The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
French Intellectual Sniffs Out Anti-Semitic "Zombie Catholicism" Behind Paris "Charlie Hebdo" Marches for Secularism
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
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
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The real threat: zombie Catholics

As you may have noticed, Europe is currently under siege from huge numbers of Middle Easterners and Africans trying to move in so they can become the parents of Europe’s next generation of car-be-que youths and kosher supermarket shooter-uppers. But that’s not the real problem, the real problem is that some natives, whose ancestors thought of Europe as “Christendom,” are not happy about this.

From The Guardian, an article about the new bestselling book Who Is Charlie? by French historian Emmanuel Todd, an expert on how family structures historically varied across Christendom, in which he sniffs out hereditary blood guilt among pro-Charlie Hebdo demonstrators in favor of secularism.

Emmanuel Todd: the French thinker who won’t toe the Charlie Hebdo line

After the horror of the Paris attacks, everyone agreed that the ensuing street rallies were the best of France. Then a leftwing historian called them a totalitarian sham – and his critique of ‘zombie Catholicism’ has outraged a nation

Angelique Chrisafis Friday 28 August 2015

… Since then, the so-called “spirit of 11 January” – the date of the street rallies – has been seized upon by politicians as shorthand for all that is best and still great about France.

While the aftermath of the attacks has been bitterly contested, no one questioned the street rallies themselves, which were seen as sacrosanct: the one positive sign in one of France’s grimmest hours.

But then a leading French intellectual, the leftwing historian and sociologist Emmanuel Todd, lobbed what he called his own “magnificently crafted Exocet missile” at the nation, with a book arguing that the street rallies were a giant lie. The rallies, he argued, were not what they claimed to be – an admirable coming-together of people from different ethnic, religious and social backgrounds standing up for tolerance – but an odious display of middle-class domination, prejudice and Islamophobia. To Todd, they represented “a sudden glimpse of totalitarianism”. These “sham” demonstrations, he claimed, were made up of a one-sided elite who wanted to spit on Islam, the religion of a weak minority in France.

It’s fascinating how the reigning philosophical discourse in the 21st Century has become simply:

1. Puncher-downers … bad.

2. Puncher-uppers … good, even when they punch-up with AK47s against cartoonists and shoppers.

3. Don’t you dare question our definitions of who are the puncher-uppers and who are the puncher-downers, you racist puncher-downer, you. We know who should be the who and who should be the whom, and if you question us, you deserve to wind up a whom.

Sarah Waters in Times Higher Education sums up Todd’s message:

The Charlie Hebdo demonstration was not a great democratic rally, he says, but a moment of collective hysteria driven by xenophobic, authoritarian and nationalist impulses.

My understanding of French history (e.g., 1792) is that xenophobic, authoritarian, and nationalist ~ democratic.

Those who took to the streets came primarily from the privileged middle classes, taking advantage of the emotional shock that followed the killings in order to reaffirm their position of social domination and privilege.

Back to The Guardian:

The working class and the children of immigrants had been notably absent, he said. The most enthusiastic demonstrations, he decided, had occurred in the country’s most historically Catholic and reactionary regions, an affirmation of the middle class’s moral superiority and domination, and their Islamophobic quest for a scapegoat.

Well, sure, these French folks were demonstrating in favor of the aggressively secular Republic formalized by law in 1905, but the important point is that some of their great-grandparents had been against Col. Dreyfus and thus were on the losing side in 1905. You don’t wash out that kind of hereditary taint in just 110 years by giving up your religion and accepting your rivals’ ideology. You still have anti-Dreyfus genes in there somewhere. Corruption of blood can’t be atoned for that fast.

Todd’s massively contested and controversial book, Who is Charlie? – which is published in English next week – instantly became a bestseller and caused one of the biggest intellectual slanging matches of recent years, even by bruising French standards. …

Todd in turn likened Valls’s blind optimism about France to that of Marshal Pétain, the leader of France’s collaborationist Vichy regime in the 1940s. Who is Charlie? is now being published across the world with a preface warning that in all western societies “a Charlie lies slumbering” – a horrific event that cleaves society apart and sees the highly educated and well-off stick their heads in the sand. …

The furious row surrounding Todd’s book comes amid a wider soul-searching in France. After a fresh round of terror attacks in France – including a beheading and attempt to blow up a chemical plant near Lyon, and last week’s shooting on a high-speed train from Amsterdam to Paris – the question of what remains of that spirit of 11 January haunts the country.

Has France moved on? Or is it still in thrall to the unsettling fears that Charlie Hebdo’s attackers, the Kouachi brothers, ignited, despite the repeated breastbeating of politicians from the far-left to the far-right of the strength of the republican, secular ideal? As France came to terms with its national trauma, it was easier for politicians to focus on 11 January as one day of unity than the three fraught days between 7 and 9 January when two brothers who were once wards of the republic in children’s homes massacred some of the country’s best-known cartoonists as well as a Muslim policeman before finally being shot dead by police after a hostage-taking at a printer’s outside Paris. Their target, Charlie Hebdo, had long been under police protection after death threats over its caricatures of the prophet Muhammad.

The febrile atmosphere worsened when the brothers’ accomplice, Amedy Coulibaly, also French born and bred, touched the rawest of nerves by killing four people in a siege of a Paris kosher grocery store days after shooting dead a policewoman while reportedly on his way to attack a Jewish school.

The slogan “Je Suis Charlie” (I am Charlie) became a worldwide rallying cry but proved complex, and to some extent, excluding.

It didn’t fit with those who utterly condemned the shooting, but didn’t agree with the magazine’s caricatures of Muhammad. Scores of disrupted minute’s silences in schools, particularly in the restive banlieues, or suburbs, appeared to highlight the uneasy relationship between teenagers, often from immigrant minorities, and their teachers.\

Amid this, the French government cracked down on speech “deemed to glorify terrorism”. A series of cases rushed through the courts resulted in heavy prison sentences, some handed down to people who were drunk. …

It was against that background that Todd launched his Exocet. He hadn’t gone on the 11 January rallies himself, although he knew the economist Bernard Maris, who was killed in the Charlie Hebdo attack.

But he said that when he opened the newspaper the next day and saw the maps of where rallies had taken place, he saw a pattern that infuriated him.

“Here was clear fraud. The street demonstrations were the self-glorification of the French middle class. That made me explode.”

He saw it as France refusing to look at the economic stagnation and deep inequality that might have led to the horror of the attacks.

Todd’s central argument is that there are fundamentally two Frances. There is a “central” France, including Paris and Marseille and the Mediterranean, where there is equality on the family level and a deep-rooted attachment to secular values of the French revolution and the republic.

I.e., the Good French.

Then there is a France of the periphery, for example, the west or cities such as Lyon, which has stayed true to the old Catholic bedrock, where people may no longer be practising Catholics, but they’re still infused with all the social conservatism of that Catholicism, its hierarchies and inequality.

More zombie Catholics

I.e., the Bad French.

He calls this “zombie Catholicism”. Infuriating his critics, Todd maintains that the post-attack rallies represented zombie Catholicism on the march.

The Bad French are Zombie Catholics. Sure, they aren’t very Catholic anymore, but blood will tell.

Despite the row, he stands by the idea. “France is always double,” he says. “That’s why you never know if it will collapse or get back on its feet.” Todd, who comes from a cosmopolitan family of writers and is distantly related to the anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss,

Oh, okay, that explains a lot. As Todd always says (about other people), family ties explain a lot.

came to fame for predicting the fall of the Soviet Union in 1976 and more recently for suggesting the US is an empire in decline. He has long argued that family structures explain why people adhere to certain ideologies, and has pleaded for France to leave the euro. …

One of his key concerns is “the wave of Islamophobia” in France, which he says is echoed across the west. …

The maternal side of Todd’s family is Jewish. “This is probably the first time in my life that I’ve written a book as a Jew,” he said.

Todd is an expert about how traditional family ties in Christendom explain current political views, but similar analysis of Jews is basically not done.

For example, the triple bankshot ideologies of Todd’s kinsman Levi-Strauss, along with those of Marx and Freud, were subjected to an intentionally New York Jewish intellectual-style analysis in the 1974 book The Ordeal of Civility by Irish-American New York academic John Murray Cuddihy.

But you’ve probably never heard of that book because a gentile analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews is unimaginable. Jewish intellectuals very much do not like their own tools of analysis being applied to themselves. Turnabout may be fair play, but it’s also, to be frank, zombie Catholicism.

A huge amount of intellectualizing consists of triple bankshots made up by Jewish intellectuals to rationalize primal emotions they feel. Their triple bankshots (bomb Libya abroad, lay down to Muslim inundation at home, or whatever) frequently don’t make much sense in non-emotional terms, but they very much do not like gentiles applying Occam’s Razor to their triple bankshots.

When a young gunman Mohamed Merah opened fire outside a Jewish school in Toulouse in 2012, killing four, Todd put the antisemitic element to the back of his mind; likewise when a French gunman killed four at the Jewish museum in Brussels last year. But with the attack on the kosher grocery store, which he feels has been overshadowed by the Charlie Hebdo killings, he said antisemitism was clearly at crisis point.

All of these were massacres of Jews perpetrated by Muslims. But the point is the massacrers were puncher-uppers, and the important thing is to sniff out the would-be puncher-downers, who, oddly enough, so often turn out to be one’s hereditary enemies, and punish them for the sins of their great-grandfathers.

His theory is that the rise in Islamophobia is in turn stoking antisemitism in run-down suburbs, and that antisemitism is growing in the middle class.

Then again, a more disinterested observer might suggest that anti-Semitic Muslim massacres in Europe are stoking Islamophobia among average people.

But average people — zombie Catholics — and their latent, hereditary anti-Semitism are the Real Danger.

“Two Women,” 1960

In the mid-20th Century, European elites occasionally used Muslims as shock troops against other Europeans to spread terror. General Franco used Moroccans to shatter the morale of the Spanish Left in the early days of the Spanish Civil War. And the Allies used French-commanded Moroccans to finally dislodge the Germans from strategic Monte Cassino in Italy. The French Allied general promised his Muslim troops that if they succeeded in driving the Germans off of the mountain, they would get 50 hours to rape Italian civilian women with impunity. (Sophia Loren won her Oscar for a movie about this, but since then it appears to have disappeared down the memory hole outside of Italy.)

Personally, I think Europeans should try harder to get along with each other rather than import Muslims to spread terror and rape in Europe for partisan advantage in intra-European squabbles.

But then I’m some kind of wacko extremist, so I would say that, wouldn’t I?

 
Hide 193 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. There is no end to French intellectual masturbation. I’m something of a Francofile, but you have to ignore a lot of merde to get to the good stuff. Halas.

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    I remember reading when I was a young man about some adult clubs in Paris that featured frottage, basically some guy would come out onstage and some woman would come out, well-versed, as Voltaire would say, in the science of hydraulics and sufficient reason, and through the expert application of friction and manual pressure, would achieve tremendous distances for the resulting ejaculation. Triple bank shot, indeed.

    Quite a lot of intellectual activity is focused on justifying some emotional attachment, or some some irrational conception. Quite a lot. Of course none of us are immune, so, if you want to be rational you have to be detached, and you also have to make sure that emotionally you are in a good place. Good writing and good thinking come mostly from being in a good mood.
  2. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    David P. Goldman aka “Spengler” also likes to describe Europeans, and gentiles more generally, including Muslims, as “zombies” with dying cultures and falling fertility rates, the sole exception according to Goldman being, naturally, the Jews:

    https://pjmedia.com/spengler/2013/07/03/zombie-apocalypse/

    The history of the world is the history of humankind’s search for immortality,” I argued in my 2011 book Why Civilizations Die (and Why Islam is Dying, Too). Human beings can’t tolerate life without the hope of some existence beyond our brief mortal span of years. Cultures that know they have made it past their best-used-by date tend to die for lack of interest. Extreme examples are the neolithic tribes that walk out of the Amazon to encounter modernity, and succumb to alcoholism and other vices in a matter of years. Less extreme examples are the radical Muslims who declare that they love death more than we love life, or the European nations whose fertility rate is so low that their national survival is questionable at the hundred-year horizon. I argued in Civilizations that the so-called Arab Spring was a paroxysm of cultural despair, the prelude to societal breakdown with appalling consequences; watching the dreadful events in Egypt and Syria, few today can dismiss this thesis as alarmist.

    Dying cultures are the living dead. Half of the world’s 6,000 languages will disappear by the end of this century. They are zombie cultures.

    • Replies: @wonderbread
    "Among the large industrial countries, there is one great exception to the declinist story: the United States. . . . It is not that Americans in general are having children, but that Americans of faith are having children . . . . It's just that there are far more Americans than Europeans practicing a faith. . . . Almost as extreme as the fertility gap between religious and secular Americans is the one between members of mainline Protestant denominations and evangelicals." (How Civilizations Die, 191-4).

    Goldman then goes on to apply the same line of reasoning to Jews, distinguishing fertile Orthodox Jews from infertile less-affiliated Jews.

    , @Taco
    In reply to Spengler, I would quote Frank Herbert, from Dune,

    "And he thought about the Guild -- the force which had specialized for so long that it had become a parasite, unable to exist independently of the life upon which it had fed. They had never dared grasp the sword... and now they could not grasp it. They might have taken Arrakis when they realized the error of specializing on the melange awareness-spectrum narcotic for their navigators. They could have done this, lived their glorious day and died. Instead, they'd existed from moment to moment, hoping the seas in which they swam might produce a new host when the old one died.

    "The guild navigators, gifted with limited prescience, had made the fatal decision: they'd chosen always the clear, safe course that leads downward into stagnation."

    Call me a zombie if you will. From my ancestral gene-pool sprang Shakespeare, both industrial revolutions, the assembly line, and footprints on the moon. We grasped the sword and lived our glorious day. Even if we burn out and become nothing more than a reviled memory in the social justice textbooks of the future, we will have accomplished far more than the Marxs, Freuds, and Spenglers ever could.

    , @yaqub the mad scientiat
    Spengler's entire writing builds around this theme. He reports with glee the demographic woes of Arabs, Persians, Japanese, and on and on. He must fantasize about them expiring from the earth.

    That said, he has done some sympathetic writing on Russia, as opposed to his neocon brethren.
  3. Two points on Todd:
    1) The Charlie Hebdo marches were a weird of mix spontaneous feeling and politico-mediatic orchestration. Nominally for free speech and “tolerance,” the next day the government arrested the comedian Dieudonné for “hate speech.” In short, the French government is subsidizing anti-Muslim blasphemy and is persecuting anti-Holocaust-Industry blasphemy. Nor was there any recognition that shutting down Islamic immigration could limit these problems in the future or that the FN had a point and should be allowed to participate in democratic politics. The government also exploited the incident to pass more surveillance legislation. There is nothing good about these sheep-like demonstrations and on the contrary shows the government’s ability to rally people around a somewhat authoritarian, faux-patriotic, and censorious agenda. I think the latter is what disturbs Todd about “Je Suis Charlie.”

    2) Todd has been roundly mocked for his unbelievably obtuse pseudo-explanation of the “Charlie” phenomenon and is basically a very, very roundabout way of avoiding any mention of Jewish ethnocentrism in French politics. Said ethnocentrism however largely explains the double standard on insulting the Prophet vs. the Shoah.

    • Agree: Horzabky
  4. Jews think that 1950s era America, which defeated Nazi Germany and prosecuted the perpetrators of the Holaucast just a few years earlier, was also deeply anti-semitic.

    Jews can find anti-semitism in the most unexpected of places…………..

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I'd say it's more the case that some Jews see anti-Semitism in 1930's America that kept most Jewish refugees out, but they don't like to write about that period as much because there are feelings of failure that their ancestors also didn't push harder to save the European Jews. I wonder if we would see as much criticism of 1950's America country club and college admissions discrimination from liberal Jews if 1930's America had accepted more Jewish refugees.
  5. Peter Meyer [AKA "Peter Fagan"] says:

    Semi-related long-form article from The New Yorker about the Islam in France:

    http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/08/31/the-other-france

    Executive summary: crime and extremism and treason, these we can look past, but many of these Muslim immigrants are *gasp* anti-Semitic. The horror! Although the author still manages to pin this on the French, especially Marine Le Pen. Apparently the Muslim community support her now? I honestly can’t keep up.

  6. Derrida was a French Jewish intellectual, who, like Foucault, was inspired by Heidegger , a Nazi. After Heidegger’s past was revealed, Derrida still defended him. There is a reason why the word”intello” is a term of abuse in French. French intellos have done more harm to Europe than anything since the Black Death. Their theories deny the existence of reason and truth as merely social constructs. They should be ignored. In my time as an academic, I used to meet people like this all the time, spouting bile while quaffing the college claret. I had a conversation with one who defended bride burning. I ended the conversation by threatening to deconstruct his face.

    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson
    Center shot!
    , @rod1963
    Ahhh the French Po-Mo's and Decons. Leave it to French Jews to create a philosophy that denies reality and language. A century earlier they would have been locked up as lunatics.

    What they spouted was and is pure poison - a corrosive acid that turns people into nihilists. When you believe in nothing, you care for nothing and fight for nothing. How a bunch of gullible Western students bought into that s**t I'll never know.

    I also agree this movement has done more damage to our people than the Black Death. It literally induced a death wish among the intellectual and political classes. They have become the hollow men or men without chests.

    It would also explain the utter helplessness displayed by our elites in many domains. There is no fight in them, even the notion of self-preservation has vanished.
    , @5371
    I have no time for Derrida, but you are being very stupid. Is one obliged to boycott Bieberbach and Teichmüller too, or just Heidegger?
    , @The Last Real Calvinist

    They should be ignored.

     

    Mostly, but sometimes they require a bit of eye-rolling and a smirk or two. Nothing drives them into even more-incoherent frenzies than a signal that you're on to their infantile intellectual game, and therefore decline to take them seriously.
  7. A huge amount of intellectualizing consists of triple bankshots made up by Jewish intellectuals to rationalize primal emotions they feel. Their triple bankshots (bomb Libya abroad, lay down to Muslim inundation at home, or whatever) frequently don’t make much sense in non-emotional terms, but they very much do not like gentiles applying Occam’s Razor to their triple bankshots.

    So, what does Occam’s Razor say then?

    You seem to be flirting with Kevin MacDonaldism, where the Eternal Jew is always pushing Jewish interests at the expense of everyone else.

    Now, no doubt many Jews advocate for Jewish interests. But what is your support for the idea that anti-white Jews somehow can’t just be self-hating ethno-masochists like other white ethnic groups? Why is it when a Jew advocates his country to be inundated with Muslims, it is some convoluted “triple bankshot” to advance Jewish interests, but not when Italians or Swedes do the same?

    If you want to apply Occam’s razor here, it is that French half-jews like Todd that advocate France be overrun with Arabs and black muslims that hate jews, they do it because they are, at best, indifferent to the country being overrun by anti-semites who will attack Jews on the streets and vote in George Galloway types who want to BDS Israel into a South Africa type pariah state.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I think your argument is more with Dr. Todd.
    , @iSteveFan

    Why is it when a Jew advocates his country to be inundated with Muslims, it is some convoluted “triple bankshot” to advance Jewish interests, but not when Italians or Swedes do the same?
     
    Right or wrong if you mean Israel when you mention a Jew and his country, then I don't think you'd have anyone suggesting a triple bank shot. Instead they would consider him a self-hating Jew just like they would consider the treacherous Italian and Swede to be self-hating whites.
    , @Anonymous
    A lot of the Kevin MacDonald/Sailer open-ended brief against All Jews Everywhere depends on this sort of circular self-confirmation: if proponent A is advancing a cause opposite of proponent B's, it's because they're tacitly Darwinistically collaborating on policy C, defined somewhere along the thermometer of anti-gentile skullduggery. All political behavior is overtly or covertly malicious as fruit of the malicious identity tree. Then you do some hand-waving when a Israel Shahak or Norman Finkelstein crops up because biology is complicated, man, and dismiss any questions raised against the special perfidy gene as "race denialism."
    , @Ananias Dare
    An observation from Marine Le Pen :

    “The reality is that there exist in France associations that are supposedly representative of French Jews, which have stuck with a software that came out of the Second World War,” she said, meaning that members of the Jewish leadership are still preoccupied with the threat of Nazi-like fascism. “For decades they have continued to fight against an anti-Semitism that no longer exists in France, for reasons of—how should I say this?—intellectual laziness. And by a form of submission to the politically correct. And while they were doing this, while they were fighting against an enemy that no longer existed, an anti-Semitism was gaining force in France stemming notably from the development of fundamentalist Islamist thought.”
     
    http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/03/is-it-time-for-the-jews-to-leave-europe/386279/
    , @ben tillman

    Now, no doubt many Jews advocate for Jewish interests. But what is your support for the idea that anti-white Jews somehow can’t just be self-hating ethno-masochists like other white ethnic groups?
     
    There's no phenomenon that could be explained by (a) Jews being self-hating ethno-masochists or (b) something else.

    Jews do not popularize a notion of "Jewish privilege" or any other anti-Jewish double standards. They do not call for more diversity (meaning fewer Jews) in any context.

    , @ben tillman

    Why is it when a Jew advocates his country to be inundated with Muslims, it is some convoluted “triple bankshot” to advance Jewish interests, but not when Italians or Swedes do the same?
     
    Because Jews and Muslims have a history of teaming up against Eurpean Christendom.

    Because Jews have pioneered a theory of social pluralism that makes sense on its face: (1) a pluralistic society reduces the size and cohesion of any potential groups that might arise to compete with the Jewish group (see Earl Raab on this) and (2) the salience of Jewish identity is reduced when there are many minorities rather than, say, a 95% majority and a 5% Jewish minority.

    , @ben tillman

    Now, no doubt many Jews advocate for Jewish interests. But what is your support for the idea that anti-white Jews somehow can’t just be self-hating ethno-masochists like other white ethnic groups?
     
    If Jewish anti-Whiteness is ethnic Whiteness since it's an internal affair among Whites, then it would seem to follow that the Holocaust was just another example of ethnic masochism for the same reason.
  8. @Lot

    A huge amount of intellectualizing consists of triple bankshots made up by Jewish intellectuals to rationalize primal emotions they feel. Their triple bankshots (bomb Libya abroad, lay down to Muslim inundation at home, or whatever) frequently don’t make much sense in non-emotional terms, but they very much do not like gentiles applying Occam’s Razor to their triple bankshots.
     
    So, what does Occam's Razor say then?

    You seem to be flirting with Kevin MacDonaldism, where the Eternal Jew is always pushing Jewish interests at the expense of everyone else.

    Now, no doubt many Jews advocate for Jewish interests. But what is your support for the idea that anti-white Jews somehow can't just be self-hating ethno-masochists like other white ethnic groups? Why is it when a Jew advocates his country to be inundated with Muslims, it is some convoluted "triple bankshot" to advance Jewish interests, but not when Italians or Swedes do the same?

    If you want to apply Occam's razor here, it is that French half-jews like Todd that advocate France be overrun with Arabs and black muslims that hate jews, they do it because they are, at best, indifferent to the country being overrun by anti-semites who will attack Jews on the streets and vote in George Galloway types who want to BDS Israel into a South Africa type pariah state.

    I think your argument is more with Dr. Todd.

    • Agree: SPMoore8
  9. Re: Catholic Zombies, I assume there is similar disdain towards the Orthodox Zombies, which might explain why I am supposed to hate those dirty Slavs. I believe the Protestant Zombies are now being gathered together in a fit of nativist rage in the USA by the Donald.

  10. The NYT had a very insidious reportage of Trump deporting Ramos from that room which summed up the way Jews have corrupted public discourse:

    The 30-minute news conference Mr. Trump presided over in Iowa on Tuesday night was the purest distillation of the psychological quirks and emotional idiosyncrasies that have made his candidacy such an irresistible spectacle — at times repellent, but often riveting.

    Gosh, psychological quirks and emotional idiosyncrasies—well but of course everyone thinks of Woody Allen when they see Trump on the stump.

  11. @Lot

    A huge amount of intellectualizing consists of triple bankshots made up by Jewish intellectuals to rationalize primal emotions they feel. Their triple bankshots (bomb Libya abroad, lay down to Muslim inundation at home, or whatever) frequently don’t make much sense in non-emotional terms, but they very much do not like gentiles applying Occam’s Razor to their triple bankshots.
     
    So, what does Occam's Razor say then?

    You seem to be flirting with Kevin MacDonaldism, where the Eternal Jew is always pushing Jewish interests at the expense of everyone else.

    Now, no doubt many Jews advocate for Jewish interests. But what is your support for the idea that anti-white Jews somehow can't just be self-hating ethno-masochists like other white ethnic groups? Why is it when a Jew advocates his country to be inundated with Muslims, it is some convoluted "triple bankshot" to advance Jewish interests, but not when Italians or Swedes do the same?

    If you want to apply Occam's razor here, it is that French half-jews like Todd that advocate France be overrun with Arabs and black muslims that hate jews, they do it because they are, at best, indifferent to the country being overrun by anti-semites who will attack Jews on the streets and vote in George Galloway types who want to BDS Israel into a South Africa type pariah state.

    Why is it when a Jew advocates his country to be inundated with Muslims, it is some convoluted “triple bankshot” to advance Jewish interests, but not when Italians or Swedes do the same?

    Right or wrong if you mean Israel when you mention a Jew and his country, then I don’t think you’d have anyone suggesting a triple bank shot. Instead they would consider him a self-hating Jew just like they would consider the treacherous Italian and Swede to be self-hating whites.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "Instead they would consider him a self-hating Jew just like they would consider the treacherous Italian and Swede to be self-hating whites."

    More like self hating Swedes and self hating Italians instead of self hating Whites. There is no pan White identity in Europe because they are not united by one common language like White Americans are for example. And even with sharing a common language there is still not much racial tribalism among White Americans. Heck many Italians do not even see Italians from other regions of Italy as their people, let alone see Swedes as their people when they do not even speak the same language as each other.

    Regional pride is strong in Italy and there are Venetians who do not see Calabrians for example as their people.

    Just like there is no Pan Asian identity in Asia. Pan Asian identity is only a North American creation. In Asia the Japanese do not see the Vietnamese for example as their people, because they do not share the same language. And the same analogy applies Italians and Swedes.

    Shared anguage is a stronger barrier than shared phenotype for a lot of people. Hence why there are Hispanics with Caucasoid phenotypes who feel way more culturally comfortable hanging out with Amerindian looking Hispanics than they do hanging out with Non Spanish speaking White Gringos.

    iSteve you would feel culturally comfortable hanging out with a bunch of Italians who speak no English? Or Russians who speak no English?

    , @Lot

    Right or wrong if you mean Israel when you mention a Jew and his country, then I don’t think you’d have anyone suggesting a triple bank shot. Instead they would consider him a self-hating Jew just like they would consider the treacherous Italian and Swede to be self-hating whites.
     
    Jewish Islamophilia seems to me to just about invariably be a package deal. Like Oprah giving away cars to her audience, it's "Arabs for you, and you, and you, for everyone!"

    Now I am not saying that there is no Jew anywhere who wants to flood America but not Israel with Muslims, but I am not aware of any. Can you provide some particular examples? The closest thing I can think of are Sheldon Adelson types who want Israel to have a rational boarder, but whose business interests favor lots of Mexican, Chinese, and Indian labor/consumers, and are willing to accept some Arabs given the practical impossibility of, say, a Mexican but not Somali policy. But while that's wrong, I can certainly understand not wanting Syrians and Sudanese in a crowded and relatively poor Israel, but being OK with a mostly Mexican and Chinese coming into an uncrowded and rich USA.

    But are there any French or British Jews, whose potential mix of third world immigrants is basically the same as Israel's, advocating for open boarders in their country but not Israel? To take the French Jew that is the subject of this post, Todd is a conventional European anti-Israel Islamophile. He writes things like this:

    "The incapacity of more and more Israelis to perceive the Arabs as human beings in general is obvious to the people who follow the news in print or on television."
  12. I don’t think it was a bunch of “zombie Catholics” that in 48 hours (1) designed the “Je suis Charlie” logo, (2) contacted several t-shirt printing companies, (3) located and procured several thousand identical t-shirts, (4) distributed them to the printers, (5) collected the printed t-shirts, (6) arranged a distribution network to get them to thousands of individuals, (7) persuaded those individuals to wear them, (8) then gathered them all together with a bunch of politicians for a giant photo opportunity in the middle of Paris.

    And again, doing all this in just 48 hours.

  13. “Then there is a France of the periphery, for example, the west or cities such as Lyon, which has stayed true to the old Catholic bedrock, where people may no longer be practising Catholics, but they’re still infused with all the social conservatism of that Catholicism, its hierarchies and inequality.”

    The half Jew Emmanuel Todd hates French Catholics because of their social Conservatism. Yeah because his beloved favorite pets the Muslims are so socially Liberal right? I am sure the vast majority of Muslims support same sex marriage and World War Ts like Caitlyn Jenner. Muslims will turn France into a French speaking version of San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, and Berkeley right?

    Also I wonder what the half Jew thinks of Orthodox and Hasidic Jews who look down on Homosexuality and Transgenderism. There was an Orthodox Jew who started stabbing Homosexual men at a Gay pride parade in Israel.

    “These “sham” demonstrations, he claimed, were made up of a one-sided elite who wanted to spit on Islam, the religion of a weak minority in France.”

    Yeah Muslims in France are so weak and harmless, that is why there are no-go zone areas in France that Infidel Catholic, Jewish, and Atheist French people are too afraid to step foot in.

    People don’t fear the weak. The fact that so many French people fear Muslims, means they are not a weak religion of poor little helpless Betas.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    I am sure the vast majority of Muslims support same sex marriage and World War Ts like Caitlyn Jenner
     
    They just might. "When your enemy is committing suicide, don't interfere."

    That saying came from the West, but it sounds as Arab as all get out.
  14. @asdf
    There is no end to French intellectual masturbation. I'm something of a Francofile, but you have to ignore a lot of merde to get to the good stuff. Halas.

    I remember reading when I was a young man about some adult clubs in Paris that featured frottage, basically some guy would come out onstage and some woman would come out, well-versed, as Voltaire would say, in the science of hydraulics and sufficient reason, and through the expert application of friction and manual pressure, would achieve tremendous distances for the resulting ejaculation. Triple bank shot, indeed.

    Quite a lot of intellectual activity is focused on justifying some emotional attachment, or some some irrational conception. Quite a lot. Of course none of us are immune, so, if you want to be rational you have to be detached, and you also have to make sure that emotionally you are in a good place. Good writing and good thinking come mostly from being in a good mood.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    I can think of a great many great writers, and even many great thinkers, who are not renown for their having had characteristic good moods....
    , @Bill B.
    Are you suggesting that frottage is a necessary precursor to clear thinking?

    My impression has been the French Intellos have been engaged in vigorous frottage for half a century with results aimed at the boring goyim rubes - and that isn't turning out well.
  15. But you’ve probably never heard of that book because a gentile analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews is unimaginable. Jewish intellectuals very much do not like their own tools being applied to themselves. Turnabout may be fair play, but it’s, to be frank, zombie Catholicism.

    Aside from the pleasure of ratiocination, is there some goal that “analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews” serves?

    It isn’t as if analysis of “Jews qua Jews” doesn’t happen. Sure, it is a disreputable activity, but there is no shortage of smart people like MacDonald doing it.

    Whatever the ostensible goal, the actual effect of “analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews” seems to have is offending and alienating a highly intelligent, moral, and influential group of Americans, and prolonging the evil taint Nazism attached to what was once a humane, influential, and progressive eugenics movement.

    Aside from all that, I find it sort of tiresome and boring as well. The question of the percentage of Jewish Bolsheviks, their relative responsibility for the ’65 immigration act and 70’s feminism, and the other questions that preoccupy MacDonaldists for me are not very interesting as historical questions compared to, say, Roman history, or 17th century England. Nor do they seem relevant to issues confronting our present and future: how do block amnesty at home, elect the Donald president, and stop the exponentially growing stream of refugees from the Third World from destroying the First.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    You prefer Roman history, do you? Okay, here is a question for you: Since the Roman Republic / Empire was not only arguably the greatest civilization in recorded history, but also inarguably one of the three great civilizations upon which American civilization itself was built, why is it that the Romans are overwhelmingly portrayed, here in modern America, in a negative light-- indeed, as having essentially been proto-Nazis? If that is too complex a question for you to tackle, in this humble forum, how about this one: Would you really characterize Margaret Sanger's well-known views on Black reproduction as ultimately having been grounded in her "humane" concern for their own welfare?
    , @FinMin
    They're relevant because they point us to the source of who is preventing us from stopping amnesty, electing the Donald, and stopping the stream of refugees, along with a million other problems.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Lot says:

    It isn’t as if analysis of “Jews qua Jews” doesn’t happen. Sure, it is a disreputable activity, but there is no shortage of smart people like MacDonald doing it."

    And you seem intent upon keeping it disreputable and marginalized. Why is that? There is no shortage of people who have analyzed my people, white protestants, qua white protestants. Why is this not a worthwhile pursuit when it comes to Jews?
    , @5371
    [ a highly intelligent, moral, and influential group of Americans]

    Not afraid of dislocating your shoulder by patting yourself on the back so hard?
    , @JSM

    there is no shortage of smart people like MacDonald doing it.
     
    I dispute this. There *absolutely* is a shortage. MacDonald and a mere handful of others are doing it.

    If there were hundreds of PhDs granted per year on the subject, I'd agree with you. If Fox News had nightly segments with dozens of pundits discussing the issue, I'd agree with you. But, that doesn't happen.


    Instead it's one University professor who was wily enough to get tenure before he opened his yap, and a few intrepid, poorly paid bloggers which SPLC and ADL kick in the teeth, every chance they get.
    , @SFG
    Moral, Lot? Intelligent and influential I'll buy, but you really think Jews are more ethical than, say, New England WASPs, Brahmins, or any other brainy overclass throughout the years? Even the civil rights movement was at least in part a plot to go after discrimination against everyone in order to decrease discrimination against Jews. I don't actually think any ethnic group is more moral than any other, though certainly some ethnic neighborhoods are a lot safer to walk through at 2 AM (or 2 PM) due to average differences in future time orientation, etc. Everybody's got dirt.

    You do have a point that *practically speaking*, Trump is probably the immigration restrictionist with the strongest Jewish connections, and the one to get the furthest so far, and that possibly these things are connected. But it might just be that he's come along as people are getting increasingly frustrated with the economic situation on both the left and the right.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "......... is offending and alienating a highly intelligent, moral, and influential group of Americans,.............."

    Intelligent and influential, sure. But moral? Are they -as a group - especially moral? If they were an especially moral ethnic group, wouldn't we expect to see them underrepresented in immoral enterprises like gambling, pornography, and usury? But just the opposite is the case.
  16. Priss Factor [AKA "skiapolemistis"] says:

    Puncher-downers are good when they’re Jews punching down on ‘white trash’.

    Puncher-uppers are bad when they are middle class white challenging Jewish privilege.

  17. @iSteveFan

    Why is it when a Jew advocates his country to be inundated with Muslims, it is some convoluted “triple bankshot” to advance Jewish interests, but not when Italians or Swedes do the same?
     
    Right or wrong if you mean Israel when you mention a Jew and his country, then I don't think you'd have anyone suggesting a triple bank shot. Instead they would consider him a self-hating Jew just like they would consider the treacherous Italian and Swede to be self-hating whites.

    “Instead they would consider him a self-hating Jew just like they would consider the treacherous Italian and Swede to be self-hating whites.”

    More like self hating Swedes and self hating Italians instead of self hating Whites. There is no pan White identity in Europe because they are not united by one common language like White Americans are for example. And even with sharing a common language there is still not much racial tribalism among White Americans. Heck many Italians do not even see Italians from other regions of Italy as their people, let alone see Swedes as their people when they do not even speak the same language as each other.

    Regional pride is strong in Italy and there are Venetians who do not see Calabrians for example as their people.

    Just like there is no Pan Asian identity in Asia. Pan Asian identity is only a North American creation. In Asia the Japanese do not see the Vietnamese for example as their people, because they do not share the same language. And the same analogy applies Italians and Swedes.

    Shared anguage is a stronger barrier than shared phenotype for a lot of people. Hence why there are Hispanics with Caucasoid phenotypes who feel way more culturally comfortable hanging out with Amerindian looking Hispanics than they do hanging out with Non Spanish speaking White Gringos.

    iSteve you would feel culturally comfortable hanging out with a bunch of Italians who speak no English? Or Russians who speak no English?

  18. Priss Factor [AKA "skiapolemistis"] says:

    I can’t support the Charlie H march because there is no free speech in France to begin with.

    Just ask Brigit Bardot who was fined for her comments about Muslims.

    Just ask Jean Marie Le Pen about his fines.

    Charlie Hypocrisy is more like it.

    Also, while I support the free speech for Charlie H, I think the mag is total trash and doesn’t represent the best of French culture.

  19. @Anonymous
    David P. Goldman aka "Spengler" also likes to describe Europeans, and gentiles more generally, including Muslims, as "zombies" with dying cultures and falling fertility rates, the sole exception according to Goldman being, naturally, the Jews:

    https://pjmedia.com/spengler/2013/07/03/zombie-apocalypse/

    The history of the world is the history of humankind’s search for immortality,” I argued in my 2011 book Why Civilizations Die (and Why Islam is Dying, Too). Human beings can’t tolerate life without the hope of some existence beyond our brief mortal span of years. Cultures that know they have made it past their best-used-by date tend to die for lack of interest. Extreme examples are the neolithic tribes that walk out of the Amazon to encounter modernity, and succumb to alcoholism and other vices in a matter of years. Less extreme examples are the radical Muslims who declare that they love death more than we love life, or the European nations whose fertility rate is so low that their national survival is questionable at the hundred-year horizon. I argued in Civilizations that the so-called Arab Spring was a paroxysm of cultural despair, the prelude to societal breakdown with appalling consequences; watching the dreadful events in Egypt and Syria, few today can dismiss this thesis as alarmist.

    Dying cultures are the living dead. Half of the world’s 6,000 languages will disappear by the end of this century. They are zombie cultures.
     

    “Among the large industrial countries, there is one great exception to the declinist story: the United States. . . . It is not that Americans in general are having children, but that Americans of faith are having children . . . . It’s just that there are far more Americans than Europeans practicing a faith. . . . Almost as extreme as the fertility gap between religious and secular Americans is the one between members of mainline Protestant denominations and evangelicals.” (How Civilizations Die, 191-4).

    Goldman then goes on to apply the same line of reasoning to Jews, distinguishing fertile Orthodox Jews from infertile less-affiliated Jews.

    • Replies: @Deduction
    Todd laments zombie Catholicism because people are too Catholic.

    Goldman laments it because they are not Catholic enough.

    Gee, it's almost like Jews have diversity in their opinion too...
  20. Aside from all that, I find it sort of tiresome and boring as well. The question of the percentage of Jewish Bolsheviks, their relative responsibility for the ’65 immigration act and 70′s feminism, and the other questions that preoccupy MacDonaldists for me are not very interesting as historical questions compared to, say, Roman history, or 17th century England. Nor do they seem relevant to issues confronting our present and future: how do block amnesty at home, elect the Donald president, and stop the exponentially growing stream of refugees from the Third World from destroying the First.

    If 17th century England is your cup of tea then definitely get Shakespeare by Another Name by Mark Anderson. But understanding how recent history was influenced by Jews is interesting because their influence was so vast, and so underreported. Not to mention radical, and understanding that Jews are apt to be radical puts Steve’s central claim into crystal clear perspective: that he is the moderate voice. That’s very useful to keep putting across re how do you block amnesty at home, and MacDonald compliments the point excellently, seems to me. I do understand how Roman history makes one think more. But maybe that’s because its not so easy, which is to say it’s not so Jewish. And I don’t think Jews who don’t ostracize Abe Foxman and his ilk are particularly moral individuals. Or maybe character assassination is the moral alternative to dueling. Or maybe not.

    • Replies: @Lot

    But understanding how recent history was influenced by Jews is interesting because their influence was so vast, and so underreported.
     
    Underreported I think implies some sort of interesting story, like Jews fighting for a just America against prejudice, or Jews united in pursuit of their sinister goal of world domination. I think it is a lot more boring that this: American Ashkenazi have extremely high IQs and did extremely well serving a capitalist, meritocratic America.

    Not to mention radical, and understanding that Jews are apt to be radical puts Steve’s central claim into crystal clear perspective: that he is the moderate voice.
     
    When Jews faced discrimination in mainstream society, but radicals were open to their talents, Jews were radical. Is that really the case now that Jews are firmly ensconced and intermixed into the American upper classes? Even talking about "American Jews" is becoming increasingly incoherent as the number of partly-ethnic Jews increases and the number of "old style" secular 100% Ashkenazi that really defined our idea of American Jews rapidly declines. Does anyone really care much about non-practicing 1/4 Jews, or Yiddish speaking welfare cases in upstate New York?

    That’s very useful to keep putting across re how do you block amnesty at home, and MacDonald compliments the point excellently, seems to me.
     

    I don't understand your point here.
    , @Lackawanna
    "Aside from all that, I find it sort of tiresome and boring as well."

    An excellent example of Orwellian crimestop.
  21. @Lot

    But you’ve probably never heard of that book because a gentile analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews is unimaginable. Jewish intellectuals very much do not like their own tools being applied to themselves. Turnabout may be fair play, but it’s, to be frank, zombie Catholicism.
     
    Aside from the pleasure of ratiocination, is there some goal that "analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews" serves?

    It isn't as if analysis of "Jews qua Jews" doesn't happen. Sure, it is a disreputable activity, but there is no shortage of smart people like MacDonald doing it.

    Whatever the ostensible goal, the actual effect of "analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews" seems to have is offending and alienating a highly intelligent, moral, and influential group of Americans, and prolonging the evil taint Nazism attached to what was once a humane, influential, and progressive eugenics movement.

    Aside from all that, I find it sort of tiresome and boring as well. The question of the percentage of Jewish Bolsheviks, their relative responsibility for the '65 immigration act and 70's feminism, and the other questions that preoccupy MacDonaldists for me are not very interesting as historical questions compared to, say, Roman history, or 17th century England. Nor do they seem relevant to issues confronting our present and future: how do block amnesty at home, elect the Donald president, and stop the exponentially growing stream of refugees from the Third World from destroying the First.

    You prefer Roman history, do you? Okay, here is a question for you: Since the Roman Republic / Empire was not only arguably the greatest civilization in recorded history, but also inarguably one of the three great civilizations upon which American civilization itself was built, why is it that the Romans are overwhelmingly portrayed, here in modern America, in a negative light– indeed, as having essentially been proto-Nazis? If that is too complex a question for you to tackle, in this humble forum, how about this one: Would you really characterize Margaret Sanger’s well-known views on Black reproduction as ultimately having been grounded in her “humane” concern for their own welfare?

    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson
    > why is it that the Romans are overwhelmingly portrayed,
    > here in modern America, in a negative light– indeed, as
    > having essentially been proto-Nazis?

    Stupidity.
    , @Lot

    why is it that the Romans are overwhelmingly portrayed, here in modern America, in a negative light– indeed, as having essentially been proto-Nazis?
     
    I don't know about "overwhelmingly" negative. The Romans in HBO's Rome were a mixture of vice and virtue, and the Jeremy Sisto Caesar mini-series was fairly positive. Mostly through it is underdogism. The Romans were on top in the ancient world, and we like to see the underdog gladiators, gauls, britons, jews, christians, and poor oppressed plebians beat the snooty world-dominating Roman elites. The English aren't treated too well either in American movies.

    If you're interested in a positive portrayal of Romans, watch Agora, a really good Spanish-made movie filmed in English. The Romans are the heros, the villains are the Christian and Jewish Alexandrian mobs who want to destroy the remnants of pagan humanism and kill Hypatia.

    Would you really characterize Margaret Sanger’s well-known views on Black reproduction as ultimately having been grounded in her “humane” concern for their own welfare?
     
    Yes. Black families of that era would have been best served focusing their limited resources on fewer children.
    , @SFG
    Proto-Nazis? The trend seems to be more to focus on the decadence.
  22. @22pp22
    Derrida was a French Jewish intellectual, who, like Foucault, was inspired by Heidegger , a Nazi. After Heidegger's past was revealed, Derrida still defended him. There is a reason why the word"intello" is a term of abuse in French. French intellos have done more harm to Europe than anything since the Black Death. Their theories deny the existence of reason and truth as merely social constructs. They should be ignored. In my time as an academic, I used to meet people like this all the time, spouting bile while quaffing the college claret. I had a conversation with one who defended bride burning. I ended the conversation by threatening to deconstruct his face.

    Center shot!

  23. @iSteveFan

    Why is it when a Jew advocates his country to be inundated with Muslims, it is some convoluted “triple bankshot” to advance Jewish interests, but not when Italians or Swedes do the same?
     
    Right or wrong if you mean Israel when you mention a Jew and his country, then I don't think you'd have anyone suggesting a triple bank shot. Instead they would consider him a self-hating Jew just like they would consider the treacherous Italian and Swede to be self-hating whites.

    Right or wrong if you mean Israel when you mention a Jew and his country, then I don’t think you’d have anyone suggesting a triple bank shot. Instead they would consider him a self-hating Jew just like they would consider the treacherous Italian and Swede to be self-hating whites.

    Jewish Islamophilia seems to me to just about invariably be a package deal. Like Oprah giving away cars to her audience, it’s “Arabs for you, and you, and you, for everyone!”

    Now I am not saying that there is no Jew anywhere who wants to flood America but not Israel with Muslims, but I am not aware of any. Can you provide some particular examples? The closest thing I can think of are Sheldon Adelson types who want Israel to have a rational boarder, but whose business interests favor lots of Mexican, Chinese, and Indian labor/consumers, and are willing to accept some Arabs given the practical impossibility of, say, a Mexican but not Somali policy. But while that’s wrong, I can certainly understand not wanting Syrians and Sudanese in a crowded and relatively poor Israel, but being OK with a mostly Mexican and Chinese coming into an uncrowded and rich USA.

    But are there any French or British Jews, whose potential mix of third world immigrants is basically the same as Israel’s, advocating for open boarders in their country but not Israel? To take the French Jew that is the subject of this post, Todd is a conventional European anti-Israel Islamophile. He writes things like this:

    “The incapacity of more and more Israelis to perceive the Arabs as human beings in general is obvious to the people who follow the news in print or on television.”

    • Replies: @rod1963
    The fact is you cannot find any prominent Jew that considers Muslim immigration a problem or will speak out against it in public. And worse Jewish run organizations like the ADL and ACLU are often the first to run to the defense of Muslim immigrants if whites start complaining about them.

    In France Jews are leaving because of the threats from Muslims, yet they do not complain. Same in England, they are often found to support Muslim immigrants when the EDL or BNP takes to the streets. Even though Jews are now losing political clout in England.

    IOW the Jews are committing racial suicide. Their hatred for the white goy blinds them to their own fate if immigration policies are not reversed.
  24. @D. K.
    You prefer Roman history, do you? Okay, here is a question for you: Since the Roman Republic / Empire was not only arguably the greatest civilization in recorded history, but also inarguably one of the three great civilizations upon which American civilization itself was built, why is it that the Romans are overwhelmingly portrayed, here in modern America, in a negative light-- indeed, as having essentially been proto-Nazis? If that is too complex a question for you to tackle, in this humble forum, how about this one: Would you really characterize Margaret Sanger's well-known views on Black reproduction as ultimately having been grounded in her "humane" concern for their own welfare?

    > why is it that the Romans are overwhelmingly portrayed,
    > here in modern America, in a negative light– indeed, as
    > having essentially been proto-Nazis?

    Stupidity.

    • Replies: @Mark Green
    The Romans are depicted negatively in American cinema because they were pagans who destroyed Israel's Temple, killed Jews, and then managed to exile all these holy and innocent Jews to other, faraway lands.

    How the Romans managed to identify and then expel all these Jews (and then keep they away from Jerusalem for centuries) remains something of a mystery.
  25. @SPMoore8
    I remember reading when I was a young man about some adult clubs in Paris that featured frottage, basically some guy would come out onstage and some woman would come out, well-versed, as Voltaire would say, in the science of hydraulics and sufficient reason, and through the expert application of friction and manual pressure, would achieve tremendous distances for the resulting ejaculation. Triple bank shot, indeed.

    Quite a lot of intellectual activity is focused on justifying some emotional attachment, or some some irrational conception. Quite a lot. Of course none of us are immune, so, if you want to be rational you have to be detached, and you also have to make sure that emotionally you are in a good place. Good writing and good thinking come mostly from being in a good mood.

    I can think of a great many great writers, and even many great thinkers, who are not renown for their having had characteristic good moods….

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    I suppose it depends on genre; being in a good mood is not the same thing as avoiding vituperation. As Schopenhauer writes:

    But condition of health, sleep, nourishment, temperature, weather, surroundings, and much else that is purely external, have, in general, an important influence upon our mood and therefore upon our thoughts. Hence both our view of any matter and our capacity for any work are very much subject to time and place. So it is best to profit by a good mood — for how seldom it comes! —
    Nehmt die gute Stimmung wahr,
    Denn sie kommt so selten.28
    28 Goethe.]

     

    But to each his own.
  26. @D. K.
    You prefer Roman history, do you? Okay, here is a question for you: Since the Roman Republic / Empire was not only arguably the greatest civilization in recorded history, but also inarguably one of the three great civilizations upon which American civilization itself was built, why is it that the Romans are overwhelmingly portrayed, here in modern America, in a negative light-- indeed, as having essentially been proto-Nazis? If that is too complex a question for you to tackle, in this humble forum, how about this one: Would you really characterize Margaret Sanger's well-known views on Black reproduction as ultimately having been grounded in her "humane" concern for their own welfare?

    why is it that the Romans are overwhelmingly portrayed, here in modern America, in a negative light– indeed, as having essentially been proto-Nazis?

    I don’t know about “overwhelmingly” negative. The Romans in HBO’s Rome were a mixture of vice and virtue, and the Jeremy Sisto Caesar mini-series was fairly positive. Mostly through it is underdogism. The Romans were on top in the ancient world, and we like to see the underdog gladiators, gauls, britons, jews, christians, and poor oppressed plebians beat the snooty world-dominating Roman elites. The English aren’t treated too well either in American movies.

    If you’re interested in a positive portrayal of Romans, watch Agora, a really good Spanish-made movie filmed in English. The Romans are the heros, the villains are the Christian and Jewish Alexandrian mobs who want to destroy the remnants of pagan humanism and kill Hypatia.

    Would you really characterize Margaret Sanger’s well-known views on Black reproduction as ultimately having been grounded in her “humane” concern for their own welfare?

    Yes. Black families of that era would have been best served focusing their limited resources on fewer children.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    Silly me, I thought it might have something to do with Roman history from the mid-first century of the Common Era.... If you honestly believe that Margaret Sanger was motivated by pure racial goodwill toward the oppressed and underprivileged Negro, I can see why you believe that the Jews are just like everybody else....
    , @Deduction

    The Romans in HBO’s Rome were a mixture of vice and virtue,
     
    The Romans in that series were awesome.
  27. “The jailing of three Al-Jazeera journalists in Egypt for “spreading false news” has been described as “sickening” and politically motivated.

    Mohamed Fahmy, Baher Mohammed and Peter Greste were sentenced at a retrial that many expected would vindicate them.” Sky News reports.

    Onion writers beware! Egyptian Zombies are spreading…In sports…Onion Sports Network on Twitter: “1,400 Dead After Mike Trout Fouls Line Drive Into Stands http://t.co/IAKXxmnIzZ”

    Who let the dogs out? Would you please let the people out?

  28. @D. K.
    I can think of a great many great writers, and even many great thinkers, who are not renown for their having had characteristic good moods....

    I suppose it depends on genre; being in a good mood is not the same thing as avoiding vituperation. As Schopenhauer writes:

    But condition of health, sleep, nourishment, temperature, weather, surroundings, and much else that is purely external, have, in general, an important influence upon our mood and therefore upon our thoughts. Hence both our view of any matter and our capacity for any work are very much subject to time and place. So it is best to profit by a good mood — for how seldom it comes! —
    Nehmt die gute Stimmung wahr,
    Denn sie kommt so selten.28
    28 Goethe.]

    But to each his own.

  29. @Anonymous
    David P. Goldman aka "Spengler" also likes to describe Europeans, and gentiles more generally, including Muslims, as "zombies" with dying cultures and falling fertility rates, the sole exception according to Goldman being, naturally, the Jews:

    https://pjmedia.com/spengler/2013/07/03/zombie-apocalypse/

    The history of the world is the history of humankind’s search for immortality,” I argued in my 2011 book Why Civilizations Die (and Why Islam is Dying, Too). Human beings can’t tolerate life without the hope of some existence beyond our brief mortal span of years. Cultures that know they have made it past their best-used-by date tend to die for lack of interest. Extreme examples are the neolithic tribes that walk out of the Amazon to encounter modernity, and succumb to alcoholism and other vices in a matter of years. Less extreme examples are the radical Muslims who declare that they love death more than we love life, or the European nations whose fertility rate is so low that their national survival is questionable at the hundred-year horizon. I argued in Civilizations that the so-called Arab Spring was a paroxysm of cultural despair, the prelude to societal breakdown with appalling consequences; watching the dreadful events in Egypt and Syria, few today can dismiss this thesis as alarmist.

    Dying cultures are the living dead. Half of the world’s 6,000 languages will disappear by the end of this century. They are zombie cultures.
     

    In reply to Spengler, I would quote Frank Herbert, from Dune,

    “And he thought about the Guild — the force which had specialized for so long that it had become a parasite, unable to exist independently of the life upon which it had fed. They had never dared grasp the sword… and now they could not grasp it. They might have taken Arrakis when they realized the error of specializing on the melange awareness-spectrum narcotic for their navigators. They could have done this, lived their glorious day and died. Instead, they’d existed from moment to moment, hoping the seas in which they swam might produce a new host when the old one died.

    “The guild navigators, gifted with limited prescience, had made the fatal decision: they’d chosen always the clear, safe course that leads downward into stagnation.”

    Call me a zombie if you will. From my ancestral gene-pool sprang Shakespeare, both industrial revolutions, the assembly line, and footprints on the moon. We grasped the sword and lived our glorious day. Even if we burn out and become nothing more than a reviled memory in the social justice textbooks of the future, we will have accomplished far more than the Marxs, Freuds, and Spenglers ever could.

    • Replies: @Deduction
    Goldman is entirely on board with your critique of modern Jews as the Guild from Dune...
    , @WhatEvvs

    From my ancestral gene-pool sprang Shakespeare, both industrial revolutions, the assembly line, and footprints on the moon.
     
    What have you done, sir?

    And by the way, have you ever worked on an assembly line? Have you ever signed your name to someone else's paycheck? Did you know that GPS technology depends upon the theory of relativity?
  30. Priss Factor [AKA "skiapolemistis"] says:

    LOL

    http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/252248-the-hulk-wants-to-be-trumps-running-mate

    ROTFL

    http://www.eteknix.com/99-women-profiles-ashley-madison-fake/

    “An elementary school teacher who was allowed to keep his job despite being late for work 111 times in two years said Friday that breakfast is to blame for his tardiness.”

    Do the breakfasts include watermelons?

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-jersey-elementary-school-teacher-late-111-times-eating-breakfast/

    Now they’re coming with guns.

    http://greece.greekreporter.com/2015/08/29/15-year-old-migrant-dead-after-saturday-noon-shooting-in-symi-greece/

  31. I’m with Lot Steve you are overthinking it. FT tiday has liberal Israeli Jews demanding open borders. Saying they are immigrants so take in half of Africa. Jews are urbanite professionals so no kidding they are GoodWhites. If they were rural or suburban they’d parade Judah P. Benjamin images around Kid Rock concerts with Confederate flags yelling yeee hawwww!

    Your missing the GoodWhite urbanism for the Jews and conflating the two. Like all Goodwhites Jews cannot wait to be annihilated by the Third World save half the Jews in Israel living outside urban areas thus being badwhite.

    I am a badWhite. Don’t fight it. Embrace the dark side. Of BadWhitsm.

    • Replies: @JSM
    If they were rural or suburban

    Hmmmm...how come is it they aren't rural or suburban?
  32. @Pat Casey

    Aside from all that, I find it sort of tiresome and boring as well. The question of the percentage of Jewish Bolsheviks, their relative responsibility for the ’65 immigration act and 70′s feminism, and the other questions that preoccupy MacDonaldists for me are not very interesting as historical questions compared to, say, Roman history, or 17th century England. Nor do they seem relevant to issues confronting our present and future: how do block amnesty at home, elect the Donald president, and stop the exponentially growing stream of refugees from the Third World from destroying the First.
     
    If 17th century England is your cup of tea then definitely get Shakespeare by Another Name by Mark Anderson. But understanding how recent history was influenced by Jews is interesting because their influence was so vast, and so underreported. Not to mention radical, and understanding that Jews are apt to be radical puts Steve's central claim into crystal clear perspective: that he is the moderate voice. That's very useful to keep putting across re how do you block amnesty at home, and MacDonald compliments the point excellently, seems to me. I do understand how Roman history makes one think more. But maybe that's because its not so easy, which is to say it's not so Jewish. And I don't think Jews who don't ostracize Abe Foxman and his ilk are particularly moral individuals. Or maybe character assassination is the moral alternative to dueling. Or maybe not.

    But understanding how recent history was influenced by Jews is interesting because their influence was so vast, and so underreported.

    Underreported I think implies some sort of interesting story, like Jews fighting for a just America against prejudice, or Jews united in pursuit of their sinister goal of world domination. I think it is a lot more boring that this: American Ashkenazi have extremely high IQs and did extremely well serving a capitalist, meritocratic America.

    Not to mention radical, and understanding that Jews are apt to be radical puts Steve’s central claim into crystal clear perspective: that he is the moderate voice.

    When Jews faced discrimination in mainstream society, but radicals were open to their talents, Jews were radical. Is that really the case now that Jews are firmly ensconced and intermixed into the American upper classes? Even talking about “American Jews” is becoming increasingly incoherent as the number of partly-ethnic Jews increases and the number of “old style” secular 100% Ashkenazi that really defined our idea of American Jews rapidly declines. Does anyone really care much about non-practicing 1/4 Jews, or Yiddish speaking welfare cases in upstate New York?

    That’s very useful to keep putting across re how do you block amnesty at home, and MacDonald compliments the point excellently, seems to me.

    I don’t understand your point here.

    • Replies: @Pat Casey
    Actually I think it is more interesting than their high IQ, precisely where their success has outstripped what their IQ would predict. Nepotism is not meritocratic, nor is the silencing of sober criticism particularly appealing. The history of how such actualities obtained may or may not interest you, but certainly its a worthy subject of study.

    MacDonald's point about the Jewish culture of critique is that its inherently Jewish. Freudianism and Feminism have significant threads that clearly originated in complexes unique to Jews. And of course his basic point is that discrimination against Jews was discrimination against a group that discriminated against gentiles, in certain Jewish ways, and mostly never thought twice about the naturalness of doing so.

    Now that Jews are firmly ensconced in this nation's elite establishment, radical opinions are simply the norm. That's the whole point. Plenty of opinion shapers in the op eds and on TV espouse open boarders, or amnesty plus vastly increasing legal immigration. Aside from Lou Dobbs maybe, I don't think any mainstream voice of note is calling for a moratorium. But if the reporting on the issue was honest and the debate was open, I believe exactly that would be the majority opinion. That though would be a world where the media gate keepers were not hyper-sensitive to certain arguments about nationalism. And yes our foreign policy is radically unbalanced, since AIPAC, etc.

    Regarding Jewish assimilation, I don't know, the ethnocentrism seems to be getting more flagrant. There was that Jewish get together not long ago, where two Jewish billionaires were on stage discussing buying the New York Times, and making its coverage pure propaganda for Israel. Someone said it was like a parody of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Most of the money contributed to political campaigns in this country comes from Jews, which is just incredible, and I suspect that as Jews dissipate as a percentage of the population, that money will actually increase.

    My point was that Steve's position on immigration can only make headway the more he reminds the world that his is the moderate opinion.
  33. Humanity Still Producing New Art As Though Megadeth’s ‘Rust In Peace’ Doesn’t Already Exist

    “It’s not just incredibly disrespectful to keep making art; in many ways, it’s actually quite sad. The deluded people churning out this worthless garbage just can’t seem to reconcile themselves to the fact that their pathetic little sculptures and films and novels and whatnot will always pale in comparison to the brilliantly inspired, heart-stopping tempo shift halfway through ‘Holy Wars… The Punishment Due. At press time, a spokesperson from the Centre Pompidou in Paris confirmed the museum’s plans to throw out the contents of an entire wing and leave a massive, pure white space where the track “Lucretia” will be played on loop at full volume.’” http://www.theonion.com/article/humanity-still-producing-new-art-though-megadeths–50983

    Museum has gone to the dogs!

  34. @Lot

    Right or wrong if you mean Israel when you mention a Jew and his country, then I don’t think you’d have anyone suggesting a triple bank shot. Instead they would consider him a self-hating Jew just like they would consider the treacherous Italian and Swede to be self-hating whites.
     
    Jewish Islamophilia seems to me to just about invariably be a package deal. Like Oprah giving away cars to her audience, it's "Arabs for you, and you, and you, for everyone!"

    Now I am not saying that there is no Jew anywhere who wants to flood America but not Israel with Muslims, but I am not aware of any. Can you provide some particular examples? The closest thing I can think of are Sheldon Adelson types who want Israel to have a rational boarder, but whose business interests favor lots of Mexican, Chinese, and Indian labor/consumers, and are willing to accept some Arabs given the practical impossibility of, say, a Mexican but not Somali policy. But while that's wrong, I can certainly understand not wanting Syrians and Sudanese in a crowded and relatively poor Israel, but being OK with a mostly Mexican and Chinese coming into an uncrowded and rich USA.

    But are there any French or British Jews, whose potential mix of third world immigrants is basically the same as Israel's, advocating for open boarders in their country but not Israel? To take the French Jew that is the subject of this post, Todd is a conventional European anti-Israel Islamophile. He writes things like this:

    "The incapacity of more and more Israelis to perceive the Arabs as human beings in general is obvious to the people who follow the news in print or on television."

    The fact is you cannot find any prominent Jew that considers Muslim immigration a problem or will speak out against it in public. And worse Jewish run organizations like the ADL and ACLU are often the first to run to the defense of Muslim immigrants if whites start complaining about them.

    In France Jews are leaving because of the threats from Muslims, yet they do not complain. Same in England, they are often found to support Muslim immigrants when the EDL or BNP takes to the streets. Even though Jews are now losing political clout in England.

    IOW the Jews are committing racial suicide. Their hatred for the white goy blinds them to their own fate if immigration policies are not reversed.

    • Replies: @Lot
    "The fact is you cannot find any prominent Jew that considers Muslim immigration a problem or will speak out against it in public."

    Pam Geller, David Horowitz, Ben Shapiro, and about 90% of Israeli politicians.

    I am not a fan of their neoconnery BTW, but there you go.
    , @Massimo Heitor

    The fact is you cannot find any prominent Jew that considers Muslim immigration a problem or will speak out against it in public.
     
    To add to @Lot's response:

    Alain Finkielkraut is a non-native French Jew who fits this profile and speaks beautifully about this. I would add Ilana Mercer as another very Jewish critic who writes beautifully and of course, is also hosted on unz.
    , @Deduction

    Same in England, they are often found to support Muslim immigrants when the EDL or BNP takes to the streets
     
    I

    OW the Jews are committing racial suicide. Their hatred for the white goy blinds them to their own fate if immigration policies are not reversed.
     
    So white gentiles are committing racial suicide because of....?

    But white Jews are committing racial suicide because they hate white gentiles?

    I thought we liked Occam's Razor here.
  35. @Anonymous
    David P. Goldman aka "Spengler" also likes to describe Europeans, and gentiles more generally, including Muslims, as "zombies" with dying cultures and falling fertility rates, the sole exception according to Goldman being, naturally, the Jews:

    https://pjmedia.com/spengler/2013/07/03/zombie-apocalypse/

    The history of the world is the history of humankind’s search for immortality,” I argued in my 2011 book Why Civilizations Die (and Why Islam is Dying, Too). Human beings can’t tolerate life without the hope of some existence beyond our brief mortal span of years. Cultures that know they have made it past their best-used-by date tend to die for lack of interest. Extreme examples are the neolithic tribes that walk out of the Amazon to encounter modernity, and succumb to alcoholism and other vices in a matter of years. Less extreme examples are the radical Muslims who declare that they love death more than we love life, or the European nations whose fertility rate is so low that their national survival is questionable at the hundred-year horizon. I argued in Civilizations that the so-called Arab Spring was a paroxysm of cultural despair, the prelude to societal breakdown with appalling consequences; watching the dreadful events in Egypt and Syria, few today can dismiss this thesis as alarmist.

    Dying cultures are the living dead. Half of the world’s 6,000 languages will disappear by the end of this century. They are zombie cultures.
     

    Spengler’s entire writing builds around this theme. He reports with glee the demographic woes of Arabs, Persians, Japanese, and on and on. He must fantasize about them expiring from the earth.

    That said, he has done some sympathetic writing on Russia, as opposed to his neocon brethren.

    • Replies: @Bies Podkrakowski
    If memory serves me lately he also started sucking up to Chinese. Both cultures: Chinese and Jews share many values, hard work, etc. China is an empire that transcended and united many squabbling nations and tribes under one culture and ideology - a Big Thing in Spengler's world view. And basically, he says this is only hope for Europe - rejection of old, dying national identities. He also hates Hungarians for some reason. Their antisemitism maybe?
  36. @Lot

    But you’ve probably never heard of that book because a gentile analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews is unimaginable. Jewish intellectuals very much do not like their own tools being applied to themselves. Turnabout may be fair play, but it’s, to be frank, zombie Catholicism.
     
    Aside from the pleasure of ratiocination, is there some goal that "analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews" serves?

    It isn't as if analysis of "Jews qua Jews" doesn't happen. Sure, it is a disreputable activity, but there is no shortage of smart people like MacDonald doing it.

    Whatever the ostensible goal, the actual effect of "analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews" seems to have is offending and alienating a highly intelligent, moral, and influential group of Americans, and prolonging the evil taint Nazism attached to what was once a humane, influential, and progressive eugenics movement.

    Aside from all that, I find it sort of tiresome and boring as well. The question of the percentage of Jewish Bolsheviks, their relative responsibility for the '65 immigration act and 70's feminism, and the other questions that preoccupy MacDonaldists for me are not very interesting as historical questions compared to, say, Roman history, or 17th century England. Nor do they seem relevant to issues confronting our present and future: how do block amnesty at home, elect the Donald president, and stop the exponentially growing stream of refugees from the Third World from destroying the First.

    They’re relevant because they point us to the source of who is preventing us from stopping amnesty, electing the Donald, and stopping the stream of refugees, along with a million other problems.

  37. @D. K.
    You prefer Roman history, do you? Okay, here is a question for you: Since the Roman Republic / Empire was not only arguably the greatest civilization in recorded history, but also inarguably one of the three great civilizations upon which American civilization itself was built, why is it that the Romans are overwhelmingly portrayed, here in modern America, in a negative light-- indeed, as having essentially been proto-Nazis? If that is too complex a question for you to tackle, in this humble forum, how about this one: Would you really characterize Margaret Sanger's well-known views on Black reproduction as ultimately having been grounded in her "humane" concern for their own welfare?

    Proto-Nazis? The trend seems to be more to focus on the decadence.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "Proto-Nazis? The trend seems to be more to focus on the decadence."

    Apparently you never saw the movie "Spartacus". Or "Gladiator", which even had a muscial score that sounded like "Goetterdaemerung".

    Mind you, it isn't entirely suprising that the ancient Romans should seem fascistic, given that fascism was modeled on ancient Rome. However, Rome was also a state that served as an inspiration for the American Republic.
    , @D. K.
    I cannot claim to know with certainty what the trend is, since I have not been to the movies since 1999. (Even then, it was the would-be "director's cut" of Orson Welles' "Touch of Evil" from over forty years earlier! The last time that I went to see a new or recent release was in April 1997.) I am skeptical, nonetheless, that contemporary Hollywood is actually more sympathetic toward Roman culture and civilization than was the Hollywood of the so-called "Golden Age" of American film.

    With the advent of CinemaScope, in 1953, Hollywood cranked out many Roman epics: "The Robe" (the first CinemaScope film), its sequel "Demetrius and the Gladiators", "Quo Vadis", "Ben Hur", "Spartacus", "King of Kings", "Cleopatra", "The Fall of the Roman Empire", "The Greatest Story Ever Told", and a host of cheaper imitations. I have seen all of the named films, and most of those many times; and, as a definite fan of classic movies, I enjoy most of them-- but not without some qualification. For the most part, those films co-opted Christian audiences to paint the Romans as alone responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus, and to portray the Jews, as a nation, as the fellow primary and innocent victims, along with the Christians, of the cruelly sadistic Romans.

    The fact that the Jews hated the subsequent Christianized Roman Empire, just as they had hated the Hellenistic Greeks who had ruled Palestine, before the Romans arrived, is a subject avoided by Hollywood, as were such subjects as the Pax Romana, Roman law, Roman engineering, Roman letters, and any other positive aspects of arguably the greatest civilization in recorded history. Why might that have been? Was it really because the Romans, during their millennium-long run (followed by the comparable success of the Byzantine Empire, in the relocated imperial capital, at the gateway to Asia), were so spectacularly decadent, compared to the rest of the ancient world-- or even compared to, say, the modern-day Babylon that is Hollywood, U.S.A., itself?
    , @Percy Gryce

    The trend seems to be more to focus on the decadence.
     
    What decadence? Pansexualism, political dynasties, higher taxes, foreign misadventures, and open borders--sounds like mainstream America today.
  38. @Lot

    But you’ve probably never heard of that book because a gentile analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews is unimaginable. Jewish intellectuals very much do not like their own tools being applied to themselves. Turnabout may be fair play, but it’s, to be frank, zombie Catholicism.
     
    Aside from the pleasure of ratiocination, is there some goal that "analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews" serves?

    It isn't as if analysis of "Jews qua Jews" doesn't happen. Sure, it is a disreputable activity, but there is no shortage of smart people like MacDonald doing it.

    Whatever the ostensible goal, the actual effect of "analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews" seems to have is offending and alienating a highly intelligent, moral, and influential group of Americans, and prolonging the evil taint Nazism attached to what was once a humane, influential, and progressive eugenics movement.

    Aside from all that, I find it sort of tiresome and boring as well. The question of the percentage of Jewish Bolsheviks, their relative responsibility for the '65 immigration act and 70's feminism, and the other questions that preoccupy MacDonaldists for me are not very interesting as historical questions compared to, say, Roman history, or 17th century England. Nor do they seem relevant to issues confronting our present and future: how do block amnesty at home, elect the Donald president, and stop the exponentially growing stream of refugees from the Third World from destroying the First.

    “Lot says:

    It isn’t as if analysis of “Jews qua Jews” doesn’t happen. Sure, it is a disreputable activity, but there is no shortage of smart people like MacDonald doing it.”

    And you seem intent upon keeping it disreputable and marginalized. Why is that? There is no shortage of people who have analyzed my people, white protestants, qua white protestants. Why is this not a worthwhile pursuit when it comes to Jews?

    • Agree: JSM
    • Replies: @FinMin
    Clearly because they rule and are unwilling to tolerate criticism, the same as any totalitarian power.
    , @Deduction

    There is no shortage of people who have analyzed my people, white protestants, qua white protestants. Why is this not a worthwhile pursuit when it comes to Jews?
     
    It's very worthwhile. And the fact that it is taboo has sadly left the task to a bunch of paranoid loons.
  39. “Well, sure, these French folks were demonstrating in favor of the aggressively secular Republic formalized by law in 1905, but the important point is that some of their great-grandparents had been against Col. Dreyfus and thus were on the losing side in 1905. ”

    This is something that needs to be high-lighted, French extreme secularist laws came right after the Dreyfuss Affair, the losers of the Affair were the Catholic Church and the Military, the main Conservative institutions in France.

    Marxists, Atheists and jews came out as the winners of the Dreyfuss Affair, it was no accident that the first Socialist Prime-Minister of France was the Jew Leon Blum who was deeply influenced by the Affair.

  40. @Lot

    why is it that the Romans are overwhelmingly portrayed, here in modern America, in a negative light– indeed, as having essentially been proto-Nazis?
     
    I don't know about "overwhelmingly" negative. The Romans in HBO's Rome were a mixture of vice and virtue, and the Jeremy Sisto Caesar mini-series was fairly positive. Mostly through it is underdogism. The Romans were on top in the ancient world, and we like to see the underdog gladiators, gauls, britons, jews, christians, and poor oppressed plebians beat the snooty world-dominating Roman elites. The English aren't treated too well either in American movies.

    If you're interested in a positive portrayal of Romans, watch Agora, a really good Spanish-made movie filmed in English. The Romans are the heros, the villains are the Christian and Jewish Alexandrian mobs who want to destroy the remnants of pagan humanism and kill Hypatia.

    Would you really characterize Margaret Sanger’s well-known views on Black reproduction as ultimately having been grounded in her “humane” concern for their own welfare?
     
    Yes. Black families of that era would have been best served focusing their limited resources on fewer children.

    Silly me, I thought it might have something to do with Roman history from the mid-first century of the Common Era…. If you honestly believe that Margaret Sanger was motivated by pure racial goodwill toward the oppressed and underprivileged Negro, I can see why you believe that the Jews are just like everybody else….

  41. BTW, are you sure you’re not projecting our own American fights over puncher-upping and puncher-downing onto the French? They have their own historical culture war involving laicité versus Catholicism. Seems to me he’s trying to claim the left should stop fighting Muslims and go back to fighting Catholics, and is trying to find an excuse to do so now that fewer and fewer people are actually Catholic in France.

    There’s some similarity to the KKKrazy Glue over here, I agree.

    • Replies: @Veracitor
    Jean Raspail was an old-fashioned Catholic when he wrote Camp of the Saints and the book is suffused with a Catholic sensibility as well as criticism of the Church as it was rotting in the 1970's; Raspail even predicted a Pope would take the name Benedict, though only some of his other predictions about the Church in the book turned out so exactly.

    To the (large) extent that Camp predicts current events, it also incites anti-Catholics to see people who don't want France swamped by hostile migrants as representatives of an old order which critics hate even more than they fear the migrants. In fact some people would rather feed France to the dogs than concede that their old foes could have been right in any way about anything. Furthermore they are so eager to defeat the ghosts of their old enemies that they will project them onto living people with only the most tenuous of justifications.

    Steve wrote about this sort of thing while discussing diminishing returns in politics a few days ago.
  42. @SFG
    Proto-Nazis? The trend seems to be more to focus on the decadence.

    “Proto-Nazis? The trend seems to be more to focus on the decadence.”

    Apparently you never saw the movie “Spartacus”. Or “Gladiator”, which even had a muscial score that sounded like “Goetterdaemerung”.

    Mind you, it isn’t entirely suprising that the ancient Romans should seem fascistic, given that fascism was modeled on ancient Rome. However, Rome was also a state that served as an inspiration for the American Republic.

    • Replies: @SFG
    Yes, but both 'Spartacus' and 'Gladiator' are about the *Empire*. That's not anti-Romanism, it's (among other things) fear of own Republic turning into an Empire. That was the underlying backstory of 'Star Wars', among other things, as well as countless actual political speeches from the left (economic concentration is like the Roman slaveowners driving independent farmers out) and occasionally right (Buchanan is a good example).

    The Empire is what people are afraid we will become...not without reason, I must say.
    , @Bill Jones
    Hence the proliferation of Fasces in the Congress and on the memorial to the great dictator
    http://livinglincoln.web.unc.edu/2015/04/17/the-lincoln-memorial-how-it-stands-today/
  43. ” Seems to me he’s trying to claim the left should stop fighting Muslims and go back to fighting Catholics, and is trying to find an excuse to do so now that fewer and fewer people are actually Catholic in France.”

    Is his hatred of French Catholics really religion based or more ethnic based? Does he feel the same extreme hatred in his heart for Filipino Catholics and Nonwhite Latin American Catholics as well? Somehow I doubt he hates all Catholics regardless of race. I think he only reserves hatred for White Catholics.

    Also why does this Emanuel Todd Jew love Muslims, when it has been well documented that Adolf Hitler had a very positive view of Muslims and Islam. Aren’t Jews suppose to hate everything that Adolf Hitler liked?

    Adolf Hitler had mentioned that Islam was more culturally compatible with Nazi Germany than Christianity. Adolf Hitler saw Christianity as a weak religion with its meakness and flabbiness.

  44. @22pp22
    Derrida was a French Jewish intellectual, who, like Foucault, was inspired by Heidegger , a Nazi. After Heidegger's past was revealed, Derrida still defended him. There is a reason why the word"intello" is a term of abuse in French. French intellos have done more harm to Europe than anything since the Black Death. Their theories deny the existence of reason and truth as merely social constructs. They should be ignored. In my time as an academic, I used to meet people like this all the time, spouting bile while quaffing the college claret. I had a conversation with one who defended bride burning. I ended the conversation by threatening to deconstruct his face.

    Ahhh the French Po-Mo’s and Decons. Leave it to French Jews to create a philosophy that denies reality and language. A century earlier they would have been locked up as lunatics.

    What they spouted was and is pure poison – a corrosive acid that turns people into nihilists. When you believe in nothing, you care for nothing and fight for nothing. How a bunch of gullible Western students bought into that s**t I’ll never know.

    I also agree this movement has done more damage to our people than the Black Death. It literally induced a death wish among the intellectual and political classes. They have become the hollow men or men without chests.

    It would also explain the utter helplessness displayed by our elites in many domains. There is no fight in them, even the notion of self-preservation has vanished.

    • Replies: @Bill B.
    Roger Scruton on his website has an essay on his reactions to witnessing events in Paris in 1968.
  45. @rod1963
    The fact is you cannot find any prominent Jew that considers Muslim immigration a problem or will speak out against it in public. And worse Jewish run organizations like the ADL and ACLU are often the first to run to the defense of Muslim immigrants if whites start complaining about them.

    In France Jews are leaving because of the threats from Muslims, yet they do not complain. Same in England, they are often found to support Muslim immigrants when the EDL or BNP takes to the streets. Even though Jews are now losing political clout in England.

    IOW the Jews are committing racial suicide. Their hatred for the white goy blinds them to their own fate if immigration policies are not reversed.

    “The fact is you cannot find any prominent Jew that considers Muslim immigration a problem or will speak out against it in public.”

    Pam Geller, David Horowitz, Ben Shapiro, and about 90% of Israeli politicians.

    I am not a fan of their neoconnery BTW, but there you go.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "“The fact is you cannot find any prominent Jew that considers Muslim immigration a problem or will speak out against it in public.”

    Pam Geller, David Horowitz, Ben Shapiro, and about 90% of Israeli politicians.

    I am not a fan of their neoconnery BTW, but there you go."

    Also Jason Chaffetz, Brooke Goldstein, and Mark Levin. I remember there was a Jew on Real Time With Bill Maher who said Islam is the mother of all bad ideas.

  46. Emmauel Todd was the first to foresee the collapse of the USSR. Fascinating guy and this is one of Steve’s best articles. Couldn’t put my finger on why the “Je suis” phenomenon seemed, well, faux. superficial. overdone. hypocritical.

    • Replies: @Deduction

    Emmauel Todd was the first to foresee the collapse of the USSR
     
    Your statement is clearly false.
  47. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “…the actual effect of “analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews” seems to have is offending and alienating a highly intelligent, moral, and influential group of Americans…”

    If you find being analyzed offensive and alienating, you are part of the problem, not the solution, as they say. All groups have to live with being analyzed, along with all the others, there is no royal road. It seems childish to think it could be otherwise. Suggesting it could be otherwise would seem to demand analysis.

  48. Was deposing Cat-a-fee really that popular among Jews? I know that French Jewish philosopher was in favor of it…

    And re Muslim troops, the Germans had their own in WW2, Bosnians recruited by the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.

  49. I like how they differentiate “working class” from “immigrants.”

  50. @Lot
    "The fact is you cannot find any prominent Jew that considers Muslim immigration a problem or will speak out against it in public."

    Pam Geller, David Horowitz, Ben Shapiro, and about 90% of Israeli politicians.

    I am not a fan of their neoconnery BTW, but there you go.

    ““The fact is you cannot find any prominent Jew that considers Muslim immigration a problem or will speak out against it in public.”

    Pam Geller, David Horowitz, Ben Shapiro, and about 90% of Israeli politicians.

    I am not a fan of their neoconnery BTW, but there you go.”

    Also Jason Chaffetz, Brooke Goldstein, and Mark Levin. I remember there was a Jew on Real Time With Bill Maher who said Islam is the mother of all bad ideas.

  51. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “Biggest intellectual slanging matches?” You are making me laugh. All this wannabe Zola and his dumb widdle book prove is that the good publishing subjects were taken long ago, probably by Claude Levi Strauss & company too (in the deep psychic basement of his own fears Todd likely suspects this already). He is not scraping the barrel any more, he’s clawed through the bottom lid and is playing finger-paint with the dreck on the storeroom floor. The knee-jerk intellectualoids of this type will be easily replaced by robots & outrage software in the near future.

  52. “General Franco used Moroccans to shatter the morale of the Spanish Left in the early days of the French Civil War.”

    The French Civil War—talk about an event that went completely down the memory hole!

    • Agree: Dave Pinsen
  53. @SFG
    BTW, are you sure you're not projecting our own American fights over puncher-upping and puncher-downing onto the French? They have their own historical culture war involving laicité versus Catholicism. Seems to me he's trying to claim the left should stop fighting Muslims and go back to fighting Catholics, and is trying to find an excuse to do so now that fewer and fewer people are actually Catholic in France.

    There's some similarity to the KKKrazy Glue over here, I agree.

    Jean Raspail was an old-fashioned Catholic when he wrote Camp of the Saints and the book is suffused with a Catholic sensibility as well as criticism of the Church as it was rotting in the 1970’s; Raspail even predicted a Pope would take the name Benedict, though only some of his other predictions about the Church in the book turned out so exactly.

    To the (large) extent that Camp predicts current events, it also incites anti-Catholics to see people who don’t want France swamped by hostile migrants as representatives of an old order which critics hate even more than they fear the migrants. In fact some people would rather feed France to the dogs than concede that their old foes could have been right in any way about anything. Furthermore they are so eager to defeat the ghosts of their old enemies that they will project them onto living people with only the most tenuous of justifications.

    Steve wrote about this sort of thing while discussing diminishing returns in politics a few days ago.

  54. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Lot

    A huge amount of intellectualizing consists of triple bankshots made up by Jewish intellectuals to rationalize primal emotions they feel. Their triple bankshots (bomb Libya abroad, lay down to Muslim inundation at home, or whatever) frequently don’t make much sense in non-emotional terms, but they very much do not like gentiles applying Occam’s Razor to their triple bankshots.
     
    So, what does Occam's Razor say then?

    You seem to be flirting with Kevin MacDonaldism, where the Eternal Jew is always pushing Jewish interests at the expense of everyone else.

    Now, no doubt many Jews advocate for Jewish interests. But what is your support for the idea that anti-white Jews somehow can't just be self-hating ethno-masochists like other white ethnic groups? Why is it when a Jew advocates his country to be inundated with Muslims, it is some convoluted "triple bankshot" to advance Jewish interests, but not when Italians or Swedes do the same?

    If you want to apply Occam's razor here, it is that French half-jews like Todd that advocate France be overrun with Arabs and black muslims that hate jews, they do it because they are, at best, indifferent to the country being overrun by anti-semites who will attack Jews on the streets and vote in George Galloway types who want to BDS Israel into a South Africa type pariah state.

    A lot of the Kevin MacDonald/Sailer open-ended brief against All Jews Everywhere depends on this sort of circular self-confirmation: if proponent A is advancing a cause opposite of proponent B’s, it’s because they’re tacitly Darwinistically collaborating on policy C, defined somewhere along the thermometer of anti-gentile skullduggery. All political behavior is overtly or covertly malicious as fruit of the malicious identity tree. Then you do some hand-waving when a Israel Shahak or Norman Finkelstein crops up because biology is complicated, man, and dismiss any questions raised against the special perfidy gene as “race denialism.”

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Like I said, your argument is more with Professor Todd than with me. He's the one who is saying that his struggle against the specter of "zombie Catholicism" reminds him that he's half-Jewish and that he has this complicated theory about why French mass opposition to Muslims murdering Jews in the streets of France is really, deep down, anti-Semitic.
  55. everyone agreed that the ensuing street rallies were the best of France

    No one asked me. I was more inclined to view at least the politicians as fucking hypocrites: In France, as in more than a few other countries, it is illegal to ‘deny the Holocaust’ — so re muslims, it is understandable that they would ask ‘If the Jews can have their law, why can’t we have one against denigrating the Prophet?’.

    Similar to AA, where the growing numbers of the beneficiaries makes it likely it can never be stopped, a growing muslim population means it’s likely they’ll get their law eventually.

  56. @Lot

    But you’ve probably never heard of that book because a gentile analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews is unimaginable. Jewish intellectuals very much do not like their own tools being applied to themselves. Turnabout may be fair play, but it’s, to be frank, zombie Catholicism.
     
    Aside from the pleasure of ratiocination, is there some goal that "analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews" serves?

    It isn't as if analysis of "Jews qua Jews" doesn't happen. Sure, it is a disreputable activity, but there is no shortage of smart people like MacDonald doing it.

    Whatever the ostensible goal, the actual effect of "analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews" seems to have is offending and alienating a highly intelligent, moral, and influential group of Americans, and prolonging the evil taint Nazism attached to what was once a humane, influential, and progressive eugenics movement.

    Aside from all that, I find it sort of tiresome and boring as well. The question of the percentage of Jewish Bolsheviks, their relative responsibility for the '65 immigration act and 70's feminism, and the other questions that preoccupy MacDonaldists for me are not very interesting as historical questions compared to, say, Roman history, or 17th century England. Nor do they seem relevant to issues confronting our present and future: how do block amnesty at home, elect the Donald president, and stop the exponentially growing stream of refugees from the Third World from destroying the First.

    [ a highly intelligent, moral, and influential group of Americans]

    Not afraid of dislocating your shoulder by patting yourself on the back so hard?

  57. @22pp22
    Derrida was a French Jewish intellectual, who, like Foucault, was inspired by Heidegger , a Nazi. After Heidegger's past was revealed, Derrida still defended him. There is a reason why the word"intello" is a term of abuse in French. French intellos have done more harm to Europe than anything since the Black Death. Their theories deny the existence of reason and truth as merely social constructs. They should be ignored. In my time as an academic, I used to meet people like this all the time, spouting bile while quaffing the college claret. I had a conversation with one who defended bride burning. I ended the conversation by threatening to deconstruct his face.

    I have no time for Derrida, but you are being very stupid. Is one obliged to boycott Bieberbach and Teichmüller too, or just Heidegger?

    • Replies: @22pp22
    If you had read my comment, you would have seen that I was referring to the highly influential grands maitres, who are nothing of the sort. Teichmuller and Bieberbach were both Germans and primarily mathematicians. Werner von Braun's achievements as an engineer are separate from his political beliefs.

    The scientific method gave us a life expectancy of 80 and the modern world. Foucault's philosophy didn't contribute anything at all.

    I read this site because HBD is reality. I wasted too much of my young life reading Foucault, because at the time I felt I had to. I then moved over to geology, where I don't have to worry about this rubbish.

    Go shove your hermeneutics up your episteme!
  58. @Mr. Anon
    "Lot says:

    It isn’t as if analysis of “Jews qua Jews” doesn’t happen. Sure, it is a disreputable activity, but there is no shortage of smart people like MacDonald doing it."

    And you seem intent upon keeping it disreputable and marginalized. Why is that? There is no shortage of people who have analyzed my people, white protestants, qua white protestants. Why is this not a worthwhile pursuit when it comes to Jews?

    Clearly because they rule and are unwilling to tolerate criticism, the same as any totalitarian power.

  59. @Mr. Anon
    "Proto-Nazis? The trend seems to be more to focus on the decadence."

    Apparently you never saw the movie "Spartacus". Or "Gladiator", which even had a muscial score that sounded like "Goetterdaemerung".

    Mind you, it isn't entirely suprising that the ancient Romans should seem fascistic, given that fascism was modeled on ancient Rome. However, Rome was also a state that served as an inspiration for the American Republic.

    Yes, but both ‘Spartacus’ and ‘Gladiator’ are about the *Empire*. That’s not anti-Romanism, it’s (among other things) fear of own Republic turning into an Empire. That was the underlying backstory of ‘Star Wars’, among other things, as well as countless actual political speeches from the left (economic concentration is like the Roman slaveowners driving independent farmers out) and occasionally right (Buchanan is a good example).

    The Empire is what people are afraid we will become…not without reason, I must say.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    Oh, yes, Hollywood Jews, like other elite American Jews, are worried sick about America acting as an imperial power; they all long for America to bring the troops home, and stop trying to police the world, in places like, say, the Middle East. They also are all aghast at the thought of an American Caesar coming along and trying to rule over us by executive fiat. That is why the Jewish elites all hate those former presidents, like A. Lincoln and F. D. Roosevelt, who expanded the scope and power of the federal government, ran roughshod over civil liberties, and dragged America into bloody wars, unnecessarily. We will never live to see the day when Hollywood ever will glorify such dastardly men, let alone such unjust wars, in service only to imperial geopolitics and the military-industrial complex. Jews are renown for their anti-authoritarian personalities, just as they are for their inveterate pacifism.
    , @Deduction
    The Republic was killed by precisely the same trends that tarnish the Empire for us.

    Ceasar and Augustus tried to arrest those trends but failed.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Yes, but both ‘Spartacus’ and ‘Gladiator’ are about the *Empire*. That’s not anti-Romanism, it’s (among other things) fear of own Republic turning into an Empire."

    The screen-play for "Spartacus" was written by the famously black-listed communist screenwriter, and all-round creep, Dalton Trumbo, and was based on the novel by the communist writer Howard Fast. The projection of 1930s leftist politicss on to first-century B.C. Rome were pretty obvious and contrived. Also, Spartacus was made in 1960, at the height of America's post-war self-confidence. I don't think there was much concern then about us becoming an empire, except at the margins. Mind you, we were becoming an empire at the time, but we weren't concerned about it.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking the end product. Trumbo, though a louse, was a great screen writer, and "Spartacus" was a great movie. It was after all directed by Stanley Kubrick.

    By the way, a movie is coming out soon about Dalton Trumbo, with Bryan Cranston in the lead. No doubt, it will retail the same old hackneyed sob-story about those poor, poor black-listed Hollywood commies.

    "That was the underlying backstory of ‘Star Wars’, among other things,......."

    Let's not bring George Lucas' ridiculous juvenile mythology, based on an 8th-grader's understanding of history, into a serious discussion, shall we?

    "The Empire is what people are afraid we will become…not without reason, I must say.

    Oh, I think we've already got an empire - as far-reaching, as corrupt, and as decadent as that of the Romans as well.

  60. @Whiskey
    I'm with Lot Steve you are overthinking it. FT tiday has liberal Israeli Jews demanding open borders. Saying they are immigrants so take in half of Africa. Jews are urbanite professionals so no kidding they are GoodWhites. If they were rural or suburban they'd parade Judah P. Benjamin images around Kid Rock concerts with Confederate flags yelling yeee hawwww!

    Your missing the GoodWhite urbanism for the Jews and conflating the two. Like all Goodwhites Jews cannot wait to be annihilated by the Third World save half the Jews in Israel living outside urban areas thus being badwhite.

    I am a badWhite. Don't fight it. Embrace the dark side. Of BadWhitsm.

    If they were rural or suburban

    Hmmmm…how come is it they aren’t rural or suburban?

  61. @rod1963
    The fact is you cannot find any prominent Jew that considers Muslim immigration a problem or will speak out against it in public. And worse Jewish run organizations like the ADL and ACLU are often the first to run to the defense of Muslim immigrants if whites start complaining about them.

    In France Jews are leaving because of the threats from Muslims, yet they do not complain. Same in England, they are often found to support Muslim immigrants when the EDL or BNP takes to the streets. Even though Jews are now losing political clout in England.

    IOW the Jews are committing racial suicide. Their hatred for the white goy blinds them to their own fate if immigration policies are not reversed.

    The fact is you cannot find any prominent Jew that considers Muslim immigration a problem or will speak out against it in public.

    To add to ’s response:

    Alain Finkielkraut is a non-native French Jew who fits this profile and speaks beautifully about this. I would add Ilana Mercer as another very Jewish critic who writes beautifully and of course, is also hosted on unz.

  62. Todd invented nothing and applied unintelligently the ideas of Gustave Le Play, his fame is rather undeserved.
    I would describe the post-Charlie demonstrations as zombie anti-fascism rather than zombie Catholicism. Their most obvious models are the officially backed protests against the FN that used to be staged, for example after the alleged desecration of a Jewish cemetery at Carpentras.

  63. @Anonymous
    A lot of the Kevin MacDonald/Sailer open-ended brief against All Jews Everywhere depends on this sort of circular self-confirmation: if proponent A is advancing a cause opposite of proponent B's, it's because they're tacitly Darwinistically collaborating on policy C, defined somewhere along the thermometer of anti-gentile skullduggery. All political behavior is overtly or covertly malicious as fruit of the malicious identity tree. Then you do some hand-waving when a Israel Shahak or Norman Finkelstein crops up because biology is complicated, man, and dismiss any questions raised against the special perfidy gene as "race denialism."

    Like I said, your argument is more with Professor Todd than with me. He’s the one who is saying that his struggle against the specter of “zombie Catholicism” reminds him that he’s half-Jewish and that he has this complicated theory about why French mass opposition to Muslims murdering Jews in the streets of France is really, deep down, anti-Semitic.

  64. @Lot

    But you’ve probably never heard of that book because a gentile analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews is unimaginable. Jewish intellectuals very much do not like their own tools being applied to themselves. Turnabout may be fair play, but it’s, to be frank, zombie Catholicism.
     
    Aside from the pleasure of ratiocination, is there some goal that "analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews" serves?

    It isn't as if analysis of "Jews qua Jews" doesn't happen. Sure, it is a disreputable activity, but there is no shortage of smart people like MacDonald doing it.

    Whatever the ostensible goal, the actual effect of "analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews" seems to have is offending and alienating a highly intelligent, moral, and influential group of Americans, and prolonging the evil taint Nazism attached to what was once a humane, influential, and progressive eugenics movement.

    Aside from all that, I find it sort of tiresome and boring as well. The question of the percentage of Jewish Bolsheviks, their relative responsibility for the '65 immigration act and 70's feminism, and the other questions that preoccupy MacDonaldists for me are not very interesting as historical questions compared to, say, Roman history, or 17th century England. Nor do they seem relevant to issues confronting our present and future: how do block amnesty at home, elect the Donald president, and stop the exponentially growing stream of refugees from the Third World from destroying the First.

    there is no shortage of smart people like MacDonald doing it.

    I dispute this. There *absolutely* is a shortage. MacDonald and a mere handful of others are doing it.

    If there were hundreds of PhDs granted per year on the subject, I’d agree with you. If Fox News had nightly segments with dozens of pundits discussing the issue, I’d agree with you. But, that doesn’t happen.

    Instead it’s one University professor who was wily enough to get tenure before he opened his yap, and a few intrepid, poorly paid bloggers which SPLC and ADL kick in the teeth, every chance they get.

  65. @SFG
    Proto-Nazis? The trend seems to be more to focus on the decadence.

    I cannot claim to know with certainty what the trend is, since I have not been to the movies since 1999. (Even then, it was the would-be “director’s cut” of Orson Welles’ “Touch of Evil” from over forty years earlier! The last time that I went to see a new or recent release was in April 1997.) I am skeptical, nonetheless, that contemporary Hollywood is actually more sympathetic toward Roman culture and civilization than was the Hollywood of the so-called “Golden Age” of American film.

    With the advent of CinemaScope, in 1953, Hollywood cranked out many Roman epics: “The Robe” (the first CinemaScope film), its sequel “Demetrius and the Gladiators”, “Quo Vadis”, “Ben Hur”, “Spartacus”, “King of Kings”, “Cleopatra”, “The Fall of the Roman Empire”, “The Greatest Story Ever Told”, and a host of cheaper imitations. I have seen all of the named films, and most of those many times; and, as a definite fan of classic movies, I enjoy most of them– but not without some qualification. For the most part, those films co-opted Christian audiences to paint the Romans as alone responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus, and to portray the Jews, as a nation, as the fellow primary and innocent victims, along with the Christians, of the cruelly sadistic Romans.

    The fact that the Jews hated the subsequent Christianized Roman Empire, just as they had hated the Hellenistic Greeks who had ruled Palestine, before the Romans arrived, is a subject avoided by Hollywood, as were such subjects as the Pax Romana, Roman law, Roman engineering, Roman letters, and any other positive aspects of arguably the greatest civilization in recorded history. Why might that have been? Was it really because the Romans, during their millennium-long run (followed by the comparable success of the Byzantine Empire, in the relocated imperial capital, at the gateway to Asia), were so spectacularly decadent, compared to the rest of the ancient world– or even compared to, say, the modern-day Babylon that is Hollywood, U.S.A., itself?

    • Replies: @Deduction

    as were such subjects as the Pax Romana, Roman law, Roman engineering, Roman letters, and any other positive aspects of arguably the greatest civilization in recorded history. Why might that have been
     
    Can't wait to see a big budget version of that at the cinema. Roman law: the movie.
    , @CK
    Might I suggest that this book could supply a few answers to why the Romans were so often portrayed as Nazi's in Togas in post war Hollywood epics.
    http://www.amazon.com/An-Empire-Their-Own-Hollywood/dp/0385265573
  66. Well, today, the middle class has moral superiority, hasn’t it? Middle class people are not stupid enough to be lower class and not cunning enough to be upper class.

    Why not celebrate that?

  67. @5371
    I have no time for Derrida, but you are being very stupid. Is one obliged to boycott Bieberbach and Teichmüller too, or just Heidegger?

    If you had read my comment, you would have seen that I was referring to the highly influential grands maitres, who are nothing of the sort. Teichmuller and Bieberbach were both Germans and primarily mathematicians. Werner von Braun’s achievements as an engineer are separate from his political beliefs.

    The scientific method gave us a life expectancy of 80 and the modern world. Foucault’s philosophy didn’t contribute anything at all.

    I read this site because HBD is reality. I wasted too much of my young life reading Foucault, because at the time I felt I had to. I then moved over to geology, where I don’t have to worry about this rubbish.

    Go shove your hermeneutics up your episteme!

  68. Todd is absolutely right. There are two Frances.

    Back during the whole CH attack days, one of the HDB sites, maybe HBD Chick, posted a map of French Manorialism. The idea of Manorialism is a huge idea over in that community and it is believed to have driven northern European social evolution as well as genetic selection to create the societies of northern Euro and the personality types unique to the region. This wikipedia entry defines it:

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

    As far as the HDB crowd is concerned, the key aspect of Manorialism was Out Marriage or outbreeding as opposed to Kin Marriage. People who Out Married were more socially cooperative, more trusting of strangers, more altruistic than the counterparts, those Kin Marriage people. So HDB traces these marriage patterns all over the world. There is a famous map of Britain that not only traces Manorialism in various regions of the UK, but also the migrations of people from the various regions over into North America. And how the politics TODAY of those regions are a function of the Manorialism or the lack of it back in England. This is no small potatoes to this community and often forms to very basis of opposition to immigration into the United States and Europe. The idea of a proposition republic where civil status is all that defines a nation is nonsense when Manorialism and Out Marriage is considered.

    So this map of France showing areas where Manorialism was predominate and where it wasn’t showed that it existed in sort of the rough shape of a parallelogram around Paris and Ille de France extending towards the northeast and the German border. All of those other regions outside of this part where not. They were areas of Kin Marriage. So the Good French are from the regions around Paris towards the northeast. The Bad French are not.

    And the hallmark of Kin Marriage is basically xenophobia, a lack of openness to outsiders, outside ideas. And when you track the stronghold areas of the National Front in France, it corresponds with these areas where formerly Kin Marriage predominated.

    Now before the CH attacks these Zombie Catholic people had committed horrible, horrible sins against secular France. There was a protest group referred to as Manif Pour Tous, March For All and they protested…Gasp….

    Gay Marriage.

    And worse. They exhibited Traditional Marriage roles. And even worse. Traditional Gender Profesional Roles. Meaning, God Forbid, the men acted like men and husbands, and the women acted like women and wives.

    So when CH happens, on Jan 11, they all hit the street to march but their marches were different then the cuck marches of Paris, these were truly xenophobic and anti-islam, anti-immigrant marches of the France for the French sort and not any nonsense like Free Speech cartoons.

    Then on 26th January, an organisation called “Printemps français” (“French Spring”, as in “Arab Spring”) brought an estimated 17,000 people on to the streets of Paris for a “day of rage” (jour de colère) as well as other parts of France.

    So in my opinion these are basically the French version of Trump voters, pissed off people, mad for the same reason that Trump voters are.

    And in my opinion, Todd is right to be worried about emerging antisemitism among the zombie Catholics and even other French groups. Much like here in the US and in Britain, more and more people are questioning the role of the Jews in formulating ideas, dominating media and culture, to ferment stupid altruistic tolerance of things like immigration, homosexual culture, feminism, and what has been termed “the Jewish Spirit” in commerce. And many are starting to believe the goal of the Jews is the eradication of white Europeans as retaliation for their role in the Shoah.

    And probably like here, as the shores of the Riviera have turned into a mini Camp of Saints, those zombie Catholics are probably a whole lot of more vocal and united, really to tell a whole lot of leftist 68ers to kiss their zombie asses.

    I mean, 68 is dead, and is its own Zombie self, still walking around. Probably a good term there, Zombie 68ers.

  69. The French Allied general promised his Muslim troops that if they succeeded in driving the Germans off of the mountain, they would get 50 hours to rape Italian civilian women with impunity.

    Actually, in Wikipedia it says “General Alphonse Juin allegedly declared”. & this “allegedly declared” for you is “promised”?

    The only scientific paper regarding this issue, mentioned on the Wikipedia talk page, seems to show a slightly different opinion:
    “Baris is very clear that Juin never issued a statement allowing Razias etc. before the battle of Casino. Juin’s statement involved exalting Free France. The falsified statement as currently in the article seems to go back to 1965 and the Associazione nazionale vittime civili di guerra, it has since been distributed by a number of unreliable sources including the Italian extreme Right”

    BTW, it would be nice to read more about HBD, esp. since this is the title of your blog.

  70. @SFG
    Yes, but both 'Spartacus' and 'Gladiator' are about the *Empire*. That's not anti-Romanism, it's (among other things) fear of own Republic turning into an Empire. That was the underlying backstory of 'Star Wars', among other things, as well as countless actual political speeches from the left (economic concentration is like the Roman slaveowners driving independent farmers out) and occasionally right (Buchanan is a good example).

    The Empire is what people are afraid we will become...not without reason, I must say.

    Oh, yes, Hollywood Jews, like other elite American Jews, are worried sick about America acting as an imperial power; they all long for America to bring the troops home, and stop trying to police the world, in places like, say, the Middle East. They also are all aghast at the thought of an American Caesar coming along and trying to rule over us by executive fiat. That is why the Jewish elites all hate those former presidents, like A. Lincoln and F. D. Roosevelt, who expanded the scope and power of the federal government, ran roughshod over civil liberties, and dragged America into bloody wars, unnecessarily. We will never live to see the day when Hollywood ever will glorify such dastardly men, let alone such unjust wars, in service only to imperial geopolitics and the military-industrial complex. Jews are renown for their anti-authoritarian personalities, just as they are for their inveterate pacifism.

    • Replies: @SFG
    You're right, but I doubt they think about political philosophy that hard. They just know people think 'republic good, empire bad' and make movies with that theme. I doubt George Lucas had Israeli settlement policy in mind when making 'Star Wars'. I just don't think it's any hatred of Rome per se.
  71. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    It’s pretty much granted that France will turn into a majority Islamic state some time this century.
    Horrific immigration figured issued the other day in the UK, well over 600,000 entered in the last year, makes it likely the same thing will happen to the UK, and then you have Sweden, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Italy etc etc.
    Sure, I won’t be alive in 2100, neither will anyone reading this, but it seems pretty damned obvious that Europe, in any meaningful sense is doomed.

    Knowing the French national character for what it is, I would be surprised if France does not descend into a bloody racial civil war sometime this century. It’s obvious to many observer that the French political class is trying to play some sort of duplicitous, deceitful ‘holding game’ involving the denial or reality and inevitability, whilst at the same time feeding downright lies to the French people.
    It just *cannot* last forever, the deceit is just too glaring, and the forces involved just too overpowering.
    In fact, I am confident of my prediction of bloody racial civil war in France sometime in the next 85 years.
    Steve Pinker is yet another deceiver.

  72. Steve,
    Thank you for the John Murray Cuddihy book link.

  73. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    When I start typing “mondoweiss” into the Google query box (private browsing tab/no cookies) it auto-prompts me with “mondoweiss hate site” as the 1st suggested search query. Isn’t that redundant? If people were trying to answer the basic question of “What is the site / Is it a [sic] hate site” wouldn’t they just Google the 1st term? The only way these suggestions would emerge organically would be a semi-collaborative googlebomb effort in order to provoke the artificially-intelligent search cache into believing that “[x] hate site” was a practically useful subcategory or refinement of searches on [x] — which it isn’t, in the Western civilization sense (cf. also the auto-prompt “steve sailer racist”).

    If Google espoused some kind of laissez-faire Prime Directive about the low-grade hacking of the suggested search by aggrieved partisans, that would be one thing. But they don’t — in fact they blacklist web sites who “game” the results order (albeit rarely). The manipulation would be simple to fix from an engineering standpoint; “Microsoft racist” is not a case of someone mistyping an intended search for “Microsoft,” after all, and it’s not a hit song or new smartphone, so there’s no utility gained by suggesting it. The presence of these prejudicial auto-prompts belies Google’s stated libertoid mission that they just wanna Organize Information For Make Great Benefit Global Community. Ironically I guess it makes it less work for fans of racism to socialize online w/ other fans.

  74. What Todd would really like to do is blame “Islamophobia” on Catholicism but given the current state of religious affairs in France this would be ridiculous even for a French “intello” to attempt.

    So instead he claims the LACK of real Catholicism creates “Zombie Catholicism” and this is to blame for Islamophobia, not the murderous actions of the Islamists.

    An American version of this could be in 100 years, in a racially métissaged (race mixed) America, where the very few remaining whites have been totally marginalized, if some dedicated victim class suddenly came under criticism. The victim-advocates could no longer directly blame whitey, so the most clever among them would invent the concept of “residual white privilege” or “Zombie Whiteness” in order to keep indirectly kicking the same dead White horse long after decomposition had made direct kicks impossible.

    So while Todd is ostensibly attacking the lefty bourgeois urban elite, he is doing so in a sort of religous one-drop rule — if any of your ancestors were Catholic — that is why you are so Islamophobic. But it is this very same lefty bourgeois urban elite that is so enthusiastic about importing Muslims to be faithful Socialist (PS) voters since the indigenous working class is fleeing the PS in droves for the Front National.

    What Todd is really saying is that despite the virtual death of Catholicism in France, the only way to keep a majority “coalition of the oppressed” together, is to constantly attack the ghosts of long dormant groups that once held power in the past.

    And by pointing people’s attention towards dominant groups of the past; it helps dissuade people from looking at small dominant groups of the present as potential causes of the current problems.

    • Replies: @Deduction

    So while Todd is ostensibly attacking the lefty bourgeois urban elite, he is doing so in a sort of religous one-drop rule — if any of your ancestors were Catholic — that is why you are so Islamophobic
     
    Todd is a lot more than one drop of blood Catholic...
    , @Jefferson
    "An American version of this could be in 100 years, in a racially métissaged (race mixed) America, where the very few remaining whites have been totally marginalized, if some dedicated victim class suddenly came under criticism. The victim-advocates could no longer directly blame whitey, so the most clever among them would invent the concept of “residual white privilege” or “Zombie Whiteness” in order to keep indirectly kicking the same dead White horse long after decomposition had made direct kicks impossible."

    I have seen Leftists blame White privilege and White racism for why Dominicans want to kick Haitian immigrants out of their country. Even though the vast majority of Dominicans have Sub Saharan African ancestry as well.

    It is basically Mulatto Eric Holder and Barack Obama looking Dominicans discriminating against Haitians who look like they came straight out of The Congo.
  75. @Charles Erwin Wilson
    > why is it that the Romans are overwhelmingly portrayed,
    > here in modern America, in a negative light– indeed, as
    > having essentially been proto-Nazis?

    Stupidity.

    The Romans are depicted negatively in American cinema because they were pagans who destroyed Israel’s Temple, killed Jews, and then managed to exile all these holy and innocent Jews to other, faraway lands.

    How the Romans managed to identify and then expel all these Jews (and then keep they away from Jerusalem for centuries) remains something of a mystery.

    • Replies: @LKM
    Diaspora Jews may have done a good job of identifying themselves to outsiders by self-segregating and not learning local languages. Also, payot are a dead giveaway. Today, most western Jews aren't readily identifiable as such. This is a relatively new thing.
  76. I’ve noticed before that many French Jews have a strange phobia about Lyon which doesn’t seem to correspond to the city’s actual place in history. Perhaps because it is the ecclesiastical capital? Anyway, if Haven Monahan were French, he would be the son of wealthy and very Catholic parents from Lyon.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The late French chef Paul Bocuse had his main (Michelin 3-star) restaurant in Lyon. His food was so fantastic in the early years that religious French Jews were concerned that a visit to his restaurant in Lyon would push young Jews away from observance. (j/k)
  77. First off, I was never “Je Suis Charlie” because they were a bunch of left-wing, globalists who supported mass Third World immigration into France and the West and damned Marie le Pen (whose policies may have saved their worthless hides).

    You reap what you sow. That is the lesson of Charlie Hebdo.

    Second, I’m pretty sure Emmanuel Todd — or someone very much like him — appears in Jean Raspails’ The Camp of the Saints.

    It’s been a long time since I read the novel, but I think he gets eaten.

  78. @wonderbread
    "Among the large industrial countries, there is one great exception to the declinist story: the United States. . . . It is not that Americans in general are having children, but that Americans of faith are having children . . . . It's just that there are far more Americans than Europeans practicing a faith. . . . Almost as extreme as the fertility gap between religious and secular Americans is the one between members of mainline Protestant denominations and evangelicals." (How Civilizations Die, 191-4).

    Goldman then goes on to apply the same line of reasoning to Jews, distinguishing fertile Orthodox Jews from infertile less-affiliated Jews.

    Todd laments zombie Catholicism because people are too Catholic.

    Goldman laments it because they are not Catholic enough.

    Gee, it’s almost like Jews have diversity in their opinion too…

    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
    which ones did Bibi shoulder his way in to link arms with, "too Catholics" or "not Catholic enough" Catholics?
  79. @Lot

    why is it that the Romans are overwhelmingly portrayed, here in modern America, in a negative light– indeed, as having essentially been proto-Nazis?
     
    I don't know about "overwhelmingly" negative. The Romans in HBO's Rome were a mixture of vice and virtue, and the Jeremy Sisto Caesar mini-series was fairly positive. Mostly through it is underdogism. The Romans were on top in the ancient world, and we like to see the underdog gladiators, gauls, britons, jews, christians, and poor oppressed plebians beat the snooty world-dominating Roman elites. The English aren't treated too well either in American movies.

    If you're interested in a positive portrayal of Romans, watch Agora, a really good Spanish-made movie filmed in English. The Romans are the heros, the villains are the Christian and Jewish Alexandrian mobs who want to destroy the remnants of pagan humanism and kill Hypatia.

    Would you really characterize Margaret Sanger’s well-known views on Black reproduction as ultimately having been grounded in her “humane” concern for their own welfare?
     
    Yes. Black families of that era would have been best served focusing their limited resources on fewer children.

    The Romans in HBO’s Rome were a mixture of vice and virtue,

    The Romans in that series were awesome.

    • Replies: @Percy Gryce

    The Romans in that series were awesome.
     
    Well, Titus Pullo was.
  80. @Taco
    In reply to Spengler, I would quote Frank Herbert, from Dune,

    "And he thought about the Guild -- the force which had specialized for so long that it had become a parasite, unable to exist independently of the life upon which it had fed. They had never dared grasp the sword... and now they could not grasp it. They might have taken Arrakis when they realized the error of specializing on the melange awareness-spectrum narcotic for their navigators. They could have done this, lived their glorious day and died. Instead, they'd existed from moment to moment, hoping the seas in which they swam might produce a new host when the old one died.

    "The guild navigators, gifted with limited prescience, had made the fatal decision: they'd chosen always the clear, safe course that leads downward into stagnation."

    Call me a zombie if you will. From my ancestral gene-pool sprang Shakespeare, both industrial revolutions, the assembly line, and footprints on the moon. We grasped the sword and lived our glorious day. Even if we burn out and become nothing more than a reviled memory in the social justice textbooks of the future, we will have accomplished far more than the Marxs, Freuds, and Spenglers ever could.

    Goldman is entirely on board with your critique of modern Jews as the Guild from Dune…

  81. @rod1963
    The fact is you cannot find any prominent Jew that considers Muslim immigration a problem or will speak out against it in public. And worse Jewish run organizations like the ADL and ACLU are often the first to run to the defense of Muslim immigrants if whites start complaining about them.

    In France Jews are leaving because of the threats from Muslims, yet they do not complain. Same in England, they are often found to support Muslim immigrants when the EDL or BNP takes to the streets. Even though Jews are now losing political clout in England.

    IOW the Jews are committing racial suicide. Their hatred for the white goy blinds them to their own fate if immigration policies are not reversed.

    Same in England, they are often found to support Muslim immigrants when the EDL or BNP takes to the streets

    I

    OW the Jews are committing racial suicide. Their hatred for the white goy blinds them to their own fate if immigration policies are not reversed.

    So white gentiles are committing racial suicide because of….?

    But white Jews are committing racial suicide because they hate white gentiles?

    I thought we liked Occam’s Razor here.

  82. @Mr. Anon
    "Lot says:

    It isn’t as if analysis of “Jews qua Jews” doesn’t happen. Sure, it is a disreputable activity, but there is no shortage of smart people like MacDonald doing it."

    And you seem intent upon keeping it disreputable and marginalized. Why is that? There is no shortage of people who have analyzed my people, white protestants, qua white protestants. Why is this not a worthwhile pursuit when it comes to Jews?

    There is no shortage of people who have analyzed my people, white protestants, qua white protestants. Why is this not a worthwhile pursuit when it comes to Jews?

    It’s very worthwhile. And the fact that it is taboo has sadly left the task to a bunch of paranoid loons.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    It’s very worthwhile. And the fact that it is taboo has sadly left the task to a bunch of paranoid loons.

    They aren't all paranoid loons. Do you think that Steve is a paranoid loon.? And if it is taboo, and one's career can be destroyed for the undertaking, are the paranoid loons really paranoid?
  83. @Marat
    Emmauel Todd was the first to foresee the collapse of the USSR. Fascinating guy and this is one of Steve's best articles. Couldn't put my finger on why the "Je suis" phenomenon seemed, well, faux. superficial. overdone. hypocritical.

    Emmauel Todd was the first to foresee the collapse of the USSR

    Your statement is clearly false.

  84. @SFG
    Yes, but both 'Spartacus' and 'Gladiator' are about the *Empire*. That's not anti-Romanism, it's (among other things) fear of own Republic turning into an Empire. That was the underlying backstory of 'Star Wars', among other things, as well as countless actual political speeches from the left (economic concentration is like the Roman slaveowners driving independent farmers out) and occasionally right (Buchanan is a good example).

    The Empire is what people are afraid we will become...not without reason, I must say.

    The Republic was killed by precisely the same trends that tarnish the Empire for us.

    Ceasar and Augustus tried to arrest those trends but failed.

  85. @D. K.
    I cannot claim to know with certainty what the trend is, since I have not been to the movies since 1999. (Even then, it was the would-be "director's cut" of Orson Welles' "Touch of Evil" from over forty years earlier! The last time that I went to see a new or recent release was in April 1997.) I am skeptical, nonetheless, that contemporary Hollywood is actually more sympathetic toward Roman culture and civilization than was the Hollywood of the so-called "Golden Age" of American film.

    With the advent of CinemaScope, in 1953, Hollywood cranked out many Roman epics: "The Robe" (the first CinemaScope film), its sequel "Demetrius and the Gladiators", "Quo Vadis", "Ben Hur", "Spartacus", "King of Kings", "Cleopatra", "The Fall of the Roman Empire", "The Greatest Story Ever Told", and a host of cheaper imitations. I have seen all of the named films, and most of those many times; and, as a definite fan of classic movies, I enjoy most of them-- but not without some qualification. For the most part, those films co-opted Christian audiences to paint the Romans as alone responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus, and to portray the Jews, as a nation, as the fellow primary and innocent victims, along with the Christians, of the cruelly sadistic Romans.

    The fact that the Jews hated the subsequent Christianized Roman Empire, just as they had hated the Hellenistic Greeks who had ruled Palestine, before the Romans arrived, is a subject avoided by Hollywood, as were such subjects as the Pax Romana, Roman law, Roman engineering, Roman letters, and any other positive aspects of arguably the greatest civilization in recorded history. Why might that have been? Was it really because the Romans, during their millennium-long run (followed by the comparable success of the Byzantine Empire, in the relocated imperial capital, at the gateway to Asia), were so spectacularly decadent, compared to the rest of the ancient world-- or even compared to, say, the modern-day Babylon that is Hollywood, U.S.A., itself?

    as were such subjects as the Pax Romana, Roman law, Roman engineering, Roman letters, and any other positive aspects of arguably the greatest civilization in recorded history. Why might that have been

    Can’t wait to see a big budget version of that at the cinema. Roman law: the movie.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    The Romans were accomplished for their time, but they tend to remind us of an entire culture of NFL team owners. "Gladiator" succeeded with modern audiences by making up a plot in which a character representative of Roman virtues is turned into an extreme underdog. The Romans, however, mostly liked overdogs.
    , @D. K.
    They made one about the Jewish law: "The Ten Commandments" (1956). In fact, they made two, since the same director (who was an Episcopalian whose German-Jewish mother had converted to her husband's faith) already had made a silent film of the same name (1923).
  86. @Shine a Light
    What Todd would really like to do is blame "Islamophobia" on Catholicism but given the current state of religious affairs in France this would be ridiculous even for a French "intello" to attempt.

    So instead he claims the LACK of real Catholicism creates "Zombie Catholicism" and this is to blame for Islamophobia, not the murderous actions of the Islamists.

    An American version of this could be in 100 years, in a racially métissaged (race mixed) America, where the very few remaining whites have been totally marginalized, if some dedicated victim class suddenly came under criticism. The victim-advocates could no longer directly blame whitey, so the most clever among them would invent the concept of "residual white privilege" or "Zombie Whiteness" in order to keep indirectly kicking the same dead White horse long after decomposition had made direct kicks impossible.

    So while Todd is ostensibly attacking the lefty bourgeois urban elite, he is doing so in a sort of religous one-drop rule -- if any of your ancestors were Catholic -- that is why you are so Islamophobic. But it is this very same lefty bourgeois urban elite that is so enthusiastic about importing Muslims to be faithful Socialist (PS) voters since the indigenous working class is fleeing the PS in droves for the Front National.

    What Todd is really saying is that despite the virtual death of Catholicism in France, the only way to keep a majority "coalition of the oppressed" together, is to constantly attack the ghosts of long dormant groups that once held power in the past.

    And by pointing people's attention towards dominant groups of the past; it helps dissuade people from looking at small dominant groups of the present as potential causes of the current problems.

    So while Todd is ostensibly attacking the lefty bourgeois urban elite, he is doing so in a sort of religous one-drop rule — if any of your ancestors were Catholic — that is why you are so Islamophobic

    Todd is a lot more than one drop of blood Catholic…

    • Replies: @Shine a Light
    Emmanual Todd may have a tiny bit but not much at all.

    Of his four grandparents:

    On his mother Anne-Marie NIZAN's side:

    Henriette ALPHEN (mother of his mother) From a well-established Jewish family. Henriette was a cousin of Claude Lévi-Strauss. -- probably no Catholic blood.

    Paul NIZAN (father of his mother) Famous Communist hero in France, buddy of Jean-Paul Sartre and Raymond Aron in his college days. -- No doubt some Catholic blood on this line.

    Todd's father's Oliver TODD's was a famous leftist journalist who openly acted as a cheerleader for the Viet Cong and actually interviewed American POW's during the war and got them to mouth off against the US (he was not allowed to publish these interviews though). Later in life he turned away from Communism.

    Helen TODD (mother of his father) -- Canadian from Toronto -- probably no Catholic blood.

    Julius OBLATT (father of his father) -- Jew from Austria-Hungary -- probably no Catholic blood.

    So Emmanual Todd has very little Catholic blood. And the one grandparent through whom he does have Catholic ancestors was a famous Communist and so Todd could argue this service for the forces of Marxist-Leninism perhaps purges his progeny from the future taint of Catholic blood?

  87. This post is an excellent deconstruction of Todd’s latest work.

  88. @yaqub the mad scientiat
    Spengler's entire writing builds around this theme. He reports with glee the demographic woes of Arabs, Persians, Japanese, and on and on. He must fantasize about them expiring from the earth.

    That said, he has done some sympathetic writing on Russia, as opposed to his neocon brethren.

    If memory serves me lately he also started sucking up to Chinese. Both cultures: Chinese and Jews share many values, hard work, etc. China is an empire that transcended and united many squabbling nations and tribes under one culture and ideology – a Big Thing in Spengler’s world view. And basically, he says this is only hope for Europe – rejection of old, dying national identities. He also hates Hungarians for some reason. Their antisemitism maybe?

    • Replies: @yaqub the mad scientiat
    Agreed about China. He loves making the "It's Chinese children who learn European classical culture" point. His idea of transcendence also extends to Russia-he's specifically spoken of Russia as a trans-ethnic project, which it is, to some extent in it's 19th century Russification of a bunch of time zones. He's written several posts in defense of Putin, which is interesting.

    I only check him out sporadically, so I've missed the Hungarian hate.

    For years he hammered a writer named Franz Rosenweig, who I've never bothered to read, as some kind of kindred baal teshuva.

    For him, 18-19th century German culture is the the high water mark of Europe. He seems to have a real affinity for Germanized Jews of that era (Heine, Mendelssohn, etc).

    Don't know exactly why I still read him occasionally. I guess I feel the need to read someone who is sharp and makes some good points, but is infuriatingly petulant and wears his disingeniousness on his sleeve (the "we are the world, except for Israel" thing, and his dancing around the immigration issue).

    I think Steve once characterized him as "for entertainment purposes only".

  89. @Deduction

    as were such subjects as the Pax Romana, Roman law, Roman engineering, Roman letters, and any other positive aspects of arguably the greatest civilization in recorded history. Why might that have been
     
    Can't wait to see a big budget version of that at the cinema. Roman law: the movie.

    The Romans were accomplished for their time, but they tend to remind us of an entire culture of NFL team owners. “Gladiator” succeeded with modern audiences by making up a plot in which a character representative of Roman virtues is turned into an extreme underdog. The Romans, however, mostly liked overdogs.

    • Replies: @CK
    The Romans would have been great fans of the 1950-60 New York Yankees, as were so many Americans.
    American's do love a winner. I think George Patton said that.
  90. @SPMoore8
    I remember reading when I was a young man about some adult clubs in Paris that featured frottage, basically some guy would come out onstage and some woman would come out, well-versed, as Voltaire would say, in the science of hydraulics and sufficient reason, and through the expert application of friction and manual pressure, would achieve tremendous distances for the resulting ejaculation. Triple bank shot, indeed.

    Quite a lot of intellectual activity is focused on justifying some emotional attachment, or some some irrational conception. Quite a lot. Of course none of us are immune, so, if you want to be rational you have to be detached, and you also have to make sure that emotionally you are in a good place. Good writing and good thinking come mostly from being in a good mood.

    Are you suggesting that frottage is a necessary precursor to clear thinking?

    My impression has been the French Intellos have been engaged in vigorous frottage for half a century with results aimed at the boring goyim rubes – and that isn’t turning out well.

  91. @Lot

    But understanding how recent history was influenced by Jews is interesting because their influence was so vast, and so underreported.
     
    Underreported I think implies some sort of interesting story, like Jews fighting for a just America against prejudice, or Jews united in pursuit of their sinister goal of world domination. I think it is a lot more boring that this: American Ashkenazi have extremely high IQs and did extremely well serving a capitalist, meritocratic America.

    Not to mention radical, and understanding that Jews are apt to be radical puts Steve’s central claim into crystal clear perspective: that he is the moderate voice.
     
    When Jews faced discrimination in mainstream society, but radicals were open to their talents, Jews were radical. Is that really the case now that Jews are firmly ensconced and intermixed into the American upper classes? Even talking about "American Jews" is becoming increasingly incoherent as the number of partly-ethnic Jews increases and the number of "old style" secular 100% Ashkenazi that really defined our idea of American Jews rapidly declines. Does anyone really care much about non-practicing 1/4 Jews, or Yiddish speaking welfare cases in upstate New York?

    That’s very useful to keep putting across re how do you block amnesty at home, and MacDonald compliments the point excellently, seems to me.
     

    I don't understand your point here.

    Actually I think it is more interesting than their high IQ, precisely where their success has outstripped what their IQ would predict. Nepotism is not meritocratic, nor is the silencing of sober criticism particularly appealing. The history of how such actualities obtained may or may not interest you, but certainly its a worthy subject of study.

    MacDonald’s point about the Jewish culture of critique is that its inherently Jewish. Freudianism and Feminism have significant threads that clearly originated in complexes unique to Jews. And of course his basic point is that discrimination against Jews was discrimination against a group that discriminated against gentiles, in certain Jewish ways, and mostly never thought twice about the naturalness of doing so.

    Now that Jews are firmly ensconced in this nation’s elite establishment, radical opinions are simply the norm. That’s the whole point. Plenty of opinion shapers in the op eds and on TV espouse open boarders, or amnesty plus vastly increasing legal immigration. Aside from Lou Dobbs maybe, I don’t think any mainstream voice of note is calling for a moratorium. But if the reporting on the issue was honest and the debate was open, I believe exactly that would be the majority opinion. That though would be a world where the media gate keepers were not hyper-sensitive to certain arguments about nationalism. And yes our foreign policy is radically unbalanced, since AIPAC, etc.

    Regarding Jewish assimilation, I don’t know, the ethnocentrism seems to be getting more flagrant. There was that Jewish get together not long ago, where two Jewish billionaires were on stage discussing buying the New York Times, and making its coverage pure propaganda for Israel. Someone said it was like a parody of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Most of the money contributed to political campaigns in this country comes from Jews, which is just incredible, and I suspect that as Jews dissipate as a percentage of the population, that money will actually increase.

    My point was that Steve’s position on immigration can only make headway the more he reminds the world that his is the moderate opinion.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    "Aside from Lou Dobbs maybe, I don’t think any mainstream voice of note is calling for a moratorium."

    Ann Coulter.

    , @CK
    If you remember the sudden and complete demise of Operation Wall Street, the attack on the 1%, then it will help to remember the composition of the 1% in terms of disparate impact; not racially but religiously. 3,216,000 Americans are in the 1% today.
    OWS hit close to the bone and not just at Goldman-Sachs.
  92. @Pat Casey
    Actually I think it is more interesting than their high IQ, precisely where their success has outstripped what their IQ would predict. Nepotism is not meritocratic, nor is the silencing of sober criticism particularly appealing. The history of how such actualities obtained may or may not interest you, but certainly its a worthy subject of study.

    MacDonald's point about the Jewish culture of critique is that its inherently Jewish. Freudianism and Feminism have significant threads that clearly originated in complexes unique to Jews. And of course his basic point is that discrimination against Jews was discrimination against a group that discriminated against gentiles, in certain Jewish ways, and mostly never thought twice about the naturalness of doing so.

    Now that Jews are firmly ensconced in this nation's elite establishment, radical opinions are simply the norm. That's the whole point. Plenty of opinion shapers in the op eds and on TV espouse open boarders, or amnesty plus vastly increasing legal immigration. Aside from Lou Dobbs maybe, I don't think any mainstream voice of note is calling for a moratorium. But if the reporting on the issue was honest and the debate was open, I believe exactly that would be the majority opinion. That though would be a world where the media gate keepers were not hyper-sensitive to certain arguments about nationalism. And yes our foreign policy is radically unbalanced, since AIPAC, etc.

    Regarding Jewish assimilation, I don't know, the ethnocentrism seems to be getting more flagrant. There was that Jewish get together not long ago, where two Jewish billionaires were on stage discussing buying the New York Times, and making its coverage pure propaganda for Israel. Someone said it was like a parody of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Most of the money contributed to political campaigns in this country comes from Jews, which is just incredible, and I suspect that as Jews dissipate as a percentage of the population, that money will actually increase.

    My point was that Steve's position on immigration can only make headway the more he reminds the world that his is the moderate opinion.

    “Aside from Lou Dobbs maybe, I don’t think any mainstream voice of note is calling for a moratorium.”

    Ann Coulter.

    • Replies: @Clyde

    “Aside from Lou Dobbs maybe, I don’t think any mainstream voice of note is calling for a moratorium.”
    Ann Coulter.
     
    Anne is semi-banned from Fox. She is no longer allowed on Bill O'Reilly and I doubt she has ever been on Megyn Kelly's show. Anne has made asides about an effort to marginalize and ignore her since she came put with her latest book on immigration putting the Republican party out of business they way it has done in California.
    I have not seen her on Greta's show though Sean Hannity still hosts her on radio and Fox-TV
  93. Let me phrase it in another way, one that Mr Sailer may find acceptable:

    Since the French have passed laws against ‘Holocaust denial’ (as well as other ‘thought crimes’ and ‘speech crimes’) , and indeed the (nominally) conservative Sarkozy expressed support for a law against denying the ‘Armenian genocide’, the French could probably go some way to ameliorating their problem with radical Islam (surely some muslims have been smart enough to notice the hypocrisy) by enacting a law against denigrating ‘the Prophet’. And this would not be inconsistent with their propensity for ideological tyranny — as noted above.

    If they did that, theorizing about ‘Zombie Catholicism’ — or whatever — would be moot.

  94. @Lot

    A huge amount of intellectualizing consists of triple bankshots made up by Jewish intellectuals to rationalize primal emotions they feel. Their triple bankshots (bomb Libya abroad, lay down to Muslim inundation at home, or whatever) frequently don’t make much sense in non-emotional terms, but they very much do not like gentiles applying Occam’s Razor to their triple bankshots.
     
    So, what does Occam's Razor say then?

    You seem to be flirting with Kevin MacDonaldism, where the Eternal Jew is always pushing Jewish interests at the expense of everyone else.

    Now, no doubt many Jews advocate for Jewish interests. But what is your support for the idea that anti-white Jews somehow can't just be self-hating ethno-masochists like other white ethnic groups? Why is it when a Jew advocates his country to be inundated with Muslims, it is some convoluted "triple bankshot" to advance Jewish interests, but not when Italians or Swedes do the same?

    If you want to apply Occam's razor here, it is that French half-jews like Todd that advocate France be overrun with Arabs and black muslims that hate jews, they do it because they are, at best, indifferent to the country being overrun by anti-semites who will attack Jews on the streets and vote in George Galloway types who want to BDS Israel into a South Africa type pariah state.

    An observation from Marine Le Pen :

    “The reality is that there exist in France associations that are supposedly representative of French Jews, which have stuck with a software that came out of the Second World War,” she said, meaning that members of the Jewish leadership are still preoccupied with the threat of Nazi-like fascism. “For decades they have continued to fight against an anti-Semitism that no longer exists in France, for reasons of—how should I say this?—intellectual laziness. And by a form of submission to the politically correct. And while they were doing this, while they were fighting against an enemy that no longer existed, an anti-Semitism was gaining force in France stemming notably from the development of fundamentalist Islamist thought.”

    http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/03/is-it-time-for-the-jews-to-leave-europe/386279/

  95. Todd’s central argument is that there are fundamentally two Frances. There is a “central” France, including Paris and Marseille and the Mediterranean, where there is equality on the family level and a deep-rooted attachment to secular values of the French revolution and the republic.

    Talk about fighting old battles. Has Mr Todd glanced at who is actually filling up these oh so secularist places?

    Todd can only talk like this by taking the assumption that Muslim newcomers have absolute rights to equality in belief and values notwithstanding that these might utterly contradict the values and beliefs of the old French. One has to engage in a huge amount of intellectual frottage to think this is a viable structure for a nation.

    • Replies: @rod1963
    Todd is a fool.

    He refuses to see those immigrants replacing Frenchmen are antithetical to secular values, the French Revolution and the Republic. Muslims are antithetical to the West in general.

    He doesn't see they are the reason Jews are fleeing France.

    Nor does he see the upcoming bloodshed when the Muslims simply start slaughtering the natives or consider that being a Jew puts him at the top of the list for a bullet.

    It's just ironic, that the Jews, being some of the biggest supporters of open borders there are, are also responsible for helping create the eventuality where they themselves are totally expunged from Europe by the people they helped import.
  96. @D. K.
    I cannot claim to know with certainty what the trend is, since I have not been to the movies since 1999. (Even then, it was the would-be "director's cut" of Orson Welles' "Touch of Evil" from over forty years earlier! The last time that I went to see a new or recent release was in April 1997.) I am skeptical, nonetheless, that contemporary Hollywood is actually more sympathetic toward Roman culture and civilization than was the Hollywood of the so-called "Golden Age" of American film.

    With the advent of CinemaScope, in 1953, Hollywood cranked out many Roman epics: "The Robe" (the first CinemaScope film), its sequel "Demetrius and the Gladiators", "Quo Vadis", "Ben Hur", "Spartacus", "King of Kings", "Cleopatra", "The Fall of the Roman Empire", "The Greatest Story Ever Told", and a host of cheaper imitations. I have seen all of the named films, and most of those many times; and, as a definite fan of classic movies, I enjoy most of them-- but not without some qualification. For the most part, those films co-opted Christian audiences to paint the Romans as alone responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus, and to portray the Jews, as a nation, as the fellow primary and innocent victims, along with the Christians, of the cruelly sadistic Romans.

    The fact that the Jews hated the subsequent Christianized Roman Empire, just as they had hated the Hellenistic Greeks who had ruled Palestine, before the Romans arrived, is a subject avoided by Hollywood, as were such subjects as the Pax Romana, Roman law, Roman engineering, Roman letters, and any other positive aspects of arguably the greatest civilization in recorded history. Why might that have been? Was it really because the Romans, during their millennium-long run (followed by the comparable success of the Byzantine Empire, in the relocated imperial capital, at the gateway to Asia), were so spectacularly decadent, compared to the rest of the ancient world-- or even compared to, say, the modern-day Babylon that is Hollywood, U.S.A., itself?

    Might I suggest that this book could supply a few answers to why the Romans were so often portrayed as Nazi’s in Togas in post war Hollywood epics.

  97. @Deduction

    So while Todd is ostensibly attacking the lefty bourgeois urban elite, he is doing so in a sort of religous one-drop rule — if any of your ancestors were Catholic — that is why you are so Islamophobic
     
    Todd is a lot more than one drop of blood Catholic...

    Emmanual Todd may have a tiny bit but not much at all.

    Of his four grandparents:

    On his mother Anne-Marie NIZAN’s side:

    Henriette ALPHEN (mother of his mother) From a well-established Jewish family. Henriette was a cousin of Claude Lévi-Strauss. — probably no Catholic blood.

    Paul NIZAN (father of his mother) Famous Communist hero in France, buddy of Jean-Paul Sartre and Raymond Aron in his college days. — No doubt some Catholic blood on this line.

    Todd’s father’s Oliver TODD’s was a famous leftist journalist who openly acted as a cheerleader for the Viet Cong and actually interviewed American POW’s during the war and got them to mouth off against the US (he was not allowed to publish these interviews though). Later in life he turned away from Communism.

    Helen TODD (mother of his father) — Canadian from Toronto — probably no Catholic blood.

    Julius OBLATT (father of his father) — Jew from Austria-Hungary — probably no Catholic blood.

    So Emmanual Todd has very little Catholic blood. And the one grandparent through whom he does have Catholic ancestors was a famous Communist and so Todd could argue this service for the forces of Marxist-Leninism perhaps purges his progeny from the future taint of Catholic blood?

    • Replies: @Yngvar
    What the hell is "Catholic blood"? Something like midi-chlorians?
  98. @Steve Sailer
    The Romans were accomplished for their time, but they tend to remind us of an entire culture of NFL team owners. "Gladiator" succeeded with modern audiences by making up a plot in which a character representative of Roman virtues is turned into an extreme underdog. The Romans, however, mostly liked overdogs.

    The Romans would have been great fans of the 1950-60 New York Yankees, as were so many Americans.
    American’s do love a winner. I think George Patton said that.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar


    The Romans would have been great fans of the 1950-60 New York Yankees, as were so many Americans.
    American’s do love a winner. I think George Patton said that.

     

    The Yankees won nine pennants in the ten years from 1949-58. But only once in that span did they manage to reach 100 wins. They won 103 in 1954-- and finished eight games behind Cleveland.

    That part sounds more Greek than Roman. I think the Indians' manager that year was Epaminondas.
  99. @Pat Casey
    Actually I think it is more interesting than their high IQ, precisely where their success has outstripped what their IQ would predict. Nepotism is not meritocratic, nor is the silencing of sober criticism particularly appealing. The history of how such actualities obtained may or may not interest you, but certainly its a worthy subject of study.

    MacDonald's point about the Jewish culture of critique is that its inherently Jewish. Freudianism and Feminism have significant threads that clearly originated in complexes unique to Jews. And of course his basic point is that discrimination against Jews was discrimination against a group that discriminated against gentiles, in certain Jewish ways, and mostly never thought twice about the naturalness of doing so.

    Now that Jews are firmly ensconced in this nation's elite establishment, radical opinions are simply the norm. That's the whole point. Plenty of opinion shapers in the op eds and on TV espouse open boarders, or amnesty plus vastly increasing legal immigration. Aside from Lou Dobbs maybe, I don't think any mainstream voice of note is calling for a moratorium. But if the reporting on the issue was honest and the debate was open, I believe exactly that would be the majority opinion. That though would be a world where the media gate keepers were not hyper-sensitive to certain arguments about nationalism. And yes our foreign policy is radically unbalanced, since AIPAC, etc.

    Regarding Jewish assimilation, I don't know, the ethnocentrism seems to be getting more flagrant. There was that Jewish get together not long ago, where two Jewish billionaires were on stage discussing buying the New York Times, and making its coverage pure propaganda for Israel. Someone said it was like a parody of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Most of the money contributed to political campaigns in this country comes from Jews, which is just incredible, and I suspect that as Jews dissipate as a percentage of the population, that money will actually increase.

    My point was that Steve's position on immigration can only make headway the more he reminds the world that his is the moderate opinion.

    If you remember the sudden and complete demise of Operation Wall Street, the attack on the 1%, then it will help to remember the composition of the 1% in terms of disparate impact; not racially but religiously. 3,216,000 Americans are in the 1% today.
    OWS hit close to the bone and not just at Goldman-Sachs.

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Occupy Wall Street was incoherent on multiple levels, that's part of why it fizzled. For starters, Wall Street head honchos aren't "the 1%". They're the 0.01%. So they were off by two orders of magnitude. On top of that, they whined about Wall Street in a vacuum, without acknowledging the extent to which Wall Streeters voted for the same president they did, or why they did.

    OWS basically had a sense they were being screwed, saddled with college debt and low wage retail jobs, but rather than think about the government policies that were screwing them (unilateral free trade, mass immigration, government inflation of college tuitions and deflation of the value of college degrees, etc.) they raged at Wall Street.

    The other part of why it fizzled was it did nothing but camp out, sexually assault naive coeds, and commit quality of life crimes, until the riot police cleared them out. At least the Tea Party managed to get new blood elected to the House and Senate.
  100. @D. K.
    Oh, yes, Hollywood Jews, like other elite American Jews, are worried sick about America acting as an imperial power; they all long for America to bring the troops home, and stop trying to police the world, in places like, say, the Middle East. They also are all aghast at the thought of an American Caesar coming along and trying to rule over us by executive fiat. That is why the Jewish elites all hate those former presidents, like A. Lincoln and F. D. Roosevelt, who expanded the scope and power of the federal government, ran roughshod over civil liberties, and dragged America into bloody wars, unnecessarily. We will never live to see the day when Hollywood ever will glorify such dastardly men, let alone such unjust wars, in service only to imperial geopolitics and the military-industrial complex. Jews are renown for their anti-authoritarian personalities, just as they are for their inveterate pacifism.

    You’re right, but I doubt they think about political philosophy that hard. They just know people think ‘republic good, empire bad’ and make movies with that theme. I doubt George Lucas had Israeli settlement policy in mind when making ‘Star Wars’. I just don’t think it’s any hatred of Rome per se.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    In the words of Wikipedia:

    "The work of the mythologist Joseph Campbell, especially his book The Hero with a Thousand Faces, directly influenced Lucas, and was what drove him to create the 'modern myth' of Star Wars.[1][2]"

    References:

    [1] "The Mythology of Star Wars with George Lucas and Bill Moyers". films.com. Films Media Group.

    [2] "Star Wars @ NASM, Unit 1, Introduction Page". Nasm.si.edu. 1999-01-31. Retrieved 2010-01-22.

    ***

    Although Jews, as an ethnoreligious collective, hate Christianity-- and, arguably, us indigenous Europeans, for having institutionalized Christendom-- more than they do the Roman Empire per se, the latter is second only to Nazi Germany, among actual political states, in the hatred which it engenders among Jewry. The Roman razing of Herod's Temple was essentially the holocaust that preceded and prefigured The Holocaust itself. When the Jews annually recite their desire to meet again "next year, in Jerusalem," it is the Romans that they have in mind....
  101. @Lot

    A huge amount of intellectualizing consists of triple bankshots made up by Jewish intellectuals to rationalize primal emotions they feel. Their triple bankshots (bomb Libya abroad, lay down to Muslim inundation at home, or whatever) frequently don’t make much sense in non-emotional terms, but they very much do not like gentiles applying Occam’s Razor to their triple bankshots.
     
    So, what does Occam's Razor say then?

    You seem to be flirting with Kevin MacDonaldism, where the Eternal Jew is always pushing Jewish interests at the expense of everyone else.

    Now, no doubt many Jews advocate for Jewish interests. But what is your support for the idea that anti-white Jews somehow can't just be self-hating ethno-masochists like other white ethnic groups? Why is it when a Jew advocates his country to be inundated with Muslims, it is some convoluted "triple bankshot" to advance Jewish interests, but not when Italians or Swedes do the same?

    If you want to apply Occam's razor here, it is that French half-jews like Todd that advocate France be overrun with Arabs and black muslims that hate jews, they do it because they are, at best, indifferent to the country being overrun by anti-semites who will attack Jews on the streets and vote in George Galloway types who want to BDS Israel into a South Africa type pariah state.

    Now, no doubt many Jews advocate for Jewish interests. But what is your support for the idea that anti-white Jews somehow can’t just be self-hating ethno-masochists like other white ethnic groups?

    There’s no phenomenon that could be explained by (a) Jews being self-hating ethno-masochists or (b) something else.

    Jews do not popularize a notion of “Jewish privilege” or any other anti-Jewish double standards. They do not call for more diversity (meaning fewer Jews) in any context.

    • Replies: @Deduction

    There’s no phenomenon that could be explained by (a) Jews being self-hating ethno-masochists or (b) something else.

    Jews do not popularize a notion of “Jewish privilege” or any other anti-Jewish double standards. They do not call for more diversity (meaning fewer Jews) in any context.
     
    Jews don't need to popularise a notion of 'Jewish privilege.' They are already caught in the term 'White privilege.'

    And when a Jew calls for more (non-white) diversity, it logically follows that they are calling for fewer Jews.

    Jews, well Ashkenazi Jews, certainly do not consider themselves 'people of colour.'
    , @SFG
    There are quite a few left-wing Jewish critics of Israel on the Palestinian issue. I know of no other diaspora that formed a lobbying group to get its homeland to lay off, apart from the German-American anti-Nazi associations (anyone know of any others)?
  102. @Lot

    A huge amount of intellectualizing consists of triple bankshots made up by Jewish intellectuals to rationalize primal emotions they feel. Their triple bankshots (bomb Libya abroad, lay down to Muslim inundation at home, or whatever) frequently don’t make much sense in non-emotional terms, but they very much do not like gentiles applying Occam’s Razor to their triple bankshots.
     
    So, what does Occam's Razor say then?

    You seem to be flirting with Kevin MacDonaldism, where the Eternal Jew is always pushing Jewish interests at the expense of everyone else.

    Now, no doubt many Jews advocate for Jewish interests. But what is your support for the idea that anti-white Jews somehow can't just be self-hating ethno-masochists like other white ethnic groups? Why is it when a Jew advocates his country to be inundated with Muslims, it is some convoluted "triple bankshot" to advance Jewish interests, but not when Italians or Swedes do the same?

    If you want to apply Occam's razor here, it is that French half-jews like Todd that advocate France be overrun with Arabs and black muslims that hate jews, they do it because they are, at best, indifferent to the country being overrun by anti-semites who will attack Jews on the streets and vote in George Galloway types who want to BDS Israel into a South Africa type pariah state.

    Why is it when a Jew advocates his country to be inundated with Muslims, it is some convoluted “triple bankshot” to advance Jewish interests, but not when Italians or Swedes do the same?

    Because Jews and Muslims have a history of teaming up against Eurpean Christendom.

    Because Jews have pioneered a theory of social pluralism that makes sense on its face: (1) a pluralistic society reduces the size and cohesion of any potential groups that might arise to compete with the Jewish group (see Earl Raab on this) and (2) the salience of Jewish identity is reduced when there are many minorities rather than, say, a 95% majority and a 5% Jewish minority.

    • Replies: @Deduction

    Because Jews and Muslims have a history of teaming up against Eurpean Christendom.
     
    Yes and France teamed up with the Ottoman Caliphate against Austria...whatever...
    , @SFG
    Sure, but that was in the Middle Ages back when Muslims were less antisemitic than Christians.

    The second bit, yes, I agree with you.
  103. @ben tillman

    Now, no doubt many Jews advocate for Jewish interests. But what is your support for the idea that anti-white Jews somehow can’t just be self-hating ethno-masochists like other white ethnic groups?
     
    There's no phenomenon that could be explained by (a) Jews being self-hating ethno-masochists or (b) something else.

    Jews do not popularize a notion of "Jewish privilege" or any other anti-Jewish double standards. They do not call for more diversity (meaning fewer Jews) in any context.

    There’s no phenomenon that could be explained by (a) Jews being self-hating ethno-masochists or (b) something else.

    Jews do not popularize a notion of “Jewish privilege” or any other anti-Jewish double standards. They do not call for more diversity (meaning fewer Jews) in any context.

    Jews don’t need to popularise a notion of ‘Jewish privilege.’ They are already caught in the term ‘White privilege.’

    And when a Jew calls for more (non-white) diversity, it logically follows that they are calling for fewer Jews.

    Jews, well Ashkenazi Jews, certainly do not consider themselves ‘people of colour.’

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    Jews don’t need to popularise a notion of ‘Jewish privilege.’ They are already caught in the term ‘White privilege.’
     
    No, they're cloaked by it.

    And when a Jew calls for more (non-white) diversity, it logically follows that they are calling for fewer Jews.
     
    No, it doesn't. It does not follow in theory, and it does not follow in practice.
  104. @ben tillman

    Why is it when a Jew advocates his country to be inundated with Muslims, it is some convoluted “triple bankshot” to advance Jewish interests, but not when Italians or Swedes do the same?
     
    Because Jews and Muslims have a history of teaming up against Eurpean Christendom.

    Because Jews have pioneered a theory of social pluralism that makes sense on its face: (1) a pluralistic society reduces the size and cohesion of any potential groups that might arise to compete with the Jewish group (see Earl Raab on this) and (2) the salience of Jewish identity is reduced when there are many minorities rather than, say, a 95% majority and a 5% Jewish minority.

    Because Jews and Muslims have a history of teaming up against Eurpean Christendom.

    Yes and France teamed up with the Ottoman Caliphate against Austria…whatever…

  105. “After a fresh round of terror attacks in France – including a beheading and attempt to blow up a chemical plant near Lyon”

    The detonation of the fertilizer AZF plant shortly after 9/11. Often thought to be a terrorist action. The perpetrator alleged his remains wearing five undershorts and four pants or four undershorts and five pants. The signature of the jihadist on a suicide mission. For what reason that manner of dress unclear to me.

  106. @Bies Podkrakowski
    If memory serves me lately he also started sucking up to Chinese. Both cultures: Chinese and Jews share many values, hard work, etc. China is an empire that transcended and united many squabbling nations and tribes under one culture and ideology - a Big Thing in Spengler's world view. And basically, he says this is only hope for Europe - rejection of old, dying national identities. He also hates Hungarians for some reason. Their antisemitism maybe?

    Agreed about China. He loves making the “It’s Chinese children who learn European classical culture” point. His idea of transcendence also extends to Russia-he’s specifically spoken of Russia as a trans-ethnic project, which it is, to some extent in it’s 19th century Russification of a bunch of time zones. He’s written several posts in defense of Putin, which is interesting.

    I only check him out sporadically, so I’ve missed the Hungarian hate.

    For years he hammered a writer named Franz Rosenweig, who I’ve never bothered to read, as some kind of kindred baal teshuva.

    For him, 18-19th century German culture is the the high water mark of Europe. He seems to have a real affinity for Germanized Jews of that era (Heine, Mendelssohn, etc).

    Don’t know exactly why I still read him occasionally. I guess I feel the need to read someone who is sharp and makes some good points, but is infuriatingly petulant and wears his disingeniousness on his sleeve (the “we are the world, except for Israel” thing, and his dancing around the immigration issue).

    I think Steve once characterized him as “for entertainment purposes only”.

    • Replies: @rod1963
    I read him over a decade ago and stopped. He reminds me of Kunstler and like him, Spengler is no friend of the West.

    I'm fricking tired of mealy mouthed globalists like him. They are poison to humanity.
    , @Bies Podkrakowski
    The same here. He is intelligent and his observations and are fascinating. But he is easy to overdose. How long you can read someone who is convinced that your people and culture are going extinct and cheering the fact without changes is blood pressure?
  107. @ben tillman

    Why is it when a Jew advocates his country to be inundated with Muslims, it is some convoluted “triple bankshot” to advance Jewish interests, but not when Italians or Swedes do the same?
     
    Because Jews and Muslims have a history of teaming up against Eurpean Christendom.

    Because Jews have pioneered a theory of social pluralism that makes sense on its face: (1) a pluralistic society reduces the size and cohesion of any potential groups that might arise to compete with the Jewish group (see Earl Raab on this) and (2) the salience of Jewish identity is reduced when there are many minorities rather than, say, a 95% majority and a 5% Jewish minority.

    Sure, but that was in the Middle Ages back when Muslims were less antisemitic than Christians.

    The second bit, yes, I agree with you.

  108. @ben tillman

    Now, no doubt many Jews advocate for Jewish interests. But what is your support for the idea that anti-white Jews somehow can’t just be self-hating ethno-masochists like other white ethnic groups?
     
    There's no phenomenon that could be explained by (a) Jews being self-hating ethno-masochists or (b) something else.

    Jews do not popularize a notion of "Jewish privilege" or any other anti-Jewish double standards. They do not call for more diversity (meaning fewer Jews) in any context.

    There are quite a few left-wing Jewish critics of Israel on the Palestinian issue. I know of no other diaspora that formed a lobbying group to get its homeland to lay off, apart from the German-American anti-Nazi associations (anyone know of any others)?

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    The "homeland" of the diaspora you mention is the Oblasts of Eastern Europe.
  109. @Lot

    But you’ve probably never heard of that book because a gentile analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews is unimaginable. Jewish intellectuals very much do not like their own tools being applied to themselves. Turnabout may be fair play, but it’s, to be frank, zombie Catholicism.
     
    Aside from the pleasure of ratiocination, is there some goal that "analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews" serves?

    It isn't as if analysis of "Jews qua Jews" doesn't happen. Sure, it is a disreputable activity, but there is no shortage of smart people like MacDonald doing it.

    Whatever the ostensible goal, the actual effect of "analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews" seems to have is offending and alienating a highly intelligent, moral, and influential group of Americans, and prolonging the evil taint Nazism attached to what was once a humane, influential, and progressive eugenics movement.

    Aside from all that, I find it sort of tiresome and boring as well. The question of the percentage of Jewish Bolsheviks, their relative responsibility for the '65 immigration act and 70's feminism, and the other questions that preoccupy MacDonaldists for me are not very interesting as historical questions compared to, say, Roman history, or 17th century England. Nor do they seem relevant to issues confronting our present and future: how do block amnesty at home, elect the Donald president, and stop the exponentially growing stream of refugees from the Third World from destroying the First.

    Moral, Lot? Intelligent and influential I’ll buy, but you really think Jews are more ethical than, say, New England WASPs, Brahmins, or any other brainy overclass throughout the years? Even the civil rights movement was at least in part a plot to go after discrimination against everyone in order to decrease discrimination against Jews. I don’t actually think any ethnic group is more moral than any other, though certainly some ethnic neighborhoods are a lot safer to walk through at 2 AM (or 2 PM) due to average differences in future time orientation, etc. Everybody’s got dirt.

    You do have a point that *practically speaking*, Trump is probably the immigration restrictionist with the strongest Jewish connections, and the one to get the furthest so far, and that possibly these things are connected. But it might just be that he’s come along as people are getting increasingly frustrated with the economic situation on both the left and the right.

  110. We know who should be the who and who should be the whom,

    This definitely calls for Seussification…

    How the Gringo Stole an Election

    Every Whom down in Whomville liked migration a lot…
    But the Gringo, who lived just north of Whomville, did NOT!

    The Gringo hated migration! The whole migration racket!
    We think we know why–his low income bracket.

    Or maybe his head wasn’t screwed on just right.
    He never was–really–let’s face it–contrite.

    But I think the most likely reason to date,
    May have been that his heart was all filled with hate.

    Whatever the reason, his heart or his mind,
    He sat there on the border, acting unkind,

    Staring down from his gas-guzzling SUV,
    at the vibrant, diverse (desperate) polity.

    For he knew every Whom in Whomville just south,
    Was coming despite California’s long drouth.

    “And they’re coming in droves!” he snarled with a sneer,
    “Cross-border migration! It’s year after year!”

    Then he growled, with his teeth covered in nicotine,
    “You’re stealing a job from a white indigene.”

    For eventually, every Whom anchor baby
    Would draw in grandparents, cousins, and, maybe,

    Never be able to do more than say
    “No se. No se. No intiendo Ingles!”

    That’s the one thing he hated!
    “No intiendo Ingles!”

    Then the Whoms, il- and legal, would buy up some very ol’
    established town and create their own barrio.

    They’d evade the Who taxes and use the Who healthcare,
    increasing Who debt, which the Whos cannot all bear.

    And then they’d do something he liked least of all!
    Every Whom down in Whomville, the small and more small,

    Would turn into a cause for a Stupid JW
    Who needs to do something for some Whom or someone who

    Used to be Who but made the transition
    From Who to Whom-ette. Because… predisposition?

    (But apparently if you’re a whitey turned brown,
    You’re not an authentic objective pronoun.

    So don’t think that you can just choose to be
    A leader in the NAACP.)

    And the more Gringo thought of this Whom-migrating,
    The more Gringo thought, “I must stop this whole thing!”

    “Why, for 25 years of this bad legislation,
    We’ve failed to see any Whom-similation!”

    Then he got an idea! An awful idea!
    THE GRINGO GOT A WONDERFUL, AWFUL IDEA!
    “I know just what to do!” the Gringo laughed from his gut.
    And he made a quick billion and got a haircut.

    And he pursed and he squinted, “I’ll go out on the stump!”
    “With this money and haircut, I look just like Don Trump!”

    “All I need is support…” The Gringo looked around.
    But, since MSM’s in charge, there was none to be found.

    Did that stop old Gringo? No! Gringo simply said,
    “If I can’t find support, I’ll drum up some instead!”

    So he put down some chick, Megyn Kelly by name,
    And lit into John “I was shot down” McCain.

    Then he put on The Hat: “Make America Great”
    And watched as his poll numbers began to inflate…

    How will it end? Nobody knows!
    I’ll leave to someone else to write Horton was a Whom:

    On 26th of October,
    in the state of Mass.,
    on an autumn day,
    at a station for gas,

    He was slashing…
    enjoying a homicidal spree…

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    Or The Hack in the Black...

    the sun did not shine.
    we were too white to sway.
    so we watched Jon Stewart
    all that cold, cold, wet day.

    i sat there with sally.
    we sat there, dejected
    and i said, "how i wish
    a black man were elected!"

    ...

    and then something went BUMP!
    how that bump made us jump!
    we looked!
    then we saw him step in on the mat!
    we looked!
    and we saw him!
    the hack in the black.
    and he said to us,
    "We are the change
    we've been waiting for."
    "Yes, we can."
    , @Mr. Anon
    Not bad, but you got it backwards. We are the "whoms". They are the "whos". The "whoms" are them what get done to.
    , @Seneca
    Bravo! Mighty well done!
  111. I can’t claim to have understood much of the post or the comments, but I just wanted to point out that historically the strongest “Catholic” region of France was to the north and east of Paris. The strongholds of the Cathars and the Protestants tended to be in the the south and west. Even today, electoral support for the Socialists and whatever the party to the right is called at the moment tracks this pattern.

    • Replies: @5371
    The traditional map of partisan French politics does closely mirror the map of religious practice, though the latter is more complicated than your portrayal. But since the immigration invasion that old alignment has faded almost out of existence. It has been replaced by a new one where those areas invaded vote right and particularly FN, while those still not invaded vote left. The one exception is the Paris region, which is non-white enough to vote left anyway.
  112. @Chrisnonymous

    We know who should be the who and who should be the whom,
     
    This definitely calls for Seussification...

    How the Gringo Stole an Election

    Every Whom down in Whomville liked migration a lot...
    But the Gringo, who lived just north of Whomville, did NOT!

    The Gringo hated migration! The whole migration racket!
    We think we know why--his low income bracket.

    Or maybe his head wasn't screwed on just right.
    He never was--really--let's face it--contrite.

    But I think the most likely reason to date,
    May have been that his heart was all filled with hate.

    Whatever the reason, his heart or his mind,
    He sat there on the border, acting unkind,

    Staring down from his gas-guzzling SUV,
    at the vibrant, diverse (desperate) polity.

    For he knew every Whom in Whomville just south,
    Was coming despite California's long drouth.

    "And they're coming in droves!" he snarled with a sneer,
    "Cross-border migration! It's year after year!"

    Then he growled, with his teeth covered in nicotine,
    "You're stealing a job from a white indigene."

    For eventually, every Whom anchor baby
    Would draw in grandparents, cousins, and, maybe,

    Never be able to do more than say
    "No se. No se. No intiendo Ingles!"

    That's the one thing he hated!
    "No intiendo Ingles!"

    Then the Whoms, il- and legal, would buy up some very ol'
    established town and create their own barrio.

    They'd evade the Who taxes and use the Who healthcare,
    increasing Who debt, which the Whos cannot all bear.

    And then they'd do something he liked least of all!
    Every Whom down in Whomville, the small and more small,

    Would turn into a cause for a Stupid JW
    Who needs to do something for some Whom or someone who

    Used to be Who but made the transition
    From Who to Whom-ette. Because... predisposition?

    (But apparently if you're a whitey turned brown,
    You're not an authentic objective pronoun.

    So don't think that you can just choose to be
    A leader in the NAACP.)

    And the more Gringo thought of this Whom-migrating,
    The more Gringo thought, "I must stop this whole thing!"

    "Why, for 25 years of this bad legislation,
    We've failed to see any Whom-similation!"

    Then he got an idea! An awful idea!
    THE GRINGO GOT A WONDERFUL, AWFUL IDEA!
    "I know just what to do!" the Gringo laughed from his gut.
    And he made a quick billion and got a haircut.

    And he pursed and he squinted, "I'll go out on the stump!"
    "With this money and haircut, I look just like Don Trump!"

    "All I need is support..." The Gringo looked around.
    But, since MSM's in charge, there was none to be found.

    Did that stop old Gringo? No! Gringo simply said,
    "If I can't find support, I'll drum up some instead!"

    So he put down some chick, Megyn Kelly by name,
    And lit into John "I was shot down" McCain.

    Then he put on The Hat: "Make America Great"
    And watched as his poll numbers began to inflate...


    How will it end? Nobody knows!
    I'll leave to someone else to write Horton was a Whom:

    On 26th of October,
    in the state of Mass.,
    on an autumn day,
    at a station for gas,

    He was slashing...
    enjoying a homicidal spree...

    Or The Hack in the Black

    the sun did not shine.
    we were too white to sway.
    so we watched Jon Stewart
    all that cold, cold, wet day.

    i sat there with sally.
    we sat there, dejected
    and i said, “how i wish
    a black man were elected!”

    and then something went BUMP!
    how that bump made us jump!
    we looked!
    then we saw him step in on the mat!
    we looked!
    and we saw him!
    the hack in the black.
    and he said to us,
    “We are the change
    we’ve been waiting for.”
    “Yes, we can.”

  113. Todd like others of his tribe never miss a chance to blaspheme Christianity. By using the term zombie catholicism he is disparagingly comparing Christ’s resurrection to a zombie.

  114. @Deduction
    Todd laments zombie Catholicism because people are too Catholic.

    Goldman laments it because they are not Catholic enough.

    Gee, it's almost like Jews have diversity in their opinion too...

    which ones did Bibi shoulder his way in to link arms with, “too Catholics” or “not Catholic enough” Catholics?

  115. Todd by using the term ‘zombie catholicism’ is alluding to the blasphemy which compares the resurrection of Christ to a zombie.

  116. @SFG
    You're right, but I doubt they think about political philosophy that hard. They just know people think 'republic good, empire bad' and make movies with that theme. I doubt George Lucas had Israeli settlement policy in mind when making 'Star Wars'. I just don't think it's any hatred of Rome per se.

    In the words of Wikipedia:

    “The work of the mythologist Joseph Campbell, especially his book The Hero with a Thousand Faces, directly influenced Lucas, and was what drove him to create the ‘modern myth’ of Star Wars.[1][2]”

    References:

    [1] “The Mythology of Star Wars with George Lucas and Bill Moyers”. films.com. Films Media Group.

    [2] “Star Wars @ NASM, Unit 1, Introduction Page”. Nasm.si.edu. 1999-01-31. Retrieved 2010-01-22.

    ***

    Although Jews, as an ethnoreligious collective, hate Christianity– and, arguably, us indigenous Europeans, for having institutionalized Christendom– more than they do the Roman Empire per se, the latter is second only to Nazi Germany, among actual political states, in the hatred which it engenders among Jewry. The Roman razing of Herod’s Temple was essentially the holocaust that preceded and prefigured The Holocaust itself. When the Jews annually recite their desire to meet again “next year, in Jerusalem,” it is the Romans that they have in mind….

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    What ethnoreligious collective? Secular and Reform Jews don't get along well enough with Orthodox Jews to collaborate with them. There is discussion of the ways in which Christianity differs from Judaism in Jewish communities where Christian non-Jews are encountered in daily life, but there is no explicit hatred of European non-Jews that is taught to all Jews.
  117. “The working class and the children of immigrants had been notably absent, he said.” – Were the working class really absent? Also telling that he distinguishes the two groups.

  118. @Mr. Anon
    "Proto-Nazis? The trend seems to be more to focus on the decadence."

    Apparently you never saw the movie "Spartacus". Or "Gladiator", which even had a muscial score that sounded like "Goetterdaemerung".

    Mind you, it isn't entirely suprising that the ancient Romans should seem fascistic, given that fascism was modeled on ancient Rome. However, Rome was also a state that served as an inspiration for the American Republic.

    Hence the proliferation of Fasces in the Congress and on the memorial to the great dictator
    http://livinglincoln.web.unc.edu/2015/04/17/the-lincoln-memorial-how-it-stands-today/

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    I imagine the founding fathers would have been aghast at the obscenity of the Lincoln memorial - the postumous elevation of a mere President, and one who presided over a bloody civil war as well, to the rank of Caesar, and the founding of a cult of worship around him. The rational side of Jefferson probably wouldn't have liked the Jefferson memorial either (although the man himself may have been flattered by it). In any event, it will probably be demolished or repurposed given that Jefferson was a slave-owner.
  119. @Deduction

    as were such subjects as the Pax Romana, Roman law, Roman engineering, Roman letters, and any other positive aspects of arguably the greatest civilization in recorded history. Why might that have been
     
    Can't wait to see a big budget version of that at the cinema. Roman law: the movie.

    They made one about the Jewish law: “The Ten Commandments” (1956). In fact, they made two, since the same director (who was an Episcopalian whose German-Jewish mother had converted to her husband’s faith) already had made a silent film of the same name (1923).

  120. @SFG
    There are quite a few left-wing Jewish critics of Israel on the Palestinian issue. I know of no other diaspora that formed a lobbying group to get its homeland to lay off, apart from the German-American anti-Nazi associations (anyone know of any others)?

    The “homeland” of the diaspora you mention is the Oblasts of Eastern Europe.

    • Agree: Alfa158
  121. @Bill B.
    Todd’s central argument is that there are fundamentally two Frances. There is a “central” France, including Paris and Marseille and the Mediterranean, where there is equality on the family level and a deep-rooted attachment to secular values of the French revolution and the republic.



    Talk about fighting old battles. Has Mr Todd glanced at who is actually filling up these oh so secularist places?

    Todd can only talk like this by taking the assumption that Muslim newcomers have absolute rights to equality in belief and values notwithstanding that these might utterly contradict the values and beliefs of the old French. One has to engage in a huge amount of intellectual frottage to think this is a viable structure for a nation.

    Todd is a fool.

    He refuses to see those immigrants replacing Frenchmen are antithetical to secular values, the French Revolution and the Republic. Muslims are antithetical to the West in general.

    He doesn’t see they are the reason Jews are fleeing France.

    Nor does he see the upcoming bloodshed when the Muslims simply start slaughtering the natives or consider that being a Jew puts him at the top of the list for a bullet.

    It’s just ironic, that the Jews, being some of the biggest supporters of open borders there are, are also responsible for helping create the eventuality where they themselves are totally expunged from Europe by the people they helped import.

  122. @yaqub the mad scientiat
    Agreed about China. He loves making the "It's Chinese children who learn European classical culture" point. His idea of transcendence also extends to Russia-he's specifically spoken of Russia as a trans-ethnic project, which it is, to some extent in it's 19th century Russification of a bunch of time zones. He's written several posts in defense of Putin, which is interesting.

    I only check him out sporadically, so I've missed the Hungarian hate.

    For years he hammered a writer named Franz Rosenweig, who I've never bothered to read, as some kind of kindred baal teshuva.

    For him, 18-19th century German culture is the the high water mark of Europe. He seems to have a real affinity for Germanized Jews of that era (Heine, Mendelssohn, etc).

    Don't know exactly why I still read him occasionally. I guess I feel the need to read someone who is sharp and makes some good points, but is infuriatingly petulant and wears his disingeniousness on his sleeve (the "we are the world, except for Israel" thing, and his dancing around the immigration issue).

    I think Steve once characterized him as "for entertainment purposes only".

    I read him over a decade ago and stopped. He reminds me of Kunstler and like him, Spengler is no friend of the West.

    I’m fricking tired of mealy mouthed globalists like him. They are poison to humanity.

  123. @Deduction

    There is no shortage of people who have analyzed my people, white protestants, qua white protestants. Why is this not a worthwhile pursuit when it comes to Jews?
     
    It's very worthwhile. And the fact that it is taboo has sadly left the task to a bunch of paranoid loons.

    It’s very worthwhile. And the fact that it is taboo has sadly left the task to a bunch of paranoid loons.

    They aren’t all paranoid loons. Do you think that Steve is a paranoid loon.? And if it is taboo, and one’s career can be destroyed for the undertaking, are the paranoid loons really paranoid?

    • Replies: @Deduction

    They aren’t all paranoid loons. Do you think that Steve is a paranoid loon.? And if it is taboo, and one’s career can be destroyed for the undertaking, are the paranoid loons really paranoid
     
    Steve makes moderate and considered points. The majority of commenters on this issue come across as total psychopaths. My point was a generalisation and still holds.

    You can be thinking in the right direction but still be wrong because you are bereft of a sense of context or scale.

    Someone who locks themselves in a basement with an armoury of guns because they are expecting to be arrested for a parking offense is entirely correct that the police are out to get them, but they are still quite mad.
  124. @SFG
    Yes, but both 'Spartacus' and 'Gladiator' are about the *Empire*. That's not anti-Romanism, it's (among other things) fear of own Republic turning into an Empire. That was the underlying backstory of 'Star Wars', among other things, as well as countless actual political speeches from the left (economic concentration is like the Roman slaveowners driving independent farmers out) and occasionally right (Buchanan is a good example).

    The Empire is what people are afraid we will become...not without reason, I must say.

    “Yes, but both ‘Spartacus’ and ‘Gladiator’ are about the *Empire*. That’s not anti-Romanism, it’s (among other things) fear of own Republic turning into an Empire.”

    The screen-play for “Spartacus” was written by the famously black-listed communist screenwriter, and all-round creep, Dalton Trumbo, and was based on the novel by the communist writer Howard Fast. The projection of 1930s leftist politicss on to first-century B.C. Rome were pretty obvious and contrived. Also, Spartacus was made in 1960, at the height of America’s post-war self-confidence. I don’t think there was much concern then about us becoming an empire, except at the margins. Mind you, we were becoming an empire at the time, but we weren’t concerned about it.

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m not knocking the end product. Trumbo, though a louse, was a great screen writer, and “Spartacus” was a great movie. It was after all directed by Stanley Kubrick.

    By the way, a movie is coming out soon about Dalton Trumbo, with Bryan Cranston in the lead. No doubt, it will retail the same old hackneyed sob-story about those poor, poor black-listed Hollywood commies.

    “That was the underlying backstory of ‘Star Wars’, among other things,…….”

    Let’s not bring George Lucas’ ridiculous juvenile mythology, based on an 8th-grader’s understanding of history, into a serious discussion, shall we?

    “The Empire is what people are afraid we will become…not without reason, I must say.

    Oh, I think we’ve already got an empire – as far-reaching, as corrupt, and as decadent as that of the Romans as well.

  125. @Chrisnonymous

    We know who should be the who and who should be the whom,
     
    This definitely calls for Seussification...

    How the Gringo Stole an Election

    Every Whom down in Whomville liked migration a lot...
    But the Gringo, who lived just north of Whomville, did NOT!

    The Gringo hated migration! The whole migration racket!
    We think we know why--his low income bracket.

    Or maybe his head wasn't screwed on just right.
    He never was--really--let's face it--contrite.

    But I think the most likely reason to date,
    May have been that his heart was all filled with hate.

    Whatever the reason, his heart or his mind,
    He sat there on the border, acting unkind,

    Staring down from his gas-guzzling SUV,
    at the vibrant, diverse (desperate) polity.

    For he knew every Whom in Whomville just south,
    Was coming despite California's long drouth.

    "And they're coming in droves!" he snarled with a sneer,
    "Cross-border migration! It's year after year!"

    Then he growled, with his teeth covered in nicotine,
    "You're stealing a job from a white indigene."

    For eventually, every Whom anchor baby
    Would draw in grandparents, cousins, and, maybe,

    Never be able to do more than say
    "No se. No se. No intiendo Ingles!"

    That's the one thing he hated!
    "No intiendo Ingles!"

    Then the Whoms, il- and legal, would buy up some very ol'
    established town and create their own barrio.

    They'd evade the Who taxes and use the Who healthcare,
    increasing Who debt, which the Whos cannot all bear.

    And then they'd do something he liked least of all!
    Every Whom down in Whomville, the small and more small,

    Would turn into a cause for a Stupid JW
    Who needs to do something for some Whom or someone who

    Used to be Who but made the transition
    From Who to Whom-ette. Because... predisposition?

    (But apparently if you're a whitey turned brown,
    You're not an authentic objective pronoun.

    So don't think that you can just choose to be
    A leader in the NAACP.)

    And the more Gringo thought of this Whom-migrating,
    The more Gringo thought, "I must stop this whole thing!"

    "Why, for 25 years of this bad legislation,
    We've failed to see any Whom-similation!"

    Then he got an idea! An awful idea!
    THE GRINGO GOT A WONDERFUL, AWFUL IDEA!
    "I know just what to do!" the Gringo laughed from his gut.
    And he made a quick billion and got a haircut.

    And he pursed and he squinted, "I'll go out on the stump!"
    "With this money and haircut, I look just like Don Trump!"

    "All I need is support..." The Gringo looked around.
    But, since MSM's in charge, there was none to be found.

    Did that stop old Gringo? No! Gringo simply said,
    "If I can't find support, I'll drum up some instead!"

    So he put down some chick, Megyn Kelly by name,
    And lit into John "I was shot down" McCain.

    Then he put on The Hat: "Make America Great"
    And watched as his poll numbers began to inflate...


    How will it end? Nobody knows!
    I'll leave to someone else to write Horton was a Whom:

    On 26th of October,
    in the state of Mass.,
    on an autumn day,
    at a station for gas,

    He was slashing...
    enjoying a homicidal spree...

    Not bad, but you got it backwards. We are the “whoms”. They are the “whos”. The “whoms” are them what get done to.

  126. @Lot

    But you’ve probably never heard of that book because a gentile analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews is unimaginable. Jewish intellectuals very much do not like their own tools being applied to themselves. Turnabout may be fair play, but it’s, to be frank, zombie Catholicism.
     
    Aside from the pleasure of ratiocination, is there some goal that "analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews" serves?

    It isn't as if analysis of "Jews qua Jews" doesn't happen. Sure, it is a disreputable activity, but there is no shortage of smart people like MacDonald doing it.

    Whatever the ostensible goal, the actual effect of "analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews" seems to have is offending and alienating a highly intelligent, moral, and influential group of Americans, and prolonging the evil taint Nazism attached to what was once a humane, influential, and progressive eugenics movement.

    Aside from all that, I find it sort of tiresome and boring as well. The question of the percentage of Jewish Bolsheviks, their relative responsibility for the '65 immigration act and 70's feminism, and the other questions that preoccupy MacDonaldists for me are not very interesting as historical questions compared to, say, Roman history, or 17th century England. Nor do they seem relevant to issues confronting our present and future: how do block amnesty at home, elect the Donald president, and stop the exponentially growing stream of refugees from the Third World from destroying the First.

    “……… is offending and alienating a highly intelligent, moral, and influential group of Americans,…………..”

    Intelligent and influential, sure. But moral? Are they -as a group – especially moral? If they were an especially moral ethnic group, wouldn’t we expect to see them underrepresented in immoral enterprises like gambling, pornography, and usury? But just the opposite is the case.

  127. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @JohnnyWalker123
    Jews think that 1950s era America, which defeated Nazi Germany and prosecuted the perpetrators of the Holaucast just a few years earlier, was also deeply anti-semitic.

    Jews can find anti-semitism in the most unexpected of places..............

    I’d say it’s more the case that some Jews see anti-Semitism in 1930’s America that kept most Jewish refugees out, but they don’t like to write about that period as much because there are feelings of failure that their ancestors also didn’t push harder to save the European Jews. I wonder if we would see as much criticism of 1950’s America country club and college admissions discrimination from liberal Jews if 1930’s America had accepted more Jewish refugees.

    • Replies: @Ralphie


    I’d say it’s more the case that some Jews see anti-Semitism in 1930′s America that kept most Jewish refugees out, but they don’t like to write about that period as much because there are feelings of failure that their ancestors also didn’t push harder to save the European Jews. I wonder if we would see as much criticism of 1950′s America country club and college admissions discrimination from liberal Jews if 1930′s America had accepted more Jewish refugees.
     
    Yeah, it is the whiny Jews saying this crap. My uncle is the son of Jews who came here in the 1930's. Most Jews are very patriotic Americans who know that regular Americans died fighting the Nazis even though most of those Americans had no idea of the atrocities.
  128. Now, no doubt many Jews advocate for Jewish interests. But what is your support for the idea that anti-white Jews somehow can’t just be self-hating ethno-masochists like other white ethnic groups?

    Er, because the ratio of ethnocentric Jews to “self-hating” Jews is the inverse of the ratio of ethnocentric whites to “self-hating” whites?

    Because a Jew who hates on whites isn’t a self-hating Jew, he’s a white-hater?

    Because the actual boots-on-the-ground army of Jewish wreckers of Jewish self-love is vanishingly small?

    Why is it when a Jew advocates his country to be inundated with Muslims, it is some convoluted “triple bankshot” to advance Jewish interests, but not when Italians or Swedes do the same?

    Because Italians and Swedes are being inundated with Muslims, while Jews bomb their Muslim population every few years?

    Whatever the ostensible goal, the actual effect of “analyzing hugely influential Jews qua Jews” seems to have is offending and alienating a highly intelligent, moral, and influential group of Americans, and prolonging the evil taint Nazism attached to what was once a humane, influential, and progressive eugenics movement.

    Meaning, if you point out their malfeasance, Jews will smash you. Jews have been the prime movers of doing what you describe to whites, of course, and making it effectively the mainstream. What evil is being prolonged there?

    Aside from all that, I find it sort of tiresome and boring as well.

    We can go round and round about what Jews have been up to, that I find tiresome and boring. So, welcome to the club.

    And I don’t think Jews who don’t ostracize Abe Foxman and his ilk are particularly moral individuals.

    Stopping the “free Pollard” Jews would be another one. And putting a stop to what the Jews are doing to the Palestinians, natch. And putting a stop to the Jewish National Sport of doing everything they can to stop whites from doing in their countries what Jews do in theirs, that would be nice. And putting a stop to subjecting whites to standards and criticism that are “ANTISEMITIC!!!” when whites apply them to Jews would be grand. And…

    Now I am not saying that there is no Jew anywhere who wants to flood America but not Israel with Muslims, but I am not aware of any. Can you provide some particular examples?

    It’s easy to “want” something “universal” when your tribe isn’t going to get it under any circumstances, but rival tribes are already getting it. If these people really wanted to push Muslims across the board, they’d stop pushing them for white countries until they had pushed a bunch onto Israel; it should stick in their craw that Israel isn’t complying, but it doesn’t, because their ostensible aims are a pose.

    I can certainly understand not wanting Syrians and Sudanese in a crowded and relatively poor Israel, but being OK with a mostly Mexican and Chinese coming into an uncrowded and rich USA.

    Israel is a first-world country, until it isn’t.

    Jews are urbanite professionals so no kidding they are GoodWhites. If they were –

    They’re not, so it hardly matters.

    The rest of your lies are exposed thus: Israel and their BFF, the Jewish diaspora.

    IOW the Jews are committing racial suicide. Their hatred for the white goy blinds them to their own fate if immigration policies are not reversed.

    More like racial murder of whites. Jews will live on in their Fatherland.

    A lot of the Kevin MacDonald/Sailer open-ended brief against All Jews Everywhere –

    Yes, do go on to describe what doesn’t exist.

    Jews don’t need to popularise a notion of ‘Jewish privilege.’ They are already caught in the term ‘White privilege.’

    And when a Jew calls for more (non-white) diversity, it logically follows that they are calling for fewer Jews.

    Jews, well Ashkenazi Jews, certainly do not consider themselves ‘people of colour.’

    Obviously they don’t “need” to popularize it, or it would already be popular. They do need to call it “ANTISEMITISM!!!” and strangle it in its crib, though.

    Jews get to opt out of whiteness when they want (been over this too many times to do so again), so, not really white.

  129. Criticism of whites is good. Criticism of (white ethnicity here) is just criticism of whites, and therefore also good. Criticism of Jews is “ANTISEMITISM!!!” and the height of evil.

    Paper over that.

  130. @5371
    I've noticed before that many French Jews have a strange phobia about Lyon which doesn't seem to correspond to the city's actual place in history. Perhaps because it is the ecclesiastical capital? Anyway, if Haven Monahan were French, he would be the son of wealthy and very Catholic parents from Lyon.

    The late French chef Paul Bocuse had his main (Michelin 3-star) restaurant in Lyon. His food was so fantastic in the early years that religious French Jews were concerned that a visit to his restaurant in Lyon would push young Jews away from observance. (j/k)

    • Replies: @The Man From K Street

    The late French chef Paul Bocuse
     
    Um, Bocuse is still very much alive. 89 to be sure, but not buried yet.
  131. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @D. K.
    In the words of Wikipedia:

    "The work of the mythologist Joseph Campbell, especially his book The Hero with a Thousand Faces, directly influenced Lucas, and was what drove him to create the 'modern myth' of Star Wars.[1][2]"

    References:

    [1] "The Mythology of Star Wars with George Lucas and Bill Moyers". films.com. Films Media Group.

    [2] "Star Wars @ NASM, Unit 1, Introduction Page". Nasm.si.edu. 1999-01-31. Retrieved 2010-01-22.

    ***

    Although Jews, as an ethnoreligious collective, hate Christianity-- and, arguably, us indigenous Europeans, for having institutionalized Christendom-- more than they do the Roman Empire per se, the latter is second only to Nazi Germany, among actual political states, in the hatred which it engenders among Jewry. The Roman razing of Herod's Temple was essentially the holocaust that preceded and prefigured The Holocaust itself. When the Jews annually recite their desire to meet again "next year, in Jerusalem," it is the Romans that they have in mind....

    What ethnoreligious collective? Secular and Reform Jews don’t get along well enough with Orthodox Jews to collaborate with them. There is discussion of the ways in which Christianity differs from Judaism in Jewish communities where Christian non-Jews are encountered in daily life, but there is no explicit hatred of European non-Jews that is taught to all Jews.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    I was referring to the Jews collectively-- whether religious Jews, of whatever strain, or secular Jews (like my atheistic brother-in-law). I was not implying that they all collaborate with one another, despite their differences. I think that ultimately, however, secular Jews tend to maintain traditional Jewish distinctions vis-a-vis gentiles; secular Jews merely translate traditional Jewish tendencies from theological to ideological imperatives, and cover over particularist preferences with universalist proclamations.
    , @ben tillman

    What ethnoreligious collective? Secular and Reform Jews don’t get along well enough with Orthodox Jews to collaborate with them.
     
    Of course, there are internal divisions, but this is an exaggeration. The JCPA (Jewish Council for Public Affairs) includes the Orthodox Union among its 15 member agencies. The Orthodox Union is also a member of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.
  132. I checked to see if the Cuddihy book is available to me at our renown New York Public Library:

    ***

    The Ordeal of Civility
    By Cuddihy, John Murray
    Book – 1974
    Total Copies: 1

    In-library use only (1)
    Location Collection Volume Call No. Status
    Stephen A. Schwarzman Building Schwarzman Building – Dorot Jewish Division Rm 111 — *PXK 75-6065 Available
    USE IN LIBRARY

    ***

    • Replies: @David
    Here's a copy for $11, no return required.

    http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=16860037077&searchurl=sts%3Dt%26sortby%3D20%26an%3DCuddihy%2C+John+Murray
  133. Emmanuel Todd notices (it has become difficult not to notice, actually) that Black and Arab immigrants hate Jews. His “analysis”: it’s White Gentiles’ fault… Their islamophobia is the root cause of Muslim antisemitism. Pathetic.

    Never trust an intellectual who is regularly invited to talk shows. Those guys are always phonies. Real intellectuals live and work like Benedictine monks. Emmanuel Todd had a brilliant idea about the USSR in 1976, he wrote a good book about US imperialism in 2002, and since then he has been showing his increasingly phony self on TV screens.

    In 2002, he wrote in “Après l’Empire”, a viscerally anti-American book, that he felt quite safe as a French Jew (of Austrian descent), and he just didn’t understand his American cousins perpetual ethnic anxiety (it seems that part of his family moved to the USA rather than France). Since then, he has become anti-German rather than anti-American, and he doesn’t feel safe as a French Jew anymore.

    The fact that he didn’t see Muslim anti-semitism rising in France in 2002 shows that he lives a comfortable, secluded life in a Parisian high-income neighborhood with predominantly white public schools. But eventually unpleasant facts become impossible to ignore.

    Good bye, Emmanuel. You never really liked White French Catholics, even when they abandoned catholicism and conservative values. Thank you for showing your true nature in the end.

  134. Notwithstanding, the starting point of Todd’s analysis was quite correct. The “Je suis Charlie” movement had nothing to do with freedom of speech and everything to do with upholding the social dominance of the present elites.

    And Todd was even right insofar as the elites are now indeed looking for support from the rural and Catholic population – that’s the task of Sarkozy. And Todd might even have said that this strategy was problematic: The rural and Catholic auxiliaries might possibly get the upper hand and overcome the Jewish and Freemason cosmopolitans.

    Everything beyond that is, of course, sick fantasy.

    By the way, the dominant problem of our time is still Hofstadter’s anti-populism (or elitism). And every populist (or anti-elitist), even Todd, ought to be defended.

  135. @CK
    If you remember the sudden and complete demise of Operation Wall Street, the attack on the 1%, then it will help to remember the composition of the 1% in terms of disparate impact; not racially but religiously. 3,216,000 Americans are in the 1% today.
    OWS hit close to the bone and not just at Goldman-Sachs.

    Occupy Wall Street was incoherent on multiple levels, that’s part of why it fizzled. For starters, Wall Street head honchos aren’t “the 1%”. They’re the 0.01%. So they were off by two orders of magnitude. On top of that, they whined about Wall Street in a vacuum, without acknowledging the extent to which Wall Streeters voted for the same president they did, or why they did.

    OWS basically had a sense they were being screwed, saddled with college debt and low wage retail jobs, but rather than think about the government policies that were screwing them (unilateral free trade, mass immigration, government inflation of college tuitions and deflation of the value of college degrees, etc.) they raged at Wall Street.

    The other part of why it fizzled was it did nothing but camp out, sexually assault naive coeds, and commit quality of life crimes, until the riot police cleared them out. At least the Tea Party managed to get new blood elected to the House and Senate.

    • Replies: @yaqub the mad scientist
    On top of that, they whined about Wall Street in a vacuum, without acknowledging the extent to which Wall Streeters voted for the same president they did, or why they did.

    These people try to console themselves into believing that that Wall Streeters are Daddy Warbucks capitalists: racist fat whities with penguin suits and monocles like the cartoon on the Monopoly board game, or some Bolshevik propaganda poster.
  136. @yaqub the mad scientiat
    Agreed about China. He loves making the "It's Chinese children who learn European classical culture" point. His idea of transcendence also extends to Russia-he's specifically spoken of Russia as a trans-ethnic project, which it is, to some extent in it's 19th century Russification of a bunch of time zones. He's written several posts in defense of Putin, which is interesting.

    I only check him out sporadically, so I've missed the Hungarian hate.

    For years he hammered a writer named Franz Rosenweig, who I've never bothered to read, as some kind of kindred baal teshuva.

    For him, 18-19th century German culture is the the high water mark of Europe. He seems to have a real affinity for Germanized Jews of that era (Heine, Mendelssohn, etc).

    Don't know exactly why I still read him occasionally. I guess I feel the need to read someone who is sharp and makes some good points, but is infuriatingly petulant and wears his disingeniousness on his sleeve (the "we are the world, except for Israel" thing, and his dancing around the immigration issue).

    I think Steve once characterized him as "for entertainment purposes only".

    The same here. He is intelligent and his observations and are fascinating. But he is easy to overdose. How long you can read someone who is convinced that your people and culture are going extinct and cheering the fact without changes is blood pressure?

    • Replies: @yaqub the mad scientist
    He did once proclaim that he was here to make people feel bad, not good.
  137. @Shine a Light
    What Todd would really like to do is blame "Islamophobia" on Catholicism but given the current state of religious affairs in France this would be ridiculous even for a French "intello" to attempt.

    So instead he claims the LACK of real Catholicism creates "Zombie Catholicism" and this is to blame for Islamophobia, not the murderous actions of the Islamists.

    An American version of this could be in 100 years, in a racially métissaged (race mixed) America, where the very few remaining whites have been totally marginalized, if some dedicated victim class suddenly came under criticism. The victim-advocates could no longer directly blame whitey, so the most clever among them would invent the concept of "residual white privilege" or "Zombie Whiteness" in order to keep indirectly kicking the same dead White horse long after decomposition had made direct kicks impossible.

    So while Todd is ostensibly attacking the lefty bourgeois urban elite, he is doing so in a sort of religous one-drop rule -- if any of your ancestors were Catholic -- that is why you are so Islamophobic. But it is this very same lefty bourgeois urban elite that is so enthusiastic about importing Muslims to be faithful Socialist (PS) voters since the indigenous working class is fleeing the PS in droves for the Front National.

    What Todd is really saying is that despite the virtual death of Catholicism in France, the only way to keep a majority "coalition of the oppressed" together, is to constantly attack the ghosts of long dormant groups that once held power in the past.

    And by pointing people's attention towards dominant groups of the past; it helps dissuade people from looking at small dominant groups of the present as potential causes of the current problems.

    “An American version of this could be in 100 years, in a racially métissaged (race mixed) America, where the very few remaining whites have been totally marginalized, if some dedicated victim class suddenly came under criticism. The victim-advocates could no longer directly blame whitey, so the most clever among them would invent the concept of “residual white privilege” or “Zombie Whiteness” in order to keep indirectly kicking the same dead White horse long after decomposition had made direct kicks impossible.”

    I have seen Leftists blame White privilege and White racism for why Dominicans want to kick Haitian immigrants out of their country. Even though the vast majority of Dominicans have Sub Saharan African ancestry as well.

    It is basically Mulatto Eric Holder and Barack Obama looking Dominicans discriminating against Haitians who look like they came straight out of The Congo.

  138. @CK
    The Romans would have been great fans of the 1950-60 New York Yankees, as were so many Americans.
    American's do love a winner. I think George Patton said that.

    The Romans would have been great fans of the 1950-60 New York Yankees, as were so many Americans.
    American’s do love a winner. I think George Patton said that.

    The Yankees won nine pennants in the ten years from 1949-58. But only once in that span did they manage to reach 100 wins. They won 103 in 1954– and finished eight games behind Cleveland.

    That part sounds more Greek than Roman. I think the Indians’ manager that year was Epaminondas.

  139. Living in France, I can confirm that whatever the idiocy of Emmanuel Todd, his observation that the “Je Suis Charlie” morons are “zombie Catholics” has more than a little accidental truth to it. Refusing to own up to their own culture or heritage, they cling to the abstract notions left behind in desperation to counter a manifestly evil foe they dare not name. Never mind the fact that Charlie Hebdo tried to ban the Front National; it’s liberty of expression at its finest.

    Moi, je ne suis pas Charlie.

  140. @Dave Pinsen
    Occupy Wall Street was incoherent on multiple levels, that's part of why it fizzled. For starters, Wall Street head honchos aren't "the 1%". They're the 0.01%. So they were off by two orders of magnitude. On top of that, they whined about Wall Street in a vacuum, without acknowledging the extent to which Wall Streeters voted for the same president they did, or why they did.

    OWS basically had a sense they were being screwed, saddled with college debt and low wage retail jobs, but rather than think about the government policies that were screwing them (unilateral free trade, mass immigration, government inflation of college tuitions and deflation of the value of college degrees, etc.) they raged at Wall Street.

    The other part of why it fizzled was it did nothing but camp out, sexually assault naive coeds, and commit quality of life crimes, until the riot police cleared them out. At least the Tea Party managed to get new blood elected to the House and Senate.

    On top of that, they whined about Wall Street in a vacuum, without acknowledging the extent to which Wall Streeters voted for the same president they did, or why they did.

    These people try to console themselves into believing that that Wall Streeters are Daddy Warbucks capitalists: racist fat whities with penguin suits and monocles like the cartoon on the Monopoly board game, or some Bolshevik propaganda poster.

    • Agree: Dave Pinsen
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Easier than facing the cognitive dissonance that the cool black guy they voted for presided over a period where the economy got worse for the non-rich.
  141. @Bies Podkrakowski
    The same here. He is intelligent and his observations and are fascinating. But he is easy to overdose. How long you can read someone who is convinced that your people and culture are going extinct and cheering the fact without changes is blood pressure?

    He did once proclaim that he was here to make people feel bad, not good.

    • Replies: @Bies Podkrakowski
    Interesting. Judging by comments he was making a lot of people feel very good about themselves. Many of them belonged to a particular nationality.
  142. @Chrisnonymous

    We know who should be the who and who should be the whom,
     
    This definitely calls for Seussification...

    How the Gringo Stole an Election

    Every Whom down in Whomville liked migration a lot...
    But the Gringo, who lived just north of Whomville, did NOT!

    The Gringo hated migration! The whole migration racket!
    We think we know why--his low income bracket.

    Or maybe his head wasn't screwed on just right.
    He never was--really--let's face it--contrite.

    But I think the most likely reason to date,
    May have been that his heart was all filled with hate.

    Whatever the reason, his heart or his mind,
    He sat there on the border, acting unkind,

    Staring down from his gas-guzzling SUV,
    at the vibrant, diverse (desperate) polity.

    For he knew every Whom in Whomville just south,
    Was coming despite California's long drouth.

    "And they're coming in droves!" he snarled with a sneer,
    "Cross-border migration! It's year after year!"

    Then he growled, with his teeth covered in nicotine,
    "You're stealing a job from a white indigene."

    For eventually, every Whom anchor baby
    Would draw in grandparents, cousins, and, maybe,

    Never be able to do more than say
    "No se. No se. No intiendo Ingles!"

    That's the one thing he hated!
    "No intiendo Ingles!"

    Then the Whoms, il- and legal, would buy up some very ol'
    established town and create their own barrio.

    They'd evade the Who taxes and use the Who healthcare,
    increasing Who debt, which the Whos cannot all bear.

    And then they'd do something he liked least of all!
    Every Whom down in Whomville, the small and more small,

    Would turn into a cause for a Stupid JW
    Who needs to do something for some Whom or someone who

    Used to be Who but made the transition
    From Who to Whom-ette. Because... predisposition?

    (But apparently if you're a whitey turned brown,
    You're not an authentic objective pronoun.

    So don't think that you can just choose to be
    A leader in the NAACP.)

    And the more Gringo thought of this Whom-migrating,
    The more Gringo thought, "I must stop this whole thing!"

    "Why, for 25 years of this bad legislation,
    We've failed to see any Whom-similation!"

    Then he got an idea! An awful idea!
    THE GRINGO GOT A WONDERFUL, AWFUL IDEA!
    "I know just what to do!" the Gringo laughed from his gut.
    And he made a quick billion and got a haircut.

    And he pursed and he squinted, "I'll go out on the stump!"
    "With this money and haircut, I look just like Don Trump!"

    "All I need is support..." The Gringo looked around.
    But, since MSM's in charge, there was none to be found.

    Did that stop old Gringo? No! Gringo simply said,
    "If I can't find support, I'll drum up some instead!"

    So he put down some chick, Megyn Kelly by name,
    And lit into John "I was shot down" McCain.

    Then he put on The Hat: "Make America Great"
    And watched as his poll numbers began to inflate...


    How will it end? Nobody knows!
    I'll leave to someone else to write Horton was a Whom:

    On 26th of October,
    in the state of Mass.,
    on an autumn day,
    at a station for gas,

    He was slashing...
    enjoying a homicidal spree...

    Bravo! Mighty well done!

  143. @Mark Green
    The Romans are depicted negatively in American cinema because they were pagans who destroyed Israel's Temple, killed Jews, and then managed to exile all these holy and innocent Jews to other, faraway lands.

    How the Romans managed to identify and then expel all these Jews (and then keep they away from Jerusalem for centuries) remains something of a mystery.

    Diaspora Jews may have done a good job of identifying themselves to outsiders by self-segregating and not learning local languages. Also, payot are a dead giveaway. Today, most western Jews aren’t readily identifiable as such. This is a relatively new thing.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "LKM says:

    Diaspora Jews may have done a good job of identifying themselves to outsiders by self-segregating and not learning local languages. "

    I suppose they may have done a lot of things. They might have remigrated to thier homeland. And yet they didn't.
  144. Occam’s Razor says this Toddian attitude is not a triple bankshot but the eternal struggle between GoodWhites and BadWhites since Israelis suffer the same thing, desire for mass African Immigration by GoodWhite Israelis:

    FT link to Israeli African refugees:

    This week, amid news reports of Africans freed from Holot being barred from Arad or rearrested in Tel Aviv, liberal Israelis reflected on their own past as a country founded largely by people fleeing persecution.

    “We are a country of refugees,” says Anat Ovadia, a spokesperson for the Hotline for Refugees and Migrants, one of the non-governmental organisations that petitioned for the detainees’ release. “It is very shameful that Israel forgets its history.”

    Refugee experts say that Israel’s policies toward migrants reflect both political pressures to do something and This week, amid news reports of Africans freed from Holot being barred from Arad or rearrested in Tel Aviv, liberal Israelis reflected on their own past as a country founded largely by people fleeing persecution.

    “We are a country of refugees,” says Anat Ovadia, a spokesperson for the Hotline for Refugees and Migrants, one of the non-governmental organisations that petitioned for the detainees’ release. “It is very shameful that Israel forgets its history.”

    Refugee experts say that Israel’s policies toward migrants reflect both political pressures to do something and demographic anxieties in its rightwing governing elite about maintaining a strong Jewish majority in the country.

    “This week’s events reflect once again the lack of a policy of the Israeli government when it concerns non-Jewish immigration to Israel,” says Jean-Marc Liling, an Israeli lawyer specialising in refugee law.

    “There is a complete incapacity to deal with the fact that Israel has become a country of immigration and not only a country of Aliyah [Jewish immigration].”

    “This week’s events reflect once again the lack of a policy of the Israeli government when it concerns non-Jewish immigration to Israel,” says Jean-Marc Liling, an Israeli lawyer specialising in refugee law.

    “There is a complete incapacity to deal with the fact that Israel has become a country of immigration and not only a country of Aliyah [Jewish immigration].
    ========================
    Read that again,

    demographic anxieties in its rightwing governing elite about maintaining a strong Jewish majority in the country.

    Whiskey’s Law: Any elite that is sufficiently urban, educated and in a social bubble i.e. not concerned with immediate survival and removed from daily diversity will be GoodWhite and engaged in a moral struggle for social dominance and status by eradicating BadWhites.

    First Corollary: Any elite that is sufficiently threatened by demographic change will act firstly to preserve itself out of basic human nature, GoodWhite vs. BadWhite concerns aside. This is seen particularly in small isolated countries overwhelmed in a few years time so that leaders will be chosen from migrating racial/ethnic groups not the local natives.

    Second Corollary: Any elite that has a comfortable margin of ten years or more of political control even with mass migration will encourage it to wage the battle of GoodWhites vs. BadWhites. Even though long-term political survival is doomed. Human nature can only look two years ahead at best.
    ———————
    A not insignificant number of Jews in Israel want to make their country “a nation of immigrants” and thus push forward their GoodWhite status. They are sufficiently isolated and naive about realities of daily life to feel that all people are all the same and that turning Tel Aviv into Addis Abbaba would be a good idea, more ethnic food and glorious multiculturalism and such.

    These are the GoodWhites of Israel.

    The BadWhites of Israel are the “right-wing” leaders who don’t figure on being much as minorities in their own country and would like to keep on being Knesset members or Prime Minister not say, a serf in their own land serving African masters. Which is exactly what mass African immigration would do to Israel. Which they can see happening in as little as two years.

    Zombie Catholicism is the same as “We are a Nation of Immigrants” and “right wing leaders” blocking glorious commitment to the UN 1951 refugee agreement.

    What is wrong with the West is the social isolation and insularity of the elites who are not sharing the same demographic dispossession as say, White residents of Ferguson or working class Israelis in Jerusalem or working class Frenchmen in Lyon, non-cool “flyover” areas in France.

    This primarily a function of both geographic isolation of elites and class stratification. As Murray points out, the SuperZip leaders live in just a few zip codes in Georgetown, NYC, and LA, and these are the people leading the country.

    • Replies: @Rifleman

    Whiskey’s Law: Any elite that is sufficiently urban, educated and in a social bubble i.e. not concerned with immediate survival and removed from daily diversity will be GoodWhite and engaged in a moral struggle for social dominance and status by eradicating BadWhites.
     
    Whiskey's Law: Excuse the Jews, and Blame the White women.

    Whiskey's Law: Excuse the Jews, and Blame the White women.Whiskey's Law: Excuse the Jews, and Blame the White women.

    Now repeat that in meandering, paranoid form endlessly.
  145. At this point, it’s hard to tell if Jewish intellectuals and journalists seriously fear and loathe white Christians, or if they’re cynically coming up with these crazy ideas to make a profit in the multicultural/anti-racist/anti-fascist racket. There’s no real incentive for Jews to write sensible things about race, immigration, and culture. And as Paul Gottfried has argued, European leaders and elites seem to encourage this insanity from Jewish intellectuals. I’m not denying that Jews in western societies have, at times, have exhibited hostility to their host nations, I’m just arguing that there seems to be an incentive from white gentiles to behave this way.

  146. @Shine a Light
    Emmanual Todd may have a tiny bit but not much at all.

    Of his four grandparents:

    On his mother Anne-Marie NIZAN's side:

    Henriette ALPHEN (mother of his mother) From a well-established Jewish family. Henriette was a cousin of Claude Lévi-Strauss. -- probably no Catholic blood.

    Paul NIZAN (father of his mother) Famous Communist hero in France, buddy of Jean-Paul Sartre and Raymond Aron in his college days. -- No doubt some Catholic blood on this line.

    Todd's father's Oliver TODD's was a famous leftist journalist who openly acted as a cheerleader for the Viet Cong and actually interviewed American POW's during the war and got them to mouth off against the US (he was not allowed to publish these interviews though). Later in life he turned away from Communism.

    Helen TODD (mother of his father) -- Canadian from Toronto -- probably no Catholic blood.

    Julius OBLATT (father of his father) -- Jew from Austria-Hungary -- probably no Catholic blood.

    So Emmanual Todd has very little Catholic blood. And the one grandparent through whom he does have Catholic ancestors was a famous Communist and so Todd could argue this service for the forces of Marxist-Leninism perhaps purges his progeny from the future taint of Catholic blood?

    What the hell is “Catholic blood”? Something like midi-chlorians?

  147. What utter rubbish. Better off reading Eric Zemmour! How much of this posturing is generational rather than ethnic or religious? The post-war generation lived so well for doing so little, protected by the Iron Curtain on a planet with 5-6 billion less people than today. This brain-addling ease ostensibly facilitated a descent into political fantasy that still dominates among the still so dominant Boomer cohort. It’s always 1945-1973 for these people. Good jobs, the welfare state, social change (really just hedonism and anything goes), starving African children on the TV in dusty villages (rather than UN projections of 17 billion people), decolonization, etc. Todd was born in 1951! No wonder he can write such baloney. A lot of Boomers are riding high on their pensions, their inflated assets, and the cheap labour that immigrants provide them in their dotage. They are complacent and still fond of the moral self-righteousness that they believe comes from associating with cute ‘minorities’. As the Boomers had fewer children than their parents, and their own children basically have none, their stupidities and fantasies really do prevail, a bizarre holdover from a simpler world where it was easy to take white middle-class life for granted. People like Todd haven’t quite figured out that that life is pretty much a thing of the past and are still picking fights with a bourgeoisie that is no more.

    • Agree: Deduction
    • Replies: @Deduction

    What utter rubbish. Better off reading Eric Zemmour! How much of this posturing is generational rather than ethnic or religious? The post-war generation lived so well for doing so little, protected by the Iron Curtain on a planet with 5-6 billion less people than today. This brain-addling ease ostensibly facilitated a descent into political fantasy that still dominates among the still so dominant Boomer cohort. It’s always 1945-1973 for these people. Good jobs, the welfare state, social change (really just hedonism and anything goes), starving African children on the TV in dusty villages (rather than UN projections of 17 billion people), decolonization, etc. Todd was born in 1951! No wonder he can write such baloney. A lot of Boomers are riding high on their pensions, their inflated assets, and the cheap labour that immigrants provide them in their dotage. They are complacent and still fond of the moral self-righteousness that they believe comes from associating with cute ‘minorities’. As the Boomers had fewer children than their parents, and their own children basically have none, their stupidities and fantasies really do prevail, a bizarre holdover from a simpler world where it was easy to take white middle-class life for granted. People like Todd haven’t quite figured out that that life is pretty much a thing of the past and are still picking fights with a bourgeoisie that is no more.
     
    Every single word in this is correct. Thank you. I have nothing to add except for the fact that you could not be more right.
  148. @Anonymous
    What ethnoreligious collective? Secular and Reform Jews don't get along well enough with Orthodox Jews to collaborate with them. There is discussion of the ways in which Christianity differs from Judaism in Jewish communities where Christian non-Jews are encountered in daily life, but there is no explicit hatred of European non-Jews that is taught to all Jews.

    I was referring to the Jews collectively– whether religious Jews, of whatever strain, or secular Jews (like my atheistic brother-in-law). I was not implying that they all collaborate with one another, despite their differences. I think that ultimately, however, secular Jews tend to maintain traditional Jewish distinctions vis-a-vis gentiles; secular Jews merely translate traditional Jewish tendencies from theological to ideological imperatives, and cover over particularist preferences with universalist proclamations.

  149. @Anonymous
    I'd say it's more the case that some Jews see anti-Semitism in 1930's America that kept most Jewish refugees out, but they don't like to write about that period as much because there are feelings of failure that their ancestors also didn't push harder to save the European Jews. I wonder if we would see as much criticism of 1950's America country club and college admissions discrimination from liberal Jews if 1930's America had accepted more Jewish refugees.

    I’d say it’s more the case that some Jews see anti-Semitism in 1930′s America that kept most Jewish refugees out, but they don’t like to write about that period as much because there are feelings of failure that their ancestors also didn’t push harder to save the European Jews. I wonder if we would see as much criticism of 1950′s America country club and college admissions discrimination from liberal Jews if 1930′s America had accepted more Jewish refugees.

    Yeah, it is the whiny Jews saying this crap. My uncle is the son of Jews who came here in the 1930’s. Most Jews are very patriotic Americans who know that regular Americans died fighting the Nazis even though most of those Americans had no idea of the atrocities.

  150. @SFG
    Proto-Nazis? The trend seems to be more to focus on the decadence.

    The trend seems to be more to focus on the decadence.

    What decadence? Pansexualism, political dynasties, higher taxes, foreign misadventures, and open borders–sounds like mainstream America today.

  151. @Deduction

    The Romans in HBO’s Rome were a mixture of vice and virtue,
     
    The Romans in that series were awesome.

    The Romans in that series were awesome.

    Well, Titus Pullo was.

    • Replies: @Romanian
    The Dissident Right needs its own Titus Pullo now that Caesar has shown himself.

    https://youtu.be/oenHjrs_Wgk
  152. The rallies . . . were . . . an odious display of middle-class domination, prejudice and Islamophobia . . . were made up of a one-sided elite who wanted to spit on Islam, the religion of a weak minority in France.

    If only.

  153. @22pp22
    Derrida was a French Jewish intellectual, who, like Foucault, was inspired by Heidegger , a Nazi. After Heidegger's past was revealed, Derrida still defended him. There is a reason why the word"intello" is a term of abuse in French. French intellos have done more harm to Europe than anything since the Black Death. Their theories deny the existence of reason and truth as merely social constructs. They should be ignored. In my time as an academic, I used to meet people like this all the time, spouting bile while quaffing the college claret. I had a conversation with one who defended bride burning. I ended the conversation by threatening to deconstruct his face.

    They should be ignored.

    Mostly, but sometimes they require a bit of eye-rolling and a smirk or two. Nothing drives them into even more-incoherent frenzies than a signal that you’re on to their infantile intellectual game, and therefore decline to take them seriously.

  154. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I enjoyed this Steve.

    Todd appears like the stereotypical Jew-elite-who-blames-middle-class-Christians-to-deflect-from-personal-pomposity. (i’ve no shorter name for that)

    Cuddihy’s book seems interesting. I shall read.

    A comment over at the Cuddihy book’s Amazon page sparked a new insight into feminism for me: The Jews were, compared to gentiles, pretty “misogynistic” weren’t they? They were also pretty Patriarchal weren’t they?

    The comment offered much insight in less than a hundred words:

    ” I remember reading about suggestions to the immigrant Jews to always carry a handkerchief to blow your nose and to catch mucous and to give your seat to a woman on a public conveyance. But it seems that Professor Cuddihy fails to recognize that in the old county people addressed each other with the repectful title of Reb and were super respectful to the point of fawning over learned rabbis.

    Perhaps Jewish women, in addition to feeling insecure about their low SMV score, wanted their men to treat them more like how western women were treated?
    Perhaps Jewish men, feeling the heat as “the chosen people”, also felt a little insecure knowing that mere goyim knew how to treat their women better than them? So, not to be outdone by the Goyim, they agreed and amplified with their women folk, giving birth to the first Jewish holier-than-thou New York Hipster.

    Works for me.

  155. @yaqub the mad scientist
    On top of that, they whined about Wall Street in a vacuum, without acknowledging the extent to which Wall Streeters voted for the same president they did, or why they did.

    These people try to console themselves into believing that that Wall Streeters are Daddy Warbucks capitalists: racist fat whities with penguin suits and monocles like the cartoon on the Monopoly board game, or some Bolshevik propaganda poster.

    Easier than facing the cognitive dissonance that the cool black guy they voted for presided over a period where the economy got worse for the non-rich.

  156. @Ed
    I can't claim to have understood much of the post or the comments, but I just wanted to point out that historically the strongest "Catholic" region of France was to the north and east of Paris. The strongholds of the Cathars and the Protestants tended to be in the the south and west. Even today, electoral support for the Socialists and whatever the party to the right is called at the moment tracks this pattern.

    The traditional map of partisan French politics does closely mirror the map of religious practice, though the latter is more complicated than your portrayal. But since the immigration invasion that old alignment has faded almost out of existence. It has been replaced by a new one where those areas invaded vote right and particularly FN, while those still not invaded vote left. The one exception is the Paris region, which is non-white enough to vote left anyway.

  157. @Mr. Anon
    It’s very worthwhile. And the fact that it is taboo has sadly left the task to a bunch of paranoid loons.

    They aren't all paranoid loons. Do you think that Steve is a paranoid loon.? And if it is taboo, and one's career can be destroyed for the undertaking, are the paranoid loons really paranoid?

    They aren’t all paranoid loons. Do you think that Steve is a paranoid loon.? And if it is taboo, and one’s career can be destroyed for the undertaking, are the paranoid loons really paranoid

    Steve makes moderate and considered points. The majority of commenters on this issue come across as total psychopaths. My point was a generalisation and still holds.

    You can be thinking in the right direction but still be wrong because you are bereft of a sense of context or scale.

    Someone who locks themselves in a basement with an armoury of guns because they are expecting to be arrested for a parking offense is entirely correct that the police are out to get them, but they are still quite mad.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "The majority of commenters on this issue come across as total psychopaths."

    This is hyperbole and a gratuituous insult, and is simply not true at all. The minority of commenters consisting of you comes across as disingenuous and/or stupid. It obviously pains you that people use this forum to express opinions of which you disaspprove. Your approval is neither needed or wanted.
  158. @km
    What utter rubbish. Better off reading Eric Zemmour! How much of this posturing is generational rather than ethnic or religious? The post-war generation lived so well for doing so little, protected by the Iron Curtain on a planet with 5-6 billion less people than today. This brain-addling ease ostensibly facilitated a descent into political fantasy that still dominates among the still so dominant Boomer cohort. It's always 1945-1973 for these people. Good jobs, the welfare state, social change (really just hedonism and anything goes), starving African children on the TV in dusty villages (rather than UN projections of 17 billion people), decolonization, etc. Todd was born in 1951! No wonder he can write such baloney. A lot of Boomers are riding high on their pensions, their inflated assets, and the cheap labour that immigrants provide them in their dotage. They are complacent and still fond of the moral self-righteousness that they believe comes from associating with cute 'minorities'. As the Boomers had fewer children than their parents, and their own children basically have none, their stupidities and fantasies really do prevail, a bizarre holdover from a simpler world where it was easy to take white middle-class life for granted. People like Todd haven't quite figured out that that life is pretty much a thing of the past and are still picking fights with a bourgeoisie that is no more.

    What utter rubbish. Better off reading Eric Zemmour! How much of this posturing is generational rather than ethnic or religious? The post-war generation lived so well for doing so little, protected by the Iron Curtain on a planet with 5-6 billion less people than today. This brain-addling ease ostensibly facilitated a descent into political fantasy that still dominates among the still so dominant Boomer cohort. It’s always 1945-1973 for these people. Good jobs, the welfare state, social change (really just hedonism and anything goes), starving African children on the TV in dusty villages (rather than UN projections of 17 billion people), decolonization, etc. Todd was born in 1951! No wonder he can write such baloney. A lot of Boomers are riding high on their pensions, their inflated assets, and the cheap labour that immigrants provide them in their dotage. They are complacent and still fond of the moral self-righteousness that they believe comes from associating with cute ‘minorities’. As the Boomers had fewer children than their parents, and their own children basically have none, their stupidities and fantasies really do prevail, a bizarre holdover from a simpler world where it was easy to take white middle-class life for granted. People like Todd haven’t quite figured out that that life is pretty much a thing of the past and are still picking fights with a bourgeoisie that is no more.

    Every single word in this is correct. Thank you. I have nothing to add except for the fact that you could not be more right.

  159. @rod1963
    Ahhh the French Po-Mo's and Decons. Leave it to French Jews to create a philosophy that denies reality and language. A century earlier they would have been locked up as lunatics.

    What they spouted was and is pure poison - a corrosive acid that turns people into nihilists. When you believe in nothing, you care for nothing and fight for nothing. How a bunch of gullible Western students bought into that s**t I'll never know.

    I also agree this movement has done more damage to our people than the Black Death. It literally induced a death wish among the intellectual and political classes. They have become the hollow men or men without chests.

    It would also explain the utter helplessness displayed by our elites in many domains. There is no fight in them, even the notion of self-preservation has vanished.

    Roger Scruton on his website has an essay on his reactions to witnessing events in Paris in 1968.

  160. @D. K.
    I checked to see if the Cuddihy book is available to me at our renown New York Public Library:

    ***

    The Ordeal of Civility
    By Cuddihy, John Murray
    Book - 1974
    Total Copies: 1

    In-library use only (1)
    Location Collection Volume Call No. Status
    Stephen A. Schwarzman Building Schwarzman Building - Dorot Jewish Division Rm 111 --- *PXK 75-6065 Available
    USE IN LIBRARY

    ***
  161. Todd: “The United States are a greater danger to peace than Iran”.

    I think Todd is a French lefter-than-thou intellectual who resents that France is a joke country and the US dominates the world with military force. So he blames the traditional allegiances of the French, though his own liberalism is itself scarcely a less venerable tradition. Anyway the competition in all this is to disown any concept of France as a nation state with a population who matter. They don’t . The intellectual elite serve the business elite, who demand growth because that can let them leverage their assets. Anti indigenous agitation serves unending immigration flows, which are a way of pumping up the GDP, enabling massive leveraging.

    • Replies: @Rifleman

    Todd: “The United States are a greater danger to peace than Iran”.
     
    True.

    I think Todd is a French lefter-than-thou intellectual who resents that France is a joke country and the US dominates the world with military force.
     
    True. I saw him on Charlie Rose years ago and the guy was clearly inadequate as a "Frenchman" in relation to US power. He was threatened, insecure and demoralized.

    He was even fantasizing about a French led superstate of France, Germany, Russia and Japan creating an alternative to "US hegemony".

    The guy was creepy as hell.

    I guess now he has resurrected a more Jewish identity visa via his White French Gentile Devils.

    He seems to be forever looking for a Powerful White "Other" to give him an identity. French or Jewish or maybe The Beleaguered Intellectual.
  162. Europe is currently under siege from huge numbers of Middle Easterners and Africans trying to move in

    They are already in. Zemmour has said the “white proletariat is helpless before the ostentatious virility of their black and Arab competitors seducing numerous young white women”

  163. More from Zemmour:

    Zemmour says he would like to put on trial the anti-racism of the 1980s,[41] which he considers, along with feminism, to be a “bien-pensant cause” derived from the “milieu of French and Western pseudo-elites” that the people will not follow in the least.[4] He says that it was especially after having “read Pierre-André Taguieff,” known for his positions and work on the Nouvelle droite and anti-racism that he “understood that anti-racist progressivism was the successor of communism, with the same totalitarian methods developed by the Comintern during the 1930s.”[42] According to him, anti-racism is a tactic initiated by François Mitterrand to make people forget the Left’s turn to economic liberalism in 1983. Anti-racism would be an ideology implemented by former leftists who had had to give up their illusions. With immigrants, these people had found a kind of alternative revolutionary people

    • Replies: @Bill B.
    Eric Zemmour is terrific.

    He has a stinging response in Figaro where he notes that Todd is willing to throw away secularism and freedom for the sake of a dubious peace - and so follows a long pacifist tendency on the French left ("Better to be a live German than a dead Frenchman" etc.).

    Zemmour argues that Todd wants Islam to have a wildly unmerited equality with Catholicism (the forge of the nation) and is using Islamic aggression to wipe away the remnants of Christianity in France.

    I read Todd's much earlier books and I thought they were useful. Now he is revealed as a utopian loon. Zemmour's article is on pdf in French here:

    http://ac.matra.free.fr/FB/20150513zemmour.pdf
  164. Jean Jaures famous socialist, who the FN are now quoting was anti clerical. Uber-Revanchist Raymond Poincare, who started WW1 and then initiated mass immigration into France so it would have cannon fodder for WW2 (which he also started) was anti-clerical too.

    In 1905 there was a scandal when it was discovered practicing Catholic military officers were being denied promotion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affaire_Des_Fiches

    Petain is supposed to have said he could not report on which of his subordinates attended mass as he always sat in the front row. He probably saved France from defeat in WW1.

  165. @Steve Sailer
    "Aside from Lou Dobbs maybe, I don’t think any mainstream voice of note is calling for a moratorium."

    Ann Coulter.

    “Aside from Lou Dobbs maybe, I don’t think any mainstream voice of note is calling for a moratorium.”
    Ann Coulter.

    Anne is semi-banned from Fox. She is no longer allowed on Bill O’Reilly and I doubt she has ever been on Megyn Kelly’s show. Anne has made asides about an effort to marginalize and ignore her since she came put with her latest book on immigration putting the Republican party out of business they way it has done in California.
    I have not seen her on Greta’s show though Sean Hannity still hosts her on radio and Fox-TV

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "Anne is semi-banned from Fox. She is no longer allowed on Bill O’Reilly and I doubt she has ever been on Megyn Kelly’s show."

    Ann Coulter was just on Megyn Kelly's show last week.
  166. WhatEvvs [AKA "Aamirkhanfan"] says:
    @Taco
    In reply to Spengler, I would quote Frank Herbert, from Dune,

    "And he thought about the Guild -- the force which had specialized for so long that it had become a parasite, unable to exist independently of the life upon which it had fed. They had never dared grasp the sword... and now they could not grasp it. They might have taken Arrakis when they realized the error of specializing on the melange awareness-spectrum narcotic for their navigators. They could have done this, lived their glorious day and died. Instead, they'd existed from moment to moment, hoping the seas in which they swam might produce a new host when the old one died.

    "The guild navigators, gifted with limited prescience, had made the fatal decision: they'd chosen always the clear, safe course that leads downward into stagnation."

    Call me a zombie if you will. From my ancestral gene-pool sprang Shakespeare, both industrial revolutions, the assembly line, and footprints on the moon. We grasped the sword and lived our glorious day. Even if we burn out and become nothing more than a reviled memory in the social justice textbooks of the future, we will have accomplished far more than the Marxs, Freuds, and Spenglers ever could.

    From my ancestral gene-pool sprang Shakespeare, both industrial revolutions, the assembly line, and footprints on the moon.

    What have you done, sir?

    And by the way, have you ever worked on an assembly line? Have you ever signed your name to someone else’s paycheck? Did you know that GPS technology depends upon the theory of relativity?

    • Replies: @Taco
    I have worked on an assembly line and signed someone's paycheck, but you still make a point. I'm not Shakespeare or Armstrong. But who is Goldman? Is he himself the rambam? Are you? If I get no part of the credit for my ancestors and cousins, why do you and Goldman get credit for yours?

    In other words, nice try, but make a real point.
  167. @Deduction

    They aren’t all paranoid loons. Do you think that Steve is a paranoid loon.? And if it is taboo, and one’s career can be destroyed for the undertaking, are the paranoid loons really paranoid
     
    Steve makes moderate and considered points. The majority of commenters on this issue come across as total psychopaths. My point was a generalisation and still holds.

    You can be thinking in the right direction but still be wrong because you are bereft of a sense of context or scale.

    Someone who locks themselves in a basement with an armoury of guns because they are expecting to be arrested for a parking offense is entirely correct that the police are out to get them, but they are still quite mad.

    “The majority of commenters on this issue come across as total psychopaths.”

    This is hyperbole and a gratuituous insult, and is simply not true at all. The minority of commenters consisting of you comes across as disingenuous and/or stupid. It obviously pains you that people use this forum to express opinions of which you disaspprove. Your approval is neither needed or wanted.

    • Replies: @Deduction

    This is hyperbole and a gratuituous insult, and is simply not true at all. The minority of commenters consisting of you comes across as disingenuous and/or stupid. It obviously pains you that people use this forum to express opinions of which you disaspprove. Your approval is neither needed or wanted.
     
    It's no exaggeration, trust me, I've been called a Zionist agent for arguing against the theory that Jews are in the final stages of a two thousand year long plan to wipe out other pale-skinned peoples.

    Is it an insult to call someone who's clearly insane 'mad?' Or is it just appropriate use of the English language?

    As for my approval, I never claimed that you sought it. So stating that you don't care either way seems a bit petulant...

    As for my interest -

    Unfortunately the credibility of my arguments are tied to these tireless crusaders against Zionism and I would prefer not to be stabbed in the back by their obvious insanity.

    As millions of African and Arab invaders pour over the borders and Jews intermarry into non-existence all these idiots can do is dribble about bloody Jews!
  168. @LKM
    Diaspora Jews may have done a good job of identifying themselves to outsiders by self-segregating and not learning local languages. Also, payot are a dead giveaway. Today, most western Jews aren't readily identifiable as such. This is a relatively new thing.

    “LKM says:

    Diaspora Jews may have done a good job of identifying themselves to outsiders by self-segregating and not learning local languages. ”

    I suppose they may have done a lot of things. They might have remigrated to thier homeland. And yet they didn’t.

  169. @Jefferson
    "Then there is a France of the periphery, for example, the west or cities such as Lyon, which has stayed true to the old Catholic bedrock, where people may no longer be practising Catholics, but they’re still infused with all the social conservatism of that Catholicism, its hierarchies and inequality."

    The half Jew Emmanuel Todd hates French Catholics because of their social Conservatism. Yeah because his beloved favorite pets the Muslims are so socially Liberal right? I am sure the vast majority of Muslims support same sex marriage and World War Ts like Caitlyn Jenner. Muslims will turn France into a French speaking version of San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, and Berkeley right?

    Also I wonder what the half Jew thinks of Orthodox and Hasidic Jews who look down on Homosexuality and Transgenderism. There was an Orthodox Jew who started stabbing Homosexual men at a Gay pride parade in Israel.

    "These “sham” demonstrations, he claimed, were made up of a one-sided elite who wanted to spit on Islam, the religion of a weak minority in France."

    Yeah Muslims in France are so weak and harmless, that is why there are no-go zone areas in France that Infidel Catholic, Jewish, and Atheist French people are too afraid to step foot in.

    People don't fear the weak. The fact that so many French people fear Muslims, means they are not a weak religion of poor little helpless Betas.

    I am sure the vast majority of Muslims support same sex marriage and World War Ts like Caitlyn Jenner

    They just might. “When your enemy is committing suicide, don’t interfere.”

    That saying came from the West, but it sounds as Arab as all get out.

    • Replies: @Sean
    Actually the Muslims in France are the French Catholics only allies against

    http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21596977-row-about-childrens-books-exposes-sharp-cultural-divisions-france-everybody-naked


    The most recent concerned several books designed for children of primary-school age, bearing such titles as “Jean has two Mummies”, “Daddy wears a dress”, and “Everybody naked!”, a volume that shows, page by page, family members, a baby-sitter, a policeman, a teacher and several others all taking their clothes off [...] The book row is just part of a wider panic uniting Catholic and Muslim traditionalists[...] Schoolchildren, say .. critics, are to be taught that sexual identity is learned rather than being biologically or otherwise determined.

    Teenagers will be “encouraged to doubt their sexual identity”, declares [activist of north African origin] Farida Belghoul, an anti-gender-theory activist, as the government tries to “re-educate our children”. The education ministry, asserts her group, is in the pockets of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender lobby.


    , @Matra
    French Muslims were conspicuous by their absence in the anti-gay marriage protests a few years ago.
  170. @Bill Jones
    Hence the proliferation of Fasces in the Congress and on the memorial to the great dictator
    http://livinglincoln.web.unc.edu/2015/04/17/the-lincoln-memorial-how-it-stands-today/

    I imagine the founding fathers would have been aghast at the obscenity of the Lincoln memorial – the postumous elevation of a mere President, and one who presided over a bloody civil war as well, to the rank of Caesar, and the founding of a cult of worship around him. The rational side of Jefferson probably wouldn’t have liked the Jefferson memorial either (although the man himself may have been flattered by it). In any event, it will probably be demolished or repurposed given that Jefferson was a slave-owner.

    • Replies: @Curle
    The historian Clyde Wilson makes precisely this point several times in his collection of essays From Union to Empire. That the founding generation considered Republican principles to involve a public ethos that included a disdain for the glorification of individual men. Jefferson would have hated his monument (not to mention Lincoln's).

    http://www.amazon.com/From-Union-Empire-Jeffersonian-Tradition/dp/0962384216
  171. @Reg Cæsar

    I am sure the vast majority of Muslims support same sex marriage and World War Ts like Caitlyn Jenner
     
    They just might. "When your enemy is committing suicide, don't interfere."

    That saying came from the West, but it sounds as Arab as all get out.

    Actually the Muslims in France are the French Catholics only allies against

    http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21596977-row-about-childrens-books-exposes-sharp-cultural-divisions-france-everybody-naked

    The most recent concerned several books designed for children of primary-school age, bearing such titles as “Jean has two Mummies”, “Daddy wears a dress”, and “Everybody naked!”, a volume that shows, page by page, family members, a baby-sitter, a policeman, a teacher and several others all taking their clothes off […] The book row is just part of a wider panic uniting Catholic and Muslim traditionalists[…] Schoolchildren, say .. critics, are to be taught that sexual identity is learned rather than being biologically or otherwise determined.

    Teenagers will be “encouraged to doubt their sexual identity”, declares [activist of north African origin] Farida Belghoul, an anti-gender-theory activist, as the government tries to “re-educate our children”. The education ministry, asserts her group, is in the pockets of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender lobby.

  172. @Whiskey
    Occam's Razor says this Toddian attitude is not a triple bankshot but the eternal struggle between GoodWhites and BadWhites since Israelis suffer the same thing, desire for mass African Immigration by GoodWhite Israelis:

    FT link to Israeli African refugees:

    This week, amid news reports of Africans freed from Holot being barred from Arad or rearrested in Tel Aviv, liberal Israelis reflected on their own past as a country founded largely by people fleeing persecution.

    “We are a country of refugees,” says Anat Ovadia, a spokesperson for the Hotline for Refugees and Migrants, one of the non-governmental organisations that petitioned for the detainees’ release. “It is very shameful that Israel forgets its history.”
    ...

    Refugee experts say that Israel’s policies toward migrants reflect both political pressures to do something and This week, amid news reports of Africans freed from Holot being barred from Arad or rearrested in Tel Aviv, liberal Israelis reflected on their own past as a country founded largely by people fleeing persecution.

    “We are a country of refugees,” says Anat Ovadia, a spokesperson for the Hotline for Refugees and Migrants, one of the non-governmental organisations that petitioned for the detainees’ release. “It is very shameful that Israel forgets its history.”
    ...

    Refugee experts say that Israel’s policies toward migrants reflect both political pressures to do something and demographic anxieties in its rightwing governing elite about maintaining a strong Jewish majority in the country.

    “This week’s events reflect once again the lack of a policy of the Israeli government when it concerns non-Jewish immigration to Israel,” says Jean-Marc Liling, an Israeli lawyer specialising in refugee law.

    “There is a complete incapacity to deal with the fact that Israel has become a country of immigration and not only a country of Aliyah [Jewish immigration].”

    “This week’s events reflect once again the lack of a policy of the Israeli government when it concerns non-Jewish immigration to Israel,” says Jean-Marc Liling, an Israeli lawyer specialising in refugee law.

    “There is a complete incapacity to deal with the fact that Israel has become a country of immigration and not only a country of Aliyah [Jewish immigration].
    ========================
    Read that again,

    demographic anxieties in its rightwing governing elite about maintaining a strong Jewish majority in the country.

    Whiskey's Law: Any elite that is sufficiently urban, educated and in a social bubble i.e. not concerned with immediate survival and removed from daily diversity will be GoodWhite and engaged in a moral struggle for social dominance and status by eradicating BadWhites.

    First Corollary: Any elite that is sufficiently threatened by demographic change will act firstly to preserve itself out of basic human nature, GoodWhite vs. BadWhite concerns aside. This is seen particularly in small isolated countries overwhelmed in a few years time so that leaders will be chosen from migrating racial/ethnic groups not the local natives.

    Second Corollary: Any elite that has a comfortable margin of ten years or more of political control even with mass migration will encourage it to wage the battle of GoodWhites vs. BadWhites. Even though long-term political survival is doomed. Human nature can only look two years ahead at best.
    ---------------------
    A not insignificant number of Jews in Israel want to make their country "a nation of immigrants" and thus push forward their GoodWhite status. They are sufficiently isolated and naive about realities of daily life to feel that all people are all the same and that turning Tel Aviv into Addis Abbaba would be a good idea, more ethnic food and glorious multiculturalism and such.

    These are the GoodWhites of Israel.

    The BadWhites of Israel are the "right-wing" leaders who don't figure on being much as minorities in their own country and would like to keep on being Knesset members or Prime Minister not say, a serf in their own land serving African masters. Which is exactly what mass African immigration would do to Israel. Which they can see happening in as little as two years.

    Zombie Catholicism is the same as "We are a Nation of Immigrants" and "right wing leaders" blocking glorious commitment to the UN 1951 refugee agreement.

    What is wrong with the West is the social isolation and insularity of the elites who are not sharing the same demographic dispossession as say, White residents of Ferguson or working class Israelis in Jerusalem or working class Frenchmen in Lyon, non-cool "flyover" areas in France.

    This primarily a function of both geographic isolation of elites and class stratification. As Murray points out, the SuperZip leaders live in just a few zip codes in Georgetown, NYC, and LA, and these are the people leading the country.

    Whiskey’s Law: Any elite that is sufficiently urban, educated and in a social bubble i.e. not concerned with immediate survival and removed from daily diversity will be GoodWhite and engaged in a moral struggle for social dominance and status by eradicating BadWhites.

    Whiskey’s Law: Excuse the Jews, and Blame the White women.

    Whiskey’s Law: Excuse the Jews, and Blame the White women.Whiskey’s Law: Excuse the Jews, and Blame the White women.

    Now repeat that in meandering, paranoid form endlessly.

  173. @Sean
    Todd: "The United States are a greater danger to peace than Iran".

    I think Todd is a French lefter-than-thou intellectual who resents that France is a joke country and the US dominates the world with military force. So he blames the traditional allegiances of the French, though his own liberalism is itself scarcely a less venerable tradition. Anyway the competition in all this is to disown any concept of France as a nation state with a population who matter. They don't . The intellectual elite serve the business elite, who demand growth because that can let them leverage their assets. Anti indigenous agitation serves unending immigration flows, which are a way of pumping up the GDP, enabling massive leveraging.

    Todd: “The United States are a greater danger to peace than Iran”.

    True.

    I think Todd is a French lefter-than-thou intellectual who resents that France is a joke country and the US dominates the world with military force.

    True. I saw him on Charlie Rose years ago and the guy was clearly inadequate as a “Frenchman” in relation to US power. He was threatened, insecure and demoralized.

    He was even fantasizing about a French led superstate of France, Germany, Russia and Japan creating an alternative to “US hegemony”.

    The guy was creepy as hell.

    I guess now he has resurrected a more Jewish identity visa via his White French Gentile Devils.

    He seems to be forever looking for a Powerful White “Other” to give him an identity. French or Jewish or maybe The Beleaguered Intellectual.

  174. @WhatEvvs

    From my ancestral gene-pool sprang Shakespeare, both industrial revolutions, the assembly line, and footprints on the moon.
     
    What have you done, sir?

    And by the way, have you ever worked on an assembly line? Have you ever signed your name to someone else's paycheck? Did you know that GPS technology depends upon the theory of relativity?

    I have worked on an assembly line and signed someone’s paycheck, but you still make a point. I’m not Shakespeare or Armstrong. But who is Goldman? Is he himself the rambam? Are you? If I get no part of the credit for my ancestors and cousins, why do you and Goldman get credit for yours?

    In other words, nice try, but make a real point.

    • Replies: @WhatEvvs
    I think Goldman is a total asshole, not worthy of comment. And no one who has any true self-regard gets motivation from the achievements of co-ethnics.
  175. @Mr. Anon
    "The majority of commenters on this issue come across as total psychopaths."

    This is hyperbole and a gratuituous insult, and is simply not true at all. The minority of commenters consisting of you comes across as disingenuous and/or stupid. It obviously pains you that people use this forum to express opinions of which you disaspprove. Your approval is neither needed or wanted.

    This is hyperbole and a gratuituous insult, and is simply not true at all. The minority of commenters consisting of you comes across as disingenuous and/or stupid. It obviously pains you that people use this forum to express opinions of which you disaspprove. Your approval is neither needed or wanted.

    It’s no exaggeration, trust me, I’ve been called a Zionist agent for arguing against the theory that Jews are in the final stages of a two thousand year long plan to wipe out other pale-skinned peoples.

    Is it an insult to call someone who’s clearly insane ‘mad?’ Or is it just appropriate use of the English language?

    As for my approval, I never claimed that you sought it. So stating that you don’t care either way seems a bit petulant…

    As for my interest –

    Unfortunately the credibility of my arguments are tied to these tireless crusaders against Zionism and I would prefer not to be stabbed in the back by their obvious insanity.

    As millions of African and Arab invaders pour over the borders and Jews intermarry into non-existence all these idiots can do is dribble about bloody Jews!

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "It’s no exaggeration, trust me,..........."

    Why should I trust you? You stated that a majority of people who post on this site on a particular topic are psychopaths. A majority? Have you counted them? What percentage are they, exactly?

    You're just making stuff up. Why should anyone care what you think?
  176. @Anonymous
    The late French chef Paul Bocuse had his main (Michelin 3-star) restaurant in Lyon. His food was so fantastic in the early years that religious French Jews were concerned that a visit to his restaurant in Lyon would push young Jews away from observance. (j/k)

    The late French chef Paul Bocuse

    Um, Bocuse is still very much alive. 89 to be sure, but not buried yet.

  177. @Deduction
    More from Zemmour:

    Zemmour says he would like to put on trial the anti-racism of the 1980s,[41] which he considers, along with feminism, to be a "bien-pensant cause" derived from the "milieu of French and Western pseudo-elites" that the people will not follow in the least.[4] He says that it was especially after having "read Pierre-André Taguieff," known for his positions and work on the Nouvelle droite and anti-racism that he "understood that anti-racist progressivism was the successor of communism, with the same totalitarian methods developed by the Comintern during the 1930s."[42] According to him, anti-racism is a tactic initiated by François Mitterrand to make people forget the Left's turn to economic liberalism in 1983. Anti-racism would be an ideology implemented by former leftists who had had to give up their illusions. With immigrants, these people had found a kind of alternative revolutionary people

    Eric Zemmour is terrific.

    He has a stinging response in Figaro where he notes that Todd is willing to throw away secularism and freedom for the sake of a dubious peace – and so follows a long pacifist tendency on the French left (“Better to be a live German than a dead Frenchman” etc.).

    Zemmour argues that Todd wants Islam to have a wildly unmerited equality with Catholicism (the forge of the nation) and is using Islamic aggression to wipe away the remnants of Christianity in France.

    I read Todd’s much earlier books and I thought they were useful. Now he is revealed as a utopian loon. Zemmour’s article is on pdf in French here:

    http://ac.matra.free.fr/FB/20150513zemmour.pdf

  178. It’s a pity that neither Eric Zemmour’s Le Suicide Français nor Thilo Sarrazin’s Germany Abolishes Itself have been translated into English.

    PS I know several good French websites on immigration and the EU (I read French). Can anyone recommend ones with some English for Germany, Italy or indeed Spain?

  179. @Reg Cæsar

    I am sure the vast majority of Muslims support same sex marriage and World War Ts like Caitlyn Jenner
     
    They just might. "When your enemy is committing suicide, don't interfere."

    That saying came from the West, but it sounds as Arab as all get out.

    French Muslims were conspicuous by their absence in the anti-gay marriage protests a few years ago.

  180. @Mr. Anon
    I imagine the founding fathers would have been aghast at the obscenity of the Lincoln memorial - the postumous elevation of a mere President, and one who presided over a bloody civil war as well, to the rank of Caesar, and the founding of a cult of worship around him. The rational side of Jefferson probably wouldn't have liked the Jefferson memorial either (although the man himself may have been flattered by it). In any event, it will probably be demolished or repurposed given that Jefferson was a slave-owner.

    The historian Clyde Wilson makes precisely this point several times in his collection of essays From Union to Empire. That the founding generation considered Republican principles to involve a public ethos that included a disdain for the glorification of individual men. Jefferson would have hated his monument (not to mention Lincoln’s).

    http://www.amazon.com/From-Union-Empire-Jeffersonian-Tradition/dp/0962384216

  181. @Clyde

    “Aside from Lou Dobbs maybe, I don’t think any mainstream voice of note is calling for a moratorium.”
    Ann Coulter.
     
    Anne is semi-banned from Fox. She is no longer allowed on Bill O'Reilly and I doubt she has ever been on Megyn Kelly's show. Anne has made asides about an effort to marginalize and ignore her since she came put with her latest book on immigration putting the Republican party out of business they way it has done in California.
    I have not seen her on Greta's show though Sean Hannity still hosts her on radio and Fox-TV

    “Anne is semi-banned from Fox. She is no longer allowed on Bill O’Reilly and I doubt she has ever been on Megyn Kelly’s show.”

    Ann Coulter was just on Megyn Kelly’s show last week.

  182. @Deduction

    There’s no phenomenon that could be explained by (a) Jews being self-hating ethno-masochists or (b) something else.

    Jews do not popularize a notion of “Jewish privilege” or any other anti-Jewish double standards. They do not call for more diversity (meaning fewer Jews) in any context.
     
    Jews don't need to popularise a notion of 'Jewish privilege.' They are already caught in the term 'White privilege.'

    And when a Jew calls for more (non-white) diversity, it logically follows that they are calling for fewer Jews.

    Jews, well Ashkenazi Jews, certainly do not consider themselves 'people of colour.'

    Jews don’t need to popularise a notion of ‘Jewish privilege.’ They are already caught in the term ‘White privilege.’

    No, they’re cloaked by it.

    And when a Jew calls for more (non-white) diversity, it logically follows that they are calling for fewer Jews.

    No, it doesn’t. It does not follow in theory, and it does not follow in practice.

  183. @Lot

    A huge amount of intellectualizing consists of triple bankshots made up by Jewish intellectuals to rationalize primal emotions they feel. Their triple bankshots (bomb Libya abroad, lay down to Muslim inundation at home, or whatever) frequently don’t make much sense in non-emotional terms, but they very much do not like gentiles applying Occam’s Razor to their triple bankshots.
     
    So, what does Occam's Razor say then?

    You seem to be flirting with Kevin MacDonaldism, where the Eternal Jew is always pushing Jewish interests at the expense of everyone else.

    Now, no doubt many Jews advocate for Jewish interests. But what is your support for the idea that anti-white Jews somehow can't just be self-hating ethno-masochists like other white ethnic groups? Why is it when a Jew advocates his country to be inundated with Muslims, it is some convoluted "triple bankshot" to advance Jewish interests, but not when Italians or Swedes do the same?

    If you want to apply Occam's razor here, it is that French half-jews like Todd that advocate France be overrun with Arabs and black muslims that hate jews, they do it because they are, at best, indifferent to the country being overrun by anti-semites who will attack Jews on the streets and vote in George Galloway types who want to BDS Israel into a South Africa type pariah state.

    Now, no doubt many Jews advocate for Jewish interests. But what is your support for the idea that anti-white Jews somehow can’t just be self-hating ethno-masochists like other white ethnic groups?

    If Jewish anti-Whiteness is ethnic Whiteness since it’s an internal affair among Whites, then it would seem to follow that the Holocaust was just another example of ethnic masochism for the same reason.

  184. @Anonymous
    What ethnoreligious collective? Secular and Reform Jews don't get along well enough with Orthodox Jews to collaborate with them. There is discussion of the ways in which Christianity differs from Judaism in Jewish communities where Christian non-Jews are encountered in daily life, but there is no explicit hatred of European non-Jews that is taught to all Jews.

    What ethnoreligious collective? Secular and Reform Jews don’t get along well enough with Orthodox Jews to collaborate with them.

    Of course, there are internal divisions, but this is an exaggeration. The JCPA (Jewish Council for Public Affairs) includes the Orthodox Union among its 15 member agencies. The Orthodox Union is also a member of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.

  185. WhatEvvs [AKA "AamirKhanFan"] says:
    @Taco
    I have worked on an assembly line and signed someone's paycheck, but you still make a point. I'm not Shakespeare or Armstrong. But who is Goldman? Is he himself the rambam? Are you? If I get no part of the credit for my ancestors and cousins, why do you and Goldman get credit for yours?

    In other words, nice try, but make a real point.

    I think Goldman is a total asshole, not worthy of comment. And no one who has any true self-regard gets motivation from the achievements of co-ethnics.

  186. @Deduction

    This is hyperbole and a gratuituous insult, and is simply not true at all. The minority of commenters consisting of you comes across as disingenuous and/or stupid. It obviously pains you that people use this forum to express opinions of which you disaspprove. Your approval is neither needed or wanted.
     
    It's no exaggeration, trust me, I've been called a Zionist agent for arguing against the theory that Jews are in the final stages of a two thousand year long plan to wipe out other pale-skinned peoples.

    Is it an insult to call someone who's clearly insane 'mad?' Or is it just appropriate use of the English language?

    As for my approval, I never claimed that you sought it. So stating that you don't care either way seems a bit petulant...

    As for my interest -

    Unfortunately the credibility of my arguments are tied to these tireless crusaders against Zionism and I would prefer not to be stabbed in the back by their obvious insanity.

    As millions of African and Arab invaders pour over the borders and Jews intermarry into non-existence all these idiots can do is dribble about bloody Jews!

    “It’s no exaggeration, trust me,………..”

    Why should I trust you? You stated that a majority of people who post on this site on a particular topic are psychopaths. A majority? Have you counted them? What percentage are they, exactly?

    You’re just making stuff up. Why should anyone care what you think?

  187. I ran into your blog while seeking further information about Keila Ravelo . I felt like I have been in a desert along time, and you gave me a cup of water, a real big cup! I am enjoying the great conversations , and hope to be around for many more . I feel like I gained 100 points in my IQ !

  188. @Percy Gryce

    The Romans in that series were awesome.
     
    Well, Titus Pullo was.

    The Dissident Right needs its own Titus Pullo now that Caesar has shown himself.

  189. @yaqub the mad scientist
    He did once proclaim that he was here to make people feel bad, not good.

    Interesting. Judging by comments he was making a lot of people feel very good about themselves. Many of them belonged to a particular nationality.

  190. Sorry, too slow to correct, should be:

    Interesting. Judging by comments his articles make a lot of people feel very good about themselves. Many of them belong to a particular ethnic group…

  191. @Pat Casey

    Aside from all that, I find it sort of tiresome and boring as well. The question of the percentage of Jewish Bolsheviks, their relative responsibility for the ’65 immigration act and 70′s feminism, and the other questions that preoccupy MacDonaldists for me are not very interesting as historical questions compared to, say, Roman history, or 17th century England. Nor do they seem relevant to issues confronting our present and future: how do block amnesty at home, elect the Donald president, and stop the exponentially growing stream of refugees from the Third World from destroying the First.
     
    If 17th century England is your cup of tea then definitely get Shakespeare by Another Name by Mark Anderson. But understanding how recent history was influenced by Jews is interesting because their influence was so vast, and so underreported. Not to mention radical, and understanding that Jews are apt to be radical puts Steve's central claim into crystal clear perspective: that he is the moderate voice. That's very useful to keep putting across re how do you block amnesty at home, and MacDonald compliments the point excellently, seems to me. I do understand how Roman history makes one think more. But maybe that's because its not so easy, which is to say it's not so Jewish. And I don't think Jews who don't ostracize Abe Foxman and his ilk are particularly moral individuals. Or maybe character assassination is the moral alternative to dueling. Or maybe not.

    “Aside from all that, I find it sort of tiresome and boring as well.”

    An excellent example of Orwellian crimestop.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS