crusades. I was shocked at it because it was very thinly veiled, Anti-Christian and anti-European propaganda.

    It was low-brow stuff. Cheap video reenactments. Very little informational content. Few words in the script. It was pure vehicle. Positive about Jews and Muslims. Almost all negative about Euros. It would show a Crusader swinging a sword, and the narrator would say “Lizard hindbrain”. It was nakedly built around that one phrase, which was repeated.

    It was obvious it was designed for one purpose only: to try to disarm any resistance to the ethnic transformation of Europe. Surprisingly (to me, at least) it was not funded by a Jew, even though it was positive about Jews, but by a wealthy Muslim foundation. They know who their allies are though, like in Spain.

    I put it down mostly as agenda though, impersonal. The Polish Holocaust video though is just dripping with naked malice. I think it is rather awe-inspiring that someone could feel that way toward Poland. And be hot-headed long enough to produce the video. It would not surprise me in the least, if they next made a video about Ireland.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    The Polish Holocaust video though is just dripping with naked malice.
     
    It seems so but they made a mistake her perhaps there was a sabotage. Actually it was god sent. Poles should use this opportunity and turn it around. See my comment #83.

    Polish Holocaust could be turn into an effective brand just like Jewish Holocaust was and compete with it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. songbird says:
    @utu

    Poles killed hundreds of thousands of Jews
     
    I saw 200k number in Haaretz or JP in an article about historian Jan Grabovski. I do not know how he arrived at this number but I suspect it is just some demographic inference.

    In my opinion Poles w/o protest should accept this number and make the following offer not to Israel but to Germany:

    Dear Germany,

    how much since the WWII did you pay to Israel and Jews all over the world? Is it $100 billions more or less? It seems that you have over paid by about 3.3%. We are being told that it is us, the Poles, who are responsible for the 200,000 deaths out of the 6 millions. So we would like to compensate it for you, Please give us your bank account number on which we can transfer the money.

    Yours truly,

    Poland
     
    Now, being serious this is the best opportunity for Poland to return under the wings of Angela Merkel and forget about fantasies of being the Trojan horse of the US and Israel in Europe. The Uncle Sam is not going to protect Poland from Israel regardless of the accomplishments of the Trojan Horse on the behalf of the Empire.

    I read that letter first as signed by Israel, and thought it was brilliant satire.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. 88 comments. Lol.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  90. iffen says:
    @Randal
    Lot's of good info and stuff for discussion here.

    But in the end accepting the definition of "anti-whateverism" put forward by the identity lobby for "whatevers" is always a mug's game. The only response to the pernicious crap put around by the likes of the ADL is to say that either their broad definition of antisemitism is correct, in which case anti-Semitism self-evidently is just a legitimate and widely held political position of no particular demerit, or anti-Semitism is as noxious as they claim in which case it doesn't mean what they claim it means - it means actually hating jews just for being jews (and almost nobody is actually an anti-Semite).

    They want to have it both ways, for obvious reasons, and they should never be allowed to. The same, mutatis mutandis, applies to all the politically correct smear terms used in this mendacious way by self-serving minority identity lobbies - racist, homophobe, islamophobe etc.


    I suppose I deserve my “accolades” from the SPLC and RationalWiki after all.
     
    Might as well embrace it, since guilt by association is a foundational principle of identity lobbies such as the jewish one. You are an anti-whateverist if you merely allow real or supposed anti-whateverists to speak freely on your blog or in your publication anyway.

    hating jews just for being jews

    People write this nonsensical line all the time and do you know why?

    Violà!

    (and almost nobody is actually an anti-Semite).

    See no anti-Semites, hear no anti-Semites, speak of no anti-Semites.

    There are no anti-Semites!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    People write this nonsensical line all the time and do you know why?
     
    Yes, it's because that's the definition used implicitly when people like you need to hold up examples of "antisemites" to make people see it as something especially unpleasant and hate-filled. Skinhead thugs, obsessive NSDAP murderers, people who clearly actually hate jewish people just for being jewish.

    But you knew that, of course.


    See no anti-Semites, hear no anti-Semites, speak of no anti-Semites.

    There are no anti-Semites!
     

    "Almost nobody" is not the same as nobody.

    But you knew that, of course.

    The purpose of the moving definition you and your kind use is clear and has been explained many times - a form of equivocation akin to the "motte and bailey fallacy", where you use one definition to establish evilness and then shift to a broader one to smear political opponents with that evilness. Same with the way antiracists use "racist", homosexualist activists use "homophobe", pro-immigration activists use "islamophobe".

    The same technique is used by many different groups, because it works often enough to be extremely effective.

    Minority identity lobby liar:

    "See that thug with the swastika tattoos beating up an old lady because she's jewish? That's an anti-Semite, that is. Aren't anti-Semites nasty, hate-filled and despicable?"

    Naif:

    "Gosh, yes! That's awful. You're right. I agree now with your suggestions about laws against such people and such behaviour."

    Minority identity lobby liar:

    OK, I've sorted out a definition of "anti-Semite" and made a list. We're ready to go, and to expel these noxious people from decent society. Your financial contribution backed up by the charitable tax refund and government subsidy you voted for was very useful.

    Naif:

    "Ok. Er, that's good I suppose. Won't be seeing any more of those skinheads beating up old ladies around here." [Peeks at list] "Wow, I never realised there were so many skinhead thugs around! Is that professor really an antisemite? And that lady who sings songs?"

    Minority identity lobby liar:

    "Of course. It's all scientifically worked out by the entirely unbiased and disinterested experts at an institute devoted to the purpose."

    , @Anon

    Violà!
     
    Request granted!

    http://www.violinmusicacademy.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/The-Viola.png

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. @German_reader
    I've never heard about Jan Grabovski...I assume that refers to this book:
    https://www.amazon.com/Hunt-Jews-Betrayal-Murder-German-Occupied/dp/0253010748

    From one of the reviews cited there:

    ...[A] grim, compelling work of research...The author followed the fates of 337 Jews who tried to survive in the county, of which 51 managed to hide until liberation, while 286 died between 1942 and 1945. Grabowski breaks down each group with meticulous research. (Kirkus Reviews)
     
    I'm unconvinced a study about a few hundred Jews is proof Poles killed 200 000 Jews...

    being serious this is the best opportunity for Poland to return under the wings of Angela Merkel
     
    lol, what's it with you and Angela Merkel, do you feel some kind of sexual attraction to her or what? Hint: She isn't some great stateswoman, and never was. Unless you've got some sort of death wish, you'd do well to do everything to avoid being "under her wings".

    Moreover, the study seems to heavily rely on postwar Stalinist trials against supposed collaborators, which it takes at face value. Also on testimonies by Germans in postwar (1960s) German trials, which it also takes at face value, though obviously the Germans testifying there had an interest in deflecting blame to the Poles.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. iffen says:
    @German_reader

    (opposite example: Germans, who have tended to be remarkably loyal to their host countries, even when they were at war with Germany).
     
    True, obviously a grave problem from a German perspective. One of the things I find most irritating about the US is that there isn't a German lobby there...there are all those Americans of German descent, with German names (one of the largest groups of white Americans, probably second only to those of British isles descent), and yet they're doing almost nothing for Germany or German interests.

    What knowing goyim notice and dislike is that too many of their (((fellow white people))) combine progressive, pro-minority agendas with aggressive support of Israel across virtually all countries where they have a substantial demographic presence.

     

    Exactly...this obvious hypocrisy and mendacity which one isn't supposed to notice is increasingly hard to tolerate, and is the main reason why I have no tolerance for right-wingers in Europe who make a show of being pro-Israel.

    – have played outsized role in promoting Marxism, feminism, anti-racism, etc., resent immigration as a “core Jewish value”, and have been outspoken in trying to discredit Trump, the closest the US has ever had or might ever have to a Netanyahu.
     
    Should be "represent" here.

    Anyway, good post, thanks.

    and yet they’re doing almost nothing for Germany or German interests.

    Not true. We got rid of the commies for you.

    Read More
    • Replies: @whahae
    Thanks for nothing. GDR was more reddpilled than West Germany.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. utu says:
    @German_reader
    I've never heard about Jan Grabovski...I assume that refers to this book:
    https://www.amazon.com/Hunt-Jews-Betrayal-Murder-German-Occupied/dp/0253010748

    From one of the reviews cited there:

    ...[A] grim, compelling work of research...The author followed the fates of 337 Jews who tried to survive in the county, of which 51 managed to hide until liberation, while 286 died between 1942 and 1945. Grabowski breaks down each group with meticulous research. (Kirkus Reviews)
     
    I'm unconvinced a study about a few hundred Jews is proof Poles killed 200 000 Jews...

    being serious this is the best opportunity for Poland to return under the wings of Angela Merkel
     
    lol, what's it with you and Angela Merkel, do you feel some kind of sexual attraction to her or what? Hint: She isn't some great stateswoman, and never was. Unless you've got some sort of death wish, you'd do well to do everything to avoid being "under her wings".

    what’s it with you and Angela Merkel

    April 2015 phone call:
    Bibi Netanyahu: Hi Victor, I have a favor to ask you. You must start building a fence on the border with Serbia.
    Victor Orban: Why do I need a fence? There are no Palestinians or Arab terrorists in Serbia.
    Bibi Netanyahu: Soon there will be. We are taking care of it. Sorry that it will give you bad publicity but we must to push Angela Merkel’s hand on Syria. We want to see mayhem on this border. That’s where you come in. Europe is dragging its feet. Three years of our efforts and there is still no no-fly zone over Syria. The gas attack was not enough, ISIS was not enough, so perhaps when we scare Europeans with invasion finally they will do something.
    Victor Orban: But what do I get in return?
    Bibi Netanyahu: You can talk about Soros all day long. You can even call him a dirty Jew. You have my permission. Nobody will call you an anti-semite. Even in Brooklyn.
    Victor Orban: How soon you want this wall?
    Bibi Netanyahu: Soon. Make a big announcement in May or in June the latest.

    May 2015 phone call:
    Bibi Netanyahu: Hi Donald, you are running as we agreed, right?
    Donald Trump: But what is my program? What will I talk during my announcement speech? You told me it suppose to be in June, next months.
    Bibi Netanyahu: Don’t worry. We have people working on it. It is almost ready. You will talk about ISIS and building a fence on the border. Or even better, building a wall. To protect America form the invasion. Believe me it will work. You talk about ISIS and the wall. Soon they will see Dantean scenes on Hungarian border.
    Donald Trump: But we don’t have ISIS on the border. And what it has to do with Hungary?
    Bibi Netanyahu: Americans don’t know geography. Don’t worry. You just talk about rapists and drug traffickers invading from Mexico and they will see pictures from Hungary. They do not know the difference. Just do not forget talking a lot about ISIS.

    August 2015 phone call:
    Vladimir Putin: Angela, I am still not ready I need several more weeks to prepare the mission.
    Angela Merkel: Vlad, they are really pressuring me. Those picture from Hungary are killing me.
    Vladimir Putin: So make those pictures go away.
    Angela Merkel: How?
    Vladimir Putin: You know I am a judoka. You need to make the judo move. Instead of resisting give in. Don’t push but pull.
    Angela Merkel: Are you crazy, you want me to open borders?
    Vladimir Putin: That’s the only option, Angela. We need to defuse the trap the fuckers Bibi’s and Victor’s set up for you.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    Merkel isn't on speaking terms with Putin anymore since that incident with Putin's dog Konni.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. Dmitry says:
    @reiner Tor

    Within the liberal milieu, liberal newspaper will sell out, and likewise within a conservative one, conservative newspaper will be far more popular (as you can see in Israel).
     
    Even this could be a question, but for example with entertainment it clearly doesn’t work like this. You watch movies for special effects, action scenes, the main characters, or similar, and you don’t care for the number of black judges and top scientists or ass-kicking babes etc. shown in them, but they do have a subconscious effect on you. It sounds very good in theory that I could watch a Star Wars movie without an ass-kicking babe and African hijabi rebel leaders, but it’s not like I actually have much of a choice except not watching any Star Wars movies, or rather, no space operas or sci-fi movies at all.

    Now there’s clearly no such competition with TV channels either, you only have a few of those with big budget quality entertainment. It’s also probably not too difficult to debase and corrupt culture without losing entertainment value. So pushing any such agenda should be rather easy, though of course any agenda could be pushed if you are smart enough not to get overly political. Goebbels had a lot of light entertainment be produced without much political agenda, but peppered with some little propaganda snippets (and the occasional propaganda blockbuster) he could easily change Germans in a more and more anti-Semitic direction.

    the conspiracy theorist found capitalist families who 100 years had Jewish origin, like the Bonnier Group – then Jews are suddenly responsible for contemporary Swedish liberalism
     
    You don’t seem to understand the argument here. It’s not really a conspiracy theory in that it doesn’t postulate any kind of coordination between the Bonniers, Soros, Netanyahu, and Chuck Schumer. In fact, they (some of them) could even hate each other.

    The theory of your opponents is that people not rooted in the Swedish people, but living there among Swedes, will have a sense of alienation and not really thinking of the well-being of the Swedish people or community, and instead they will often have an inclination to deconstruct the community (the Swedish people itself) from which they are alienated. This is not only true of Jews, but it is always true of them anywhere except in Israel. As an example, in the original Swedish push for multiculturalism, Jewish voices were vastly disproportionate, but for example there was a Hungarian author (refugee from communism) and some other non-Jewish non-Swedes as well. To give another example, in 1930s Romania, Jews and Hungarians were both overrepresented among Communist Party members. Obviously, both had reasons to dislike Romania (Hungarians were forced to join Romania just a couple decades earlier, and clearly had no attachment to it), Jews are simply such outsider minorities in every white gentile country, and usually with huge chips on their shoulders.

    Even this could be a question, but for example with entertainment it clearly doesn’t work like this. You watch movies for special effects, action scenes, the main characters, or similar, and you don’t care for the number of black judges and top scientists or ass-kicking babes etc. shown in them, but they do have a subconscious effect on you. It sounds very good in theory that I could watch a Star Wars movie without an ass-kicking babe and African hijabi rebel leaders, but it’s not like I actually have much of a choice except not watching any Star Wars movies, or rather, no space operas or sci-fi movies at all.

    Now there’s clearly no such competition with TV channels either, you only have a few of those with big budget quality entertainment. It’s also probably not too difficult to debase and corrupt culture without losing entertainment value. So pushing any such agenda should be rather easy, though of course any agenda could be pushed if you are smart enough not to get overly political. Goebbels had a lot of light entertainment be produced without much political agenda, but peppered with some little propaganda snippets (and the occasional propaganda blockbuster) he could easily change Germans in a more and more anti-Semitic direction.

    You don’t seem to understand the argument here. It’s not really a conspiracy theory in that it doesn’t postulate any kind of coordination between the Bonniers, Soros, Netanyahu, and Chuck Schumer. In fact, they (some of them) could even hate each other.

    The theory of your opponents is that people not rooted in the Swedish people, but living there among Swedes, will have a sense of alienation and not really thinking of the well-being of the Swedish people or community, and instead they will often have an inclination to deconstruct the community (the Swedish people itself) from which they are alienated. This is not only true of Jews, but it is always true of them anywhere except in Israel. As an example, in the original Swedish push for multiculturalism, Jewish voices were vastly disproportionate, but for example there was a Hungarian author (refugee from communism) and some other non-Jewish non-Swedes as well. To give another example, in 1930s Romania, Jews and Hungarians were both overrepresented among Communist Party members. Obviously, both had reasons to dislike Romania (Hungarians were forced to join Romania just a couple decades earlier, and clearly had no attachment to it), Jews are simply such outsider minorities in every white gentile country, and usually with huge chips on their shoulders.

    In the particular case cited, it’s clear from a few minutes research on their lives that they had assimilated to the Sweden long ago – becoming bishops of the country’s religion and appearing as stereotype (to me as foreigner) of that culture itself.

    As for the general point, about the possibility of brainwashing via media. Of course, this can be and is done – the example is quite clear that newspapers try to persuade you to their view in every edition they print.

    But again, contemplate the case of Haaretz. It had the most prestigious newspaper in the country, and they publish as much as they want, with a liberal slant. And as a result, ten times less people buy the newspaper, than the comparable conservative one – because it is located in a country where the majority of the population think like red-necks, rather than New Yorkers. People are not so stupid or lacking agency as these conspiracies claim, and where newspaper do not accord with readership slant on these issues, they will leave a gap in the market for those that do. This is how CNN continuously loses its viewership to Fox News, or we are posting on this blog, instead of on Rationalwiki page. When there is enough of an appetite for a certain slant on issues – then even poorly written media like Breitbart could become the most popular website.

    Your example in relation to Star Wars is a little different, as this supposedly a film for non-political content, and it is using subliminal messaging. But again, it’s a case where if you add content that is not appreciated by the viewers, the film will be less popular than otherwise – and that means ‘leaving money on the table’. It would be bad business, and this kind of bad business is possible when someone doesn’t mind losing money (which is possible when a wealthy person buys a newspaper, or in the case of people like Soros who are doing it for ‘philanthropy’), but will not be appreciated by shareholders, or those for whom it is the media is a source of income. In reality – there is likely to be an appetite for it. There are 40 million African Americans, there are 170 million women in America, there are tens of millions of sexual minorities. A lot of the diversity introduction in American media, is clearly good business. Showing that women are good at fighting, or that African Americans are the heroes – one might perceive that it is fantasy, but I would probably advocate their introduction, regardless of personal views for or against, if I worked in the entertainment industry.

    Your Goebbels point is interesting – but the conclusion I draw is the importance of a free media, where all kinds of films can be shown. The ones which succeed, will be those which appease the tastes of the public for good or worse.

    What actually pushes an educated and free public in different directions politically, has rather much deeper and more personal roots, than the latest Star Wars movie. What pushed the Russian-public away from simple-minded Westernization policy? Personal experience of the 1990s. What has pushed the Israeli public so far to the right, that they perceive liberal media as being traitors? Personal experience of weekly suicide bombings in the Second Intifada. And do you really consider that Star Wars could change their views.

    And what has pushed Scandinavian liberal utopian views? The fact they lived the 20th century as exactly such liberal utopias (how do people of happy and cosseted childhood tend to approach political questions?). Here I see a national case of affluenza.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    And what has pushed Scandinavian liberal utopian views? The fact they lived the 20th century as exactly such liberal utopias (how do people of happy and cosseted childhood tend to approach political questions?). Here I see a national case of affluenza.

     

    By the way, applied to Israel, it reminded me of the famous case of Sigrid Rausing's utopian activity in Israel.

    Sigrid Rausing is a Swedish convert to Judaism, from a family that has a history of affluenza. This has led her to apply the Scandinavian utopian model to activity in Israel, where she funds the NGOs like Adalah that organize the boycott of Israel (BDS campaign), as well as NGOs that conduct activism against deportation of illegal migrants.

    https://www.ngo-monitor.org/funder/sigrid_rausing_trust/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigrid_Rausing

    , @reiner Tor
    You hold a highly unrealistic view of competition in the entertainment industry. Blockbuster movies are blockbusters because they have a very high budget and so a very high barrier of entry. Mel Gibson made a killing with The Passion, but his actors’ and other contributors’ careers suffered and so he couldn’t continue making conservative movies. In an interconnected industry you cannot do something which everyone else opposes because they can make your underlings suffer and so next time no one will want to work with you. And a high barrier of entry means there are not many dissenters like Mel Gibson in a position to make such movies spreading dissenting messages.

    Your view of shareholders is totally unrealistic, like you have never heard of principal-agent problems or never understood how they can occur in big corporations (like when setting salaries of unsuccessful CEOs). The shareholders in Hollywood are also often of the same political tilt. They often don’t notice how much money they are leaving on the table, because they make a lot of money anyway. And they do leave money on the table, like the girl hero merchandise is not selling well in the case of Star Wars. This contrary to your naive assumption that it’s all about attracting girls to Star Wars movies. You know, girls don’t care that much about this type of movies regardless of girl heroes, it’s quite autistic to assume otherwise.

    The competition is not large with TV channels either. With Fox, you have a mostly neocon channel. The rest are liberal, but in foreign policy it’s often indistinguishable from a neocon point of view. The choice is somewhat similar to political parties, you have the multiculturalist pro big business pro tax cuts pro wars party/channel vs. the more eagerly multiculturalist but less eagerly interventionist party/channel supporting raising taxes.

    In websites, I guess you’re aware that this website is just a hobby project for Ron, and will only work as long as it’s important to him. Anyway, websites are the least important things with the most competition, but even there sites like this cannot compete in terms of news service with mainstream websites. With access to actual news agencies etc. Sites like Breitbart also needed wealthy supporters, I guess you guessed correctly, they were Zionist Jews.

    Regarding the Bonniers, I don’t think your impression of their assimilation should be decisive. What we are talking about is some sense of alienation; and of course genetics. Neither of which disappear with superficial worldly success. You also seem to have very strange stereotypes of Swedes if you think a publisher/media/entertainment entrepreneur family is all that stereotypically Swedish. To me it matches the stereotypes of another ethnic group, I just forgot for the moment which one.
    , @Jaakko Raipala

    In the particular case cited, it’s clear from a few minutes research on their lives that they had assimilated to the Sweden long ago – becoming bishops of the country’s religion and appearing as stereotype (to me as foreigner) of that culture itself.
     
    They were not genuine converts. The church effectively used to be the government and seeking the position of bishop was like seeking the position of governor - it's no evidence that the man was actually Christian. The infiltration of Lutheran clergy by Jews who continued to be Jews in private was one reason behind that outbreak of anti-Semitism that led to, well, you know what.

    Jews weren't the only people faking it. My family tree is full of men who sought positions in the church until about a century ago when government was secularized and clergy stopped being the main way for a social climber to gain power - and my family tree instantly stopped being interested in careers in the church. But my family was just exaggerating interest in Christianity, not maintaining a secret identity.

    There is a subset of Jews who pursue a strategy of feigning assimilation while continuing to maintain their ethnic network with its separate interests. A person who has consciously crafted an outward appearance of assimilation to some national culture for the sake of business, power or other practical purpose while maintaining a different home identity is never going to have the same level of affinity for the national culture or its people. Yet at first glance the locals are likely to assume that the man who appears to be one of them shares their affinities. Now that it's taboo to ask whether it's actually the case in the case of a Jew we once again have a cultural and political problem.

    It's not that Jews are the only people capable of this strategy. In fact, Swedes have acted the same as a diaspora in Finland. At the time of the revolution we used to have a whole class of "Finnish nationalists" who were actually Swedes who changed their names to Finnish, started speaking Finnish in public (but Swedish in private), feigned interest in Finnic pagan religion and so on to become leaders of "Finnish nationalism".

    A common trend among these "Finnish nationalists" who weren't actually Finns was pushing for conflict with Russia with little regard for the consequences. Swedes could always imagine just fleeing to Sweden in case of trouble and their desire to crusade against Russia was not tempered by fear of targeted retaliation since Russians wouldn't be able to tell the difference between an actual Finn and a Swede pretending to be a Finn. Their crafted identity with Finnish names and other outwardly Finnish customs didn't mean that they had the same interests.

    But that's just a local phenomenon and Swedes don't act that way anywhere else. Jews seem to produce a subset pursuing a strategy of feigned assimilation everywhere they go and they take it to extremes like faking conversion into other religions just to gain power and influence.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. utu says:
    @songbird
    Back in January, PBS (American public television) aired a documentary called the "The Saint and the Sultan" about the Crusades. I was shocked at it because it was very thinly veiled, Anti-Christian and anti-European propaganda.

    It was low-brow stuff. Cheap video reenactments. Very little informational content. Few words in the script. It was pure vehicle. Positive about Jews and Muslims. Almost all negative about Euros. It would show a Crusader swinging a sword, and the narrator would say "Lizard hindbrain". It was nakedly built around that one phrase, which was repeated.

    It was obvious it was designed for one purpose only: to try to disarm any resistance to the ethnic transformation of Europe. Surprisingly (to me, at least) it was not funded by a Jew, even though it was positive about Jews, but by a wealthy Muslim foundation. They know who their allies are though, like in Spain.

    I put it down mostly as agenda though, impersonal. The Polish Holocaust video though is just dripping with naked malice. I think it is rather awe-inspiring that someone could feel that way toward Poland. And be hot-headed long enough to produce the video. It would not surprise me in the least, if they next made a video about Ireland.

    The Polish Holocaust video though is just dripping with naked malice.

    It seems so but they made a mistake her perhaps there was a sabotage. Actually it was god sent. Poles should use this opportunity and turn it around. See my comment #83.

    Polish Holocaust could be turn into an effective brand just like Jewish Holocaust was and compete with it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. @utu

    what’s it with you and Angela Merkel
     

    April 2015 phone call:
    Bibi Netanyahu: Hi Victor, I have a favor to ask you. You must start building a fence on the border with Serbia.
    Victor Orban: Why do I need a fence? There are no Palestinians or Arab terrorists in Serbia.
    Bibi Netanyahu: Soon there will be. We are taking care of it. Sorry that it will give you bad publicity but we must to push Angela Merkel's hand on Syria. We want to see mayhem on this border. That's where you come in. Europe is dragging its feet. Three years of our efforts and there is still no no-fly zone over Syria. The gas attack was not enough, ISIS was not enough, so perhaps when we scare Europeans with invasion finally they will do something.
    Victor Orban: But what do I get in return?
    Bibi Netanyahu: You can talk about Soros all day long. You can even call him a dirty Jew. You have my permission. Nobody will call you an anti-semite. Even in Brooklyn.
    Victor Orban: How soon you want this wall?
    Bibi Netanyahu: Soon. Make a big announcement in May or in June the latest.

    May 2015 phone call:
    Bibi Netanyahu: Hi Donald, you are running as we agreed, right?
    Donald Trump: But what is my program? What will I talk during my announcement speech? You told me it suppose to be in June, next months.
    Bibi Netanyahu: Don't worry. We have people working on it. It is almost ready. You will talk about ISIS and building a fence on the border. Or even better, building a wall. To protect America form the invasion. Believe me it will work. You talk about ISIS and the wall. Soon they will see Dantean scenes on Hungarian border.
    Donald Trump: But we don't have ISIS on the border. And what it has to do with Hungary?
    Bibi Netanyahu: Americans don't know geography. Don't worry. You just talk about rapists and drug traffickers invading from Mexico and they will see pictures from Hungary. They do not know the difference. Just do not forget talking a lot about ISIS.

    August 2015 phone call:
    Vladimir Putin: Angela, I am still not ready I need several more weeks to prepare the mission.
    Angela Merkel: Vlad, they are really pressuring me. Those picture from Hungary are killing me.
    Vladimir Putin: So make those pictures go away.
    Angela Merkel: How?
    Vladimir Putin: You know I am a judoka. You need to make the judo move. Instead of resisting give in. Don't push but pull.
    Angela Merkel: Are you crazy, you want me to open borders?
    Vladimir Putin: That's the only option, Angela. We need to defuse the trap the fuckers Bibi's and Victor's set up for you.

     

    Merkel isn’t on speaking terms with Putin anymore since that incident with Putin’s dog Konni.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    The dog incident (2007) is just a story for the masses to entertain them. Anyway, they talk all the time. In 2014 Putin made 35 calls to Merkel. That's about once every two weeks.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. @inertial

    Still, Jewish loyalty to the new, highly philo-Semitic early USSR soon picked up
     
    A small number of Jews, perhaps 10-20 thousand, benefited from the revolution. But the general Jewish population was hit hard by the new regime. Harder on average than the majority.

    According to wiki, between 1.63% and 4.27% of the general population had been the lishentsi, the "former people" who were stripped of their rights and much discriminated against (and in the later purges often targeted for elimination.)

    Among Jews, more than a third had been lishentsi! It was so bad that even the Soviet government recognized that they had a problem. So they came up with typical Bolshevik "solutions," such as sending these extraneous Jews to "voluntary" collective farms (that was several years before the general collectivization.)

    So yes, the Jews, aside from the few privileged ones, have little reason to love the Soviet power.

    people like to bring up the ‘jew on the street’. Or even better, jews who were victims of other Jews.

    Since we don’t live in a caste society, there will be average Jews hanging around. But they function as the social trampoline that bounces the ambitious/cognitive elite into the controlling citadels in society. By way of analogy, consider the claim only 10% of a scorpion is dedicated to his sting. What’s wrong, bigot? He’s 90% harmless. Stop stereotyping. Stop committing the fallacy of reification, and making his stinger essential to his definition.

    An average Jew is an altitude triggered Poz Bomb. When he’s sufficiently high up the hierarchy of power within a society, he’ll start his tricks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. Dmitry says:
    @Dmitry

    Even this could be a question, but for example with entertainment it clearly doesn’t work like this. You watch movies for special effects, action scenes, the main characters, or similar, and you don’t care for the number of black judges and top scientists or ass-kicking babes etc. shown in them, but they do have a subconscious effect on you. It sounds very good in theory that I could watch a Star Wars movie without an ass-kicking babe and African hijabi rebel leaders, but it’s not like I actually have much of a choice except not watching any Star Wars movies, or rather, no space operas or sci-fi movies at all.

    Now there’s clearly no such competition with TV channels either, you only have a few of those with big budget quality entertainment. It’s also probably not too difficult to debase and corrupt culture without losing entertainment value. So pushing any such agenda should be rather easy, though of course any agenda could be pushed if you are smart enough not to get overly political. Goebbels had a lot of light entertainment be produced without much political agenda, but peppered with some little propaganda snippets (and the occasional propaganda blockbuster) he could easily change Germans in a more and more anti-Semitic direction.

    You don’t seem to understand the argument here. It’s not really a conspiracy theory in that it doesn’t postulate any kind of coordination between the Bonniers, Soros, Netanyahu, and Chuck Schumer. In fact, they (some of them) could even hate each other.

    The theory of your opponents is that people not rooted in the Swedish people, but living there among Swedes, will have a sense of alienation and not really thinking of the well-being of the Swedish people or community, and instead they will often have an inclination to deconstruct the community (the Swedish people itself) from which they are alienated. This is not only true of Jews, but it is always true of them anywhere except in Israel. As an example, in the original Swedish push for multiculturalism, Jewish voices were vastly disproportionate, but for example there was a Hungarian author (refugee from communism) and some other non-Jewish non-Swedes as well. To give another example, in 1930s Romania, Jews and Hungarians were both overrepresented among Communist Party members. Obviously, both had reasons to dislike Romania (Hungarians were forced to join Romania just a couple decades earlier, and clearly had no attachment to it), Jews are simply such outsider minorities in every white gentile country, and usually with huge chips on their shoulders.
     

    In the particular case cited, it's clear from a few minutes research on their lives that they had assimilated to the Sweden long ago - becoming bishops of the country's religion and appearing as stereotype (to me as foreigner) of that culture itself.

    As for the general point, about the possibility of brainwashing via media. Of course, this can be and is done - the example is quite clear that newspapers try to persuade you to their view in every edition they print.

    But again, contemplate the case of Haaretz. It had the most prestigious newspaper in the country, and they publish as much as they want, with a liberal slant. And as a result, ten times less people buy the newspaper, than the comparable conservative one - because it is located in a country where the majority of the population think like red-necks, rather than New Yorkers. People are not so stupid or lacking agency as these conspiracies claim, and where newspaper do not accord with readership slant on these issues, they will leave a gap in the market for those that do. This is how CNN continuously loses its viewership to Fox News, or we are posting on this blog, instead of on Rationalwiki page. When there is enough of an appetite for a certain slant on issues - then even poorly written media like Breitbart could become the most popular website.

    Your example in relation to Star Wars is a little different, as this supposedly a film for non-political content, and it is using subliminal messaging. But again, it's a case where if you add content that is not appreciated by the viewers, the film will be less popular than otherwise - and that means 'leaving money on the table'. It would be bad business, and this kind of bad business is possible when someone doesn't mind losing money (which is possible when a wealthy person buys a newspaper, or in the case of people like Soros who are doing it for 'philanthropy'), but will not be appreciated by shareholders, or those for whom it is the media is a source of income. In reality - there is likely to be an appetite for it. There are 40 million African Americans, there are 170 million women in America, there are tens of millions of sexual minorities. A lot of the diversity introduction in American media, is clearly good business. Showing that women are good at fighting, or that African Americans are the heroes - one might perceive that it is fantasy, but I would probably advocate their introduction, regardless of personal views for or against, if I worked in the entertainment industry.

    Your Goebbels point is interesting - but the conclusion I draw is the importance of a free media, where all kinds of films can be shown. The ones which succeed, will be those which appease the tastes of the public for good or worse.

    What actually pushes an educated and free public in different directions politically, has rather much deeper and more personal roots, than the latest Star Wars movie. What pushed the Russian-public away from simple-minded Westernization policy? Personal experience of the 1990s. What has pushed the Israeli public so far to the right, that they perceive liberal media as being traitors? Personal experience of weekly suicide bombings in the Second Intifada. And do you really consider that Star Wars could change their views.

    And what has pushed Scandinavian liberal utopian views? The fact they lived the 20th century as exactly such liberal utopias (how do people of happy and cosseted childhood tend to approach political questions?). Here I see a national case of affluenza.

    And what has pushed Scandinavian liberal utopian views? The fact they lived the 20th century as exactly such liberal utopias (how do people of happy and cosseted childhood tend to approach political questions?). Here I see a national case of affluenza.

    By the way, applied to Israel, it reminded me of the famous case of Sigrid Rausing’s utopian activity in Israel.

    Sigrid Rausing is a Swedish convert to Judaism, from a family that has a history of affluenza. This has led her to apply the Scandinavian utopian model to activity in Israel, where she funds the NGOs like Adalah that organize the boycott of Israel (BDS campaign), as well as NGOs that conduct activism against deportation of illegal migrants.

    https://www.ngo-monitor.org/funder/sigrid_rausing_trust/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigrid_Rausing

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    This Swedish “Jew” nicely dovetails into what I’m saying. He’s not really Jewish and is therefore probably alienated from Israel which is basically alien to him, and so he behaves like Jews do among Europeans, organizing NGOs with the subconscious aim of destroying the society of which he’s nominally a member.
    , @utu

    This has led her to apply the Scandinavian utopian model to activity in Israel
     
    At least she is consistent. Barbara Spectre on the other hand came from Israel to Sweden and promotes immigration and multi-ethnic society.

    Both Sigrid Rausing and Barbara Specter promote the same in the host societies however one can't accuse Sigrid Rausing of duplicity.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. utu says:
    @German_reader
    Merkel isn't on speaking terms with Putin anymore since that incident with Putin's dog Konni.

    The dog incident (2007) is just a story for the masses to entertain them. Anyway, they talk all the time. In 2014 Putin made 35 calls to Merkel. That’s about once every two weeks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    But you don't know what they're talking about (unless your sources in the Deep State have told you)...could be sex talk, maybe Putin finds Merkel's voice erotic.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. @utu
    The dog incident (2007) is just a story for the masses to entertain them. Anyway, they talk all the time. In 2014 Putin made 35 calls to Merkel. That's about once every two weeks.

    But you don’t know what they’re talking about (unless your sources in the Deep State have told you)…could be sex talk, maybe Putin finds Merkel’s voice erotic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @for-the-record
    But you don’t know what they’re talking about (unless your sources in the Deep State have told you)…could be sex talk, maybe Putin finds Merkel’s voice erotic.

    It's so Putin can keep up his German (and perhaps Merkel her Russian).

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. “Jews are Powerful Globally”

    I don’t think so. Even though the US is somewhat under their thumb (see #7), it’s not like Israel was exactly getting its way under Obama. And Jews have far less influence in the rest of the world.

    Besides, the flip side of the US vetoing all the anti-Israel UN resolutions is that an absurd percentage of those resolutions are made against Israel in the first place.

    So that’s Probably False.

    This is a bizarre conclusion. Republicans want to let Israel have its cake and eat it too with a cherry on top, and Obama proposed removing the cherry. Oy vey, what an anti-semite, yowled the yids as Obama signed off on 30 billion worth of foreign aid. Obama helped them destabilize Syria to break the link in the chain between Hezbollah and Iran, and we have the Clinton emails to prove it.

    Also, what about the non-Zionist faction of Jews, who are far more dangerous? Hollywood is full of them, and it alone wields enormous cultural influence all over the globe.

    What makes Jews powerful is their networking, which is an evolved phenomenon and not a conspiracy theory. Power is generated by the interaction between things. While I wouldn’t say Jews are a fundamental cause of Western decline, they will turbo-charge any negative direction within a society they come to inhabit. They’re a force multiplier.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lemurmaniac
    Re Warmongering, in How the Jews Defeated Hitler, (((Benjamin Ginsburg))) claims on p. 4 Jews successfully swung US isolationist and pro-German attitudes to hostility in the thirties.

    In conjunction with Roosevelt's left leaning administration, it seems the Jews really were out to crush the Third Reich no matter what Hitler did.

    https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R1G7H48SQQAXD8/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1557780218

    (another Jewish researched tome)
    , @utu
    Yes, very bizarre conclusion.

    However Obama in some ways was making life much harder for Israel and Netanyahu managed to antagonize Obama which was unnecessary. While Syria got destabilized Obama did not implement the no-fly zone that would finish Syria off like Libya few years earlier. He seemed to be passively obstructing. Then Obama's parting shot was to not veto UN resolution against Israel.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. @Lemurmaniac
    "Jews are Powerful Globally"

    I don’t think so. Even though the US is somewhat under their thumb (see #7), it’s not like Israel was exactly getting its way under Obama. And Jews have far less influence in the rest of the world.

    Besides, the flip side of the US vetoing all the anti-Israel UN resolutions is that an absurd percentage of those resolutions are made against Israel in the first place.

    So that’s Probably False.
     

    This is a bizarre conclusion. Republicans want to let Israel have its cake and eat it too with a cherry on top, and Obama proposed removing the cherry. Oy vey, what an anti-semite, yowled the yids as Obama signed off on 30 billion worth of foreign aid. Obama helped them destabilize Syria to break the link in the chain between Hezbollah and Iran, and we have the Clinton emails to prove it.

    Also, what about the non-Zionist faction of Jews, who are far more dangerous? Hollywood is full of them, and it alone wields enormous cultural influence all over the globe.

    What makes Jews powerful is their networking, which is an evolved phenomenon and not a conspiracy theory. Power is generated by the interaction between things. While I wouldn't say Jews are a fundamental cause of Western decline, they will turbo-charge any negative direction within a society they come to inhabit. They're a force multiplier.

    Re Warmongering, in How the Jews Defeated Hitler, (((Benjamin Ginsburg))) claims on p. 4 Jews successfully swung US isolationist and pro-German attitudes to hostility in the thirties.

    In conjunction with Roosevelt’s left leaning administration, it seems the Jews really were out to crush the Third Reich no matter what Hitler did.

    https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R1G7H48SQQAXD8/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1557780218

    (another Jewish researched tome)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. @Dmitry

    Even this could be a question, but for example with entertainment it clearly doesn’t work like this. You watch movies for special effects, action scenes, the main characters, or similar, and you don’t care for the number of black judges and top scientists or ass-kicking babes etc. shown in them, but they do have a subconscious effect on you. It sounds very good in theory that I could watch a Star Wars movie without an ass-kicking babe and African hijabi rebel leaders, but it’s not like I actually have much of a choice except not watching any Star Wars movies, or rather, no space operas or sci-fi movies at all.

    Now there’s clearly no such competition with TV channels either, you only have a few of those with big budget quality entertainment. It’s also probably not too difficult to debase and corrupt culture without losing entertainment value. So pushing any such agenda should be rather easy, though of course any agenda could be pushed if you are smart enough not to get overly political. Goebbels had a lot of light entertainment be produced without much political agenda, but peppered with some little propaganda snippets (and the occasional propaganda blockbuster) he could easily change Germans in a more and more anti-Semitic direction.

    You don’t seem to understand the argument here. It’s not really a conspiracy theory in that it doesn’t postulate any kind of coordination between the Bonniers, Soros, Netanyahu, and Chuck Schumer. In fact, they (some of them) could even hate each other.

    The theory of your opponents is that people not rooted in the Swedish people, but living there among Swedes, will have a sense of alienation and not really thinking of the well-being of the Swedish people or community, and instead they will often have an inclination to deconstruct the community (the Swedish people itself) from which they are alienated. This is not only true of Jews, but it is always true of them anywhere except in Israel. As an example, in the original Swedish push for multiculturalism, Jewish voices were vastly disproportionate, but for example there was a Hungarian author (refugee from communism) and some other non-Jewish non-Swedes as well. To give another example, in 1930s Romania, Jews and Hungarians were both overrepresented among Communist Party members. Obviously, both had reasons to dislike Romania (Hungarians were forced to join Romania just a couple decades earlier, and clearly had no attachment to it), Jews are simply such outsider minorities in every white gentile country, and usually with huge chips on their shoulders.
     

    In the particular case cited, it's clear from a few minutes research on their lives that they had assimilated to the Sweden long ago - becoming bishops of the country's religion and appearing as stereotype (to me as foreigner) of that culture itself.

    As for the general point, about the possibility of brainwashing via media. Of course, this can be and is done - the example is quite clear that newspapers try to persuade you to their view in every edition they print.

    But again, contemplate the case of Haaretz. It had the most prestigious newspaper in the country, and they publish as much as they want, with a liberal slant. And as a result, ten times less people buy the newspaper, than the comparable conservative one - because it is located in a country where the majority of the population think like red-necks, rather than New Yorkers. People are not so stupid or lacking agency as these conspiracies claim, and where newspaper do not accord with readership slant on these issues, they will leave a gap in the market for those that do. This is how CNN continuously loses its viewership to Fox News, or we are posting on this blog, instead of on Rationalwiki page. When there is enough of an appetite for a certain slant on issues - then even poorly written media like Breitbart could become the most popular website.

    Your example in relation to Star Wars is a little different, as this supposedly a film for non-political content, and it is using subliminal messaging. But again, it's a case where if you add content that is not appreciated by the viewers, the film will be less popular than otherwise - and that means 'leaving money on the table'. It would be bad business, and this kind of bad business is possible when someone doesn't mind losing money (which is possible when a wealthy person buys a newspaper, or in the case of people like Soros who are doing it for 'philanthropy'), but will not be appreciated by shareholders, or those for whom it is the media is a source of income. In reality - there is likely to be an appetite for it. There are 40 million African Americans, there are 170 million women in America, there are tens of millions of sexual minorities. A lot of the diversity introduction in American media, is clearly good business. Showing that women are good at fighting, or that African Americans are the heroes - one might perceive that it is fantasy, but I would probably advocate their introduction, regardless of personal views for or against, if I worked in the entertainment industry.

    Your Goebbels point is interesting - but the conclusion I draw is the importance of a free media, where all kinds of films can be shown. The ones which succeed, will be those which appease the tastes of the public for good or worse.

    What actually pushes an educated and free public in different directions politically, has rather much deeper and more personal roots, than the latest Star Wars movie. What pushed the Russian-public away from simple-minded Westernization policy? Personal experience of the 1990s. What has pushed the Israeli public so far to the right, that they perceive liberal media as being traitors? Personal experience of weekly suicide bombings in the Second Intifada. And do you really consider that Star Wars could change their views.

    And what has pushed Scandinavian liberal utopian views? The fact they lived the 20th century as exactly such liberal utopias (how do people of happy and cosseted childhood tend to approach political questions?). Here I see a national case of affluenza.

    You hold a highly unrealistic view of competition in the entertainment industry. Blockbuster movies are blockbusters because they have a very high budget and so a very high barrier of entry. Mel Gibson made a killing with The Passion, but his actors’ and other contributors’ careers suffered and so he couldn’t continue making conservative movies. In an interconnected industry you cannot do something which everyone else opposes because they can make your underlings suffer and so next time no one will want to work with you. And a high barrier of entry means there are not many dissenters like Mel Gibson in a position to make such movies spreading dissenting messages.

    Your view of shareholders is totally unrealistic, like you have never heard of principal-agent problems or never understood how they can occur in big corporations (like when setting salaries of unsuccessful CEOs). The shareholders in Hollywood are also often of the same political tilt. They often don’t notice how much money they are leaving on the table, because they make a lot of money anyway. And they do leave money on the table, like the girl hero merchandise is not selling well in the case of Star Wars. This contrary to your naive assumption that it’s all about attracting girls to Star Wars movies. You know, girls don’t care that much about this type of movies regardless of girl heroes, it’s quite autistic to assume otherwise.

    The competition is not large with TV channels either. With Fox, you have a mostly neocon channel. The rest are liberal, but in foreign policy it’s often indistinguishable from a neocon point of view. The choice is somewhat similar to political parties, you have the multiculturalist pro big business pro tax cuts pro wars party/channel vs. the more eagerly multiculturalist but less eagerly interventionist party/channel supporting raising taxes.

    In websites, I guess you’re aware that this website is just a hobby project for Ron, and will only work as long as it’s important to him. Anyway, websites are the least important things with the most competition, but even there sites like this cannot compete in terms of news service with mainstream websites. With access to actual news agencies etc. Sites like Breitbart also needed wealthy supporters, I guess you guessed correctly, they were Zionist Jews.

    Regarding the Bonniers, I don’t think your impression of their assimilation should be decisive. What we are talking about is some sense of alienation; and of course genetics. Neither of which disappear with superficial worldly success. You also seem to have very strange stereotypes of Swedes if you think a publisher/media/entertainment entrepreneur family is all that stereotypically Swedish. To me it matches the stereotypes of another ethnic group, I just forgot for the moment which one.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian

    Mel Gibson made a killing with The Passion, but his actors’ and other contributors’ careers suffered and so he couldn’t continue making conservative movies.
     
    Wrong. The Passion was a unique movie & one of the sort. Mel later made very successful "Apocalypto", and his later films were not undermined by Jewish Hollywood hostility (which is real), but due to his excesses in booze, sex, life-disorientation & all.

    If one's celebrity career was undermined by organized ethnic grievances, it is the case of Richard Gere & the Chinese.

    https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/04/richard-gere-hollywood-china

    http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/movies/richard-gere-on-how-china-has-damaged-his-career-over-his-support-for-tibet-20170511-gw29g9.html
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. @Dmitry

    And what has pushed Scandinavian liberal utopian views? The fact they lived the 20th century as exactly such liberal utopias (how do people of happy and cosseted childhood tend to approach political questions?). Here I see a national case of affluenza.

     

    By the way, applied to Israel, it reminded me of the famous case of Sigrid Rausing's utopian activity in Israel.

    Sigrid Rausing is a Swedish convert to Judaism, from a family that has a history of affluenza. This has led her to apply the Scandinavian utopian model to activity in Israel, where she funds the NGOs like Adalah that organize the boycott of Israel (BDS campaign), as well as NGOs that conduct activism against deportation of illegal migrants.

    https://www.ngo-monitor.org/funder/sigrid_rausing_trust/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigrid_Rausing

    This Swedish “Jew” nicely dovetails into what I’m saying. He’s not really Jewish and is therefore probably alienated from Israel which is basically alien to him, and so he behaves like Jews do among Europeans, organizing NGOs with the subconscious aim of destroying the society of which he’s nominally a member.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    Regarding the Bonniers, I don’t think your impression of their assimilation should be decisive. What we are talking about is some sense of alienation; and of course genetics. Neither of which disappear with superficial worldly success. You also seem to have very strange stereotypes of Swedes if you think a publisher/media/entertainment entrepreneur family is all that stereotypically Swedish. To me it matches the stereotypes of another ethnic group, I just forgot for the moment which one.

     

    For me, after a few minutes of research, they are a stereotype of rich, very 'posh', Swedish with inherited sources of income, and affluenza - very similar to the Rausing family I mention above.

    Of course, in 150 years ago they were Jews - but how many generations have they been Christians and intermarrying. They are 1/8 Jewish or 1/16 Jewish?

    (I can hardly relate my modest family to this kind of bourgeois dynasty. But my grandfather had Jewish descent (his mother). By the third-generation, this becomes more just something interesting on the family tree, told as a story every couple years, than something which shapes your upbringing or creates any distinctions. Actually I am quite interested in Jewish affairs since I was a teenager and I lived in Israel for several months five years ago - I still have friends in Israel and really love this country, but nobody else in my family has any interest or even notices the subject; the majority are rather unlike me).

    To go back on topic.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jo_Bonnier

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eva_Bonnier

    "She established a foundation for the beautification of Stockholm, which in its first years financed paintings and sculptures for public places and institutions, such as the Royal Library, Stockholm University, and several Stockholm schools. The foundation remains active."

    "Eva Bonnier suffered from frequent depressions and took her own life in 1909."

    Those two - quite talented.

    And then others just Christian liberals I would infer.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%85ke_Bonnier


    This Swedish “Jew” nicely dovetails into what I’m saying. He’s not really Jewish and is therefore probably alienated from Israel which is basically alien to him, and so he behaves like Jews do among Europeans, organizing NGOs with the subconscious aim of destroying the society of which he’s nominally a member.
     
    Well Reiner I enjoy your posts usually. But you're the resident psychoanalyst that diagnoses people with autism. And this - like most people on this site - is generally a strange claim about how liberals and utopians actually think.

    Liberals generally believe in their liberalism. Some are malicious, have chips on their shoulders, others are clear psychos with a chaos agenda (Soros), etc, but the majority feel they are doing good and benefactors.

    In Rausing's case - of course, she is in ivory tower (belonging to Sweden's richest family), and doesn't need Israel to protect her. So she has no real stake in it.

    But much more you can just perceive her Swedish utopian liberalism, from a woman who grew up in a cozy environment.

    She actually believes the left tradition, and that Israel would be better off if it took illegal immigrants, became more multi-cultural, was pacifist, etc. She grew up in a safe environment and doesn't perceive the dangers that are only visible to those from more precarious background.

    In other words, she wants Israel to become another version of Sweden.

    I don't think she is malicious or alienated.

    The last sentence in the article I will link below is quite interesting and may support your interpretation though:

    https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-jewish-chronicle/20070518/282192236555718


    Your view of shareholders is totally unrealistic, like you have never heard of principal-agent problems or never understood how they can occur in big corporations (like when setting salaries of unsuccessful CEOs). The shareholders in Hollywood are also often of the same political tilt. They often don’t notice how much money they are leaving on the table, because they make a lot of money anyway. And they do leave money on the table, like the girl hero merchandise is not selling well in the case of Star Wars. This contrary to your naive assumption that it’s all about attracting girls to Star Wars movies. You know, girls don’t care that much about this type of movies regardless of girl heroes, it’s quite autistic to assume otherwise.

     

    Sure, there are high barriers to entry in the industry. But there is a lot of competition between studios, a lot of motive to move into the industry (the massive profits) and the success of a film is determined exactly by its profits.

    The 'autistic' viewpoint is the assumption that the introduction of diversity agenda into movies is not popular or at least motivated by an attempt to be popular (rather than inferring rather strange conspiracies). The latest Star Wars diversity has failed, but it was very clearly motivated by an attempt at popularity (i.e. the Chinese character to appeal to the Chinese market, etc).


    In websites, I guess you’re aware that this website is just a hobby project for Ron, and will only work as long as it’s important to him. Anyway, websites are the least important things with the most competition, but even there sites like this cannot compete in terms of news service with mainstream websites. With access to actual news agencies etc. Sites like Breitbart also needed wealthy supporters, I guess you guessed correctly, they were Zionist Jews.

     

    Breitbart is popular became of its anti-immigration and anti-liberal agenda. It filled a gap in the market like Fox did some years earlier. The Zionist aspect of Breitbart is not really the key to its success, although it does accord with the views of the largest segment of the readership (i.e. the Republican base).

    You hold a highly unrealistic view of competition in the entertainment industry. Blockbuster movies are blockbusters because they have a very high budget and so a very high barrier of entry. Mel Gibson made a killing with The Passion, but his actors’ and other contributors’ careers suffered and so he couldn’t continue making conservative movies. In an interconnected industry you cannot do something which everyone else opposes because they can make your underlings suffer and so next time no one will want to work with you. And a high barrier of entry means there are not many dissenters like Mel Gibson in a position to make such movies spreading dissenting messages.

     

    Gibson movies are still bestselling blockbusters. The reason is because they are a kind of trash that appeals to viewers with low cultural level, like every other blockbuster film.

    Meanwhile, we still have extremely talented filmakers, making good films.

    But you are not going to get rich making such films, as they do not appeal to the 'lowest common denominator.

    The only good film released last year, Nelyubov’ – was the 99th most popular film of last year in its home market.

    https://www.kinopoisk.ru/index.php?level=6&view_best_box=1&view_best_box=3&view_year=2017
     

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. Another thing to bear in mind: dumb goyem (cancer boy and his twink in the senate, your white professor signed up to the Boaz race denialism cult, your dumb Irishmen on Fox news disseminating pro-Zionist pro-neocon talking points), front Jewish intellectual and political cults. Thanks to Jewish networking, powerful institutional Jewish actors work to apply their theories outside of academic wankery.

    So ‘John McCain hates Russia more than the Kagans’ is a fact that obscures more than it reveals.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  106. utu says:
    @Lemurmaniac
    "Jews are Powerful Globally"

    I don’t think so. Even though the US is somewhat under their thumb (see #7), it’s not like Israel was exactly getting its way under Obama. And Jews have far less influence in the rest of the world.

    Besides, the flip side of the US vetoing all the anti-Israel UN resolutions is that an absurd percentage of those resolutions are made against Israel in the first place.

    So that’s Probably False.
     

    This is a bizarre conclusion. Republicans want to let Israel have its cake and eat it too with a cherry on top, and Obama proposed removing the cherry. Oy vey, what an anti-semite, yowled the yids as Obama signed off on 30 billion worth of foreign aid. Obama helped them destabilize Syria to break the link in the chain between Hezbollah and Iran, and we have the Clinton emails to prove it.

    Also, what about the non-Zionist faction of Jews, who are far more dangerous? Hollywood is full of them, and it alone wields enormous cultural influence all over the globe.

    What makes Jews powerful is their networking, which is an evolved phenomenon and not a conspiracy theory. Power is generated by the interaction between things. While I wouldn't say Jews are a fundamental cause of Western decline, they will turbo-charge any negative direction within a society they come to inhabit. They're a force multiplier.

    Yes, very bizarre conclusion.

    However Obama in some ways was making life much harder for Israel and Netanyahu managed to antagonize Obama which was unnecessary. While Syria got destabilized Obama did not implement the no-fly zone that would finish Syria off like Libya few years earlier. He seemed to be passively obstructing. Then Obama’s parting shot was to not veto UN resolution against Israel.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    I forgot the most important thing: the deal with Iran that drove Netanyahu and neocons crazy.
    , @polskijoe
    Historically, the Liberal establishment was neutral towards Zionism.
    Even some of them are antiZionist (although mostly are quiet about it, because of antisemite card and Jewish money and so on).

    Obama had come to power thanks to Jews in Chicago I believe.
    However, Obama was also influenced by Zbig. Zbig was antiZionist. And even vocal about it

    The Mainline Protestant churches tend to be neutral towards Israel or antizionist. Their world council of churches (I forget the name) is an example. Some of those libs elites prefer Arab oil over Israel.
    (though in recent decades that preferance has been reduced).

    However, most Liberal Jews are Zionist. And they again have money and most vote Democrat.
    And some Mainline protestants do support Israel in some way.
    This together with the Neocon-Zionist pressure. Democrats are Zionist leaning.

    Mainline churches have a shrinking population. And their old Anglo elite has less power than it used to.
    , @Lemurmaniac
    Again, the baseline of pro-Zionism within the democrat party is set by the Republicans, who under normal non-Trumpian circumstances would be willing to start WWIII for Israel.

    Under Obama, the Jews got 80% of what they wanted instead of everything. He simply implemented their policies in a more covert way (CIA seeding of colour revolutions etc instead of the yee-haw shock and awe of his predecessor).

    The GOP is totally controlled by Zionists. The Democrats are nearly totally controlled. And whatever dissent to Democratic Zionism that exists within the party ranks, you can be sure that's led and funded by ultra-liberal anti-nationalist yids like Soros, who feel the children of Israel are called to poz the whole world instead of just one little dot on the map.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. utu says:
    @utu
    Yes, very bizarre conclusion.

    However Obama in some ways was making life much harder for Israel and Netanyahu managed to antagonize Obama which was unnecessary. While Syria got destabilized Obama did not implement the no-fly zone that would finish Syria off like Libya few years earlier. He seemed to be passively obstructing. Then Obama's parting shot was to not veto UN resolution against Israel.

    I forgot the most important thing: the deal with Iran that drove Netanyahu and neocons crazy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. whahae says:
    @iffen
    and yet they’re doing almost nothing for Germany or German interests.

    Not true. We got rid of the commies for you.

    Thanks for nothing. GDR was more reddpilled than West Germany.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    I wouldn't say redpilled, it still was a stupid socialist system. But in retrospect it's clear that the federal republic with all the pernicious rot in its basic law ("right to asylum"), its culture of postnationalism which was fostered even by the supposed "conservatives", its emerging multiculturalism and fixation on the Nazi past as the negative foundation of identity was already moving towards the current mess well before 1989. It might have been better if all of Germany had become communist in the 1940s, or if one had explored the possibility of a reunified and neutral Germany in the 1950s, the Cold war wasn't worth it. Now we have the worst of both worlds, west German multiculti postnationalism plus GDR-like state-mandated "antifascism".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. @whahae
    Thanks for nothing. GDR was more reddpilled than West Germany.

    I wouldn’t say redpilled, it still was a stupid socialist system. But in retrospect it’s clear that the federal republic with all the pernicious rot in its basic law (“right to asylum”), its culture of postnationalism which was fostered even by the supposed “conservatives”, its emerging multiculturalism and fixation on the Nazi past as the negative foundation of identity was already moving towards the current mess well before 1989. It might have been better if all of Germany had become communist in the 1940s, or if one had explored the possibility of a reunified and neutral Germany in the 1950s, the Cold war wasn’t worth it. Now we have the worst of both worlds, west German multiculti postnationalism plus GDR-like state-mandated “antifascism”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. @reiner Tor
    You hold a highly unrealistic view of competition in the entertainment industry. Blockbuster movies are blockbusters because they have a very high budget and so a very high barrier of entry. Mel Gibson made a killing with The Passion, but his actors’ and other contributors’ careers suffered and so he couldn’t continue making conservative movies. In an interconnected industry you cannot do something which everyone else opposes because they can make your underlings suffer and so next time no one will want to work with you. And a high barrier of entry means there are not many dissenters like Mel Gibson in a position to make such movies spreading dissenting messages.

    Your view of shareholders is totally unrealistic, like you have never heard of principal-agent problems or never understood how they can occur in big corporations (like when setting salaries of unsuccessful CEOs). The shareholders in Hollywood are also often of the same political tilt. They often don’t notice how much money they are leaving on the table, because they make a lot of money anyway. And they do leave money on the table, like the girl hero merchandise is not selling well in the case of Star Wars. This contrary to your naive assumption that it’s all about attracting girls to Star Wars movies. You know, girls don’t care that much about this type of movies regardless of girl heroes, it’s quite autistic to assume otherwise.

    The competition is not large with TV channels either. With Fox, you have a mostly neocon channel. The rest are liberal, but in foreign policy it’s often indistinguishable from a neocon point of view. The choice is somewhat similar to political parties, you have the multiculturalist pro big business pro tax cuts pro wars party/channel vs. the more eagerly multiculturalist but less eagerly interventionist party/channel supporting raising taxes.

    In websites, I guess you’re aware that this website is just a hobby project for Ron, and will only work as long as it’s important to him. Anyway, websites are the least important things with the most competition, but even there sites like this cannot compete in terms of news service with mainstream websites. With access to actual news agencies etc. Sites like Breitbart also needed wealthy supporters, I guess you guessed correctly, they were Zionist Jews.

    Regarding the Bonniers, I don’t think your impression of their assimilation should be decisive. What we are talking about is some sense of alienation; and of course genetics. Neither of which disappear with superficial worldly success. You also seem to have very strange stereotypes of Swedes if you think a publisher/media/entertainment entrepreneur family is all that stereotypically Swedish. To me it matches the stereotypes of another ethnic group, I just forgot for the moment which one.

    Mel Gibson made a killing with The Passion, but his actors’ and other contributors’ careers suffered and so he couldn’t continue making conservative movies.

    Wrong. The Passion was a unique movie & one of the sort. Mel later made very successful “Apocalypto”, and his later films were not undermined by Jewish Hollywood hostility (which is real), but due to his excesses in booze, sex, life-disorientation & all.

    If one’s celebrity career was undermined by organized ethnic grievances, it is the case of Richard Gere & the Chinese.

    https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/04/richard-gere-hollywood-china

    http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/movies/richard-gere-on-how-china-has-damaged-his-career-over-his-support-for-tibet-20170511-gw29g9.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. @inertial
    So you have a bespoke explanation for each war. Iraq is explained by the Jewish lobby. Serbia I suppose by the Albanian lobby (which actually did exist and was quite powerful at one point; but its power was derivative.)

    And if Iraq War was run for the benefit of Israel then you should be able to point the benefit. Iraq and Israel have no common border, so the only way Iraq could be a threat to Israel was if Saddam Hussein had WMD. Are you saying he did? You can't have it both ways.

    The usual rejoinder to this is the claim that Israel wants to create chaos in the Arab world. This argument reminds me of the ongoing "Russian interference" saga where numerous "experts" are saying that evil Putin did whatever it was that he did in order to "sow chaos and undermine Western democracy." This is what happens when you try to fit the square peg of your favorite theory into the round hole of reality.

    LOL@”Albanian lobby”. Are you serious?

    I don’t recall US presidential candidates paying visits to Albanian “Public Affairs Comittee” to pledge fealty to Albanian state. They do pledge fealty to the Jewish state. It’s a quadrennial ritual in the United States.

    If you’re unaware of how US domestic politics operates, how you can claim to understand the motivations for US foreign wars? Foreign policy is always the extention of domestic politics and in America, it is the Jews (not Albanians LMAO), who dominate both.

    The so-called “Russian inteference” in US politics does happen to be a conspiracy theory, but the Jewish domination of America is an unfortunate reality, created by billions of dollars in campaign donations and a near total media control.

    Read More
    • Replies: @inertial

    LOL@”Albanian lobby”. Are you serious?
     
    Very serious. Albanian lobby existed and was quite influential back in the day. Major US politicians had been on the take: Bob Dole, John McCain, Joe Lieberman. See this:
    http://www.emperors-clothes.com/articles/benworks/buying.html

    There were other examples. Ukrainian lobby was quite important for decades (even more important in Canada.) Even the Georgian lobby made an appearance when McCain hired a Georgian lobbying as a foreign policy adviser for his presidential campaign.

    On the other hand, all attempts to set up an effective Russian lobby had been cut down quite ruthlessly. Even the Chinese are not having much success, even though they have a huge diaspora in USA and more money than God.

    This just illustrates what I had been saying. Ethnic lobbies can be powerful but their power is derivative. If their agenda coincides with the general course of the American military/intelligence/diplomatic establishment (or the "deep state" if you like) then they are allowed to thrive and even influence specific policy. If not, they go the way of the Albanian lobby or are not allowed to exist in the first place.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. @German_reader
    But you don't know what they're talking about (unless your sources in the Deep State have told you)...could be sex talk, maybe Putin finds Merkel's voice erotic.

    But you don’t know what they’re talking about (unless your sources in the Deep State have told you)…could be sex talk, maybe Putin finds Merkel’s voice erotic.

    It’s so Putin can keep up his German (and perhaps Merkel her Russian).

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    I don’t know if it’s just anti-Putin (and pro-Merkel) propaganda, but I read that after the conversation turns deeper they always turn to Russian, because Merkel is more fluent in Russian than Putin in German, and Putin cannot express his more complicated thoughts in German well enough.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. @Dmitry

    Even this could be a question, but for example with entertainment it clearly doesn’t work like this. You watch movies for special effects, action scenes, the main characters, or similar, and you don’t care for the number of black judges and top scientists or ass-kicking babes etc. shown in them, but they do have a subconscious effect on you. It sounds very good in theory that I could watch a Star Wars movie without an ass-kicking babe and African hijabi rebel leaders, but it’s not like I actually have much of a choice except not watching any Star Wars movies, or rather, no space operas or sci-fi movies at all.

    Now there’s clearly no such competition with TV channels either, you only have a few of those with big budget quality entertainment. It’s also probably not too difficult to debase and corrupt culture without losing entertainment value. So pushing any such agenda should be rather easy, though of course any agenda could be pushed if you are smart enough not to get overly political. Goebbels had a lot of light entertainment be produced without much political agenda, but peppered with some little propaganda snippets (and the occasional propaganda blockbuster) he could easily change Germans in a more and more anti-Semitic direction.

    You don’t seem to understand the argument here. It’s not really a conspiracy theory in that it doesn’t postulate any kind of coordination between the Bonniers, Soros, Netanyahu, and Chuck Schumer. In fact, they (some of them) could even hate each other.

    The theory of your opponents is that people not rooted in the Swedish people, but living there among Swedes, will have a sense of alienation and not really thinking of the well-being of the Swedish people or community, and instead they will often have an inclination to deconstruct the community (the Swedish people itself) from which they are alienated. This is not only true of Jews, but it is always true of them anywhere except in Israel. As an example, in the original Swedish push for multiculturalism, Jewish voices were vastly disproportionate, but for example there was a Hungarian author (refugee from communism) and some other non-Jewish non-Swedes as well. To give another example, in 1930s Romania, Jews and Hungarians were both overrepresented among Communist Party members. Obviously, both had reasons to dislike Romania (Hungarians were forced to join Romania just a couple decades earlier, and clearly had no attachment to it), Jews are simply such outsider minorities in every white gentile country, and usually with huge chips on their shoulders.
     

    In the particular case cited, it's clear from a few minutes research on their lives that they had assimilated to the Sweden long ago - becoming bishops of the country's religion and appearing as stereotype (to me as foreigner) of that culture itself.

    As for the general point, about the possibility of brainwashing via media. Of course, this can be and is done - the example is quite clear that newspapers try to persuade you to their view in every edition they print.

    But again, contemplate the case of Haaretz. It had the most prestigious newspaper in the country, and they publish as much as they want, with a liberal slant. And as a result, ten times less people buy the newspaper, than the comparable conservative one - because it is located in a country where the majority of the population think like red-necks, rather than New Yorkers. People are not so stupid or lacking agency as these conspiracies claim, and where newspaper do not accord with readership slant on these issues, they will leave a gap in the market for those that do. This is how CNN continuously loses its viewership to Fox News, or we are posting on this blog, instead of on Rationalwiki page. When there is enough of an appetite for a certain slant on issues - then even poorly written media like Breitbart could become the most popular website.

    Your example in relation to Star Wars is a little different, as this supposedly a film for non-political content, and it is using subliminal messaging. But again, it's a case where if you add content that is not appreciated by the viewers, the film will be less popular than otherwise - and that means 'leaving money on the table'. It would be bad business, and this kind of bad business is possible when someone doesn't mind losing money (which is possible when a wealthy person buys a newspaper, or in the case of people like Soros who are doing it for 'philanthropy'), but will not be appreciated by shareholders, or those for whom it is the media is a source of income. In reality - there is likely to be an appetite for it. There are 40 million African Americans, there are 170 million women in America, there are tens of millions of sexual minorities. A lot of the diversity introduction in American media, is clearly good business. Showing that women are good at fighting, or that African Americans are the heroes - one might perceive that it is fantasy, but I would probably advocate their introduction, regardless of personal views for or against, if I worked in the entertainment industry.

    Your Goebbels point is interesting - but the conclusion I draw is the importance of a free media, where all kinds of films can be shown. The ones which succeed, will be those which appease the tastes of the public for good or worse.

    What actually pushes an educated and free public in different directions politically, has rather much deeper and more personal roots, than the latest Star Wars movie. What pushed the Russian-public away from simple-minded Westernization policy? Personal experience of the 1990s. What has pushed the Israeli public so far to the right, that they perceive liberal media as being traitors? Personal experience of weekly suicide bombings in the Second Intifada. And do you really consider that Star Wars could change their views.

    And what has pushed Scandinavian liberal utopian views? The fact they lived the 20th century as exactly such liberal utopias (how do people of happy and cosseted childhood tend to approach political questions?). Here I see a national case of affluenza.

    In the particular case cited, it’s clear from a few minutes research on their lives that they had assimilated to the Sweden long ago – becoming bishops of the country’s religion and appearing as stereotype (to me as foreigner) of that culture itself.

    They were not genuine converts. The church effectively used to be the government and seeking the position of bishop was like seeking the position of governor – it’s no evidence that the man was actually Christian. The infiltration of Lutheran clergy by Jews who continued to be Jews in private was one reason behind that outbreak of anti-Semitism that led to, well, you know what.

    Jews weren’t the only people faking it. My family tree is full of men who sought positions in the church until about a century ago when government was secularized and clergy stopped being the main way for a social climber to gain power – and my family tree instantly stopped being interested in careers in the church. But my family was just exaggerating interest in Christianity, not maintaining a secret identity.

    There is a subset of Jews who pursue a strategy of feigning assimilation while continuing to maintain their ethnic network with its separate interests. A person who has consciously crafted an outward appearance of assimilation to some national culture for the sake of business, power or other practical purpose while maintaining a different home identity is never going to have the same level of affinity for the national culture or its people. Yet at first glance the locals are likely to assume that the man who appears to be one of them shares their affinities. Now that it’s taboo to ask whether it’s actually the case in the case of a Jew we once again have a cultural and political problem.

    It’s not that Jews are the only people capable of this strategy. In fact, Swedes have acted the same as a diaspora in Finland. At the time of the revolution we used to have a whole class of “Finnish nationalists” who were actually Swedes who changed their names to Finnish, started speaking Finnish in public (but Swedish in private), feigned interest in Finnic pagan religion and so on to become leaders of “Finnish nationalism”.

    A common trend among these “Finnish nationalists” who weren’t actually Finns was pushing for conflict with Russia with little regard for the consequences. Swedes could always imagine just fleeing to Sweden in case of trouble and their desire to crusade against Russia was not tempered by fear of targeted retaliation since Russians wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between an actual Finn and a Swede pretending to be a Finn. Their crafted identity with Finnish names and other outwardly Finnish customs didn’t mean that they had the same interests.

    But that’s just a local phenomenon and Swedes don’t act that way anywhere else. Jews seem to produce a subset pursuing a strategy of feigned assimilation everywhere they go and they take it to extremes like faking conversion into other religions just to gain power and influence.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    But that’s just a local phenomenon and Swedes don’t act that way anywhere else.
     
    Because Swedes are obviously not a diaspora people, whose whole identity is blood (but not soil), or whose whole culture works in a diaspora setting, or who are or were at some point in history a minority (with the accompanying grudges against locals etc.) in a whole bunch of countries, etc.

    Jews are not really devils, just a people under really unique circumstances, with probable partial genetic adaptations.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. Refreshing to read someone who reasons well, doesn’t stick a finger in the wind to decide which way to bloviate, and ultimately doesn’t take too seriously what others might excoriate about his opinions, without malice. And doesn’t take himself overly seriously, either.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    And beyond that, Mr. Karlin is just immensely likable. I'm sure there's some form of cognitive tribalism in that - most of his readers probably relate to him because they also have some interest in understanding-maximization rather than the usual ego-maximization potential that the Internet provides.

    In such, it probably limits his readership. But it makes for a much more worthwhile community overall.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. @Jaakko Raipala

    In the particular case cited, it’s clear from a few minutes research on their lives that they had assimilated to the Sweden long ago – becoming bishops of the country’s religion and appearing as stereotype (to me as foreigner) of that culture itself.
     
    They were not genuine converts. The church effectively used to be the government and seeking the position of bishop was like seeking the position of governor - it's no evidence that the man was actually Christian. The infiltration of Lutheran clergy by Jews who continued to be Jews in private was one reason behind that outbreak of anti-Semitism that led to, well, you know what.

    Jews weren't the only people faking it. My family tree is full of men who sought positions in the church until about a century ago when government was secularized and clergy stopped being the main way for a social climber to gain power - and my family tree instantly stopped being interested in careers in the church. But my family was just exaggerating interest in Christianity, not maintaining a secret identity.

    There is a subset of Jews who pursue a strategy of feigning assimilation while continuing to maintain their ethnic network with its separate interests. A person who has consciously crafted an outward appearance of assimilation to some national culture for the sake of business, power or other practical purpose while maintaining a different home identity is never going to have the same level of affinity for the national culture or its people. Yet at first glance the locals are likely to assume that the man who appears to be one of them shares their affinities. Now that it's taboo to ask whether it's actually the case in the case of a Jew we once again have a cultural and political problem.

    It's not that Jews are the only people capable of this strategy. In fact, Swedes have acted the same as a diaspora in Finland. At the time of the revolution we used to have a whole class of "Finnish nationalists" who were actually Swedes who changed their names to Finnish, started speaking Finnish in public (but Swedish in private), feigned interest in Finnic pagan religion and so on to become leaders of "Finnish nationalism".

    A common trend among these "Finnish nationalists" who weren't actually Finns was pushing for conflict with Russia with little regard for the consequences. Swedes could always imagine just fleeing to Sweden in case of trouble and their desire to crusade against Russia was not tempered by fear of targeted retaliation since Russians wouldn't be able to tell the difference between an actual Finn and a Swede pretending to be a Finn. Their crafted identity with Finnish names and other outwardly Finnish customs didn't mean that they had the same interests.

    But that's just a local phenomenon and Swedes don't act that way anywhere else. Jews seem to produce a subset pursuing a strategy of feigned assimilation everywhere they go and they take it to extremes like faking conversion into other religions just to gain power and influence.

    But that’s just a local phenomenon and Swedes don’t act that way anywhere else.

    Because Swedes are obviously not a diaspora people, whose whole identity is blood (but not soil), or whose whole culture works in a diaspora setting, or who are or were at some point in history a minority (with the accompanying grudges against locals etc.) in a whole bunch of countries, etc.

    Jews are not really devils, just a people under really unique circumstances, with probable partial genetic adaptations.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. @for-the-record
    But you don’t know what they’re talking about (unless your sources in the Deep State have told you)…could be sex talk, maybe Putin finds Merkel’s voice erotic.

    It's so Putin can keep up his German (and perhaps Merkel her Russian).

    I don’t know if it’s just anti-Putin (and pro-Merkel) propaganda, but I read that after the conversation turns deeper they always turn to Russian, because Merkel is more fluent in Russian than Putin in German, and Putin cannot express his more complicated thoughts in German well enough.

    Read More
    • Replies: @for-the-record
    I don’t know if it’s just anti-Putin (and pro-Merkel) propaganda, but I read that after the conversation turns deeper they always turn to Russian, because Merkel is more fluent in Russian than Putin in German, and Putin cannot express his more complicated thoughts in German well enough.

    I can't find it now, but I recall reading somewhere that it was precisely the opposite!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. Randal says:
    @iffen
    hating jews just for being jews

    People write this nonsensical line all the time and do you know why?

    Violà!

    (and almost nobody is actually an anti-Semite).

    See no anti-Semites, hear no anti-Semites, speak of no anti-Semites.

    There are no anti-Semites!

    People write this nonsensical line all the time and do you know why?

    Yes, it’s because that’s the definition used implicitly when people like you need to hold up examples of “antisemites” to make people see it as something especially unpleasant and hate-filled. Skinhead thugs, obsessive NSDAP murderers, people who clearly actually hate jewish people just for being jewish.

    But you knew that, of course.

    See no anti-Semites, hear no anti-Semites, speak of no anti-Semites.

    There are no anti-Semites!

    “Almost nobody” is not the same as nobody.

    But you knew that, of course.

    The purpose of the moving definition you and your kind use is clear and has been explained many times – a form of equivocation akin to the “motte and bailey fallacy”, where you use one definition to establish evilness and then shift to a broader one to smear political opponents with that evilness. Same with the way antiracists use “racist”, homosexualist activists use “homophobe”, pro-immigration activists use “islamophobe”.

    The same technique is used by many different groups, because it works often enough to be extremely effective.

    Minority identity lobby liar:

    “See that thug with the swastika tattoos beating up an old lady because she’s jewish? That’s an anti-Semite, that is. Aren’t anti-Semites nasty, hate-filled and despicable?”

    Naif:

    “Gosh, yes! That’s awful. You’re right. I agree now with your suggestions about laws against such people and such behaviour.”

    Minority identity lobby liar:

    OK, I’ve sorted out a definition of “anti-Semite” and made a list. We’re ready to go, and to expel these noxious people from decent society. Your financial contribution backed up by the charitable tax refund and government subsidy you voted for was very useful.

    Naif:

    “Ok. Er, that’s good I suppose. Won’t be seeing any more of those skinheads beating up old ladies around here.” [Peeks at list] “Wow, I never realised there were so many skinhead thugs around! Is that professor really an antisemite? And that lady who sings songs?”

    Minority identity lobby liar:

    “Of course. It’s all scientifically worked out by the entirely unbiased and disinterested experts at an institute devoted to the purpose.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    when people like you


    you and your kind

    I'm on your side, Randal.

    As usual you are over thinking and not doing a very good job at it anyway.

    I would like to make one observation. The evidence is pretty clear that a homosexual orientation for a small % is out of their control. It is an abnormal normality.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. Anon 2 says:

    A few interesting facts:

    1. Having been expelled from much of Western Europe, by 1550 about 90%
    of the world’s Ashkenazi Jews lived in the Polish-Lithuanian Common-
    wealth. At the same time they were effectively barred from Russia;

    2. Throughout much of Poland’s history the Jews constituted 5-10% of the
    population. It was about 10% in the 1920s-’30s, or about 3.5 million.
    The percentages varied during the interwar period as hundreds of thousands
    of Jews escaped from Russia in the 1920s. 10% in the U.S. would mean
    about 32 million Jews instead of today’s 5-6 million. Imagine the United
    States with 32 million Jews! Except for France, in much of Western
    Europe the Jewish percentage is typically 0.1-0.3%.

    3. The American expression “Russian Jews” seems to imply that the
    millions of Jews who emigrated from the Russian Empire to the U.S.
    came from Moscow, SPB, Saratov or Omsk. Of course, that’s nonsense.
    They came mostly from the Pale of Settlement (i.e., roughly the eastern
    part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth) to which they were
    confined, i.e., from today’s Lithuania, Belarus, and Western Ukraine.
    Relatively few came from Congress Poland. The Jews thrived in 19th
    century Poland, and didn’t want to leave. Under the arenda system
    the Polish Jews were overrepresented in the entertainment and vice
    industries, and in the distribution of alcoholic beverages at inns and
    bordellos. Many of Israel’s Prime Ministers came from the former
    Pol-Lith Commonwealth starting with Ben-Gurion who was born north
    of Warsaw and Netanyahu whose father was born in Warsaw and his
    surname was Milejkowski. Netanyahu should use his real name –
    Milejkowski.

    4. Russia, like China, India, and the U.S., is not a country. It’s still
    an empire. It likes its huge territory. Therefore it’s compelled to pay
    the price in terms of multiculturalism and lack of unity. All empires
    are unstable due to extreme diversity, and need strong-man rule
    to maintain fragile equilibrium. The U.S., for example, is very likely
    to fall apart in the coming decades unless it (and it already is an oligarchy)
    turns to autocratic rule.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  119. Tyrion 2 says:

    What knowing goyim notice and dislike is that too many of their (((fellow white people))) combine progressive, pro-minority agendas with aggressive support of Israel across virtually all countries where they have a substantial demographic presence.

    First let me vent. I’ve never met a Jew who uses the word goyim or any variation thereof and I’ve never met a Jew who makes jokes at the expense of non-Jews vis a vis Jews themselves.

    It may feel cute and insidery to write like you have but it comes across about as dumb as a box of rocks. Even American Blacks don’t ever write about American Whites in the same way. It is utter ignorance put forward passive aggressively as a sophisticated and humourous critique.

    Anyway, venting almost done! I haven’t finished your article yet, I feel, in general, that you aren’t really empathising with your subject very well and occasionally draw a false conclusion to spice up your writing. Otoh, it is a difficult subject to be sensible on, for many reasons.

    As for your observation that if an SJW supports Israel, 9/10 they are Jewish. This is basically true. Of course this could easily be seen, not as an inexcusable hypocrisy, but as a relative compliment of those Jews.

    The pressure to conform to SJW norms is immense in Western capitals. Jews are under constant pressure to do so too. Pretty much any refusal to go along with the cult is a story of bravery and love, at least in my mind! Just as going along with the mutually reinforcing self-esteem boosting delusions and participating in every 2 minute hate session is a story of (understandable) cowardice.

    The fact that what probably amounts to a substantial minority of Jewish SJWs buck the trend for Israel’s sake may be annoying to non-SJWs. After all, why can’t they just show the moral fortitude to not be SJWs? But then at least they are able to buck it in some way, and for a higher level virtue like loyalty, while the vast majority of SJWs show absolutely none of the character required to escape the SJW solipsistic trap.

    Those Jewish SJWs may be mediocre at best in quality of character but the other SJWs are utterly abject.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin

    ... I’ve never met a Jew who makes jokes at the expense of non-Jews vis a vis Jews themselves.
     
    That joke was told by a Silicon Valley Soviet Jew to other Soviet Jews and who, I strongly suspect, was under the mistaken impression that I was a Jew.

    I certainly don't mind them telling such jokes, at least so long as it goes both ways.
    , @songbird
    Just chiming in: I have heard the word "goyish" used by some of my Jewish acquaintances. It was used in a joking, fairly benign way, among and referring to themselves. However, both favor anti white policies. One clearly has an historical grudge, which I find quite bizarre, for a variety of reasons, the least not being that he is atheistic and only half a Jew.

    Imagine a half Irishman/half Englishman who hated England and wanted to ethnically transform it. It's impossible. Many full Irishmen enjoy the old songs and a good social ribbing against the English, but have no real ill will. The most radical only want Ireland to be reunited. They don't want to ethnically transform England. But, then again, they have roots.

    BTW, HuffPost ran a headline "Goy, Bye" a while back before pulling it. There was a clear subtext about immigration trends. I have only known one Jew who ever made a critical comment about immigration. He was not what I would call a metropolitan, but grew up distantly from the main urban ring.
    , @RobinG
    "I’ve never met a Jew who uses the word goyim..."

    Then you don't get out much (or you're too obvious a stiff and towheaded goy for them to speak in front of you). About the first time I really heard it used (1977), a college aged Jewess told an acquaintance how happy she was that her family was moving to Israel, because she was "sick of all the goyim."

    As far as jokes about non-Jews, don't forget "Shiksas don't count." I think that qualifies, because it's said with a sneer.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. @reiner Tor
    I don’t know if it’s just anti-Putin (and pro-Merkel) propaganda, but I read that after the conversation turns deeper they always turn to Russian, because Merkel is more fluent in Russian than Putin in German, and Putin cannot express his more complicated thoughts in German well enough.

    I don’t know if it’s just anti-Putin (and pro-Merkel) propaganda, but I read that after the conversation turns deeper they always turn to Russian, because Merkel is more fluent in Russian than Putin in German, and Putin cannot express his more complicated thoughts in German well enough.

    I can’t find it now, but I recall reading somewhere that it was precisely the opposite!

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    It would certainly make more sense if it was the other way around, since Merkel never lived in Russia, but Putin did live in Germany for an extended period of time, so it’d make more sense for Putin to have learned German better than for Merkel to have learned Russian. But Merkel is known to have won some prize for her excellent knowledge of Russian, so who knows. It doesn’t matter much, except it’d be interesting if a false propaganda spread fake news on Putin’s lack of German skills. Until there’s some (credible) source, I won’t think it is so, though.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. @Tyrion 2

    What knowing goyim notice and dislike is that too many of their (((fellow white people))) combine progressive, pro-minority agendas with aggressive support of Israel across virtually all countries where they have a substantial demographic presence.
     
    First let me vent. I've never met a Jew who uses the word goyim or any variation thereof and I've never met a Jew who makes jokes at the expense of non-Jews vis a vis Jews themselves.

    It may feel cute and insidery to write like you have but it comes across about as dumb as a box of rocks. Even American Blacks don't ever write about American Whites in the same way. It is utter ignorance put forward passive aggressively as a sophisticated and humourous critique.

    Anyway, venting almost done! I haven't finished your article yet, I feel, in general, that you aren't really empathising with your subject very well and occasionally draw a false conclusion to spice up your writing. Otoh, it is a difficult subject to be sensible on, for many reasons.

    As for your observation that if an SJW supports Israel, 9/10 they are Jewish. This is basically true. Of course this could easily be seen, not as an inexcusable hypocrisy, but as a relative compliment of those Jews.

    The pressure to conform to SJW norms is immense in Western capitals. Jews are under constant pressure to do so too. Pretty much any refusal to go along with the cult is a story of bravery and love, at least in my mind! Just as going along with the mutually reinforcing self-esteem boosting delusions and participating in every 2 minute hate session is a story of (understandable) cowardice.

    The fact that what probably amounts to a substantial minority of Jewish SJWs buck the trend for Israel's sake may be annoying to non-SJWs. After all, why can't they just show the moral fortitude to not be SJWs? But then at least they are able to buck it in some way, and for a higher level virtue like loyalty, while the vast majority of SJWs show absolutely none of the character required to escape the SJW solipsistic trap.

    Those Jewish SJWs may be mediocre at best in quality of character but the other SJWs are utterly abject.

    … I’ve never met a Jew who makes jokes at the expense of non-Jews vis a vis Jews themselves.

    That joke was told by a Silicon Valley Soviet Jew to other Soviet Jews and who, I strongly suspect, was under the mistaken impression that I was a Jew.

    I certainly don’t mind them telling such jokes, at least so long as it goes both ways.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
    I learned the word 'goy' from the alt right. When I first read it I had absolutely no idea what it meant and had never heard nor seen it previously. It was entirely alien to me.

    I've never heard an anti-gentile joke either.

    Yet, I have heard many Jews say anti-Jewish jokes. Then again, I am English so moderate self-deprecation is traditional social behaviour.

    I assume that were I to meet those two ex-Soviet Jews I would, against my better self, internally label them as yokels. That type of self-congratulatory humour only works if the real joke in on you for acting the chauvinist simpleton. Perhaps they were doing that? Perhaps they're just a bit basic...
    , @iffen
    I certainly don’t mind them telling such jokes, at least so long as it goes both ways.

    First the UK runs out of Hungarians and now AK is worried about running out of Ivans.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. Tyrion 2 says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    ... I’ve never met a Jew who makes jokes at the expense of non-Jews vis a vis Jews themselves.
     
    That joke was told by a Silicon Valley Soviet Jew to other Soviet Jews and who, I strongly suspect, was under the mistaken impression that I was a Jew.

    I certainly don't mind them telling such jokes, at least so long as it goes both ways.

    I learned the word ‘goy’ from the alt right. When I first read it I had absolutely no idea what it meant and had never heard nor seen it previously. It was entirely alien to me.

    I’ve never heard an anti-gentile joke either.

    Yet, I have heard many Jews say anti-Jewish jokes. Then again, I am English so moderate self-deprecation is traditional social behaviour.

    I assume that were I to meet those two ex-Soviet Jews I would, against my better self, internally label them as yokels. That type of self-congratulatory humour only works if the real joke in on you for acting the chauvinist simpleton. Perhaps they were doing that? Perhaps they’re just a bit basic…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh

    That type of self-congratulatory humour only works if the real joke in on you for acting the chauvinist simpleton.
     
    I found the joke funny, too and am obviously not Jewish. It plays off the surprise of "like."

    just like the Jews with the Arabs.


    This sets the reader's mind to the usual track of "quality over quantity." Which is then made dissonant by...

    But do we have enough Jews?

    But its not enough to have quality. It has to be the quality of the Jewish!

    One can argue that the joke only works well on individuals who are fairly sophisticated enough that such ethnic assumptions aren't strong enough that the surprise of the punchline can work. Like most humor, it subverts expectations.

    Its similar to the humor in this, imo:

    Tonto and the Lone Ranger were riding through a canyon together, when all of a sudden both sides were filled with Indian warriors on horses, dressed for battle. The Lone Ranger turned to Tonto and asked, “What are we going to do?” Tonto replied, “What you mean ‘we,’ White Man?”
    , @Anon
    Here's a good one:

    It's a shtetl in Poland in the eighteenth century. There's a storm and the snow is driving. Old Abraham Moskowitz is dying, and he knows the end is coming soon. So he says to his son "Fetch a priest, before it's too late". His wife says "Surely you mean the rabbi, dear?". Abe says "No, I said a priest and I meant a priest! Now go!"; the son leaves. The wife says "Abraham, are you going to abandon the faith of your fathers? How can you do this?" The man says: "What are you, crazy? You want the rabbi should miss his dinner and come out in this snow?"
    , @Karl
    122 Tyrion2 > When I first read it I had absolutely no idea what it meant and had never heard nor seen it previously

    almost never appears in writing in contemporary Israel, and almost no one SAYS it.

    "zar'im" is most likely to be used for white or white-ish (asians) foreigners

    Africans are called "mistanan'im ("infiltrators"). Because they mostly did NOT enter legally. Most white/asian foreigners did, at least initially. Then over-stayed.

    Arabs are called "arav'im" Because they speak Arabic.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. @for-the-record
    I don’t know if it’s just anti-Putin (and pro-Merkel) propaganda, but I read that after the conversation turns deeper they always turn to Russian, because Merkel is more fluent in Russian than Putin in German, and Putin cannot express his more complicated thoughts in German well enough.

    I can't find it now, but I recall reading somewhere that it was precisely the opposite!

    It would certainly make more sense if it was the other way around, since Merkel never lived in Russia, but Putin did live in Germany for an extended period of time, so it’d make more sense for Putin to have learned German better than for Merkel to have learned Russian. But Merkel is known to have won some prize for her excellent knowledge of Russian, so who knows. It doesn’t matter much, except it’d be interesting if a false propaganda spread fake news on Putin’s lack of German skills. Until there’s some (credible) source, I won’t think it is so, though.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. Anon 2 says:

    Continuing,

    5. There were some problems with the huge Jewish population
    in 19th century Poland. As most of them were Orthodox and ultra-
    Orthodox, they had enormous birthrates. As mentioned, they were
    overrepresented in the vice industries. This scandalized not only
    the Polish Christians but also their Jewish brethren. For example,
    there were periodic raids on the Jewish-run bordellos in Warsaw
    around 1905 BY RELIGIOUS JEWS, but to no avail. The Jews could
    not police their own. That undermined their reputation. Harvey
    Weinstein almost sounds like a character from 19th-century Jewish
    Warsaw.

    6. Until World War I, the Polish Jews often refused to learn Polish.
    For example, Isaac Bashevis Singer who was born and raised in Poland,
    mostly in Warsaw, barely spoke Polish and wrote his books in Yiddish.
    But you’ve got to give him credit: in his memoirs he wrote how intensely
    happy he was growing up in Poland as a Jew. To many, unlike Russia and
    Ukraine, Poland around 1900 was still Paradisus Iudaeorum (Jewish Paradise).

    7. Then came WW I. Unfortunately, many prominent Jews were vehemently
    opposed to Poland regaining independence after 123 years. They even argued
    against it at the Peace Conference in Versailles. Nevertheless, while the Jews
    were escaping from the Russian Empire to the U.S. by the million, the Polish
    Jews were so happy in Poland that relatively few came to the U.S. Many even
    participated in the wars of Polish independence under Gen. Pilsudski. That’s how
    Poland, other than the U.S., ended up with the world’s largest number of Jews
    in the 1920s. Of course, Jews historically have preferred multiethnic empires
    to nations.

    8. World War II – unfortunately 150,000 Jews fought in Hitler’s army. How many
    Poles were killed or wounded by the German Jews is not known at this point.
    Perhaps it’ll never be known. During the interwar period, a number of Polish
    Jews, just like their cousins in New York, were Communist sympathizers. This
    made them suspect in Polish eyes because they seemed to want to bring Communism
    from the Soviet Union to Poland.

    9. After WW II, the Polish fears were substantiated, the Soviets imposed Communism
    in Poland, putting Polish Jews in prominent government and industrial
    positions. They lived a very privileged life while the Christian population
    starved. The Jews were also overrepresented among the secret police and torture
    apparatus. Many patriotic Poles (incl. priests) were tortured and executed, their
    children were kidnapped and executed. This is a painful chapter in Poland’s
    history that still needs a lot of research. But none of that endeared the Jews to
    the Polish population. Poland was indeed Jewish paradise for many centuries,
    but then the Jews’ leftist tendencies and what today is referred to as Cultural Marxism
    undermined good relations between the Jews and the Christians in Poland. As
    the Nobel laureate Czesław Miłosz wrote in his autobiography, the Polish behavior,
    unlike the Russian and Ukrainian behavior, and even more so German behavior,
    has typically been characterized by “moral restraint.” For example, murder rates
    in Poland have been much lower than in Russia, Ukraine, or the U.S. There were
    mass shootings in Germany in 2002 and 2009 where German teenagers killed
    15-16 school children. I could not imagine this happening in Poland.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    Mostly true. Jews in Poland had never assimilated at rates comparable to Russia (I won't even mention Germany). Apart from Julian Tuwim & Bruno Schulz, there are no significant Jewish Polish literary figures. The same goes for other spheres, although there are exceptions (mathematician Kuratowski).
    , @for-the-record
    World War II – unfortunately 150,000 Jews fought in Hitler’s army.

    I believe this should be qualified to indicate that they were (probably almost entirely) Mischlinge, i.e. only half or quarter Jewish. It is still quite surprising, I have to admit.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @iffen
    hating jews just for being jews

    People write this nonsensical line all the time and do you know why?

    Violà!

    (and almost nobody is actually an anti-Semite).

    See no anti-Semites, hear no anti-Semites, speak of no anti-Semites.

    There are no anti-Semites!

    Violà!

    Request granted!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. @Anon 2
    Continuing,

    5. There were some problems with the huge Jewish population
    in 19th century Poland. As most of them were Orthodox and ultra-
    Orthodox, they had enormous birthrates. As mentioned, they were
    overrepresented in the vice industries. This scandalized not only
    the Polish Christians but also their Jewish brethren. For example,
    there were periodic raids on the Jewish-run bordellos in Warsaw
    around 1905 BY RELIGIOUS JEWS, but to no avail. The Jews could
    not police their own. That undermined their reputation. Harvey
    Weinstein almost sounds like a character from 19th-century Jewish
    Warsaw.

    6. Until World War I, the Polish Jews often refused to learn Polish.
    For example, Isaac Bashevis Singer who was born and raised in Poland,
    mostly in Warsaw, barely spoke Polish and wrote his books in Yiddish.
    But you've got to give him credit: in his memoirs he wrote how intensely
    happy he was growing up in Poland as a Jew. To many, unlike Russia and
    Ukraine, Poland around 1900 was still Paradisus Iudaeorum (Jewish Paradise).

    7. Then came WW I. Unfortunately, many prominent Jews were vehemently
    opposed to Poland regaining independence after 123 years. They even argued
    against it at the Peace Conference in Versailles. Nevertheless, while the Jews
    were escaping from the Russian Empire to the U.S. by the million, the Polish
    Jews were so happy in Poland that relatively few came to the U.S. Many even
    participated in the wars of Polish independence under Gen. Pilsudski. That's how
    Poland, other than the U.S., ended up with the world's largest number of Jews
    in the 1920s. Of course, Jews historically have preferred multiethnic empires
    to nations.

    8. World War II - unfortunately 150,000 Jews fought in Hitler's army. How many
    Poles were killed or wounded by the German Jews is not known at this point.
    Perhaps it'll never be known. During the interwar period, a number of Polish
    Jews, just like their cousins in New York, were Communist sympathizers. This
    made them suspect in Polish eyes because they seemed to want to bring Communism
    from the Soviet Union to Poland.

    9. After WW II, the Polish fears were substantiated, the Soviets imposed Communism
    in Poland, putting Polish Jews in prominent government and industrial
    positions. They lived a very privileged life while the Christian population
    starved. The Jews were also overrepresented among the secret police and torture
    apparatus. Many patriotic Poles (incl. priests) were tortured and executed, their
    children were kidnapped and executed. This is a painful chapter in Poland's
    history that still needs a lot of research. But none of that endeared the Jews to
    the Polish population. Poland was indeed Jewish paradise for many centuries,
    but then the Jews' leftist tendencies and what today is referred to as Cultural Marxism
    undermined good relations between the Jews and the Christians in Poland. As
    the Nobel laureate Czesław Miłosz wrote in his autobiography, the Polish behavior,
    unlike the Russian and Ukrainian behavior, and even more so German behavior,
    has typically been characterized by "moral restraint." For example, murder rates
    in Poland have been much lower than in Russia, Ukraine, or the U.S. There were
    mass shootings in Germany in 2002 and 2009 where German teenagers killed
    15-16 school children. I could not imagine this happening in Poland.

    Mostly true. Jews in Poland had never assimilated at rates comparable to Russia (I won’t even mention Germany). Apart from Julian Tuwim & Bruno Schulz, there are no significant Jewish Polish literary figures. The same goes for other spheres, although there are exceptions (mathematician Kuratowski).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    Mostly true. Jews in Poland had never assimilated at rates comparable to Russia (I won’t even mention Germany). Apart from Julian Tuwim & Bruno Schulz, there are no significant Jewish Polish literary figures. The same goes for other spheres, although there are exceptions (mathematician Kuratowski).
     
    In maths and computer science/engineering applications, the Polish Jews were significant part of total Polish contributions. Tarski, Stanisław Ulam, Mandelbrot, Hugo Steinhaus, Emil Post, probably some more of that era.

    I took some set theory classes at university and was interested a little and reading about Tarski. Tarski is seen as a kind of undiscovered hero in computer science as well.

    This covers a general theme in other countries - where the Jewish populations are at best not more significant in cultural contribution than their population size. But in some fields like laying groundwork for computer science they were more heavily involved.

    , @Anon 2
    As I pointed out, there were very few Jews in Russia proper
    until 1900 or so. They were not protected by numbers so they
    had to assimilate or else. Poland had until 1940 the world's highest
    percentage of Jews so they were like Cubans in Miami. They
    basically formed their own country within Poland.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. @Fran Macadam
    Refreshing to read someone who reasons well, doesn't stick a finger in the wind to decide which way to bloviate, and ultimately doesn't take too seriously what others might excoriate about his opinions, without malice. And doesn't take himself overly seriously, either.

    And beyond that, Mr. Karlin is just immensely likable. I’m sure there’s some form of cognitive tribalism in that – most of his readers probably relate to him because they also have some interest in understanding-maximization rather than the usual ego-maximization potential that the Internet provides.

    In such, it probably limits his readership. But it makes for a much more worthwhile community overall.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. Anon 2 says:

    I’m convinced that if it hadn’t been for (1) German antisemitism amply
    demonstrated during the medieval expulsions and the mass killings of Jews
    and Poles during WW II (adding antipolonism to the list of German sins),
    and (2) Soviet Communism imposed on Poland, Poland would still have
    the world’s highest percentage of Jews, not 2% as in the U.S., but perhaps
    5-6%, i.e., a couple of million Jews would still be living in Poland to this day.
    True, many would have left for Israel and USA, but millions would be left.
    A 19th century visitor to Poland said that the Polish are the only people in
    the world whose bonhomie is so high that it’s capable of dissolving Jewish
    venom.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  129. j says: • Website
    @dmitry

    Problem: That 0.1% includes the Bonniers:

     

    And I doubt they had maintained the Jewish identity they had a century ago.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%85ke_Bonnier

    The other issue in the conspiracy theory is that Swedish media is very anti-Israel, so the theory of Swedish liberalism being Jewish is rather failing as a "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", when the product they sell on the market is an anti-Israel slanted coverage.

    When intelligent people like K. MacDonald speaks about Jewish influence on Sweden, I am astonished suspect some mental disorder. Yes, I know MacD is a professor in psychology and I know that it was the Frankfort School that first floated the idea that antisemitism is a mental problem. Only a few hundred Jews live in Sweden, they are mostly first and second generation and not rich, and live in fear of Muslim and local violence. They have zero influence on Swedish public life or politics. Regarding the Bonnier family, I do not know by what criterion they can be considered Jews, since no Bonnier has much Jewish blood at all and none practices Judaism or know what it may be. On the other hand, there is real, ongoing, open and public Jewish effort to influence Sweden, and that is Israel trying to moderate Sweden extreme anti-Israeli position. Israel is unhappy with the Swedish government support of the Palestinian extremists and the Swedish boycott of some Israeli products, artists , etc. It goes without saying that Israeli – Jewish – efforts are failing miserably. If Jews had a hundredth of the influence and power the antisemites like MacD attribute to us, Sweden would be our best friend and supporter in the United Nations.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    When intelligent people like K. MacDonald speaks about Jewish influence on Sweden, I am astonished suspect some mental disorder. Yes, I know MacD is a professor in psychology and I know that it was the Frankfort School that first floated the idea that antisemitism is a mental problem. Only a few hundred Jews live in Sweden, they are mostly first and second generation and not rich, and live in fear of Muslim and local violence. They have zero influence on Swedish public life or politics. Regarding the Bonnier family, I do not know by what criterion they can be considered Jews, since no Bonnier has much Jewish blood at all and none practices Judaism or know what it may be. On the other hand, there is real, ongoing, open and public Jewish effort to influence Sweden, and that is Israel trying to moderate Sweden extreme anti-Israeli position. Israel is unhappy with the Swedish government support of the Palestinian extremists and the Swedish boycott of some Israeli products, artists , etc. It goes without saying that Israeli – Jewish – efforts are failing miserably. If Jews had a hundredth of the influence and power the antisemites like MacD attribute to us, Sweden would be our best friend and supporter in the United Nations.

     

    I don't think subjects like 'sociology' or 'evolutionary psychology' require any intelligence to write in. They require a high degree of confirmation bias to string together your hypothesis, while discounting things that disprove or contradict your viewpoint. These theories are mainly operating in the realm of confirmation bias. But if you are an engineer and you reason like this in your work (i.e. without constant double-checking and examining of contradictions, and checking that you are not bewitched by confirmation bias), your figurative bridge will fail.
    , @fnn
    Presence on the ground in Sweden seems irrelevant. Sweden (like the rest of Western Europe) has been a de facto part of the American Empire since 1945. It's a statement of obvious fact that West Europeans have undergone a process of Americanization since WW2. For example, how long was it between the time when "hippies" made their first appearance in California in 1966 and they became common in Stockholm? Swedes have watching American TV and movies and listening to American music for a long time.

    Some Swedish guy:
    http://conswede.blogspot.com/2008/07/social-paradigms-shift-eg-our-view-on.html

    To illustrate what I talk about. Louis Armstrong visited Sweden in 1933. In all the news papers he was describe as something monkey-like let loose from the jungle. All across the line! And in the reviews by the most serious music critics.

    Who would have imagined in 1933, that twelve years later Western Europe would undergo an America-led cultural revolution which would lead to the common belief that there are no differences between races?

    Translation of two of the quotes:

    Knut Bäck in Göteborgs-Posten, November 1933:
    "This world is strange... No protests are raised against how the jungle is let loose into the society. Armstrong and his band are allowed to freely wreak destruction."

    Sten Broman in Sydsvenskan, November 1933:
    "Dare I say that he at times had something monkey-like about him and sometimes reminded of, according to our perceptions, a mentally disturbed person, when he pouted with his mouth or gaped it to its widest open and roared like a hoarse animal from a primeval forest."

    The third quote compares the concert with a natural disaster, and Armstrong's trumpet with a hell machine. The only good thing coming out of it, he says, is that it solves to old dispute of whether monkeys have a language.

    This is what Europe looked like, up until 1945. And since some people will live under the misconception that this was a phenomenon of the '30s, I here provide a quote from the Swedish Encyclopedia, Nordisk Familjebok, the 1876-1899 edition (here and here).

    "Psychologically the negro can be said be on the level of a child, with vivid fantasy, lack of endurance, ... can be said to lack morality rather than being immoral ... etc."

    Even though the point here has been to illustrate how social paradigms can shift completely in short time (and this is just one out of numerous examples), let me add how up until 1945 all the focus was put on the differences between races, and after that all the focus has been put on what is equal (while ignoring differences)
     
    , @Mistaf
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MFE0qAiofMQ

    Not Swedish, just an American Jew, married to a Rabbi, now living in Sweden and working towards the destruction of social cohesion.

    That the Swedish government is funding her institute is a sad joke but not surprising, after all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. @Tyrion 2
    I learned the word 'goy' from the alt right. When I first read it I had absolutely no idea what it meant and had never heard nor seen it previously. It was entirely alien to me.

    I've never heard an anti-gentile joke either.

    Yet, I have heard many Jews say anti-Jewish jokes. Then again, I am English so moderate self-deprecation is traditional social behaviour.

    I assume that were I to meet those two ex-Soviet Jews I would, against my better self, internally label them as yokels. That type of self-congratulatory humour only works if the real joke in on you for acting the chauvinist simpleton. Perhaps they were doing that? Perhaps they're just a bit basic...

    That type of self-congratulatory humour only works if the real joke in on you for acting the chauvinist simpleton.

    I found the joke funny, too and am obviously not Jewish. It plays off the surprise of “like.”

    just like the Jews with the Arabs.

    This sets the reader’s mind to the usual track of “quality over quantity.” Which is then made dissonant by…

    But do we have enough Jews?

    But its not enough to have quality. It has to be the quality of the Jewish!

    One can argue that the joke only works well on individuals who are fairly sophisticated enough that such ethnic assumptions aren’t strong enough that the surprise of the punchline can work. Like most humor, it subverts expectations.

    Its similar to the humor in this, imo:

    Tonto and the Lone Ranger were riding through a canyon together, when all of a sudden both sides were filled with Indian warriors on horses, dressed for battle. The Lone Ranger turned to Tonto and asked, “What are we going to do?” Tonto replied, “What you mean ‘we,’ White Man?”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
    Maybe it is a generational thing but I rolled my eyes when I read your follow-up joke.
    , @Greasy William

    Tonto and the Lone Ranger were riding through a canyon together, when all of a sudden both sides were filled with Indian warriors on horses, dressed for battle. The Lone Ranger turned to Tonto and asked, “What are we going to do?” Tonto replied, “What you mean ‘we,’ White Man?”
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Al7Bzeo-LP0
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. polskijoe says:
    @utu
    Yes, very bizarre conclusion.

    However Obama in some ways was making life much harder for Israel and Netanyahu managed to antagonize Obama which was unnecessary. While Syria got destabilized Obama did not implement the no-fly zone that would finish Syria off like Libya few years earlier. He seemed to be passively obstructing. Then Obama's parting shot was to not veto UN resolution against Israel.

    Historically, the Liberal establishment was neutral towards Zionism.
    Even some of them are antiZionist (although mostly are quiet about it, because of antisemite card and Jewish money and so on).

    Obama had come to power thanks to Jews in Chicago I believe.
    However, Obama was also influenced by Zbig. Zbig was antiZionist. And even vocal about it

    The Mainline Protestant churches tend to be neutral towards Israel or antizionist. Their world council of churches (I forget the name) is an example. Some of those libs elites prefer Arab oil over Israel.
    (though in recent decades that preferance has been reduced).

    However, most Liberal Jews are Zionist. And they again have money and most vote Democrat.
    And some Mainline protestants do support Israel in some way.
    This together with the Neocon-Zionist pressure. Democrats are Zionist leaning.

    Mainline churches have a shrinking population. And their old Anglo elite has less power than it used to.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Greasy William

    Democrats are Zionist leaning.
     
    Because of the donors and the influence of what I call "legacy" Dems (Democrats who came up in a different era and a different America). The Dems will be Corbynized by 2028 at the latest.
    , @utu
    It is not that Zbig was anti-zionist, it is that Zbig saw a bigger picture than the neocons. So when Obama came some of Obama's moves to neocons appeared anti-zionists. But Obama was taking care of the Empire. It was under him that the shift towards the anti-American left in Latin America was stopped and reversed. The neocons did care about Latin America because there were all about Israel so under Bush Latin America got a bit too uppity.

    In a long run the goal of the two factions is the same. The difference is that the neocons want to keep Jerusalem in the center all the time so when the final victory will comes the center of world will be in Jerusalem which WASP Lib Jew coalition would prefer to keep the center of the Empire whet it always was somewhere on the East Coast. But the empire is only one.

    Trump brought back the neocon faction to power with stronger tilt towards the orthodox: "He knows all the crooks in Israel" faction.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. melanf says:
    @songbird
    That's an interesting theory about Med people being good at business. Rivers are probably too choke pointed or feudalistic compared to a small sea.

    In the past, I've wondered something like this about art. You can find impressive works of art in many places. But nobody has ever had art like Europe. Not in classical times. Not during the Renaissance or really afterward. It is also seems stylistic influences radiated out of Europe to the Middle East and China and not so much the other way around.

    Of course, Northern Europe also had its Renaissance, but perhaps that is due to the North Sea. Perhaps a big flaw in the theory would be Jews and North Africans don't seem to be particularly good visual artists. Maybe, it is cultural but not genetic. A lot of art had religious themes. Prohibition for North Africans. Possibly less of a market for Jews, even though many old testament themes, it would be kind of unholy to employ a Jew in a church.

    n the past, I’ve wondered something like this about art. You can find impressive works of art in many places. But nobody has ever had art like Europe. Not in classical times. Not during the Renaissance or really afterward.

    This is strange, but in the Paleolit, Europe was also a world leader in the field of high art.

    Read More
    • Replies: @songbird
    I do think the better examples of European paleo art are qualitatively better than those elsewhere in the world, but as evidence it is sort of muddled because geology and climate arguably result in few surviving examples elsewhere.

    I'm inclined to think the Muslim prohibition on a lot of religious art may be some gene-cultural co-evolution thing. Lower native ability resulting in less predilection. Saudi Arabia has no permanent rivers, so perhaps it has something to do with trade.

    Jews are sometimes said to be deficient in spatial intelligence, but I think that only applies to Ashkenazi and it is only a relative lack compared to verbal.

    Recently, one site in Europe has been dated to 60,000 years ago. Neanderthal times. The photos look unimpressive, but there are some sketches of it that are more interesting. They show animals. Again there are the reservations about climate and geology preserving examples. But still it does make one wonder if there is something particular about Europe.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. Tyrion 2 says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    That type of self-congratulatory humour only works if the real joke in on you for acting the chauvinist simpleton.
     
    I found the joke funny, too and am obviously not Jewish. It plays off the surprise of "like."

    just like the Jews with the Arabs.


    This sets the reader's mind to the usual track of "quality over quantity." Which is then made dissonant by...

    But do we have enough Jews?

    But its not enough to have quality. It has to be the quality of the Jewish!

    One can argue that the joke only works well on individuals who are fairly sophisticated enough that such ethnic assumptions aren't strong enough that the surprise of the punchline can work. Like most humor, it subverts expectations.

    Its similar to the humor in this, imo:

    Tonto and the Lone Ranger were riding through a canyon together, when all of a sudden both sides were filled with Indian warriors on horses, dressed for battle. The Lone Ranger turned to Tonto and asked, “What are we going to do?” Tonto replied, “What you mean ‘we,’ White Man?”

    Maybe it is a generational thing but I rolled my eyes when I read your follow-up joke.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal
    What is it in the joke that made you find it worthy of "eye rolling"? I didn't laugh at it myself because I have heard it a number of times over the decades, but I recognise the humour in it. It is inherently funny because of the unexpected ruthlessness of Tonto's quick change of sides contrasted with the Lone Ranger's rather naïve assumption of loyalty. Noticeably, it's the opposite of what you criticised Anatoly's jewish joke for, since from a white perspective it's rather self-deprecatory.
    , @utu
    Are you for real? Trolling perhaps?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. OT: Anatoly, here is an article about Ukrainian Nazis immigrating to Israel as a result of the civil war. It’s in Hebrew but should work with google translate: http://www.israelhayom.co.il/article/537815

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  135. @Daniel Chieh

    That type of self-congratulatory humour only works if the real joke in on you for acting the chauvinist simpleton.
     
    I found the joke funny, too and am obviously not Jewish. It plays off the surprise of "like."

    just like the Jews with the Arabs.


    This sets the reader's mind to the usual track of "quality over quantity." Which is then made dissonant by...

    But do we have enough Jews?

    But its not enough to have quality. It has to be the quality of the Jewish!

    One can argue that the joke only works well on individuals who are fairly sophisticated enough that such ethnic assumptions aren't strong enough that the surprise of the punchline can work. Like most humor, it subverts expectations.

    Its similar to the humor in this, imo:

    Tonto and the Lone Ranger were riding through a canyon together, when all of a sudden both sides were filled with Indian warriors on horses, dressed for battle. The Lone Ranger turned to Tonto and asked, “What are we going to do?” Tonto replied, “What you mean ‘we,’ White Man?”

    Tonto and the Lone Ranger were riding through a canyon together, when all of a sudden both sides were filled with Indian warriors on horses, dressed for battle. The Lone Ranger turned to Tonto and asked, “What are we going to do?” Tonto replied, “What you mean ‘we,’ White Man?”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I grew up in a largely Jewish area. Not to be Pauline Kael here, but of the majority of Jews I’ve known personally, or with one degree of separation, I have a hard believing that they were of the same tribe as the über-successful tribe members controlling finance, media, politics. A lot of the ones I’ve known were working low-end jobs and constantly hustling or they were under-performers and always kvetching. I’ve even known some Jews who had science and law degrees who worked as antique dealers or liquor store clerks and who never had a pot to piss in and would always have big ideas about how to start a new soft drink or some other far-fetched idea. One Jewish family friend was a Ph.D. nuclear physicist and retired professor who had worked on the Manhattan Project. My mom was friends with his wife (also a scientist). They lived a very modest life, drove an old Datsun shitcan, and had a crappy house in need of constant repair. They had financial problems later in the life and my mom had to help them as much as she could. For every Michael Bloomberg you have 99 not-so-successful Jews. I know this is all anecdotal but as Nassim Taleb says, anecdotes are more salient than statistics.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    That seems to be accurate. I have similar experiences. Personally I like them the middle lower middle class American Jews. They are so much more interesting to be with than American gentiles from the same strata.
    , @Daniel Chieh
    I'll add my ancedotes. I grew up with a Jewish friend and we were all reasonably close, but around his teens, he began to get increasingly impressive accomplishments: we all wrote, but he would get published; some of us were getting getting to student associations, he became an intern at a major MSM outlet; and by the time we were poking around for careers, he already was set to be a journalist.

    I asked how he managed those things and he always shrugged and said "nepotism."

    Mind you, he was smart and capable(and perhaps self-deprecating), but it did seem that there's a strong network that helps too, and this goes beyond even the typical socioeconomic privilege that all of us had growing up. It reminds me a bit of Chinese guanxi, but much more effective and efficient, with a focus on media and messaging rather than doctors and engineering.

    One more.

    When my parents were in business, we were primarily supplied by a Jewish businessman. For some reason, our shipments kept having "extra" goods in them, which we decided to report and send back. Mysteriously afterward, the terms of business would improve.

    In retrospect, its possible that he considered that Chinese businessmen were generally dishonest and greedy, and therefore set out business/social traps like that in order to weed out individuals who are not worth doing business with. In that fashion, it would seem that he and perhaps many other Jews come from a culture uniquely well equipped with living and dealing with low-trust.

    Incidentally, I think this is the first time I've ever written about the "JQ." I suppose that cherry had to be burst eventually.

    , @Anon 2
    Nevertheless the median household income
    for the U.S. Jews is twice as high as the U.S. average.
    Read the Wikipedia article on the Jews in the United States.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. @polskijoe
    Historically, the Liberal establishment was neutral towards Zionism.
    Even some of them are antiZionist (although mostly are quiet about it, because of antisemite card and Jewish money and so on).

    Obama had come to power thanks to Jews in Chicago I believe.
    However, Obama was also influenced by Zbig. Zbig was antiZionist. And even vocal about it

    The Mainline Protestant churches tend to be neutral towards Israel or antizionist. Their world council of churches (I forget the name) is an example. Some of those libs elites prefer Arab oil over Israel.
    (though in recent decades that preferance has been reduced).

    However, most Liberal Jews are Zionist. And they again have money and most vote Democrat.
    And some Mainline protestants do support Israel in some way.
    This together with the Neocon-Zionist pressure. Democrats are Zionist leaning.

    Mainline churches have a shrinking population. And their old Anglo elite has less power than it used to.

    Democrats are Zionist leaning.

    Because of the donors and the influence of what I call “legacy” Dems (Democrats who came up in a different era and a different America). The Dems will be Corbynized by 2028 at the latest.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. Randal says:
    @Tyrion 2
    Maybe it is a generational thing but I rolled my eyes when I read your follow-up joke.

    What is it in the joke that made you find it worthy of “eye rolling”? I didn’t laugh at it myself because I have heard it a number of times over the decades, but I recognise the humour in it. It is inherently funny because of the unexpected ruthlessness of Tonto’s quick change of sides contrasted with the Lone Ranger’s rather naïve assumption of loyalty. Noticeably, it’s the opposite of what you criticised Anatoly’s jewish joke for, since from a white perspective it’s rather self-deprecatory.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    He is a troll, I think. Pretending to be a Jew from so high upper English society that he has never heard the word goy until he saw it alt right site or something.
    , @iffen
    Lone Ranger’s rather naïve assumption of loyalty

    Loyalty is generic.

    "We" expect Band of Brothers type loyalty. Evidently racial/ethnic loyalty was more important to Tonto.
    , @Tyrion 2
    Cliched white-bashing makes me roll my eyes. I've been brought up in an age where those who do it are posing as brave and taboo breaking while actually being drearily conventional. The two jokes share that, from my perspective. It's so predictable and therefore so boring. As is the po-faced lecturing (from abject ignorance) that normally accompanies it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. @Anon 2
    Continuing,

    5. There were some problems with the huge Jewish population
    in 19th century Poland. As most of them were Orthodox and ultra-
    Orthodox, they had enormous birthrates. As mentioned, they were
    overrepresented in the vice industries. This scandalized not only
    the Polish Christians but also their Jewish brethren. For example,
    there were periodic raids on the Jewish-run bordellos in Warsaw
    around 1905 BY RELIGIOUS JEWS, but to no avail. The Jews could
    not police their own. That undermined their reputation. Harvey
    Weinstein almost sounds like a character from 19th-century Jewish
    Warsaw.

    6. Until World War I, the Polish Jews often refused to learn Polish.
    For example, Isaac Bashevis Singer who was born and raised in Poland,
    mostly in Warsaw, barely spoke Polish and wrote his books in Yiddish.
    But you've got to give him credit: in his memoirs he wrote how intensely
    happy he was growing up in Poland as a Jew. To many, unlike Russia and
    Ukraine, Poland around 1900 was still Paradisus Iudaeorum (Jewish Paradise).

    7. Then came WW I. Unfortunately, many prominent Jews were vehemently
    opposed to Poland regaining independence after 123 years. They even argued
    against it at the Peace Conference in Versailles. Nevertheless, while the Jews
    were escaping from the Russian Empire to the U.S. by the million, the Polish
    Jews were so happy in Poland that relatively few came to the U.S. Many even
    participated in the wars of Polish independence under Gen. Pilsudski. That's how
    Poland, other than the U.S., ended up with the world's largest number of Jews
    in the 1920s. Of course, Jews historically have preferred multiethnic empires
    to nations.

    8. World War II - unfortunately 150,000 Jews fought in Hitler's army. How many
    Poles were killed or wounded by the German Jews is not known at this point.
    Perhaps it'll never be known. During the interwar period, a number of Polish
    Jews, just like their cousins in New York, were Communist sympathizers. This
    made them suspect in Polish eyes because they seemed to want to bring Communism
    from the Soviet Union to Poland.

    9. After WW II, the Polish fears were substantiated, the Soviets imposed Communism
    in Poland, putting Polish Jews in prominent government and industrial
    positions. They lived a very privileged life while the Christian population
    starved. The Jews were also overrepresented among the secret police and torture
    apparatus. Many patriotic Poles (incl. priests) were tortured and executed, their
    children were kidnapped and executed. This is a painful chapter in Poland's
    history that still needs a lot of research. But none of that endeared the Jews to
    the Polish population. Poland was indeed Jewish paradise for many centuries,
    but then the Jews' leftist tendencies and what today is referred to as Cultural Marxism
    undermined good relations between the Jews and the Christians in Poland. As
    the Nobel laureate Czesław Miłosz wrote in his autobiography, the Polish behavior,
    unlike the Russian and Ukrainian behavior, and even more so German behavior,
    has typically been characterized by "moral restraint." For example, murder rates
    in Poland have been much lower than in Russia, Ukraine, or the U.S. There were
    mass shootings in Germany in 2002 and 2009 where German teenagers killed
    15-16 school children. I could not imagine this happening in Poland.

    World War II – unfortunately 150,000 Jews fought in Hitler’s army.

    I believe this should be qualified to indicate that they were (probably almost entirely) Mischlinge, i.e. only half or quarter Jewish. It is still quite surprising, I have to admit.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. songbird says:
    @Tyrion 2

    What knowing goyim notice and dislike is that too many of their (((fellow white people))) combine progressive, pro-minority agendas with aggressive support of Israel across virtually all countries where they have a substantial demographic presence.
     
    First let me vent. I've never met a Jew who uses the word goyim or any variation thereof and I've never met a Jew who makes jokes at the expense of non-Jews vis a vis Jews themselves.

    It may feel cute and insidery to write like you have but it comes across about as dumb as a box of rocks. Even American Blacks don't ever write about American Whites in the same way. It is utter ignorance put forward passive aggressively as a sophisticated and humourous critique.

    Anyway, venting almost done! I haven't finished your article yet, I feel, in general, that you aren't really empathising with your subject very well and occasionally draw a false conclusion to spice up your writing. Otoh, it is a difficult subject to be sensible on, for many reasons.

    As for your observation that if an SJW supports Israel, 9/10 they are Jewish. This is basically true. Of course this could easily be seen, not as an inexcusable hypocrisy, but as a relative compliment of those Jews.

    The pressure to conform to SJW norms is immense in Western capitals. Jews are under constant pressure to do so too. Pretty much any refusal to go along with the cult is a story of bravery and love, at least in my mind! Just as going along with the mutually reinforcing self-esteem boosting delusions and participating in every 2 minute hate session is a story of (understandable) cowardice.

    The fact that what probably amounts to a substantial minority of Jewish SJWs buck the trend for Israel's sake may be annoying to non-SJWs. After all, why can't they just show the moral fortitude to not be SJWs? But then at least they are able to buck it in some way, and for a higher level virtue like loyalty, while the vast majority of SJWs show absolutely none of the character required to escape the SJW solipsistic trap.

    Those Jewish SJWs may be mediocre at best in quality of character but the other SJWs are utterly abject.

    Just chiming in: I have heard the word “goyish” used by some of my Jewish acquaintances. It was used in a joking, fairly benign way, among and referring to themselves. However, both favor anti white policies. One clearly has an historical grudge, which I find quite bizarre, for a variety of reasons, the least not being that he is atheistic and only half a Jew.

    Imagine a half Irishman/half Englishman who hated England and wanted to ethnically transform it. It’s impossible. Many full Irishmen enjoy the old songs and a good social ribbing against the English, but have no real ill will. The most radical only want Ireland to be reunited. They don’t want to ethnically transform England. But, then again, they have roots.

    BTW, HuffPost ran a headline “Goy, Bye” a while back before pulling it. There was a clear subtext about immigration trends. I have only known one Jew who ever made a critical comment about immigration. He was not what I would call a metropolitan, but grew up distantly from the main urban ring.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
    The "Goy, bye" thing was an idiot Huffington post version of the idiot pseudo-insider chat that Anatoly unfortunately fell into briefly in his article. Indeed it was directly inspired by their misunderstanding of the alt right phenomenon.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. utu says:
    @Tyrion 2
    Maybe it is a generational thing but I rolled my eyes when I read your follow-up joke.

    Are you for real? Trolling perhaps?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. utu says:
    @Randal
    What is it in the joke that made you find it worthy of "eye rolling"? I didn't laugh at it myself because I have heard it a number of times over the decades, but I recognise the humour in it. It is inherently funny because of the unexpected ruthlessness of Tonto's quick change of sides contrasted with the Lone Ranger's rather naïve assumption of loyalty. Noticeably, it's the opposite of what you criticised Anatoly's jewish joke for, since from a white perspective it's rather self-deprecatory.

    He is a troll, I think. Pretending to be a Jew from so high upper English society that he has never heard the word goy until he saw it alt right site or something.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal
    Not a straightforward troll. On the face of it he's a rather naïve young middle class jewish guy from a family in Britain. That could be a trolling pose or it might not. Be interesting to find out.

    I can believe it might be a term that has never come up in his particular social circle.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. utu says:
    @Anonymous
    I grew up in a largely Jewish area. Not to be Pauline Kael here, but of the majority of Jews I’ve known personally, or with one degree of separation, I have a hard believing that they were of the same tribe as the über-successful tribe members controlling finance, media, politics. A lot of the ones I’ve known were working low-end jobs and constantly hustling or they were under-performers and always kvetching. I’ve even known some Jews who had science and law degrees who worked as antique dealers or liquor store clerks and who never had a pot to piss in and would always have big ideas about how to start a new soft drink or some other far-fetched idea. One Jewish family friend was a Ph.D. nuclear physicist and retired professor who had worked on the Manhattan Project. My mom was friends with his wife (also a scientist). They lived a very modest life, drove an old Datsun shitcan, and had a crappy house in need of constant repair. They had financial problems later in the life and my mom had to help them as much as she could. For every Michael Bloomberg you have 99 not-so-successful Jews. I know this is all anecdotal but as Nassim Taleb says, anecdotes are more salient than statistics.

    That seems to be accurate. I have similar experiences. Personally I like them the middle lower middle class American Jews. They are so much more interesting to be with than American gentiles from the same strata.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. Randal says:
    @utu
    He is a troll, I think. Pretending to be a Jew from so high upper English society that he has never heard the word goy until he saw it alt right site or something.

    Not a straightforward troll. On the face of it he’s a rather naïve young middle class jewish guy from a family in Britain. That could be a trolling pose or it might not. Be interesting to find out.

    I can believe it might be a term that has never come up in his particular social circle.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tyrion 2

    On the face of it he’s a rather naïve young middle class jewish guy from a family in Britain.
     
    I know I am not naïve. I am too earnest, I admit. But we're living through a true tragedy. Almost none of the actors are evil. They do what they do for understandable reasons, yet the result is a slowly unfolding horror show. The Jew obsession among much of those who, like me, can see the horror of it all, is counterproductive and based on muddled thinking. So it is truly tragic in exactly the same way. It also contributes to our problems....which is why I'm minded to post here.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. utu says:
    @polskijoe
    Historically, the Liberal establishment was neutral towards Zionism.
    Even some of them are antiZionist (although mostly are quiet about it, because of antisemite card and Jewish money and so on).

    Obama had come to power thanks to Jews in Chicago I believe.
    However, Obama was also influenced by Zbig. Zbig was antiZionist. And even vocal about it

    The Mainline Protestant churches tend to be neutral towards Israel or antizionist. Their world council of churches (I forget the name) is an example. Some of those libs elites prefer Arab oil over Israel.
    (though in recent decades that preferance has been reduced).

    However, most Liberal Jews are Zionist. And they again have money and most vote Democrat.
    And some Mainline protestants do support Israel in some way.
    This together with the Neocon-Zionist pressure. Democrats are Zionist leaning.

    Mainline churches have a shrinking population. And their old Anglo elite has less power than it used to.

    It is not that Zbig was anti-zionist, it is that Zbig saw a bigger picture than the neocons. So when Obama came some of Obama’s moves to neocons appeared anti-zionists. But Obama was taking care of the Empire. It was under him that the shift towards the anti-American left in Latin America was stopped and reversed. The neocons did care about Latin America because there were all about Israel so under Bush Latin America got a bit too uppity.

    In a long run the goal of the two factions is the same. The difference is that the neocons want to keep Jerusalem in the center all the time so when the final victory will comes the center of world will be in Jerusalem which WASP Lib Jew coalition would prefer to keep the center of the Empire whet it always was somewhere on the East Coast. But the empire is only one.

    Trump brought back the neocon faction to power with stronger tilt towards the orthodox: “He knows all the crooks in Israel” faction.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. songbird says:
    @melanf

    n the past, I’ve wondered something like this about art. You can find impressive works of art in many places. But nobody has ever had art like Europe. Not in classical times. Not during the Renaissance or really afterward.
     
    This is strange, but in the Paleolit, Europe was also a world leader in the field of high art.
    https://profilib.net/reader/37/28/b22837/011.jpg

    I do think the better examples of European paleo art are qualitatively better than those elsewhere in the world, but as evidence it is sort of muddled because geology and climate arguably result in few surviving examples elsewhere.

    I’m inclined to think the Muslim prohibition on a lot of religious art may be some gene-cultural co-evolution thing. Lower native ability resulting in less predilection. Saudi Arabia has no permanent rivers, so perhaps it has something to do with trade.

    Jews are sometimes said to be deficient in spatial intelligence, but I think that only applies to Ashkenazi and it is only a relative lack compared to verbal.

    Recently, one site in Europe has been dated to 60,000 years ago. Neanderthal times. The photos look unimpressive, but there are some sketches of it that are more interesting. They show animals. Again there are the reservations about climate and geology preserving examples. But still it does make one wonder if there is something particular about Europe.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. j2 says: • Website

    I would imagine that if you know anything of Jews and their history, you must get 7 or more true,
    so why are there white or almost white spots on the map. It is probably the same as that in the 19th century there were white spots in the world map. Not studied.
    I can think of three reasons for these white or light blue spots:
    1. Do the people know anything about Jews? In the Northern countries people do not know, because in the Swedish time Jews were not allowed to settle in Sweden, so there are very few and very few have met them or thought about JQ and they answer as they would answer of any other people.
    2. How strong is the type of Christianity that says that you must support Israel since they are God’s people. It is so in the USA, maybe some groups think so in the GB also?
    3. Many think it is more intelligent and cultured to say politically correct things, and why should they not, not their problem?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  148. iffen says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    ... I’ve never met a Jew who makes jokes at the expense of non-Jews vis a vis Jews themselves.
     
    That joke was told by a Silicon Valley Soviet Jew to other Soviet Jews and who, I strongly suspect, was under the mistaken impression that I was a Jew.

    I certainly don't mind them telling such jokes, at least so long as it goes both ways.

    I certainly don’t mind them telling such jokes, at least so long as it goes both ways.

    First the UK runs out of Hungarians and now AK is worried about running out of Ivans.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. iffen says:
    @Randal

    People write this nonsensical line all the time and do you know why?
     
    Yes, it's because that's the definition used implicitly when people like you need to hold up examples of "antisemites" to make people see it as something especially unpleasant and hate-filled. Skinhead thugs, obsessive NSDAP murderers, people who clearly actually hate jewish people just for being jewish.

    But you knew that, of course.


    See no anti-Semites, hear no anti-Semites, speak of no anti-Semites.

    There are no anti-Semites!
     

    "Almost nobody" is not the same as nobody.

    But you knew that, of course.

    The purpose of the moving definition you and your kind use is clear and has been explained many times - a form of equivocation akin to the "motte and bailey fallacy", where you use one definition to establish evilness and then shift to a broader one to smear political opponents with that evilness. Same with the way antiracists use "racist", homosexualist activists use "homophobe", pro-immigration activists use "islamophobe".

    The same technique is used by many different groups, because it works often enough to be extremely effective.

    Minority identity lobby liar:

    "See that thug with the swastika tattoos beating up an old lady because she's jewish? That's an anti-Semite, that is. Aren't anti-Semites nasty, hate-filled and despicable?"

    Naif:

    "Gosh, yes! That's awful. You're right. I agree now with your suggestions about laws against such people and such behaviour."

    Minority identity lobby liar:

    OK, I've sorted out a definition of "anti-Semite" and made a list. We're ready to go, and to expel these noxious people from decent society. Your financial contribution backed up by the charitable tax refund and government subsidy you voted for was very useful.

    Naif:

    "Ok. Er, that's good I suppose. Won't be seeing any more of those skinheads beating up old ladies around here." [Peeks at list] "Wow, I never realised there were so many skinhead thugs around! Is that professor really an antisemite? And that lady who sings songs?"

    Minority identity lobby liar:

    "Of course. It's all scientifically worked out by the entirely unbiased and disinterested experts at an institute devoted to the purpose."

    when people like you

    you and your kind

    I’m on your side, Randal.

    As usual you are over thinking and not doing a very good job at it anyway.

    I would like to make one observation. The evidence is pretty clear that a homosexual orientation for a small % is out of their control. It is an abnormal normality.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. Echo of Moscow has to be the most hilariously ironic name ever. ahhaahahahahaha

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  151. iffen says:
    @Randal
    What is it in the joke that made you find it worthy of "eye rolling"? I didn't laugh at it myself because I have heard it a number of times over the decades, but I recognise the humour in it. It is inherently funny because of the unexpected ruthlessness of Tonto's quick change of sides contrasted with the Lone Ranger's rather naïve assumption of loyalty. Noticeably, it's the opposite of what you criticised Anatoly's jewish joke for, since from a white perspective it's rather self-deprecatory.

    Lone Ranger’s rather naïve assumption of loyalty

    Loyalty is generic.

    “We” expect Band of Brothers type loyalty. Evidently racial/ethnic loyalty was more important to Tonto.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    Loyalty is generic.

    “We” expect Band of Brothers type loyalty. Evidently racial/ethnic loyalty was more important to Tonto.
     
    As I interpret the joke, only because (in this case) the circumstances suddenly made that the sensible course of action. But I first heard the joke decades ago when racial/ethnic loyalty just wasn't as forefront an issue as it is today (iirc it was "pale face" not "white man" in the older tellings).

    I’m on your side, Randal.
     
    Not on this issue you aren't. Nor on free speech. And those are two pretty big and interrelated issues. The latter much more than the former for me, actually.


    I would like to make one observation. The evidence is pretty clear that a homosexual orientation for a small % is out of their control. It is an abnormal normality.
     
    !?

    Presumably this is referring back to a previous conversation. From my point of view it's of no consequence whether "homosexual orientation" is under control or not. Indeed since I regard "homosexual orientation" as merely modern homo lobby speak for being tempted to do homo sex stuff, I tend to assume it probably is outside their control to some extent, as many temptations to sin are. It's not the temptations that matter but what they do in response. I have frequently been tempted to sleep with women other than my wife. I don't feel in the slightest bad about that and nor do I consider myself an adulterer as a result. I suppose if I were to feel a temptation to have sex with another man or with an Alsatian or some other animal (the two situations are directly comparable imo) then I would feel rather perturbed and concerned, but I wouldn't feel guilty about it. I just would deal with it by not responding to it and suppressing or diverting it.

    But this seems rather dramatically off topic.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. Dmitry says:
    @reiner Tor
    This Swedish “Jew” nicely dovetails into what I’m saying. He’s not really Jewish and is therefore probably alienated from Israel which is basically alien to him, and so he behaves like Jews do among Europeans, organizing NGOs with the subconscious aim of destroying the society of which he’s nominally a member.

    Regarding the Bonniers, I don’t think your impression of their assimilation should be decisive. What we are talking about is some sense of alienation; and of course genetics. Neither of which disappear with superficial worldly success. You also seem to have very strange stereotypes of Swedes if you think a publisher/media/entertainment entrepreneur family is all that stereotypically Swedish. To me it matches the stereotypes of another ethnic group, I just forgot for the moment which one.

    For me, after a few minutes of research, they are a stereotype of rich, very ‘posh’, Swedish with inherited sources of income, and affluenza – very similar to the Rausing family I mention above.

    Of course, in 150 years ago they were Jews – but how many generations have they been Christians and intermarrying. They are 1/8 Jewish or 1/16 Jewish?

    (I can hardly relate my modest family to this kind of bourgeois dynasty. But my grandfather had Jewish descent (his mother). By the third-generation, this becomes more just something interesting on the family tree, told as a story every couple years, than something which shapes your upbringing or creates any distinctions. Actually I am quite interested in Jewish affairs since I was a teenager and I lived in Israel for several months five years ago – I still have friends in Israel and really love this country, but nobody else in my family has any interest or even notices the subject; the majority are rather unlike me).

    To go back on topic.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jo_Bonnier

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eva_Bonnier

    “She established a foundation for the beautification of Stockholm, which in its first years financed paintings and sculptures for public places and institutions, such as the Royal Library, Stockholm University, and several Stockholm schools. The foundation remains active.”

    “Eva Bonnier suffered from frequent depressions and took her own life in 1909.”

    Those two – quite talented.

    And then others just Christian liberals I would infer.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%85ke_Bonnier

    This Swedish “Jew” nicely dovetails into what I’m saying. He’s not really Jewish and is therefore probably alienated from Israel which is basically alien to him, and so he behaves like Jews do among Europeans, organizing NGOs with the subconscious aim of destroying the society of which he’s nominally a member.

    Well Reiner I enjoy your posts usually. But you’re the resident psychoanalyst that diagnoses people with autism. And this – like most people on this site – is generally a strange claim about how liberals and utopians actually think.

    Liberals generally believe in their liberalism. Some are malicious, have chips on their shoulders, others are clear psychos with a chaos agenda (Soros), etc, but the majority feel they are doing good and benefactors.

    In Rausing’s case – of course, she is in ivory tower (belonging to Sweden’s richest family), and doesn’t need Israel to protect her. So she has no real stake in it.

    But much more you can just perceive her Swedish utopian liberalism, from a woman who grew up in a cozy environment.

    She actually believes the left tradition, and that Israel would be better off if it took illegal immigrants, became more multi-cultural, was pacifist, etc. She grew up in a safe environment and doesn’t perceive the dangers that are only visible to those from more precarious background.

    In other words, she wants Israel to become another version of Sweden.

    I don’t think she is malicious or alienated.

    The last sentence in the article I will link below is quite interesting and may support your interpretation though:

    https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-jewish-chronicle/20070518/282192236555718

    Your view of shareholders is totally unrealistic, like you have never heard of principal-agent problems or never understood how they can occur in big corporations (like when setting salaries of unsuccessful CEOs). The shareholders in Hollywood are also often of the same political tilt. They often don’t notice how much money they are leaving on the table, because they make a lot of money anyway. And they do leave money on the table, like the girl hero merchandise is not selling well in the case of Star Wars. This contrary to your naive assumption that it’s all about attracting girls to Star Wars movies. You know, girls don’t care that much about this type of movies regardless of girl heroes, it’s quite autistic to assume otherwise.

    Sure, there are high barriers to entry in the industry. But there is a lot of competition between studios, a lot of motive to move into the industry (the massive profits) and the success of a film is determined exactly by its profits.

    The ‘autistic’ viewpoint is the assumption that the introduction of diversity agenda into movies is not popular or at least motivated by an attempt to be popular (rather than inferring rather strange conspiracies). The latest Star Wars diversity has failed, but it was very clearly motivated by an attempt at popularity (i.e. the Chinese character to appeal to the Chinese market, etc).

    In websites, I guess you’re aware that this website is just a hobby project for Ron, and will only work as long as it’s important to him. Anyway, websites are the least important things with the most competition, but even there sites like this cannot compete in terms of news service with mainstream websites. With access to actual news agencies etc. Sites like Breitbart also needed wealthy supporters, I guess you guessed correctly, they were Zionist Jews.

    Breitbart is popular became of its anti-immigration and anti-liberal agenda. It filled a gap in the market like Fox did some years earlier. The Zionist aspect of Breitbart is not really the key to its success, although it does accord with the views of the largest segment of the readership (i.e. the Republican base).

    You hold a highly unrealistic view of competition in the entertainment industry. Blockbuster movies are blockbusters because they have a very high budget and so a very high barrier of entry. Mel Gibson made a killing with The Passion, but his actors’ and other contributors’ careers suffered and so he couldn’t continue making conservative movies. In an interconnected industry you cannot do something which everyone else opposes because they can make your underlings suffer and so next time no one will want to work with you. And a high barrier of entry means there are not many dissenters like Mel Gibson in a position to make such movies spreading dissenting messages.

    Gibson movies are still bestselling blockbusters. The reason is because they are a kind of trash that appeals to viewers with low cultural level, like every other blockbuster film.

    Meanwhile, we still have extremely talented filmakers, making good films.

    But you are not going to get rich making such films, as they do not appeal to the ‘lowest common denominator.

    The only good film released last year, Nelyubov’ – was the 99th most popular film of last year in its home market.

    https://www.kinopoisk.ru/index.php?level=6&view_best_box=1&view_best_box=3&view_year=2017

    Read More
    • Replies: @melanf

    they are a kind of trash that appeals to viewers with low cultural level, like every other blockbuster film.
     
    That's obvious nonsense. Among the "blockbusters" there are very talented movies

    Meanwhile, we still have extremely talented filmakers, making good films.
    But you are not going to get rich making such films, as they do not appeal to the ‘lowest common denominator.
    The only good film released last year, Nelyubov’ – was the 99th most popular film of last year in its home market.
     
    Talented films fail at the box office only in very very rare cases.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. Tyrion 2 says:
    @songbird
    Just chiming in: I have heard the word "goyish" used by some of my Jewish acquaintances. It was used in a joking, fairly benign way, among and referring to themselves. However, both favor anti white policies. One clearly has an historical grudge, which I find quite bizarre, for a variety of reasons, the least not being that he is atheistic and only half a Jew.

    Imagine a half Irishman/half Englishman who hated England and wanted to ethnically transform it. It's impossible. Many full Irishmen enjoy the old songs and a good social ribbing against the English, but have no real ill will. The most radical only want Ireland to be reunited. They don't want to ethnically transform England. But, then again, they have roots.

    BTW, HuffPost ran a headline "Goy, Bye" a while back before pulling it. There was a clear subtext about immigration trends. I have only known one Jew who ever made a critical comment about immigration. He was not what I would call a metropolitan, but grew up distantly from the main urban ring.

    The “Goy, bye” thing was an idiot Huffington post version of the idiot pseudo-insider chat that Anatoly unfortunately fell into briefly in his article. Indeed it was directly inspired by their misunderstanding of the alt right phenomenon.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. Randal says:
    @iffen
    Lone Ranger’s rather naïve assumption of loyalty

    Loyalty is generic.

    "We" expect Band of Brothers type loyalty. Evidently racial/ethnic loyalty was more important to Tonto.

    Loyalty is generic.

    “We” expect Band of Brothers type loyalty. Evidently racial/ethnic loyalty was more important to Tonto.

    As I interpret the joke, only because (in this case) the circumstances suddenly made that the sensible course of action. But I first heard the joke decades ago when racial/ethnic loyalty just wasn’t as forefront an issue as it is today (iirc it was “pale face” not “white man” in the older tellings).

    I’m on your side, Randal.

    Not on this issue you aren’t. Nor on free speech. And those are two pretty big and interrelated issues. The latter much more than the former for me, actually.

    I would like to make one observation. The evidence is pretty clear that a homosexual orientation for a small % is out of their control. It is an abnormal normality.

    !?

    Presumably this is referring back to a previous conversation. From my point of view it’s of no consequence whether “homosexual orientation” is under control or not. Indeed since I regard “homosexual orientation” as merely modern homo lobby speak for being tempted to do homo sex stuff, I tend to assume it probably is outside their control to some extent, as many temptations to sin are. It’s not the temptations that matter but what they do in response. I have frequently been tempted to sleep with women other than my wife. I don’t feel in the slightest bad about that and nor do I consider myself an adulterer as a result. I suppose if I were to feel a temptation to have sex with another man or with an Alsatian or some other animal (the two situations are directly comparable imo) then I would feel rather perturbed and concerned, but I wouldn’t feel guilty about it. I just would deal with it by not responding to it and suppressing or diverting it.

    But this seems rather dramatically off topic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    But this seems rather dramatically off topic.

    We are discussing the JQ. Both are accidents of birth.

    Should be normal abnormality instead of abnormal normality.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. Tyrion 2 says:
    @Randal
    What is it in the joke that made you find it worthy of "eye rolling"? I didn't laugh at it myself because I have heard it a number of times over the decades, but I recognise the humour in it. It is inherently funny because of the unexpected ruthlessness of Tonto's quick change of sides contrasted with the Lone Ranger's rather naïve assumption of loyalty. Noticeably, it's the opposite of what you criticised Anatoly's jewish joke for, since from a white perspective it's rather self-deprecatory.

    Cliched white-bashing makes me roll my eyes. I’ve been brought up in an age where those who do it are posing as brave and taboo breaking while actually being drearily conventional. The two jokes share that, from my perspective. It’s so predictable and therefore so boring. As is the po-faced lecturing (from abject ignorance) that normally accompanies it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    Cliched white-bashing makes me roll my eyes.
     
    OK that makes sense, and I share your distaste for clichéd white-bashing. Though I think it's a bit of a stretch applying that to Chieh's joke. As I admitted, from a white perspective it's self-deprecatory (unless you see a nobility in the naïve assumption of loyalty), but it also can be interpreted as critical of Tonto for being cynically disloyal, or (perhaps more modern) being loyal to his identity group over his comrade. It can be interpreted as representing a "realist" view of the world that says that in the end you can only trust your own ethnic group.

    But it's funny not because of any of those "political" interpretations, but because of the contrast I referred to previously. De gustibus non est disputandum, though, I suppose.

    I know I am not naïve. I am too earnest, I admit.
     
    OK. The impression I get is that you are very much rather naïve about your own group, but that's not really a criticism, especially in someone young and therefore necessarily relatively inexperienced. You aren't stupid, clearly. But nor is iffen.


    The Jew obsession among much of those who, like me, can see the horror of it all, is counterproductive and based on muddled thinking.
     
    This is a matter of opinion, obviously, and yours is not shared by some very experienced and competent observers here who can produce examples and arguments to back up their position (and by a lot of fools as well, but that's by the by).

    One man's "Jew obsession" is another's recognition of problems caused by jewish influence.

    Your assumption that it's "counterproductive" is obviously based upon the denial of the belief of others that jewish influence is itself part of the problem. Speaking as someone who has been directly threatened with police harassment and prosecution merely for expressing opinions, by a jewish man using the resources of an explicitly jewish organisation, I am going to take quite a lot of convincing now that jewish collective attitudes and behaviour aren't a big part of the problems my country faces.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. fnn says:
    @German_reader

    the ethnic German lobby (apparently such a thing existed)
     
    Never heard of that and I doubt it really existed at that time. My impression is that Germans were largely crushed as a distinctive cultural force in the US during WW1 (the Nazi Bund people in the 1930s were a marginal phenomenon) and meekly accepted their absorption into Anglo-America. I've seen numerous comments by Americans of some German descent who claim being told by grandparents and the like that 1917/1918 was a real watershed, with people sometimes stopping talking German even in private...seems plausible to me.
    So I don't buy the arguments by Jewish lobbyists who come up with arguments like "Oh, in America it's normal for ethnic groups to have lobbies, everyone does it!"...clearly not true.

    He may be referring to Lutheran Church organizations in the Midwest.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hibernian
    My Mom (American born Irish w/ one Irish born parent) remembers German neighbors in Chicago circa 1939-40 who went to Nazi propaganda films at local the Lutheran church about "Polish atrocities."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. melanf says:
    @Dmitry

    Regarding the Bonniers, I don’t think your impression of their assimilation should be decisive. What we are talking about is some sense of alienation; and of course genetics. Neither of which disappear with superficial worldly success. You also seem to have very strange stereotypes of Swedes if you think a publisher/media/entertainment entrepreneur family is all that stereotypically Swedish. To me it matches the stereotypes of another ethnic group, I just forgot for the moment which one.

     

    For me, after a few minutes of research, they are a stereotype of rich, very 'posh', Swedish with inherited sources of income, and affluenza - very similar to the Rausing family I mention above.

    Of course, in 150 years ago they were Jews - but how many generations have they been Christians and intermarrying. They are 1/8 Jewish or 1/16 Jewish?

    (I can hardly relate my modest family to this kind of bourgeois dynasty. But my grandfather had Jewish descent (his mother). By the third-generation, this becomes more just something interesting on the family tree, told as a story every couple years, than something which shapes your upbringing or creates any distinctions. Actually I am quite interested in Jewish affairs since I was a teenager and I lived in Israel for several months five years ago - I still have friends in Israel and really love this country, but nobody else in my family has any interest or even notices the subject; the majority are rather unlike me).

    To go back on topic.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jo_Bonnier

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eva_Bonnier

    "She established a foundation for the beautification of Stockholm, which in its first years financed paintings and sculptures for public places and institutions, such as the Royal Library, Stockholm University, and several Stockholm schools. The foundation remains active."

    "Eva Bonnier suffered from frequent depressions and took her own life in 1909."

    Those two - quite talented.

    And then others just Christian liberals I would infer.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%85ke_Bonnier


    This Swedish “Jew” nicely dovetails into what I’m saying. He’s not really Jewish and is therefore probably alienated from Israel which is basically alien to him, and so he behaves like Jews do among Europeans, organizing NGOs with the subconscious aim of destroying the society of which he’s nominally a member.
     
    Well Reiner I enjoy your posts usually. But you're the resident psychoanalyst that diagnoses people with autism. And this - like most people on this site - is generally a strange claim about how liberals and utopians actually think.

    Liberals generally believe in their liberalism. Some are malicious, have chips on their shoulders, others are clear psychos with a chaos agenda (Soros), etc, but the majority feel they are doing good and benefactors.

    In Rausing's case - of course, she is in ivory tower (belonging to Sweden's richest family), and doesn't need Israel to protect her. So she has no real stake in it.

    But much more you can just perceive her Swedish utopian liberalism, from a woman who grew up in a cozy environment.

    She actually believes the left tradition, and that Israel would be better off if it took illegal immigrants, became more multi-cultural, was pacifist, etc. She grew up in a safe environment and doesn't perceive the dangers that are only visible to those from more precarious background.

    In other words, she wants Israel to become another version of Sweden.

    I don't think she is malicious or alienated.

    The last sentence in the article I will link below is quite interesting and may support your interpretation though:

    https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-jewish-chronicle/20070518/282192236555718


    Your view of shareholders is totally unrealistic, like you have never heard of principal-agent problems or never understood how they can occur in big corporations (like when setting salaries of unsuccessful CEOs). The shareholders in Hollywood are also often of the same political tilt. They often don’t notice how much money they are leaving on the table, because they make a lot of money anyway. And they do leave money on the table, like the girl hero merchandise is not selling well in the case of Star Wars. This contrary to your naive assumption that it’s all about attracting girls to Star Wars movies. You know, girls don’t care that much about this type of movies regardless of girl heroes, it’s quite autistic to assume otherwise.

     

    Sure, there are high barriers to entry in the industry. But there is a lot of competition between studios, a lot of motive to move into the industry (the massive profits) and the success of a film is determined exactly by its profits.

    The 'autistic' viewpoint is the assumption that the introduction of diversity agenda into movies is not popular or at least motivated by an attempt to be popular (rather than inferring rather strange conspiracies). The latest Star Wars diversity has failed, but it was very clearly motivated by an attempt at popularity (i.e. the Chinese character to appeal to the Chinese market, etc).


    In websites, I guess you’re aware that this website is just a hobby project for Ron, and will only work as long as it’s important to him. Anyway, websites are the least important things with the most competition, but even there sites like this cannot compete in terms of news service with mainstream websites. With access to actual news agencies etc. Sites like Breitbart also needed wealthy supporters, I guess you guessed correctly, they were Zionist Jews.

     

    Breitbart is popular became of its anti-immigration and anti-liberal agenda. It filled a gap in the market like Fox did some years earlier. The Zionist aspect of Breitbart is not really the key to its success, although it does accord with the views of the largest segment of the readership (i.e. the Republican base).

    You hold a highly unrealistic view of competition in the entertainment industry. Blockbuster movies are blockbusters because they have a very high budget and so a very high barrier of entry. Mel Gibson made a killing with The Passion, but his actors’ and other contributors’ careers suffered and so he couldn’t continue making conservative movies. In an interconnected industry you cannot do something which everyone else opposes because they can make your underlings suffer and so next time no one will want to work with you. And a high barrier of entry means there are not many dissenters like Mel Gibson in a position to make such movies spreading dissenting messages.

     

    Gibson movies are still bestselling blockbusters. The reason is because they are a kind of trash that appeals to viewers with low cultural level, like every other blockbuster film.

    Meanwhile, we still have extremely talented filmakers, making good films.

    But you are not going to get rich making such films, as they do not appeal to the 'lowest common denominator.

    The only good film released last year, Nelyubov’ – was the 99th most popular film of last year in its home market.

    https://www.kinopoisk.ru/index.php?level=6&view_best_box=1&view_best_box=3&view_year=2017
     

    they are a kind of trash that appeals to viewers with low cultural level, like every other blockbuster film.

    That’s obvious nonsense. Among the “blockbusters” there are very talented movies

    Meanwhile, we still have extremely talented filmakers, making good films.
    But you are not going to get rich making such films, as they do not appeal to the ‘lowest common denominator.
    The only good film released last year, Nelyubov’ – was the 99th most popular film of last year in its home market.

    Talented films fail at the box office only in very very rare cases.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    Talented films fail at the box office only in very very rare cases.

     

    As with classical music, in the time when there was still a large audience for them, as recently as the 1970s - they enjoyed moderate ticket sales. Tarkovsky was popular when our parents were growing up.

    But the films which generate larger profits, in a rather trivial way 'talented' in terms of being able to appeal to the lowest common denominator in the audience.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films

    Although I don't see a great tragedy in this so long as there can be maintained enough of a minority audience to allow the good filmmakers to still work (just as there is still an audience for classical music concerts to be performed in the large cities, even if they are hardly of great popularity in comparison to the trash music).

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. Dmitry says:
    @melanf

    they are a kind of trash that appeals to viewers with low cultural level, like every other blockbuster film.
     
    That's obvious nonsense. Among the "blockbusters" there are very talented movies

    Meanwhile, we still have extremely talented filmakers, making good films.
    But you are not going to get rich making such films, as they do not appeal to the ‘lowest common denominator.
    The only good film released last year, Nelyubov’ – was the 99th most popular film of last year in its home market.
     
    Talented films fail at the box office only in very very rare cases.

    Talented films fail at the box office only in very very rare cases.

    As with classical music, in the time when there was still a large audience for them, as recently as the 1970s – they enjoyed moderate ticket sales. Tarkovsky was popular when our parents were growing up.

    But the films which generate larger profits, in a rather trivial way ‘talented’ in terms of being able to appeal to the lowest common denominator in the audience.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films

    Although I don’t see a great tragedy in this so long as there can be maintained enough of a minority audience to allow the good filmmakers to still work (just as there is still an audience for classical music concerts to be performed in the large cities, even if they are hardly of great popularity in comparison to the trash music).

    Read More
    • Replies: @melanf

    Tarkovsky was popular when our parents were growing up.
     
    Tarkovsky's films were (in 1970) interesting to a very small number of people. And today these films are interesting to very very small number of people. I think these movies deserve to be called "trash", not the product of Mel Gibson with shooting and chase.

    But the films which generate larger profits, in a rather trivial way ‘talented’ in terms of being able to appeal to the lowest common denominator in the audience.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films
     
    from your link

    http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_E5cSkRNNzuk/TH_zPQy4poI/AAAAAAAAJ1M/BC0ZOyRRI-g/s1600/GoneWiththeWindPoster.jpg

    and: " franchise films have been among the best performers in the 21st century. Six Harry Potter films and five films from Peter Jackson's Middle-earth series are included in the nominal earnings chart, while the Star Wars and Pirates of the Caribbean franchises feature prominently."

    Middle-earth series and Star Wars (first!) realy great films

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. Tyrion 2 says:
    @Randal
    Not a straightforward troll. On the face of it he's a rather naïve young middle class jewish guy from a family in Britain. That could be a trolling pose or it might not. Be interesting to find out.

    I can believe it might be a term that has never come up in his particular social circle.

    On the face of it he’s a rather naïve young middle class jewish guy from a family in Britain.

    I know I am not naïve. I am too earnest, I admit. But we’re living through a true tragedy. Almost none of the actors are evil. They do what they do for understandable reasons, yet the result is a slowly unfolding horror show. The Jew obsession among much of those who, like me, can see the horror of it all, is counterproductive and based on muddled thinking. So it is truly tragic in exactly the same way. It also contributes to our problems….which is why I’m minded to post here.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. Dmitry says:
    @j
    When intelligent people like K. MacDonald speaks about Jewish influence on Sweden, I am astonished suspect some mental disorder. Yes, I know MacD is a professor in psychology and I know that it was the Frankfort School that first floated the idea that antisemitism is a mental problem. Only a few hundred Jews live in Sweden, they are mostly first and second generation and not rich, and live in fear of Muslim and local violence. They have zero influence on Swedish public life or politics. Regarding the Bonnier family, I do not know by what criterion they can be considered Jews, since no Bonnier has much Jewish blood at all and none practices Judaism or know what it may be. On the other hand, there is real, ongoing, open and public Jewish effort to influence Sweden, and that is Israel trying to moderate Sweden extreme anti-Israeli position. Israel is unhappy with the Swedish government support of the Palestinian extremists and the Swedish boycott of some Israeli products, artists , etc. It goes without saying that Israeli - Jewish - efforts are failing miserably. If Jews had a hundredth of the influence and power the antisemites like MacD attribute to us, Sweden would be our best friend and supporter in the United Nations.

    When intelligent people like K. MacDonald speaks about Jewish influence on Sweden, I am astonished suspect some mental disorder. Yes, I know MacD is a professor in psychology and I know that it was the Frankfort School that first floated the idea that antisemitism is a mental problem. Only a few hundred Jews live in Sweden, they are mostly first and second generation and not rich, and live in fear of Muslim and local violence. They have zero influence on Swedish public life or politics. Regarding the Bonnier family, I do not know by what criterion they can be considered Jews, since no Bonnier has much Jewish blood at all and none practices Judaism or know what it may be. On the other hand, there is real, ongoing, open and public Jewish effort to influence Sweden, and that is Israel trying to moderate Sweden extreme anti-Israeli position. Israel is unhappy with the Swedish government support of the Palestinian extremists and the Swedish boycott of some Israeli products, artists , etc. It goes without saying that Israeli – Jewish – efforts are failing miserably. If Jews had a hundredth of the influence and power the antisemites like MacD attribute to us, Sweden would be our best friend and supporter in the United Nations.

    I don’t think subjects like ‘sociology’ or ‘evolutionary psychology’ require any intelligence to write in. They require a high degree of confirmation bias to string together your hypothesis, while discounting things that disprove or contradict your viewpoint. These theories are mainly operating in the realm of confirmation bias. But if you are an engineer and you reason like this in your work (i.e. without constant double-checking and examining of contradictions, and checking that you are not bewitched by confirmation bias), your figurative bridge will fail.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    That Barbara Spectre is Jewish and extremely influential in bringing more and more never to assimilate violent Muslims to Sweden.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. fnn says:
    @inertial

    Jews at the gulag were less than their share of the general population
     
    Well of course. 75% of the GULag inmates were common criminals; and among the political prisoners, a significant percentage (I think the majority) after WWII were Nazi collaborators. Jews are underrepresented in the former category and non-existent in the latter.

    They were underrepresented among the victims of collectivization and the manufactured famines.
     
    Members of the Russian aristocracy were also underrepresented among the victims of collectivization and famines but no one doubts that they were targeted.

    There is no question that Jews were hit disproportionately hard by Soviet economic and social policies. To be sure, they were not persecuted as Jews but as former members of "abolished" classes (after having their property stolen from them.) Some Jews rose high under the new regime; but for every one of those there were many more like Ayn Rand (had she not escaped from the Soviet Russia.) So saying (like Karlin does) that Jews "pretended" to hate Stalin is... stupid.

    Slezkine, in his book, The Jewish Century: “The Jews, who were not numerous among the -nonelite victims, were underrepresented in the Great Terror as a whole. In 1937-38 about 1 percent of all Soviet Jews were arrested for political crimes, as compared to 16 percent of all Poles and 30 percent of all Latvians. By early 1939, the proportion of Jews in the Gulag was about 15.7 percent lower than their share of the total Soviet population.”

    You have to assume that (at least during the period of the Great Purge/Terror) Jews were perceived by the regime as being more loyal than the Soviet norm. Maybe understandable given the geo-political context preceding the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.

    Read More
    • Replies: @inertial
    Slezkine cherry-picks Latvians and Poles for his comparisons. These were two ethnicities with their own independent and, at the time, hostile nations. Soviet state always treated such ethnicities with extra suspicion. The Jews would later get such treatment as well, after establishment of Israel.

    In any case, arrest for political crimes was not the only reason to dislike the regime. How about, for example, being kicked out of your home and stripped of all your valuables?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. Randal says:
    @Tyrion 2
    Cliched white-bashing makes me roll my eyes. I've been brought up in an age where those who do it are posing as brave and taboo breaking while actually being drearily conventional. The two jokes share that, from my perspective. It's so predictable and therefore so boring. As is the po-faced lecturing (from abject ignorance) that normally accompanies it.

    Cliched white-bashing makes me roll my eyes.

    OK that makes sense, and I share your distaste for clichéd white-bashing. Though I think it’s a bit of a stretch applying that to Chieh’s joke. As I admitted, from a white perspective it’s self-deprecatory (unless you see a nobility in the naïve assumption of loyalty), but it also can be interpreted as critical of Tonto for being cynically disloyal, or (perhaps more modern) being loyal to his identity group over his comrade. It can be interpreted as representing a “realist” view of the world that says that in the end you can only trust your own ethnic group.

    But it’s funny not because of any of those “political” interpretations, but because of the contrast I referred to previously. De gustibus non est disputandum, though, I suppose.

    I know I am not naïve. I am too earnest, I admit.

    OK. The impression I get is that you are very much rather naïve about your own group, but that’s not really a criticism, especially in someone young and therefore necessarily relatively inexperienced. You aren’t stupid, clearly. But nor is iffen.

    The Jew obsession among much of those who, like me, can see the horror of it all, is counterproductive and based on muddled thinking.

    This is a matter of opinion, obviously, and yours is not shared by some very experienced and competent observers here who can produce examples and arguments to back up their position (and by a lot of fools as well, but that’s by the by).

    One man’s “Jew obsession” is another’s recognition of problems caused by jewish influence.

    Your assumption that it’s “counterproductive” is obviously based upon the denial of the belief of others that jewish influence is itself part of the problem. Speaking as someone who has been directly threatened with police harassment and prosecution merely for expressing opinions, by a jewish man using the resources of an explicitly jewish organisation, I am going to take quite a lot of convincing now that jewish collective attitudes and behaviour aren’t a big part of the problems my country faces.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    I always thought it was a funny example of cynical disloyalty rather than either Lone Range or Tonto being representative of his entire ethnic group. I certainly didn't see it as white-bashing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. Dmitry says:
    @Bardon Kaldian
    Mostly true. Jews in Poland had never assimilated at rates comparable to Russia (I won't even mention Germany). Apart from Julian Tuwim & Bruno Schulz, there are no significant Jewish Polish literary figures. The same goes for other spheres, although there are exceptions (mathematician Kuratowski).

    Mostly true. Jews in Poland had never assimilated at rates comparable to Russia (I won’t even mention Germany). Apart from Julian Tuwim & Bruno Schulz, there are no significant Jewish Polish literary figures. The same goes for other spheres, although there are exceptions (mathematician Kuratowski).

    In maths and computer science/engineering applications, the Polish Jews were significant part of total Polish contributions. Tarski, Stanisław Ulam, Mandelbrot, Hugo Steinhaus, Emil Post, probably some more of that era.

    I took some set theory classes at university and was interested a little and reading about Tarski. Tarski is seen as a kind of undiscovered hero in computer science as well.

    This covers a general theme in other countries – where the Jewish populations are at best not more significant in cultural contribution than their population size. But in some fields like laying groundwork for computer science they were more heavily involved.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon 2
    At the same time there were some towering Christian
    figures in Polish mathematics like Stefan Banach, one of
    the founders of functional analysis (Banach spaces, ...);
    Wacław Sierpiński, great number theorist (famous for the
    Sierpiński triangle, etc); Jan Łukasiewicz, one of the greatest
    logicians of the 20th century (famous for inventing the Polish
    notation in mathematics). He founded his own school whose
    work is continuing in the U.S. ; As Poland did not exist in the
    19th century, there were many famous mathematicians of Polish
    ancestry who lived abroad. Among them was Łobaczewski
    (Lobachevsky), one of the inventors of non-Euclidean geometry,
    and Zofia Kowalewska (Sofia Kovalevskaya), famous woman
    mathematician.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. melanf says:
    @Dmitry

    Talented films fail at the box office only in very very rare cases.

     

    As with classical music, in the time when there was still a large audience for them, as recently as the 1970s - they enjoyed moderate ticket sales. Tarkovsky was popular when our parents were growing up.

    But the films which generate larger profits, in a rather trivial way 'talented' in terms of being able to appeal to the lowest common denominator in the audience.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films

    Although I don't see a great tragedy in this so long as there can be maintained enough of a minority audience to allow the good filmmakers to still work (just as there is still an audience for classical music concerts to be performed in the large cities, even if they are hardly of great popularity in comparison to the trash music).

    Tarkovsky was popular when our parents were growing up.

    Tarkovsky’s films were (in 1970) interesting to a very small number of people. And today these films are interesting to very very small number of people. I think these movies deserve to be called “trash”, not the product of Mel Gibson with shooting and chase.

    But the films which generate larger profits, in a rather trivial way ‘talented’ in terms of being able to appeal to the lowest common denominator in the audience.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films

    from your link

    and: ” franchise films have been among the best performers in the 21st century. Six Harry Potter films and five films from Peter Jackson’s Middle-earth series are included in the nominal earnings chart, while the Star Wars and Pirates of the Caribbean franchises feature prominently.”

    Middle-earth series and Star Wars (first!) realy great films

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    Tarkovsky’s films were (in 1970) interesting to a very small number of people. And today these films are interesting to very very small number of people. I think these movies deserve to be called “trash”, not the product of Mel Gibson with shooting and chase.

     

    Well if you measure by how audience numbers - I suppose that Justin Bieber latest song is superior to Bruckner's 8th symphony?

    and: ” franchise films have been among the best performers in the 21st century. Six Harry Potter films and five films from Peter Jackson’s Middle-earth series are included in the nominal earnings chart, while the Star Wars and Pirates of the Caribbean franchises feature prominently.”

    Middle-earth series and Star Wars (first!) realy great films
     

    To be honest, looking at the inflation adjusted list lower down in the article (Gone with Wind - I haven't seen; but Jaws is somewhat entertaining), it is rather better than the non-inflation adjusted list.

    But in the top 50 highest grossing films, I can only see Jurassic Park as even a film I could watch twice. Maybe a couple others on the list, like Zootopia or Titanic, I would say are at least well-made. But the vast majority of this list is pure trash even from a populist standard (Furious 7 with $1.5 billion).

    , @E

    Tarkovsky’s films were (in 1970) interesting to a very small number of people. And today these films are interesting to very very small number of people. I think these movies deserve to be called “trash”, not the product of Mel Gibson with shooting and chase.
     
    Yeah, gonna have to disagree with you there. Watching a Tarkovsky film is like a drink of clear spring water after a drought to me -- it's one of the things that makes me remember what it means to be Russian after too long a time surrounded by foreign (American/Canadian) culture and foreign habits of thought in everyday life.

    Granted, maybe to an American, Mel Gibson movies have the same effect. To each their own.

    In terms of ticket sales:
    Ivan's Childhood - 16.7 million tickets
    Andrei Rublyov - shelved for years, 2.98 million tickets when finally released with 277 prints
    Solaris - 10.5 million tickets from only 5 cinemas
    The Mirror - released in only 73 prints, no ticket numbers available
    Stalker - 4.3 million tickets
    Nostalghia - released in exile, no numbers can be found
    The Sacrifice - same as above

    No, not quite as popular as the #1 Soviet box office hits (which would sell ~30-60 million tickets), but not nothing either. Well-known within intelligentsia class (and of course, quite successful among foreign film critics).

    Besides, Tarkovsky uses a very different film language, and diversity of habit and thought are a good thing to experience, lest we forget that there is more than one way to live, and think about, our lives.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. fnn says:
    @j
    When intelligent people like K. MacDonald speaks about Jewish influence on Sweden, I am astonished suspect some mental disorder. Yes, I know MacD is a professor in psychology and I know that it was the Frankfort School that first floated the idea that antisemitism is a mental problem. Only a few hundred Jews live in Sweden, they are mostly first and second generation and not rich, and live in fear of Muslim and local violence. They have zero influence on Swedish public life or politics. Regarding the Bonnier family, I do not know by what criterion they can be considered Jews, since no Bonnier has much Jewish blood at all and none practices Judaism or know what it may be. On the other hand, there is real, ongoing, open and public Jewish effort to influence Sweden, and that is Israel trying to moderate Sweden extreme anti-Israeli position. Israel is unhappy with the Swedish government support of the Palestinian extremists and the Swedish boycott of some Israeli products, artists , etc. It goes without saying that Israeli - Jewish - efforts are failing miserably. If Jews had a hundredth of the influence and power the antisemites like MacD attribute to us, Sweden would be our best friend and supporter in the United Nations.

    Presence on the ground in Sweden seems irrelevant. Sweden (like the rest of Western Europe) has been a de facto part of the American Empire since 1945. It’s a statement of obvious fact that West Europeans have undergone a process of Americanization since WW2. For example, how long was it between the time when “hippies” made their first appearance in California in 1966 and they became common in Stockholm? Swedes have watching American TV and movies and listening to American music for a long time.

    Some Swedish guy:

    http://conswede.blogspot.com/2008/07/social-paradigms-shift-eg-our-view-on.html

    To illustrate what I talk about. Louis Armstrong visited Sweden in 1933. In all the news papers he was describe as something monkey-like let loose from the jungle. All across the line! And in the reviews by the most serious music critics.

    Who would have imagined in 1933, that twelve years later Western Europe would undergo an America-led cultural revolution which would lead to the common belief that there are no differences between races?

    Translation of two of the quotes:

    Knut Bäck in Göteborgs-Posten, November 1933:
    “This world is strange… No protests are raised against how the jungle is let loose into the society. Armstrong and his band are allowed to freely wreak destruction.”

    Sten Broman in Sydsvenskan, November 1933:
    “Dare I say that he at times had something monkey-like about him and sometimes reminded of, according to our perceptions, a mentally disturbed person, when he pouted with his mouth or gaped it to its widest open and roared like a hoarse animal from a primeval forest.”

    The third quote compares the concert with a natural disaster, and Armstrong’s trumpet with a hell machine. The only good thing coming out of it, he says, is that it solves to old dispute of whether monkeys have a language.

    This is what Europe looked like, up until 1945. And since some people will live under the misconception that this was a phenomenon of the ’30s, I here provide a quote from the Swedish Encyclopedia, Nordisk Familjebok, the 1876-1899 edition (here and here).

    “Psychologically the negro can be said be on the level of a child, with vivid fantasy, lack of endurance, … can be said to lack morality rather than being immoral … etc.”

    Even though the point here has been to illustrate how social paradigms can shift completely in short time (and this is just one out of numerous examples), let me add how up until 1945 all the focus was put on the differences between races, and after that all the focus has been put on what is equal (while ignoring differences)

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    After WWII Swedes wanted to prove to themselves and to the world that they were the most progressive, most fair, most just nation in the world. They succeeded. They began to believe it and the original motive surfaced: their pride. And as we know the hubris always precedes the fall. They wanted to meddle into the world affairs which for everybody it was very irritating as they were always coming form morally superior position: look at us how just we are. They took the case of Palestinians. It was imperative for them to support the underdog. Every compassionate person should take the case of Palestinians. That's when their problems have began. Politicians got assassinated. Their altruism was taken advantage of. Borders were open. Characters like Barbara Specter with well funded NGO's began to operate and soon Sweden was filling up with Muslims and Arabs. The familiarity breeds contempt. Nothing cures idealistic notions about the underdog in some far away land like the actual familiarity with subject of your pity and compassion. Still the Swedes were right except that they overextended because of their pride and then they were skillfully tripped by much more sophisticated players.
    , @Alden
    But about only 11 years after those comments about Armstrong and his music, Swedish Marxist Myrdahl published “ An American Dilemma “
    a book critical of White Americans attitude towards blacks.

    Myrdahl knew nothing about American blacks. The book was probably written by operatives employed by the American communist front Carnegie Foundation.

    Even if the book was written by American communists, why was a Swedish communist chosen to be the author? As soon as the war ended, Sweden inserted itself as some kind of holier than thou compromise between Russia and the United States.

    Swedes have an almost Asian cobformity.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. utu says:
    @Dmitry

    And what has pushed Scandinavian liberal utopian views? The fact they lived the 20th century as exactly such liberal utopias (how do people of happy and cosseted childhood tend to approach political questions?). Here I see a national case of affluenza.

     

    By the way, applied to Israel, it reminded me of the famous case of Sigrid Rausing's utopian activity in Israel.

    Sigrid Rausing is a Swedish convert to Judaism, from a family that has a history of affluenza. This has led her to apply the Scandinavian utopian model to activity in Israel, where she funds the NGOs like Adalah that organize the boycott of Israel (BDS campaign), as well as NGOs that conduct activism against deportation of illegal migrants.

    https://www.ngo-monitor.org/funder/sigrid_rausing_trust/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigrid_Rausing

    This has led her to apply the Scandinavian utopian model to activity in Israel

    At least she is consistent. Barbara Spectre on the other hand came from Israel to Sweden and promotes immigration and multi-ethnic society.

    Both Sigrid Rausing and Barbara Specter promote the same in the host societies however one can’t accuse Sigrid Rausing of duplicity.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. utu says:
    @fnn
    Presence on the ground in Sweden seems irrelevant. Sweden (like the rest of Western Europe) has been a de facto part of the American Empire since 1945. It's a statement of obvious fact that West Europeans have undergone a process of Americanization since WW2. For example, how long was it between the time when "hippies" made their first appearance in California in 1966 and they became common in Stockholm? Swedes have watching American TV and movies and listening to American music for a long time.

    Some Swedish guy:
    http://conswede.blogspot.com/2008/07/social-paradigms-shift-eg-our-view-on.html

    To illustrate what I talk about. Louis Armstrong visited Sweden in 1933. In all the news papers he was describe as something monkey-like let loose from the jungle. All across the line! And in the reviews by the most serious music critics.

    Who would have imagined in 1933, that twelve years later Western Europe would undergo an America-led cultural revolution which would lead to the common belief that there are no differences between races?

    Translation of two of the quotes:

    Knut Bäck in Göteborgs-Posten, November 1933:
    "This world is strange... No protests are raised against how the jungle is let loose into the society. Armstrong and his band are allowed to freely wreak destruction."

    Sten Broman in Sydsvenskan, November 1933:
    "Dare I say that he at times had something monkey-like about him and sometimes reminded of, according to our perceptions, a mentally disturbed person, when he pouted with his mouth or gaped it to its widest open and roared like a hoarse animal from a primeval forest."

    The third quote compares the concert with a natural disaster, and Armstrong's trumpet with a hell machine. The only good thing coming out of it, he says, is that it solves to old dispute of whether monkeys have a language.

    This is what Europe looked like, up until 1945. And since some people will live under the misconception that this was a phenomenon of the '30s, I here provide a quote from the Swedish Encyclopedia, Nordisk Familjebok, the 1876-1899 edition (here and here).

    "Psychologically the negro can be said be on the level of a child, with vivid fantasy, lack of endurance, ... can be said to lack morality rather than being immoral ... etc."

    Even though the point here has been to illustrate how social paradigms can shift completely in short time (and this is just one out of numerous examples), let me add how up until 1945 all the focus was put on the differences between races, and after that all the focus has been put on what is equal (while ignoring differences)
     

    After WWII Swedes wanted to prove to themselves and to the world that they were the most progressive, most fair, most just nation in the world. They succeeded. They began to believe it and the original motive surfaced: their pride. And as we know the hubris always precedes the fall. They wanted to meddle into the world affairs which for everybody it was very irritating as they were always coming form morally superior position: look at us how just we are. They took the case of Palestinians. It was imperative for them to support the underdog. Every compassionate person should take the case of Palestinians. That’s when their problems have began. Politicians got assassinated. Their altruism was taken advantage of. Borders were open. Characters like Barbara Specter with well funded NGO’s began to operate and soon Sweden was filling up with Muslims and Arabs. The familiarity breeds contempt. Nothing cures idealistic notions about the underdog in some far away land like the actual familiarity with subject of your pity and compassion. Still the Swedes were right except that they overextended because of their pride and then they were skillfully tripped by much more sophisticated players.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. RudyM says:
    @Bardon Kaldian
    Proust's mother was Jewish, but he was not. Don't conflate ancestry & identity.

    As for asymmetries in various fields & periods, they've always existed. They cannot be explained: why an incomparable explosion of creativity has happened in German-speaking lands from, say, 1770-1830 (Hamann, Herder, Euler, Kant, Gauss, Baader, Goethe, Schiller, Novalis, Schelling, Hegel, Mozart, Beethoven, Haydn, Schubert, Clausewitz, Kleist, Bernoullis, Scheele, Schopenahuer, brothers Grimm, brothers Humboldt, …)?

    So, among generally illiterate Germans, in just a few decades & among small segments of society, marginal with regard to world population, a gigantic endeavor has happened that forever changed mathematics, physics, philosophy, political ideologies, music, the art of warfare, natural sciences, chemistry, philology, literature, ...

    Why & how? Nobody knows. But, this over-representation is far more impressive than Jewish in any period of history.

    Wir war Könige.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. Wow, I got 9/11 and I’ve always considered myself a philosemite. Go figure.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  170. inertial says:
    @Felix Keverich
    LOL@"Albanian lobby". Are you serious?

    I don't recall US presidential candidates paying visits to Albanian "Public Affairs Comittee" to pledge fealty to Albanian state. They do pledge fealty to the Jewish state. It's a quadrennial ritual in the United States.

    If you're unaware of how US domestic politics operates, how you can claim to understand the motivations for US foreign wars? Foreign policy is always the extention of domestic politics and in America, it is the Jews (not Albanians LMAO), who dominate both.

    The so-called "Russian inteference" in US politics does happen to be a conspiracy theory, but the Jewish domination of America is an unfortunate reality, created by billions of dollars in campaign donations and a near total media control.

    LOL@”Albanian lobby”. Are you serious?

    Very serious. Albanian lobby existed and was quite influential back in the day. Major US politicians had been on the take: Bob Dole, John McCain, Joe Lieberman. See this:

    http://www.emperors-clothes.com/articles/benworks/buying.html

    There were other examples. Ukrainian lobby was quite important for decades (even more important in Canada.) Even the Georgian lobby made an appearance when McCain hired a Georgian lobbying as a foreign policy adviser for his presidential campaign.

    On the other hand, all attempts to set up an effective Russian lobby had been cut down quite ruthlessly. Even the Chinese are not having much success, even though they have a huge diaspora in USA and more money than God.

    This just illustrates what I had been saying. Ethnic lobbies can be powerful but their power is derivative. If their agenda coincides with the general course of the American military/intelligence/diplomatic establishment (or the “deep state” if you like) then they are allowed to thrive and even influence specific policy. If not, they go the way of the Albanian lobby or are not allowed to exist in the first place.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. Dmitry says:
    @melanf

    Tarkovsky was popular when our parents were growing up.
     
    Tarkovsky's films were (in 1970) interesting to a very small number of people. And today these films are interesting to very very small number of people. I think these movies deserve to be called "trash", not the product of Mel Gibson with shooting and chase.

    But the films which generate larger profits, in a rather trivial way ‘talented’ in terms of being able to appeal to the lowest common denominator in the audience.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films
     
    from your link

    http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_E5cSkRNNzuk/TH_zPQy4poI/AAAAAAAAJ1M/BC0ZOyRRI-g/s1600/GoneWiththeWindPoster.jpg

    and: " franchise films have been among the best performers in the 21st century. Six Harry Potter films and five films from Peter Jackson's Middle-earth series are included in the nominal earnings chart, while the Star Wars and Pirates of the Caribbean franchises feature prominently."

    Middle-earth series and Star Wars (first!) realy great films

    Tarkovsky’s films were (in 1970) interesting to a very small number of people. And today these films are interesting to very very small number of people. I think these movies deserve to be called “trash”, not the product of Mel Gibson with shooting and chase.

    Well if you measure by how audience numbers – I suppose that Justin Bieber latest song is superior to Bruckner’s 8th symphony?

    and: ” franchise films have been among the best performers in the 21st century. Six Harry Potter films and five films from Peter Jackson’s Middle-earth series are included in the nominal earnings chart, while the Star Wars and Pirates of the Caribbean franchises feature prominently.”

    Middle-earth series and Star Wars (first!) realy great films

    To be honest, looking at the inflation adjusted list lower down in the article (Gone with Wind – I haven’t seen; but Jaws is somewhat entertaining), it is rather better than the non-inflation adjusted list.

    But in the top 50 highest grossing films, I can only see Jurassic Park as even a film I could watch twice. Maybe a couple others on the list, like Zootopia or Titanic, I would say are at least well-made. But the vast majority of this list is pure trash even from a populist standard (Furious 7 with $1.5 billion).

    Read More
    • Replies: @melanf

    Well if you measure by how audience numbers – I suppose that Justin Bieber latest song is superior to Bruckner’s 8th symphony?
     
    Well, if Justin Bieber in 50 years will have a popularity comparable to Vivaldi or Mozart - so he's a great composer. But I think Bieber will be quickly forgotten.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. inertial says:

    For instance, jokes like this about incompetent goyim are hardly atypical

    Easy to test whether this is true or not. Just read Sholem Aleichem.

    Sholem Aleichem was a Jewish comic writer who was writing in a language that few non-Jews bothered to learn at the time. Neither would occur to him that his stories would ever be translated., especially given that he usually wrote for newspapers, magazines and other such impermanent media. In other words, he was writing for Jewish eyes only.

    So how many of his jokes are at the expense of dumb non-Jews?

    Read and find out for yourself.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Or read Leo Rosten, The Joys of Yiddish.
    , @utu
    You are a troll after all. My first suspicion was correct.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. @Randal

    Cliched white-bashing makes me roll my eyes.
     
    OK that makes sense, and I share your distaste for clichéd white-bashing. Though I think it's a bit of a stretch applying that to Chieh's joke. As I admitted, from a white perspective it's self-deprecatory (unless you see a nobility in the naïve assumption of loyalty), but it also can be interpreted as critical of Tonto for being cynically disloyal, or (perhaps more modern) being loyal to his identity group over his comrade. It can be interpreted as representing a "realist" view of the world that says that in the end you can only trust your own ethnic group.

    But it's funny not because of any of those "political" interpretations, but because of the contrast I referred to previously. De gustibus non est disputandum, though, I suppose.

    I know I am not naïve. I am too earnest, I admit.
     
    OK. The impression I get is that you are very much rather naïve about your own group, but that's not really a criticism, especially in someone young and therefore necessarily relatively inexperienced. You aren't stupid, clearly. But nor is iffen.


    The Jew obsession among much of those who, like me, can see the horror of it all, is counterproductive and based on muddled thinking.
     
    This is a matter of opinion, obviously, and yours is not shared by some very experienced and competent observers here who can produce examples and arguments to back up their position (and by a lot of fools as well, but that's by the by).

    One man's "Jew obsession" is another's recognition of problems caused by jewish influence.

    Your assumption that it's "counterproductive" is obviously based upon the denial of the belief of others that jewish influence is itself part of the problem. Speaking as someone who has been directly threatened with police harassment and prosecution merely for expressing opinions, by a jewish man using the resources of an explicitly jewish organisation, I am going to take quite a lot of convincing now that jewish collective attitudes and behaviour aren't a big part of the problems my country faces.

    I always thought it was a funny example of cynical disloyalty rather than either Lone Range or Tonto being representative of his entire ethnic group. I certainly didn’t see it as white-bashing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal
    Me too. I was just exploring other plausible interpretations in the light of Tyrion2's comment and his explanation that he saw it differently.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. Randal says:
    @Daniel Chieh
    I always thought it was a funny example of cynical disloyalty rather than either Lone Range or Tonto being representative of his entire ethnic group. I certainly didn't see it as white-bashing.

    Me too. I was just exploring other plausible interpretations in the light of Tyrion2′s comment and his explanation that he saw it differently.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. E says:
    @melanf

    Tarkovsky was popular when our parents were growing up.
     
    Tarkovsky's films were (in 1970) interesting to a very small number of people. And today these films are interesting to very very small number of people. I think these movies deserve to be called "trash", not the product of Mel Gibson with shooting and chase.

    But the films which generate larger profits, in a rather trivial way ‘talented’ in terms of being able to appeal to the lowest common denominator in the audience.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films
     
    from your link

    http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_E5cSkRNNzuk/TH_zPQy4poI/AAAAAAAAJ1M/BC0ZOyRRI-g/s1600/GoneWiththeWindPoster.jpg

    and: " franchise films have been among the best performers in the 21st century. Six Harry Potter films and five films from Peter Jackson's Middle-earth series are included in the nominal earnings chart, while the Star Wars and Pirates of the Caribbean franchises feature prominently."

    Middle-earth series and Star Wars (first!) realy great films

    Tarkovsky’s films were (in 1970) interesting to a very small number of people. And today these films are interesting to very very small number of people. I think these movies deserve to be called “trash”, not the product of Mel Gibson with shooting and chase.

    Yeah, gonna have to disagree with you there. Watching a Tarkovsky film is like a drink of clear spring water after a drought to me — it’s one of the things that makes me remember what it means to be Russian after too long a time surrounded by foreign (American/Canadian) culture and foreign habits of thought in everyday life.

    Granted, maybe to an American, Mel Gibson movies have the same effect. To each their own.

    In terms of ticket sales:
    Ivan’s Childhood – 16.7 million tickets
    Andrei Rublyov – shelved for years, 2.98 million tickets when finally released with 277 prints
    Solaris – 10.5 million tickets from only 5 cinemas
    The Mirror – released in only 73 prints, no ticket numbers available
    Stalker – 4.3 million tickets
    Nostalghia – released in exile, no numbers can be found
    The Sacrifice – same as above

    No, not quite as popular as the #1 Soviet box office hits (which would sell ~30-60 million tickets), but not nothing either. Well-known within intelligentsia class (and of course, quite successful among foreign film critics).

    Besides, Tarkovsky uses a very different film language, and diversity of habit and thought are a good thing to experience, lest we forget that there is more than one way to live, and think about, our lives.

    Read More
    • Agree: dmitry, AP
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    Yeah, gonna have to disagree with you there. Watching a Tarkovsky film is like a drink of clear spring water after a drought to me — it’s one of the things that makes me remember what it means to be Russian after too long a time surrounded by foreign (American/Canadian) culture and foreign habits of thought in everyday life.

    Granted, maybe to an American, Mel Gibson movies have the same effect. To each their own.

     

    No need to use a cultural-relativism here, just because they both are both films - there is little else in common. Mel Gibson movies are assemblage of barely-watchable cliches, nothing to do with art - but closer to propaganda.

    Tarkovsky was an artist, i.e. someone who sees the world a bit differently, that tries to bring us (the audience) into this different perspective, and perhaps show us something we wouldn't otherwise have considered.

    , @melanf

    Watching a Tarkovsky film is like a drink of clear spring water after a drought to me — it’s one of the things that makes me remember what it means to be Russian
     
    Tarkovsky is not Russian culture, it is the culture of the Russian "intelligentsia". For example, the film "Andrei Rublev" - about the era of the battle of Kulikovo. But Tarkovsky was able to take a dull pseudo-historical rubbish about the good "intelligents" (monks), and bad government. As a result, this film is firmly forgotten (except for a very narrow sect of the "intelligentsia")
    In comparison the film "Alexander Nevsky" by Eisenstein has a great popularity (although it is a de facto movie-comic with heroes simple as infusoria)

    In terms of ticket sales:
     
    This is the Soviet era, where viewers were forced to watch a very meager set of films. Since then, much time has passed - good Soviet films in Russia remember and love, but Tarkovsky firmly forgotten (except for the "intelligentsia" of course). Today the film "Ivan Vasilievich: Back to the Future" by Leonid Gaidai is four orders of magnitude more popular than "Andrei Rublev". It is an objective talent assessment
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. @Anonymous
    I grew up in a largely Jewish area. Not to be Pauline Kael here, but of the majority of Jews I’ve known personally, or with one degree of separation, I have a hard believing that they were of the same tribe as the über-successful tribe members controlling finance, media, politics. A lot of the ones I’ve known were working low-end jobs and constantly hustling or they were under-performers and always kvetching. I’ve even known some Jews who had science and law degrees who worked as antique dealers or liquor store clerks and who never had a pot to piss in and would always have big ideas about how to start a new soft drink or some other far-fetched idea. One Jewish family friend was a Ph.D. nuclear physicist and retired professor who had worked on the Manhattan Project. My mom was friends with his wife (also a scientist). They lived a very modest life, drove an old Datsun shitcan, and had a crappy house in need of constant repair. They had financial problems later in the life and my mom had to help them as much as she could. For every Michael Bloomberg you have 99 not-so-successful Jews. I know this is all anecdotal but as Nassim Taleb says, anecdotes are more salient than statistics.

    I’ll add my ancedotes. I grew up with a Jewish friend and we were all reasonably close, but around his teens, he began to get increasingly impressive accomplishments: we all wrote, but he would get published; some of us were getting getting to student associations, he became an intern at a major MSM outlet; and by the time we were poking around for careers, he already was set to be a journalist.

    I asked how he managed those things and he always shrugged and said “nepotism.”

    Mind you, he was smart and capable(and perhaps self-deprecating), but it did seem that there’s a strong network that helps too, and this goes beyond even the typical socioeconomic privilege that all of us had growing up. It reminds me a bit of Chinese guanxi, but much more effective and efficient, with a focus on media and messaging rather than doctors and engineering.

    One more.

    When my parents were in business, we were primarily supplied by a Jewish businessman. For some reason, our shipments kept having “extra” goods in them, which we decided to report and send back. Mysteriously afterward, the terms of business would improve.

    In retrospect, its possible that he considered that Chinese businessmen were generally dishonest and greedy, and therefore set out business/social traps like that in order to weed out individuals who are not worth doing business with. In that fashion, it would seem that he and perhaps many other Jews come from a culture uniquely well equipped with living and dealing with low-trust.

    Incidentally, I think this is the first time I’ve ever written about the “JQ.” I suppose that cherry had to be burst eventually.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
    You give two instances with very mundane explanations: self-deprecation and experience of business outside of the West.

    This then turns into quite elaborate and even ornate points on Jewish characteristics through essentially nothing more than highly prejudicial confirmation bias which, to some extent, is taken from this site and then, amazingly, is openly put back on the site where it creates more bias as a fully formed supposedly unbiased incident!

    A similarly frustrating phenomenon may be seen in the media's reporting of Trump. Misrepresented stories are used to allow the misrepresentation of other stories. The whole thing is circular, or rather, ironically, a function of echoes.

    Not that any of this is necessarily done on purpose or with mal-intent. It is just so obvious what is happening.

    Jew's higher wealth than average is explained very simply. Higher IQ has not only a direct effect but it also means they grow up in a higher IQ culture and the IQ of your culture matters more for your success than your own - there's likely a bunch of geniuses in Eastern Congo, none will achieve anything. This, combined with living in major world cities, is more than explanation enough.

    Jewish progressivism is merely a function of class and location. Jews are disproportionately represented in Western urban elites. Western urban elites are disproportionately progressive. Did anyone in Washington DC vote for Trump?

    Israel has many problems. Its behaviour can often be seen as problematic. At least in comparison to the majority of countries West and North of it. Nonetheless compared to the majority of countries East and South of it, Israel is positively angelic. This is not hard to notice.

    There done. The entire 'JQ' answered in a few paragraphs. Goodness, it wasn't hard.
    , @utu
    It should be obvious to anybody that there is ethnic networking and ethnic nepotism. Overrepresentation of Jews in some areas can't be explained with IQ, so the IQist postulate non-Gaussian distribution with fat Jewish tail. I am sure it is a preferable explanation when one does not want to address the issue of ethnic nepotism and networking.
    , @Miro23

    ...we all wrote, but he would get published; some of us were getting getting to student associations, he became an intern at a major MSM outlet; and by the time we were poking around for careers, he already was set to be a journalist.

    I asked how he managed those things and he always shrugged and said “nepotism.”

    Mind you, he was smart and capable(and perhaps self-deprecating), but it did seem that there’s a strong network that helps too, and this goes beyond even the typical socioeconomic privilege that all of us had growing up.
     
    Light, friendly and almost invisible but very effective. However, for top positions it's probably more open and aggressive (e.g. Treasury or the Supreme Court).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. inertial says:
    @fnn
    Slezkine, in his book, The Jewish Century: "The Jews, who were not numerous among the -nonelite victims, were underrepresented in the Great Terror as a whole. In 1937-38 about 1 percent of all Soviet Jews were arrested for political crimes, as compared to 16 percent of all Poles and 30 percent of all Latvians. By early 1939, the proportion of Jews in the Gulag was about 15.7 percent lower than their share of the total Soviet population."

    You have to assume that (at least during the period of the Great Purge/Terror) Jews were perceived by the regime as being more loyal than the Soviet norm. Maybe understandable given the geo-political context preceding the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.

    Slezkine cherry-picks Latvians and Poles for his comparisons. These were two ethnicities with their own independent and, at the time, hostile nations. Soviet state always treated such ethnicities with extra suspicion. The Jews would later get such treatment as well, after establishment of Israel.

    In any case, arrest for political crimes was not the only reason to dislike the regime. How about, for example, being kicked out of your home and stripped of all your valuables?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jaakko Raipala

    Slezkine cherry-picks Latvians and Poles for his comparisons. These were two ethnicities with their own independent and, at the time, hostile nations. Soviet state always treated such ethnicities with extra suspicion.
     
    That explanation would make more sense if most Latvians in the USSR at the time of the purges were not communist exiles who were extremely hostile to Latvia themselves. The Latvians that were executed in Stalin's purges were largely the same Latvians who would have been executed in Latvia.

    In the 1930s we were debating whether to interpret the mass executions of Finnish and Baltic Reds in the Soviet Union as Stalin's gesture of friendship towards our states. These dead Reds were our sworn enemies who had escaped execution in 1918-1919. Many of them were still lobbying for Soviet resources to be used against the state of their origin so some took the purges as a sign that Stalin wanted peace and normalized relations instead of continuing to promote revolution in neighboring states like Trotsky would have done.

    It's possible that the extremely disproportionate death ratio of Baltic Reds in the USSR had something to do with the Soviet relationship with neighboring states and thus isn't indicative of ethnic attitudes in the Soviet government but if so, it was not about any chance that the Baltic Reds were planning to betray the Soviet Union for the states that they wanted to destroy.

    , @reiner Tor
    But the percentage of Jews arrested was lower than their percentage of the general population. Yes, Latvians were most persecuted, but Jews were nothing special. I don’t think Jews (most Jews, at any rate) had it great, but you were arguing for the improbable proposition that they were especially badly hit by communism. Well, they lost their property. Everyone lost their property. Peasants, the vast majority of the population, lost their properties during collectivization, too, and they were also starved to death by the millions. Some Jews were, too, but proportionally less. You cannot seriously say they had it worse than others. They didn’t have it good, on average. But, in a regime known for its propensity to murder its own citizens by the millions, they had it better than others. Which is a lot. Especially if you consider that they were overrepresented among the perpetrators. I didn’t see many instances of Jews saying sorry for this. I have seen a lot of instances of Jews demanding apologies from peoples like Poles for their minor roles in the holocaust. It’s not an admirable behavior.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. Dmitry says:
    @E

    Tarkovsky’s films were (in 1970) interesting to a very small number of people. And today these films are interesting to very very small number of people. I think these movies deserve to be called “trash”, not the product of Mel Gibson with shooting and chase.
     
    Yeah, gonna have to disagree with you there. Watching a Tarkovsky film is like a drink of clear spring water after a drought to me -- it's one of the things that makes me remember what it means to be Russian after too long a time surrounded by foreign (American/Canadian) culture and foreign habits of thought in everyday life.

    Granted, maybe to an American, Mel Gibson movies have the same effect. To each their own.

    In terms of ticket sales:
    Ivan's Childhood - 16.7 million tickets
    Andrei Rublyov - shelved for years, 2.98 million tickets when finally released with 277 prints
    Solaris - 10.5 million tickets from only 5 cinemas
    The Mirror - released in only 73 prints, no ticket numbers available
    Stalker - 4.3 million tickets
    Nostalghia - released in exile, no numbers can be found
    The Sacrifice - same as above

    No, not quite as popular as the #1 Soviet box office hits (which would sell ~30-60 million tickets), but not nothing either. Well-known within intelligentsia class (and of course, quite successful among foreign film critics).

    Besides, Tarkovsky uses a very different film language, and diversity of habit and thought are a good thing to experience, lest we forget that there is more than one way to live, and think about, our lives.

    Yeah, gonna have to disagree with you there. Watching a Tarkovsky film is like a drink of clear spring water after a drought to me — it’s one of the things that makes me remember what it means to be Russian after too long a time surrounded by foreign (American/Canadian) culture and foreign habits of thought in everyday life.

    Granted, maybe to an American, Mel Gibson movies have the same effect. To each their own.

    No need to use a cultural-relativism here, just because they both are both films – there is little else in common. Mel Gibson movies are assemblage of barely-watchable cliches, nothing to do with art – but closer to propaganda.

    Tarkovsky was an artist, i.e. someone who sees the world a bit differently, that tries to bring us (the audience) into this different perspective, and perhaps show us something we wouldn’t otherwise have considered.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. someone says:
    @reiner Tor
    The Blue Police clearly did participate in rounding the Jews up. Arguably they were compelled to serve the Germans, being threatened with the death penalty if they failed to take up service in fall 1939. The Polish government in exile accepted it, because they agreed that Poland did need some kind of law enforcement under German occupation, even if it meant carrying out German orders like rounding up Jews. The Blue Police I think mostly just joined the resistance in 1944, and throughout they were in contact with them. Their appointed commander asked the local Home Army commanders if he should accept, and they told him yes. It was a difficult job. I think a case can be made that the Poles and Ukrainians participating in the holocaust were not much different from the Jews participating in the same, like Jewish Council or Jewish Police members. They participated to avoid near certain death.

    im glad u finally admitting jewish involvment in the carnage of WW2 ‘ I think a case can be made that the Poles and Ukrainians participating in the holocaust were not much different from the Jews participating in the same, like Jewish Council or Jewish Police members. They participated to avoid near certain death.’

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. iffen says:
    @Randal

    Loyalty is generic.

    “We” expect Band of Brothers type loyalty. Evidently racial/ethnic loyalty was more important to Tonto.
     
    As I interpret the joke, only because (in this case) the circumstances suddenly made that the sensible course of action. But I first heard the joke decades ago when racial/ethnic loyalty just wasn't as forefront an issue as it is today (iirc it was "pale face" not "white man" in the older tellings).

    I’m on your side, Randal.
     
    Not on this issue you aren't. Nor on free speech. And those are two pretty big and interrelated issues. The latter much more than the former for me, actually.


    I would like to make one observation. The evidence is pretty clear that a homosexual orientation for a small % is out of their control. It is an abnormal normality.
     
    !?

    Presumably this is referring back to a previous conversation. From my point of view it's of no consequence whether "homosexual orientation" is under control or not. Indeed since I regard "homosexual orientation" as merely modern homo lobby speak for being tempted to do homo sex stuff, I tend to assume it probably is outside their control to some extent, as many temptations to sin are. It's not the temptations that matter but what they do in response. I have frequently been tempted to sleep with women other than my wife. I don't feel in the slightest bad about that and nor do I consider myself an adulterer as a result. I suppose if I were to feel a temptation to have sex with another man or with an Alsatian or some other animal (the two situations are directly comparable imo) then I would feel rather perturbed and concerned, but I wouldn't feel guilty about it. I just would deal with it by not responding to it and suppressing or diverting it.

    But this seems rather dramatically off topic.

    But this seems rather dramatically off topic.

    We are discussing the JQ. Both are accidents of birth.

    Should be normal abnormality instead of abnormal normality.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. someone says:
    @reiner Tor
    I would add that the Blue Police participation in the holocaust was quite minimal compared to other police forces in German occupied Europe. For example I think in Warsaw they refused German orders and had to be withdrawn from the ghetto before the start of the deportations.

    But there clearly was some participation.

    im glad u finally admitting jewish involvment in the carnage of WW2 ‘ I think a case can be made that the Poles and Ukrainians participating in the holocaust were not much different from the Jews participating in the same, like Jewish Council or Jewish Police members. They participated to avoid near certain death.’there was no Blue Police in getto.Getto had its own -very strict &cruel jewish police in there

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    there was no Blue Police in getto.Getto had its own -very strict &cruel jewish police in there
     
    There was Blue Police at the wall or entry points to the ghetto.
    , @utu

    I think a case can be made that the Poles and Ukrainians participating in the holocaust were not much different from the Jews participating in the same
     
    I do not think so. There were SS Ukrainian formations that are infamous for their role in massacres and running concentration camps. There were no Polish or Jewish SS formations.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @inertial

    For instance, jokes like this about incompetent goyim are hardly atypical
     
    Easy to test whether this is true or not. Just read Sholem Aleichem.

    Sholem Aleichem was a Jewish comic writer who was writing in a language that few non-Jews bothered to learn at the time. Neither would occur to him that his stories would ever be translated., especially given that he usually wrote for newspapers, magazines and other such impermanent media. In other words, he was writing for Jewish eyes only.

    So how many of his jokes are at the expense of dumb non-Jews?

    Read and find out for yourself.

    Or read Leo Rosten, The Joys of Yiddish.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. @someone
    im glad u finally admitting jewish involvment in the carnage of WW2 ' I think a case can be made that the Poles and Ukrainians participating in the holocaust were not much different from the Jews participating in the same, like Jewish Council or Jewish Police members. They participated to avoid near certain death.'there was no Blue Police in getto.Getto had its own -very strict &cruel jewish police in there

    there was no Blue Police in getto.Getto had its own -very strict &cruel jewish police in there

    There was Blue Police at the wall or entry points to the ghetto.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. Hibernian says:
    @MarkinLA
    Given those questions and how they can be interpreted, what will the ADL do when everybody taking that quiz is an anti-Semite according to them?

    Dissolve the people and elect another.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    A really well reasoned post, I agree with most of its points. However, I do have to disagree a bit with your take on #11, which relies heavily on the deeply flawed. “117 countries” meme:

    Firstly, “Jews” as an entity of one sort or another have existed for a very, very long time, as one can see from the fact that the first entry on the list dates back 2,500+ years ago. For much of this time, there has not been an independent Jewish state with a monopoly on violence within its borders, and Jews have been residents of polities where a different ethny could wield overwhelming military force. That means that there have simply been a lot of opportunities to expel “Jews” from countries relative to, say, Carthaginians or Germans. (And as a corollary, one could no doubt produce a long list of many countries where Jews resided peacefully for long periods of time, simply because Jews have existed for thousands of years and across many countries.)

    Secondly, there’s a galling inconsistency in terms of victim-blaming by many white nationalists. When Jewish people, as an ethnic and religious minority, are disliked/expelled by a majority—well that just goes to show how uniquely terrible Jews are, they wouldn’t be disliked if they didn’t deserve it, etc. (“oy vey, why do they persecute us so?”)

    But when, say, whites in South Africa are hated and persecuted by the black majority, the same white nationalists don’t conclude “oh, the hatred the blacks have must be because Afrikaners are especially terrible people—why else would they be hated?” And the same is true for many other cases: the Algerian hatred of the Pied-Noirs, the Amerindian hatred of white settlers, the Chinese hatred of European Christian missionaries, and so on—does this mean that white Christians must just be unusually terrible, horrible people? Or from a religious standpoint, does the persecution at various points of Christians and the suppression of their faith by pagans and Muslims show that Christians must have just deserved to be hated for their terrible behavior?

    And the same principle is hopefully clear, if less emotionally salient, to white nationalists in cases not involving whites: does anyone look at the expulsion of Indians from Uganda in 1972 and conclude that it must have been the Indians’ fault, and Idi Amin must have had good reasons to do so? Does anyone look at the crimes committed against the Yazidis in Iraq today and say “well, I’m sure ISIS must have a good reason for hating them, they probably deserve it.” ?

    In a world where Jews were 90% of the population of a continent and Christians a small stateless minority on it, no doubt Jewish intellectuals would reflectively stroke their beards and conclude that the plight of Christian minorities in so many countries simply goes to show that Christians are especially terrible people whose bad behavior justifies their ill treatment.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    In a world where Jews were 90% of the population...
     
    Look at Israel to see how to finish this sentence.

    Are Jews a better host to Muslims than Christians were to Jews? Or how well Christians are doing in Israel?
    , @Anatoly Karlin
    Good comment.

    You do indeed make a good point that it would be fairer to adjust for length of time spent as minorities, but I'm not sure this cardinally changes the situation.

    1. The comparisons you bring up - South African whites, French pied-noirs, [French in Haiti, Russians in Central Asia post-1916, etc.] - are cases of metropolitan minorities being left behind in the wake of retreating empires, not diasporas as such. Few people like being under the foreign boot, especially since European imperialists helpfully brought along modern nationalism with them. Hence the many cases of colonized peoples giving the imperials the boot as soon as the opportunity presented itself.

    A more relevant if for now hypothetical and exceedingly unlikely scenario in which this would apply to Jews are if Palestinians/Arabs were to get the upper hand in Israel, through demographics/democracy or military conquest. I doubt there will be full-scale genocide, but I would certainly expect some ethnic cleansing at least, and possibly wholesale expulsion.

    2. Peoples the diaspora Jewish diaspora can be compared with:

    a) Armenians - Close in psychology to Jews, and also famously underwent their own mass genocide by the Turks. How frequently were they expelled relative to Jews?

    b) Gypsies - I don't think even they have been expelled as often as Jews, despite them being a byword for petty theft and criminality in European folklore. [But perhaps nobody - including Gypsies themselves - is interested in compiling histories of their persecution].

    c) Ethnic Chinese in S.E. Asia - Have been subject to occasional pogroms, though I don't recall there being many expulsions.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  186. Hibernian says:
    @fnn
    He may be referring to Lutheran Church organizations in the Midwest.

    My Mom (American born Irish w/ one Irish born parent) remembers German neighbors in Chicago circa 1939-40 who went to Nazi propaganda films at local the Lutheran church about “Polish atrocities.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  187. utu says:
    @inertial

    For instance, jokes like this about incompetent goyim are hardly atypical
     
    Easy to test whether this is true or not. Just read Sholem Aleichem.

    Sholem Aleichem was a Jewish comic writer who was writing in a language that few non-Jews bothered to learn at the time. Neither would occur to him that his stories would ever be translated., especially given that he usually wrote for newspapers, magazines and other such impermanent media. In other words, he was writing for Jewish eyes only.

    So how many of his jokes are at the expense of dumb non-Jews?

    Read and find out for yourself.

    You are a troll after all. My first suspicion was correct.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. utu says:
    @reiner Tor
    I would add that the Blue Police participation in the holocaust was quite minimal compared to other police forces in German occupied Europe. For example I think in Warsaw they refused German orders and had to be withdrawn from the ghetto before the start of the deportations.

    But there clearly was some participation.

    Years ago I read Raul Hilberg’s “Perpetrators, Victims, and Bystanders” and as far as I remember that Poles were in the Bystanders category and furthermore he did not have anything harsh to say about the Blue police. This is what I found in Wiki:

    Scholars disagree about the degree of involvement of the Blue Police in the rounding up of Jews.[15][16] Although policing inside the Warsaw Ghetto was a responsibility of the Jewish Ghetto Police, a Polish-Jewish historian Emmanuel Ringelblum, chronicler of the Warsaw Ghetto, mentioned Polish policemen carrying out extortions and beatings.[17] The police did also take part in street roundups,[9] but not in the killings of Jews. On June 3, 1942 during a prison execution of 110 Jews in Warsaw, members of the Blue Police stood and wept, while the Germans themselves executed the victims, after the Poles refused to obey the orders of their overseers to carry out the shooting.[14] According to Raul Hilberg, “Of all the native police forces in occupied Eastern Europe, those of Poland were least involved in anti-Jewish actions…. They [the Polish Blue Police] could not join the Germans in major operations against Jews or Polish resistors, lest they be considered traitors by virtually every Polish onlooker.”[18] Holocaust historian Gunnar S. Paulsson agrees that the role of the Blue Police was minimal: “Keep this in mind – wrote Paulsson – the Jews in Poland were isolated in ghettos. They were rounded up by German police with the aid of Ukrainian and Baltic collaborators, and the enforced co-operation of the Jewish ghetto police, but very little participation by Polish police (mainly in the smaller centres). They were taken to killing centres staffed again by Germans, Ukrainians and Balts.”[19]

    But Raul Hilberg was the old school Holocaust historian. His yet unpublished manuscript was used by Hannah Arendt in her “Eichmann in Jerusalem” where she wrote extensively on the role of Jews and Judenrats that made the holocaust as we know it possible. For this her book was not translated into Hebrew for several decades. Israel kids who undergo the mandatory Holocaust indoctrination with trips to Auschwitz know nothing about it. Holocaust historians from the “new school” borrowed scientific apparatus and methodology form modern social studies departments (or perhaps the borrowing was were other way around ) and seem to be on the constant warpath just like the SJW’s in search of new enemies and perpetrators. Jewish participation and their role in Holocaust is not a subject of research anymore.

    Personally I believe that the decisions made in Israel in 1950′s to abandon prosecuting of Jewish collaborators was correct with stipulation that similar consideration should be given to some gentile collaborators who often acted under similar levels of duress. This however is not happening in narratives that are being created anew by the “new school” Holocaust researchers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    The Blue Police was better than most collaborationist police forces, but you cannot say they never did anything wrong.

    This is from your comment:

    Polish-Jewish historian Emmanuel Ringelblum, chronicler of the Warsaw Ghetto, mentioned Polish policemen carrying out extortions and beatings.[17] The police did also take part in street roundups,

    This was Warsaw. So no killings, but some beatings etc.

    Then there’s this, also from your comment:

    very little participation by Polish police (mainly in the smaller centres)

    To me, this implies that their participation was worse in the smaller centers than in Warsaw.

    I would be proud of it, if I were Polish. Realistically speaking, you cannot expect better from any people than that. But it’s not literally nothing. It’s something.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  189. utu says:
    @Anonymous
    A really well reasoned post, I agree with most of its points. However, I do have to disagree a bit with your take on #11, which relies heavily on the deeply flawed. "117 countries" meme:

    Firstly, "Jews" as an entity of one sort or another have existed for a very, very long time, as one can see from the fact that the first entry on the list dates back 2,500+ years ago. For much of this time, there has not been an independent Jewish state with a monopoly on violence within its borders, and Jews have been residents of polities where a different ethny could wield overwhelming military force. That means that there have simply been a lot of opportunities to expel "Jews" from countries relative to, say, Carthaginians or Germans. (And as a corollary, one could no doubt produce a long list of many countries where Jews resided peacefully for long periods of time, simply because Jews have existed for thousands of years and across many countries.)

    Secondly, there's a galling inconsistency in terms of victim-blaming by many white nationalists. When Jewish people, as an ethnic and religious minority, are disliked/expelled by a majority---well that just goes to show how uniquely terrible Jews are, they wouldn't be disliked if they didn't deserve it, etc. ("oy vey, why do they persecute us so?")

    But when, say, whites in South Africa are hated and persecuted by the black majority, the same white nationalists don't conclude "oh, the hatred the blacks have must be because Afrikaners are especially terrible people---why else would they be hated?" And the same is true for many other cases: the Algerian hatred of the Pied-Noirs, the Amerindian hatred of white settlers, the Chinese hatred of European Christian missionaries, and so on---does this mean that white Christians must just be unusually terrible, horrible people? Or from a religious standpoint, does the persecution at various points of Christians and the suppression of their faith by pagans and Muslims show that Christians must have just deserved to be hated for their terrible behavior?

    And the same principle is hopefully clear, if less emotionally salient, to white nationalists in cases not involving whites: does anyone look at the expulsion of Indians from Uganda in 1972 and conclude that it must have been the Indians' fault, and Idi Amin must have had good reasons to do so? Does anyone look at the crimes committed against the Yazidis in Iraq today and say "well, I'm sure ISIS must have a good reason for hating them, they probably deserve it." ?

    In a world where Jews were 90% of the population of a continent and Christians a small stateless minority on it, no doubt Jewish intellectuals would reflectively stroke their beards and conclude that the plight of Christian minorities in so many countries simply goes to show that Christians are especially terrible people whose bad behavior justifies their ill treatment.

    In a world where Jews were 90% of the population…

    Look at Israel to see how to finish this sentence.

    Are Jews a better host to Muslims than Christians were to Jews? Or how well Christians are doing in Israel?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tyrion 2

    Are Jews a better host to Muslims than Christians were to Jews? Or how well Christians are doing in Israel?
     
    The Jewish state's crimes against minorities are absolutely infinitesimal compared to the world historical average. Or even contemporary norms for their region.

    Of course, given its partially Western founding and only after the 1945 watershed in Western behaviour, this is not an apples and apples comparison but your straight up inversion of reality is dizzying. No wonder you are lost.
    , @Dmitry

    Are Jews a better host to Muslims than Christians were to Jews? Or how well Christians are doing in Israel?
     

    21st century Israel is unnaturally tolerant - too tolerant for its own good. The level of tolerance for enemies in the country is insane. Where there is a parliament, full of government paid politicians (with very high government salaries), calling for the country's destruction during the middle of parliament session.

    However, you cannot compare a 21st century Jewish country, with a Christian country of a different historical time period, in order to draw some eternal lessons. A medieval Jewish country, would likely not have behaved differently to a medieval Christian or Muslim country - likewise a 19th century and 20th century one. The current high toleration level is a product of the historical period.

    In Israel's case, it will also have to change or be a moderation in this liberalism in the future, if the country will not fracture (at some point the Arab minority will have to either become more loyal, at least to the extent of recognizing its existence and not agitating national destruction, or there will be civil war - which is already occurring on a lower level similar to in Dagestan today).

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  190. utu says:
    @someone
    im glad u finally admitting jewish involvment in the carnage of WW2 ' I think a case can be made that the Poles and Ukrainians participating in the holocaust were not much different from the Jews participating in the same, like Jewish Council or Jewish Police members. They participated to avoid near certain death.'there was no Blue Police in getto.Getto had its own -very strict &cruel jewish police in there

    I think a case can be made that the Poles and Ukrainians participating in the holocaust were not much different from the Jews participating in the same

    I do not think so. There were SS Ukrainian formations that are infamous for their role in massacres and running concentration camps. There were no Polish or Jewish SS formations.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    SS Ukrainian formations that are infamous for their role in massacres and running concentration camps
     
    Two units of the Ukrainian SS division (4th and 5th police regiments) was responsible for a My Lai style massacres of some Polish villages but overall it was not a massacring unit, like Dirlewanger , but primarily a combat entity:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14th_Waffen_Grenadier_Division_of_the_SS_(1st_Galician)

    Ironically it attracted political traditional conservatives and moderates who didn't like Banderism.

    The Ukrainian concentration camp guards were Soviet POWs who chose their job rather starve.

    Deliberate Ukrainian murderous collaboration was mostly in the form of police work. Not in combat volunteers in the Waffen SS wanting to fight Bolshevism, nor among the coerced concentration camp guards.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  191. melanf says:
    @E

    Tarkovsky’s films were (in 1970) interesting to a very small number of people. And today these films are interesting to very very small number of people. I think these movies deserve to be called “trash”, not the product of Mel Gibson with shooting and chase.
     
    Yeah, gonna have to disagree with you there. Watching a Tarkovsky film is like a drink of clear spring water after a drought to me -- it's one of the things that makes me remember what it means to be Russian after too long a time surrounded by foreign (American/Canadian) culture and foreign habits of thought in everyday life.

    Granted, maybe to an American, Mel Gibson movies have the same effect. To each their own.

    In terms of ticket sales:
    Ivan's Childhood - 16.7 million tickets
    Andrei Rublyov - shelved for years, 2.98 million tickets when finally released with 277 prints
    Solaris - 10.5 million tickets from only 5 cinemas
    The Mirror - released in only 73 prints, no ticket numbers available
    Stalker - 4.3 million tickets
    Nostalghia - released in exile, no numbers can be found
    The Sacrifice - same as above

    No, not quite as popular as the #1 Soviet box office hits (which would sell ~30-60 million tickets), but not nothing either. Well-known within intelligentsia class (and of course, quite successful among foreign film critics).

    Besides, Tarkovsky uses a very different film language, and diversity of habit and thought are a good thing to experience, lest we forget that there is more than one way to live, and think about, our lives.

    Watching a Tarkovsky film is like a drink of clear spring water after a drought to me — it’s one of the things that makes me remember what it means to be Russian

    Tarkovsky is not Russian culture, it is the culture of the Russian “intelligentsia”. For example, the film “Andrei Rublev” – about the era of the battle of Kulikovo. But Tarkovsky was able to take a dull pseudo-historical rubbish about the good “intelligents” (monks), and bad government. As a result, this film is firmly forgotten (except for a very narrow sect of the “intelligentsia”)
    In comparison the film “Alexander Nevsky” by Eisenstein has a great popularity (although it is a de facto movie-comic with heroes simple as infusoria)

    In terms of ticket sales:

    This is the Soviet era, where viewers were forced to watch a very meager set of films. Since then, much time has passed – good Soviet films in Russia remember and love, but Tarkovsky firmly forgotten (except for the “intelligentsia” of course). Today the film “Ivan Vasilievich: Back to the Future” by Leonid Gaidai is four orders of magnitude more popular than “Andrei Rublev”. It is an objective talent assessment

    Read More
    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    Tarkovsky is not Russian culture, it is the culture of the Russian “intelligentsia”. For example, the film “Andrei Rublev” – about the era of the battle of Kulikovo. But Tarkovsky was able to take a dull pseudo-historical rubbish about the good “intelligents” (monks), and bad government. As a result, this film is firmly forgotten (except for a very narrow sect of the “intelligentsia”)
    In comparison the film “Alexander Nevsky” by Eisenstein has a great popularity (although it is a de facto movie-comic with heroes simple as infusoria)
     
    "Andrei Rublev" is not his most interesting films. Solyaris, Stalker, Zerkalo - these are the more interesting ones.
    , @E

    This is the Soviet era, where viewers were forced to watch a very meager set of films.
     
    Except that Tarkovsky's films were never given wide release (except perhaps for his first, "Ivan's Childhood"). People weren't "forced" into seeing them, they specifically sought them out. This is especially true of Solaris (seen 10.5 million times at just 5 cinemas).

    Yes, it is true that they were particularly loved by the Soviet intelligentsia which later supported the processes that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union and, as a result, caused their own cultural suicide.

    I think that it is this which may explain why Tarkovsky's films are no longer liked as much in Russia - they were particularly liked by a formerly influential cultural group which "self-destructed" and is now very much out of fashion.

    And still: "diversity of habit and thought are a good thing to experience, lest we forget that there is more than one way to live, and think about, our lives".

    For the same reason, it is also healthy to read good books written in former eras, when people thought differently, in ways that are currently taboo.

    Goodness knows not all of us are perfectly "in tune" with the modern pop culture, and may find something useful in other ways of seeing things.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  192. @inertial
    Slezkine cherry-picks Latvians and Poles for his comparisons. These were two ethnicities with their own independent and, at the time, hostile nations. Soviet state always treated such ethnicities with extra suspicion. The Jews would later get such treatment as well, after establishment of Israel.

    In any case, arrest for political crimes was not the only reason to dislike the regime. How about, for example, being kicked out of your home and stripped of all your valuables?

    Slezkine cherry-picks Latvians and Poles for his comparisons. These were two ethnicities with their own independent and, at the time, hostile nations. Soviet state always treated such ethnicities with extra suspicion.

    That explanation would make more sense if most Latvians in the USSR at the time of the purges were not communist exiles who were extremely hostile to Latvia themselves. The Latvians that were executed in Stalin’s purges were largely the same Latvians who would have been executed in Latvia.

    In the 1930s we were debating whether to interpret the mass executions of Finnish and Baltic Reds in the Soviet Union as Stalin’s gesture of friendship towards our states. These dead Reds were our sworn enemies who had escaped execution in 1918-1919. Many of them were still lobbying for Soviet resources to be used against the state of their origin so some took the purges as a sign that Stalin wanted peace and normalized relations instead of continuing to promote revolution in neighboring states like Trotsky would have done.

    It’s possible that the extremely disproportionate death ratio of Baltic Reds in the USSR had something to do with the Soviet relationship with neighboring states and thus isn’t indicative of ethnic attitudes in the Soviet government but if so, it was not about any chance that the Baltic Reds were planning to betray the Soviet Union for the states that they wanted to destroy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @inertial

    That explanation would make more sense if most Latvians in the USSR at the time of the purges were not communist exiles who were extremely hostile to Latvia themselves.
     
    In 1937-38, this didn't matter one bit.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  193. melanf says:
    @Dmitry

    Tarkovsky’s films were (in 1970) interesting to a very small number of people. And today these films are interesting to very very small number of people. I think these movies deserve to be called “trash”, not the product of Mel Gibson with shooting and chase.

     

    Well if you measure by how audience numbers - I suppose that Justin Bieber latest song is superior to Bruckner's 8th symphony?

    and: ” franchise films have been among the best performers in the 21st century. Six Harry Potter films and five films from Peter Jackson’s Middle-earth series are included in the nominal earnings chart, while the Star Wars and Pirates of the Caribbean franchises feature prominently.”

    Middle-earth series and Star Wars (first!) realy great films
     

    To be honest, looking at the inflation adjusted list lower down in the article (Gone with Wind - I haven't seen; but Jaws is somewhat entertaining), it is rather better than the non-inflation adjusted list.

    But in the top 50 highest grossing films, I can only see Jurassic Park as even a film I could watch twice. Maybe a couple others on the list, like Zootopia or Titanic, I would say are at least well-made. But the vast majority of this list is pure trash even from a populist standard (Furious 7 with $1.5 billion).

    Well if you measure by how audience numbers – I suppose that Justin Bieber latest song is superior to Bruckner’s 8th symphony?

    Well, if Justin Bieber in 50 years will have a popularity comparable to Vivaldi or Mozart – so he’s a great composer. But I think Bieber will be quickly forgotten.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  194. inertial says:
    @Jaakko Raipala

    Slezkine cherry-picks Latvians and Poles for his comparisons. These were two ethnicities with their own independent and, at the time, hostile nations. Soviet state always treated such ethnicities with extra suspicion.
     
    That explanation would make more sense if most Latvians in the USSR at the time of the purges were not communist exiles who were extremely hostile to Latvia themselves. The Latvians that were executed in Stalin's purges were largely the same Latvians who would have been executed in Latvia.

    In the 1930s we were debating whether to interpret the mass executions of Finnish and Baltic Reds in the Soviet Union as Stalin's gesture of friendship towards our states. These dead Reds were our sworn enemies who had escaped execution in 1918-1919. Many of them were still lobbying for Soviet resources to be used against the state of their origin so some took the purges as a sign that Stalin wanted peace and normalized relations instead of continuing to promote revolution in neighboring states like Trotsky would have done.

    It's possible that the extremely disproportionate death ratio of Baltic Reds in the USSR had something to do with the Soviet relationship with neighboring states and thus isn't indicative of ethnic attitudes in the Soviet government but if so, it was not about any chance that the Baltic Reds were planning to betray the Soviet Union for the states that they wanted to destroy.

    That explanation would make more sense if most Latvians in the USSR at the time of the purges were not communist exiles who were extremely hostile to Latvia themselves.

    In 1937-38, this didn’t matter one bit.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  195. Judaism Is Simply Inevitable CYCLIC Sociologic Function For Reduction Of Over-Population

    [MORE]

    This analysis/exposition by Karlin is beside the pt. as Jews simply have a determinist socio-biologic purpose/function, that being to opposing the original rationalist, hence determinist, objective view, understanding, and grasp of reality (Aristotle) which created the original culture by gentiles, as Jews are, by definition, foremost SUBJECTIVISTS (Platonists, also Kantian) who hold and push the “midrash” (interpretation) of the Torah, thus the Talmudist/Pharisaic–see Talmudical.blogspot.com and Come-and-hear.com.

    Gentile pretext for subjectivism is moralism and hubris, the presumption one can be “good” or “evil,” all this by means of (non-existent) “free” will–which opposes the Christian principle of “original sin” and sinfulness–self-interest founded in willfulness, pretending to hubristic, God-like “free” will.

    Note then extreme subjectivism is idea that reality is mere product of mind/consciousness, thus making oneself God, the creator, thus satanism. Of course, many more gentiles are subjectivists and satanists, but Jews are most and best organized, most cohesive, collectivistic, best led for effectiveness of their group-think, Jews co-operating best, most practically, upon the subjectivistic project–ESPECIALLY and ultimately in way of central-banking fiat-currency–legalized counterfeiting. See Mises.org for expo on central-banking.

    Note then Jews don’t originate the subjectivist (satanic) stage of a mature, degenerate society–which is done by corrupt and hubristic gentiles themselves, as in Rome and present USA–but Jews are enabled thereupon to organize, lead, and dominate the corrupt and relatively chaotic, dis-organized, and individualistic subjectivists among gentiles who yet out-number Jews (like Christian-Zionists, for example).

    Thus organized by Judaic satanism (a redundancy, actually) the large satanic sub-culture soon dominates the whole rotten, corrupt culture/society in general in the great CYCLIC “Decline of the West,” by Oswald Spengler. Note CYCLIC hist. follows the determinist, objective nature of reality.

    So of course all gentiles and Aristotelians are non-”semitic,” hence anti-semitic–for Jews are like a disease for their sociologic effect, like typhus, leprosy, and plague, that works necessarily to exterminating and eliminating corrupt, weak, inferior gentiles who’ve become subjectivist and satanic, mostly on pretext of anti-rational moralism, known in Christian theology as Pelagian heresy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  196. @inertial
    Slezkine cherry-picks Latvians and Poles for his comparisons. These were two ethnicities with their own independent and, at the time, hostile nations. Soviet state always treated such ethnicities with extra suspicion. The Jews would later get such treatment as well, after establishment of Israel.

    In any case, arrest for political crimes was not the only reason to dislike the regime. How about, for example, being kicked out of your home and stripped of all your valuables?

    But the percentage of Jews arrested was lower than their percentage of the general population. Yes, Latvians were most persecuted, but Jews were nothing special. I don’t think Jews (most Jews, at any rate) had it great, but you were arguing for the improbable proposition that they were especially badly hit by communism. Well, they lost their property. Everyone lost their property. Peasants, the vast majority of the population, lost their properties during collectivization, too, and they were also starved to death by the millions. Some Jews were, too, but proportionally less. You cannot seriously say they had it worse than others. They didn’t have it good, on average. But, in a regime known for its propensity to murder its own citizens by the millions, they had it better than others. Which is a lot. Especially if you consider that they were overrepresented among the perpetrators. I didn’t see many instances of Jews saying sorry for this. I have seen a lot of instances of Jews demanding apologies from peoples like Poles for their minor roles in the holocaust. It’s not an admirable behavior.

    Read More
    • Replies: @inertial
    Look, the original statement was that Jews "pretended to hate Stalin." That's nonsense. Soviet regime had various wave and methods of repression, some affected Jews disproportionately and other didn't (and there was at least one episode where Jews were specifically targeted but it got aborted by Stalin'r death.) The point is that, overall, Jews were affected negatively by the Bolshevism (although some prospered) and had no reason to love it.

    BTW. The 1937-38 purges to a large degree targeted the Communist hierarchy and yet the Jews were not disproportionately affected. What does it tell you about the claim that the Communists were all Jews?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  197. @utu
    Years ago I read Raul Hilberg's "Perpetrators, Victims, and Bystanders" and as far as I remember that Poles were in the Bystanders category and furthermore he did not have anything harsh to say about the Blue police. This is what I found in Wiki:

    Scholars disagree about the degree of involvement of the Blue Police in the rounding up of Jews.[15][16] Although policing inside the Warsaw Ghetto was a responsibility of the Jewish Ghetto Police, a Polish-Jewish historian Emmanuel Ringelblum, chronicler of the Warsaw Ghetto, mentioned Polish policemen carrying out extortions and beatings.[17] The police did also take part in street roundups,[9] but not in the killings of Jews. On June 3, 1942 during a prison execution of 110 Jews in Warsaw, members of the Blue Police stood and wept, while the Germans themselves executed the victims, after the Poles refused to obey the orders of their overseers to carry out the shooting.[14] According to Raul Hilberg, "Of all the native police forces in occupied Eastern Europe, those of Poland were least involved in anti-Jewish actions.... They [the Polish Blue Police] could not join the Germans in major operations against Jews or Polish resistors, lest they be considered traitors by virtually every Polish onlooker."[18] Holocaust historian Gunnar S. Paulsson agrees that the role of the Blue Police was minimal: "Keep this in mind – wrote Paulsson – the Jews in Poland were isolated in ghettos. They were rounded up by German police with the aid of Ukrainian and Baltic collaborators, and the enforced co-operation of the Jewish ghetto police, but very little participation by Polish police (mainly in the smaller centres). They were taken to killing centres staffed again by Germans, Ukrainians and Balts."[19]
     
    But Raul Hilberg was the old school Holocaust historian. His yet unpublished manuscript was used by Hannah Arendt in her "Eichmann in Jerusalem" where she wrote extensively on the role of Jews and Judenrats that made the holocaust as we know it possible. For this her book was not translated into Hebrew for several decades. Israel kids who undergo the mandatory Holocaust indoctrination with trips to Auschwitz know nothing about it. Holocaust historians from the "new school" borrowed scientific apparatus and methodology form modern social studies departments (or perhaps the borrowing was were other way around ) and seem to be on the constant warpath just like the SJW's in search of new enemies and perpetrators. Jewish participation and their role in Holocaust is not a subject of research anymore.

    Personally I believe that the decisions made in Israel in 1950's to abandon prosecuting of Jewish collaborators was correct with stipulation that similar consideration should be given to some gentile collaborators who often acted under similar levels of duress. This however is not happening in narratives that are being created anew by the "new school" Holocaust researchers.

    The Blue Police was better than most collaborationist police forces, but you cannot say they never did anything wrong.

    This is from your comment:

    Polish-Jewish historian Emmanuel Ringelblum, chronicler of the Warsaw Ghetto, mentioned Polish policemen carrying out extortions and beatings.[17] The police did also take part in street roundups,

    This was Warsaw. So no killings, but some beatings etc.

    Then there’s this, also from your comment:

    very little participation by Polish police (mainly in the smaller centres)

    To me, this implies that their participation was worse in the smaller centers than in Warsaw.

    I would be proud of it, if I were Polish. Realistically speaking, you cannot expect better from any people than that. But it’s not literally nothing. It’s something.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    But it’s not literally nothing.
     
    Nothing is literally nothing. And one can always make something out of nothing. What criteria and metrics should be used? How many Jews did they shoot? How many did they guard? How many did they refuse to shoot? How many did they help to escape? How many policeman cried? How many policeman were shot by Germans? What comparisons should be made? With French or Dutch police or with Lithuanian or Latvian formations? Each place was different. The most important question is why are still talking about? Why the world should keep satisfying all whims of insatiable Jewish narcissism?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  198. @Anonymous
    A really well reasoned post, I agree with most of its points. However, I do have to disagree a bit with your take on #11, which relies heavily on the deeply flawed. "117 countries" meme:

    Firstly, "Jews" as an entity of one sort or another have existed for a very, very long time, as one can see from the fact that the first entry on the list dates back 2,500+ years ago. For much of this time, there has not been an independent Jewish state with a monopoly on violence within its borders, and Jews have been residents of polities where a different ethny could wield overwhelming military force. That means that there have simply been a lot of opportunities to expel "Jews" from countries relative to, say, Carthaginians or Germans. (And as a corollary, one could no doubt produce a long list of many countries where Jews resided peacefully for long periods of time, simply because Jews have existed for thousands of years and across many countries.)

    Secondly, there's a galling inconsistency in terms of victim-blaming by many white nationalists. When Jewish people, as an ethnic and religious minority, are disliked/expelled by a majority---well that just goes to show how uniquely terrible Jews are, they wouldn't be disliked if they didn't deserve it, etc. ("oy vey, why do they persecute us so?")

    But when, say, whites in South Africa are hated and persecuted by the black majority, the same white nationalists don't conclude "oh, the hatred the blacks have must be because Afrikaners are especially terrible people---why else would they be hated?" And the same is true for many other cases: the Algerian hatred of the Pied-Noirs, the Amerindian hatred of white settlers, the Chinese hatred of European Christian missionaries, and so on---does this mean that white Christians must just be unusually terrible, horrible people? Or from a religious standpoint, does the persecution at various points of Christians and the suppression of their faith by pagans and Muslims show that Christians must have just deserved to be hated for their terrible behavior?

    And the same principle is hopefully clear, if less emotionally salient, to white nationalists in cases not involving whites: does anyone look at the expulsion of Indians from Uganda in 1972 and conclude that it must have been the Indians' fault, and Idi Amin must have had good reasons to do so? Does anyone look at the crimes committed against the Yazidis in Iraq today and say "well, I'm sure ISIS must have a good reason for hating them, they probably deserve it." ?

    In a world where Jews were 90% of the population of a continent and Christians a small stateless minority on it, no doubt Jewish intellectuals would reflectively stroke their beards and conclude that the plight of Christian minorities in so many countries simply goes to show that Christians are especially terrible people whose bad behavior justifies their ill treatment.

    Good comment.

    You do indeed make a good point that it would be fairer to adjust for length of time spent as minorities, but I’m not sure this cardinally changes the situation.

    1. The comparisons you bring up – South African whites, French pied-noirs, [French in Haiti, Russians in Central Asia post-1916, etc.] – are cases of metropolitan minorities being left behind in the wake of retreating empires, not diasporas as such. Few people like being under the foreign boot, especially since European imperialists helpfully brought along modern nationalism with them. Hence the many cases of colonized peoples giving the imperials the boot as soon as the opportunity presented itself.

    A more relevant if for now hypothetical and exceedingly unlikely scenario in which this would apply to Jews are if Palestinians/Arabs were to get the upper hand in Israel, through demographics/democracy or military conquest. I doubt there will be full-scale genocide, but I would certainly expect some ethnic cleansing at least, and possibly wholesale expulsion.

    2. Peoples the diaspora Jewish diaspora can be compared with:

    a) Armenians – Close in psychology to Jews, and also famously underwent their own mass genocide by the Turks. How frequently were they expelled relative to Jews?

    b) Gypsies – I don’t think even they have been expelled as often as Jews, despite them being a byword for petty theft and criminality in European folklore. [But perhaps nobody - including Gypsies themselves - is interested in compiling histories of their persecution].

    c) Ethnic Chinese in S.E. Asia – Have been subject to occasional pogroms, though I don’t recall there being many expulsions.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    I'll repost a part of an old comment. Actually, it is more a brief review of MacDonald's evo-psych books on Jewish identity & history.

    Jews are ethnic religious tribalists who had, many of them, lived in Europe for most than 2000 years. Somewhere during the Nero’s rule, they constituted ca 10% of Roman Empire, i.e. 5-6 million people. Have they had an opportunity for natural growth, there would have been ca. 250-400 million of them now. But, most of them assimilated, vanished into greater Pagan & then Christian communities. So much for stubborn insistence of religious-ethnic pride.

    There is no “group evolutionary strategy”, only if it stands for something trivial: any ethnic-national group wants to exist ad infinitum & prosper. This applies to every single human community.
    As for Jews being particularly ethno-centric, this may be the truth in comparison with some other groups, but they didn’t differ from Zoroastrian Iranians or Hindu Brahmins; there is no way to empirically verify whether their ethnocentrism is rooted in ancient religious texts older than 1500 years (Babylonian Talmud, 250-600 AD) or something else. No causal connection can be made & all this is bogus.

    With regard to MacDonald’s thesis that Jews are culturally-generically predisposed to domination in host societies, this is an easily refutable canard: they lived harmoniously, peacefully & productively during Parthian, Zoroastrian, Abbasid empires, Cordoba caliphate, Ottoman Empire…as well as in the 17th-18th C Netherlands or 18th C Prussia. They tried (and to a larger degree succeeded) to assimilate into British & German Empires, from the beginning to the end.

    MacDonald’s theses are very simple & cannot pass the test of any rational & empirical investigation.

    Jews are, according to him, essentially, due to a compound of genes, history, religious ideology,… eternal enemy of “white race”. Not real. They lived among Europeans for almost 2 millennia & had virtually always been at the history’s receiving end. After their Enlightenment at the end of the 18th C, they avidly secularized themselves & were literally hungry for the riches of high European culture (arts, sciences, technology, ..), trying to assimilate as fast as they could. No “evolutionary group strategy” here, not anything that would preserve them as an alien dominant cultural-biological ethnicity..

    Jews are far from a monolith existing in MacDonald fantasy. It is true they, those of them who still possess Jewish identity, try to help their co-religionists if they are in trouble (which is a perfectly normal behavior). But, their primary loyalty is to their host societies, which can be seen from German Jewish behavior during WW1, when their military deaths were higher than their percentage in the population. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judenz%C3%A4hlung French Jews fought for France, British for Britain etc.

    According to MacDonald, Jews are basically destructive to a host society, like a group of pathogen bacteria swarming & sucking life out their host-victim. They’re, actually, not unlike a cancer. Another example of dehumanization & antisemitic nonsense. What about good they’ve done to their host societies, in culture, wealth, inventions, development of commerce, journalism, agriculture, arts,..

    Persistent MacDonald’s myth is about their extraordinarily high levels of endogamous practice. In reality, Catholic and Protestants didn’t mix much until the 20th C, and Jews (not converts) have been in mixed marriages with German Christians at the rate of 40%, during 1933 (Hitler’s rise to power); now, more than 60% of Jews outmarry and more than 80-90% of them do so in Russia. Where is this MacDonald’s grand “evolutionary strategy”?

    Then, he is tendentious. MacDonald presents Spanish conversos/Marranos from 15th and 16th C as ethnically-racially homogeneous group. A part of them must have stayed that way- it is perfectly natural that forcibly converted people (who had already possessed their written culture & rituals) will adopt chameleon-like behavior. So did Moriscos, forcibly converted Muslim Arabs. So, it’s not about specific Jewish traits; it is about religious violence & natural resistance of people who had found themselves on the receiving end of pressure for religious conformity. MacDonald implies that many, perhaps most Marranos succeeded in surviving Inquisition in next 2-3 centuries. True, some Marranos have succeeded to retain their identity & emigrate later to the Netherlands or Ottoman empire, but most of them vanished into broader Iberian societies.

    Conspicuously, MacDonald has glossed over the fact that most Jewish Germans in the 19th C had been assimilated with high percentage of intermarriage. Marranos in 16th C did-at least a part of them-tried to retain their separate identity. Not so in early 19th C Germany, where many Jews had voluntarily been baptized & completely assimilated into German society-no Jewish separatism & tribal behavior. No “Jewish Christian” secret societies, clannish behavior, endogamous marriages…
    Mendelssohn family simply disappeared among other Germans.

    How so if they’re eternally alien ethnic group? Where I can see that famous survival strategy? This “strategy”, it seems, leads only to obliteration of a separate national identity.

    Or, after all, Einstein (whose descendants are not Jews) was right: If it were not for antisemitism, Jews would have dispersed like leaves in the wind.
    , @Dmitry

    2. Peoples the diaspora Jewish diaspora can be compared with:

    a) Armenians – Close in psychology to Jews, and also famously underwent their own mass genocide by the Turks. How frequently were they expelled relative to Jews?

    b) Gypsies – I don’t think even they have been expelled as often as Jews, despite them being a byword for petty theft and criminality in European folklore. [But perhaps nobody - including Gypsies themselves - is interested in compiling histories of their persecution].

    c) Ethnic Chinese in S.E. Asia – Have been subject to occasional pogroms, though I don’t recall there being many expulsions.
     

    The medieval and early modern expulsions are motivated by expropriation of wealth (supernormal profits obtained in banking) by the monarch. They are highly rational short-term behaviour by the monarch, as not only the resources of the expropriated Jews are harvested by the monarch, but also the resources of all those who were in debt to the Jewish community

    The most famous and well studied.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_of_Lincoln

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exchequer_of_the_Jews

    The Wikipedia article writes very elegantly:


    This incident indicates how, on the one hand, Aaron's activity enabled the abbeys to get possession of the lands belonging to the smaller barons, and, on the other, how his death brought the abbeys into the king's power.

     

    Other nationalities like Gypsies' and Armenians do not have equivalent resources to motivate a sovereign to expropriate them.

    If you have had access to JSTOR - there are interesting papers on that.

    The same kind of process was happening very recently in Africa (where there was monarch - Idi Amin) expropriated thousands of concerns belonging to Indians.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_Asians_from_Uganda

    , @iffen
    perhaps nobody - including Gypsies themselves - is interested in compiling histories of their persecution].

    Maybe Gypsies are smarter than what is reported. Maybe they were smart enough not to write everything down for a couple thousand years, thereby not helping to reveal exactly how and how many times they screwed us over.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  199. dchang says:

    how is South Korea “anti-semetic”? not black or even a significant muslim population??? the “ADL” needs to explain itself.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  200. Tyrion 2 says:
    @utu

    In a world where Jews were 90% of the population...
     
    Look at Israel to see how to finish this sentence.

    Are Jews a better host to Muslims than Christians were to Jews? Or how well Christians are doing in Israel?

    Are Jews a better host to Muslims than Christians were to Jews? Or how well Christians are doing in Israel?

    The Jewish state’s crimes against minorities are absolutely infinitesimal compared to the world historical average. Or even contemporary norms for their region.

    Of course, given its partially Western founding and only after the 1945 watershed in Western behaviour, this is not an apples and apples comparison but your straight up inversion of reality is dizzying. No wonder you are lost.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    The Jewish state’s crimes against minorities are absolutely infinitesimal
     
    Nakba does not count? Because Palestinians were not minority yet? They became after Nakba. And after that everything was hunky dory, right?
    , @Anonymous
    Total BS. Jews treat their minorities absolutely horribly. You do know that Jews sterilized Ethiopian Jews right?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  201. Tyrion 2 says:
    @Daniel Chieh
    I'll add my ancedotes. I grew up with a Jewish friend and we were all reasonably close, but around his teens, he began to get increasingly impressive accomplishments: we all wrote, but he would get published; some of us were getting getting to student associations, he became an intern at a major MSM outlet; and by the time we were poking around for careers, he already was set to be a journalist.

    I asked how he managed those things and he always shrugged and said "nepotism."

    Mind you, he was smart and capable(and perhaps self-deprecating), but it did seem that there's a strong network that helps too, and this goes beyond even the typical socioeconomic privilege that all of us had growing up. It reminds me a bit of Chinese guanxi, but much more effective and efficient, with a focus on media and messaging rather than doctors and engineering.

    One more.

    When my parents were in business, we were primarily supplied by a Jewish businessman. For some reason, our shipments kept having "extra" goods in them, which we decided to report and send back. Mysteriously afterward, the terms of business would improve.

    In retrospect, its possible that he considered that Chinese businessmen were generally dishonest and greedy, and therefore set out business/social traps like that in order to weed out individuals who are not worth doing business with. In that fashion, it would seem that he and perhaps many other Jews come from a culture uniquely well equipped with living and dealing with low-trust.

    Incidentally, I think this is the first time I've ever written about the "JQ." I suppose that cherry had to be burst eventually.

    You give two instances with very mundane explanations: self-deprecation and experience of business outside of the West.

    This then turns into quite elaborate and even ornate points on Jewish characteristics through essentially nothing more than highly prejudicial confirmation bias which, to some extent, is taken from this site and then, amazingly, is openly put back on the site where it creates more bias as a fully formed supposedly unbiased incident!

    A similarly frustrating phenomenon may be seen in the media’s reporting of Trump. Misrepresented stories are used to allow the misrepresentation of other stories. The whole thing is circular, or rather, ironically, a function of echoes.

    Not that any of this is necessarily done on purpose or with mal-intent. It is just so obvious what is happening.

    Jew’s higher wealth than average is explained very simply. Higher IQ has not only a direct effect but it also means they grow up in a higher IQ culture and the IQ of your culture matters more for your success than your own – there’s likely a bunch of geniuses in Eastern Congo, none will achieve anything. This, combined with living in major world cities, is more than explanation enough.

    Jewish progressivism is merely a function of class and location. Jews are disproportionately represented in Western urban elites. Western urban elites are disproportionately progressive. Did anyone in Washington DC vote for Trump?

    Israel has many problems. Its behaviour can often be seen as problematic. At least in comparison to the majority of countries West and North of it. Nonetheless compared to the majority of countries East and South of it, Israel is positively angelic. This is not hard to notice.

    There done. The entire ‘JQ’ answered in a few paragraphs. Goodness, it wasn’t hard.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Are you saying that ethnic(or religious, if you wish) networking never happens at all? That's a pretty high standard.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  202. utu says:
    @Tyrion 2

    Are Jews a better host to Muslims than Christians were to Jews? Or how well Christians are doing in Israel?
     
    The Jewish state's crimes against minorities are absolutely infinitesimal compared to the world historical average. Or even contemporary norms for their region.

    Of course, given its partially Western founding and only after the 1945 watershed in Western behaviour, this is not an apples and apples comparison but your straight up inversion of reality is dizzying. No wonder you are lost.

    The Jewish state’s crimes against minorities are absolutely infinitesimal

    Nakba does not count? Because Palestinians were not minority yet? They became after Nakba. And after that everything was hunky dory, right?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
    Given the wholesale slaughter and enslavement of minorities in Syria and Iraq only a couple of years ago, being cleared off one's land during an even-sided civil type war in 1948 is small potatoes.

    The way the pieds noirs were treated by the Algerians was worse too. The difference is that their brothers the French actually took them in. There are oodles of similar examples.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  203. utu says:
    @reiner Tor
    The Blue Police was better than most collaborationist police forces, but you cannot say they never did anything wrong.

    This is from your comment:

    Polish-Jewish historian Emmanuel Ringelblum, chronicler of the Warsaw Ghetto, mentioned Polish policemen carrying out extortions and beatings.[17] The police did also take part in street roundups,

    This was Warsaw. So no killings, but some beatings etc.

    Then there’s this, also from your comment:

    very little participation by Polish police (mainly in the smaller centres)

    To me, this implies that their participation was worse in the smaller centers than in Warsaw.

    I would be proud of it, if I were Polish. Realistically speaking, you cannot expect better from any people than that. But it’s not literally nothing. It’s something.

    But it’s not literally nothing.

    Nothing is literally nothing. And one can always make something out of nothing. What criteria and metrics should be used? How many Jews did they shoot? How many did they guard? How many did they refuse to shoot? How many did they help to escape? How many policeman cried? How many policeman were shot by Germans? What comparisons should be made? With French or Dutch police or with Lithuanian or Latvian formations? Each place was different. The most important question is why are still talking about? Why the world should keep satisfying all whims of insatiable Jewish narcissism?

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    As I wrote, I think the Poles should be proud of their behavior during WW2.

    One additional point, regarding the ethnic cleansing of Germans after the war. If I recall it correctly, it was a high level political decision, with the local Polish population and even Polish police and security forces only reluctantly participating in it. At least according to historian Richard J. Evans. He also wrote that at least on some occasions Polish inhabitants and security forces tried (not always successfully) to protect the German population from atrocities by the Soviet troops, usually from rape. They didn’t view the German population as suffering a just punishment, instead as suffering an atrocity similar to those meted out by the Nazis.

    My point was that even such a nation behaving better than almost all others did something. I think that after roughly three quarters of a century, with the main culprits dead, the most culpable nation having lost a huge territory, etc., it’s high time we stopped calling out nations or ethnic groups on their imagined or real crimes and sins during WW2.
    , @for-the-record
    How many policeman were shot by Germans?

    Historian Andrzej Krzysztof Kunert estimates that 10 to 20% of the policemen were murdered by the Germans for taking part in resistance – on top of those mass-murdered by the Soviets in Mednoye – explained Irena Wollen in her documentary film "Granato
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  204. utu says:
    @Daniel Chieh
    I'll add my ancedotes. I grew up with a Jewish friend and we were all reasonably close, but around his teens, he began to get increasingly impressive accomplishments: we all wrote, but he would get published; some of us were getting getting to student associations, he became an intern at a major MSM outlet; and by the time we were poking around for careers, he already was set to be a journalist.

    I asked how he managed those things and he always shrugged and said "nepotism."

    Mind you, he was smart and capable(and perhaps self-deprecating), but it did seem that there's a strong network that helps too, and this goes beyond even the typical socioeconomic privilege that all of us had growing up. It reminds me a bit of Chinese guanxi, but much more effective and efficient, with a focus on media and messaging rather than doctors and engineering.

    One more.

    When my parents were in business, we were primarily supplied by a Jewish businessman. For some reason, our shipments kept having "extra" goods in them, which we decided to report and send back. Mysteriously afterward, the terms of business would improve.

    In retrospect, its possible that he considered that Chinese businessmen were generally dishonest and greedy, and therefore set out business/social traps like that in order to weed out individuals who are not worth doing business with. In that fashion, it would seem that he and perhaps many other Jews come from a culture uniquely well equipped with living and dealing with low-trust.

    Incidentally, I think this is the first time I've ever written about the "JQ." I suppose that cherry had to be burst eventually.

    It should be obvious to anybody that there is ethnic networking and ethnic nepotism. Overrepresentation of Jews in some areas can’t be explained with IQ, so the IQist postulate non-Gaussian distribution with fat Jewish tail. I am sure it is a preferable explanation when one does not want to address the issue of ethnic nepotism and networking.

    Read More
    • Replies: @j2
    Yes, it is not IQ. I checked from Khan's WORDSUM results and confirmed that the verbal IQ of US Jews is what Lynn said it is, that is 107.5. As this is verbal IQ, the overall IQ is very close to 100. The WORDSUM distribution was so skewed that it only can indicate that there was a selection of Jews who came to the USA. They apparently were screened for having IQ over 100. The part over 100 has average IQ of 112. In the next generation regression to the mean lowers it to 107.5, which is where it is. And that is verbal IQ, not full IQ. How many then are above, say 160? Only twice as many as in the white population because the only screening was dropping those below 100. As no whites below 100 take part to competition for academic achievements, the game should be equal if it were only IQ. Must be ethnic networking, but in the way of getting more people to such positions where you can get results, not simply by giving prizes without results to your kinsmen.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  205. Tyrion 2 says:
    @utu

    The Jewish state’s crimes against minorities are absolutely infinitesimal
     
    Nakba does not count? Because Palestinians were not minority yet? They became after Nakba. And after that everything was hunky dory, right?

    Given the wholesale slaughter and enslavement of minorities in Syria and Iraq only a couple of years ago, being cleared off one’s land during an even-sided civil type war in 1948 is small potatoes.

    The way the pieds noirs were treated by the Algerians was worse too. The difference is that their brothers the French actually took them in. There are oodles of similar examples.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    Perhaps this should be compared to past Jewish accomplishments like during Kitos War in 117 when Jews massacred 240,000 Greeks in Cyprus. So yes, Jews have greatly improved their behavior and Nakba is relatively mild comparing to their actions in Cyprus.
    , @for-the-record
    Given the wholesale slaughter and enslavement of minorities in Syria and Iraq only a couple of years ago, being cleared off one’s land during an even-sided civil type war in 1948 is small potatoes.

    Which wholesale slaughter and enslavement would that be? The Alawites have been in charge in Syria for decades, and they have been protecting minorities (themselves and the Christians).

    And it is highly disingenuous to compare the Palestinians to the pieds noirs. The former had continuously inhabited Palestine for many centuries, the latter were remnants of the actual colonising power who clearly would not be looked upon favourably by those they had colonised.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More...