The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Jewish Self-Awareness
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

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

I am a big fan of Jewish self-awareness, but it’s in increasingly short supply in recent years. Here’s an interview with a Jewish professor of history, Marc Dollinger, who points out some fairly obvious truths that have gotten lost in all the retconning.

From NPR:

Exploding Myths About ‘Black Power, Jewish Politics’

June 4, 20186:18 AM ET
LEAH DONNELLA

Many Americans tell the story of Black-Jewish political relations like this: First, there was the Civil Rights movement, where the two groups got along great.

This was the mid-1950s to the mid-60s — picture Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel and Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. marching arm-in-arm from Selma to Montgomery. And James Chaney, Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner, murdered while organizing to register black voters in Mississippi.

Then, the story goes, there was a shift. In the mid-’60s, with the rise of black nationalism (and what some describe as black anti-Semitism), “the once wonderful alliance dissolved and split. And since the mid 1960s, it’s been terrible.”

That, says historian Marc Dollinger, is “the accepted wisdom on how to understand Jewish participation in the civil rights movement.”

Except, Dollinger adds, that’s not really what happened.

He lays all this out in his new book, Black Power, Jewish Politics: Reinventing the Alliance in the 1960s.

Dollinger, a professor at San Francisco State University, argues that much of our accepted knowledge about the interaction between black and Jewish communities is based more on myth than fact. He says uncovering the real story can teach all Americans a lot about privilege, historical memory and the way we construct our own stories. …

Dollinger: So I think that — it’s called historical memory, is what academics call it — we tend to remember what we want to remember. We tend to forget what we want to forget. And we tend to spin the evidence to a prearranged thesis. So we — white American Jews — have had a prearranged thesis on the black-Jewish alliance, and therefore it tends to self-perpetuate. And it also is self-serving. …

So there are basically three areas advanced for why Jews would involve themselves in the struggle for racial equality. All three turn out to be false. But the first would be the history argument, that says blacks and Jews share a common history, and therefore Jews empathize with the historical experience of blacks, and therefore they’re willing to help. Right?

When I talk generally with white Jews about why Jews are involved in social justice or civil rights or racial equality, they’ll talk about this shared history of oppression.

And the problem is that American Jewish history and African-American history are 180 degrees opposite on that question. One of my African-American colleagues, he said, “If I ever go to a Seder and the Jews say that they know what it’s like because they too were once slaves in Egypt,” he’s gonna punch ‘em.

Because if Jews have to go back to ancient Egypt to get the slavery metaphor, then they’ve kind of missed that American Jewish history is a story of rapid social ascent, and African-American history is the legacy of slavery. That argument is insulting, and it’s very elementary. …

The second argument is a sociological one, which is to say Jews experience social marginalization; blacks experience social marginalization. Since Jews understand what it is to be on the margins, they help blacks. The problem with that is that the civil rights movement didn’t happen ’til the 1950s. In the 1950s, Jews were already in the mainstream. So if marginalization was the motive, then the movement should have started 50 years earlier. …

The third one, the one we get today, is Judaism: that the religion of the Jews argues for social justice, tikkun olam. Prophetic Judaism, the Reform movement, is involved with all of that.

The problem is, if one’s adherence to Judaism informs social justice, one would expect the Orthodox, those for whom traditional Judaism is most present in their everyday life, to be in the lead in racial equality. And in fact it’s the opposite. …

Zionism is a good example. In 1948, when the state of Israel was created, American Jews were happy, especially after the Holocaust, and thankful that there is a Jewish homeland. But they weren’t dancing in the streets, as it were.

After 1967, when the state of Israel won the Six Day War, the reaction of American Jewish youth was so pronounced that even national Jewish leaders were surprised — 7,500 young people got on airplanes and went to Israel to help, literally. Something like 98 percent of American Jews expressed strong sympathy for Israel.

And while the traditional thinking is, you know, Aren’t Jews great because they became Zionist in ’67? as a student of American Jewish history, I’m really curious why the reaction was stronger in ’67 than even in 1948. So when I did the research, I learned that the rise of black nationalism and the purge of Jews from leadership and civil rights organizations, got Jews thinking about their own nationalism.

You know, if blacks can advocate for blackness, then Jews can advocate for Jewishness. And in this sense, the Six Day War occurring in June of 1967 was perfectly timed to capture a whole bunch of young Jews who were nationalists in their proclivities, but didn’t have a place to put it. And there they could put it in Zionism.

My vague impression is that the 1967 War was galvanizing for American Jews more on the loyalist / conservative side of the spectrum by nature. According to Jacob Heilbrun, Moynihan and Nixon in the winter of 1968-69 figured out that they could sponsor neoconservatism among Jews excited about Israel and increasingly disillusioned by blacks. Perhaps that’s an exaggeration about the role played by these two very smart gentile observers of Jews, but it’s an interesting theory.

 
Hide 488 CommentsLeave a Comment
488 Comments to "Jewish Self-Awareness"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. A lot of the support for Israel in the general white population likewise might have been because the other side was notably swarthier, giving us the opportunity to root for the lighter side in a conflict, which was receding rapidly at home.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    I think it was more about the other side being Muslim, and being associated with arguably the nadir of American postwar prestige, the siege of the US embassy in Tehran and the failed hostage rescue.
    , @Mr. Blank
    Another way of looking at it:

    Islam was always going to be seen as The Enemy by a predominantly Christian West. Absent a total Third Reich victory in World War II — which even the most optimistic Nazis would probably regard as improbable — there was no alternative historical path in which Muslims and Christians might have joined together in happy shared hatred of the despised Jews. The only question was whether organized Judaism would align itself with the nominally Christian West or the less-nominally Muslim East.

    For the most part, Jews chose Western Christendom, however weak it might appear to be. So far their choice seems to have been the correct one.
    , @Simon in London
    A lot of Palestinians and other Levantines are very light skinned, and Mossad has no problem finding agents who make convincing Levantine Arabs. Palestinians Lebanese & Syrians don't look much like Gulf Arabs.

    OTOH Egyptians are often noticeably darker, so there's that.

    , @YetAnotherAnon
    I wouldn't say that ended in 1967 or 1972 either. My impression, and that's all it is, is that as Islam has increased its temporal power in the UK, whether by demography, or rape and bombings by its adherents, so Brits are less bothered about Muslims being mistreated in Palestine.

    The media helps this along - the siege of Aleppo got as much coverage in three months as the West Bank gets in a decade.

    The old British concern for 'fair play' was a product of people comfortable in their skins and in their country - as that comfort lessens, so will that concern.
    , @Svigor
    Support the rich guy across town, defending himself in court for shooting a burglar, even as his brother works to get your guns taken away and your house bulldozed.
    , @Jake
    Remarkably ignorant of you.

    American Christians, the product of WASP culture (and that has become increasingly true of Catholics as well, starting with assimilation toward the norms set by Mainline Protestants and increasing in pace with Vatican II), naturally would ally with Jews even against Palestinian Christians, not because of skin pigmentation but because of the cultural legacy of a Judaizing heresy: Anglo-Saxon Puritanism.
    , @tyrone
    It's bible prophecy plain and simple
    , @dfordoom

    A lot of the support for Israel in the general white population likewise might have been because the other side was notably swarthier, giving us the opportunity to root for the lighter side in a conflict, which was receding rapidly at home.
     
    Zionism is socially acceptable racism. You can be as racist as you like as long as your racism is directed against Israel's enemies.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Dave Pinsen says: • Website

    The problem with that is that the civil rights movement didn’t happen ’til the 1950s. In the 1950s, Jews were already in the mainstream. So if marginalization was the motive, then the movement should have started 50 years earlier. …

    Well, the idea that one needs to experience marginalization to advocate for the marginalized is obviously false, and is belied by the abolition movement, for example, which was driven by elite WASPs. But, to be fair, elite Jews like Walter Sachs and Henry Moskowitz were involved with the NAACP from its founding in 1909, well before the ‘50s.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Reg Cæsar
    A lot of the support for Israel in the general white population likewise might have been because the other side was notably swarthier, giving us the opportunity to root for the lighter side in a conflict, which was receding rapidly at home.

    I think it was more about the other side being Muslim, and being associated with arguably the nadir of American postwar prestige, the siege of the US embassy in Tehran and the failed hostage rescue.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    I think it was more about the other side being Muslim, and being associated with arguably the nadir of American postwar prestige, the siege of the US embassy in Tehran and the failed hostage rescue.
     
    Probably something to that....One could also add the chiliastic enthusiasm for Israel among many American fundamentalists....And there was also the Hollywood pro-Israel propaganda machine:



    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exodus_(1960_film)


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raid_on_Entebbe_(film)

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

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cast_a_Giant_Shadow
    , @Anon
    Attack on US embassy in Persia was 1979-80 12 years after the 67 Arab Israel war. The American sympathy for Israel was due to massive propaganda effort by American Jews. Remember book and movie Exodus?

    Plus every public high school and college library was full of WW2 history books emphazing Jewish martyrdom during WW2.

    Plus Rabbi Kahane was preparing the ground for a massive jump of Russian Jews from the Bolshevik disaster they created with endless propaganda about his Jews were sooooo abused in Russia.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. Anon[409] • Disclaimer says:

    The more Jews promote their Jewishness, the more that they become a separate thing from whites in the general consciousness. And once that happens, the more people will look at and start to quantify the proportionality of representation in various elite and influential jobs. Blending in more might be the better strategy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Independent

    the more people will look at and start to quantify the proportionality of representation in various elite and influential jobs.
     
    I would be grateful to anyone who who could provide some readily citable statistics for Jewish over-representation in positions of power, influence and wealth in both the public as well as the private sectors. I am trying to raise awareness among my fellow (and not-so-fellow, as the case may be) Jews. I need sources that stand a chance of being considered credible by "normies" and Respectables.

    Below is a comment I composed addressing this matter, the latest of several similar comments that I have submitted to a certain Respectable site. Perhaps unsurprisingly, none have made it past moderation.

    As we see from [any number of prominent examples], somehow it is considered quite acceptable for Jews to berate white gentiles for "racism" and "white privilege"-- even to the point of demanding that persons-of-color and other minorities be favored over whites in the interest of promoting "diversity". (E.g., Charles Schumer opposing judicial nominees on the grounds of them being white males.)

    Meanwhile, the fact is that in just about every area of wealth and influence: business, finance, government, academia, the media, etc., Jews hold positions in numbers that far exceed any proportionality to our percentage of the population. Yet, anyone who so much as notices, much less questions, this salient fact is reflexively denounced as an anti-Semite and forthwith blacklisted and unpersoned.

    As a Jew myself, I am not only ashamed of this rank double-standard but also quite apprehensive about where the inevitable increasing awareness and resentment of it may ultimately lead. Enough of the BS already! Either cut the sanctimonious moralizing about "diversity", etc. or stop demanding that Jewish over-representation be excluded from such discussions. You cannot have it both ways.
     
    , @Dissident
    [Please discard the nearly identical version of this comment that I submitted a few minutes ago (mistakenly using what is my posting handle and email address at a different site) in favor of this one. Thank you and apologies for the bother.]

    the more people will look at and start to quantify the proportionality of representation in various elite and influential jobs.
     
    I would be grateful to anyone who who could provide some readily citable statistics for Jewish over-representation in positions of power, influence and wealth in both the public as well as the private sectors. I am trying to raise awareness among my fellow (and not-so-fellow, as the case may be) Jews. I need sources that stand a chance of being considered credible by "normies" and "Respectables".

    Below is a comment I composed addressing this matter, the latest version of what are several that I have submitted to a certain Respectable site. Perhaps unsurprisingly, none have made it past moderation.


    As we see from [any number of prominent examples], somehow it is considered quite acceptable for Jews to berate white gentiles for "racism" and "white privilege"-- even to the point of demanding that persons-of-color and other minorities be favored over whites in the interest of promoting "diversity". (E.g., Charles Schumer opposing judicial nominees on the grounds of them being white males.)

    Meanwhile, the fact is that in just about every area of wealth and influence: business, finance, government, academia, the media, etc., Jews hold positions in numbers that far exceed any proportionality to our percentage of the population. Yet, anyone who so much as notices, much less questions, this salient fact is reflexively denounced as an anti-Semite and forthwith blacklisted and unpersoned.

    As a Jew myself, I am not only ashamed of this rank double-standard but also quite apprehensive about where the inevitable increasing awareness and resentment of it may ultimately lead. Enough of the BS already! Either cut the sanctimonious moralizing about "diversity", etc. or stop demanding that Jewish over-representation be excluded from such discussions. You cannot have it both ways.
     

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Not in 1967!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. Moses says:

    Jews, like any group, have group interests. And those interests often are not in alignment with White American interests.

    Simple as that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    ? Jews are white Americans.

    No offense.
    , @AndrewR
    "White American interests" is essentially meaningless. There are no interests that all White Americans share that all human beings don't also share. And there aren't really that many interests which a majority of white Americans share.
    , @Massimo Heitor

    Jews, like any group, have group interests. And those interests often are not in alignment with White American interests.
     
    Most taxonomies of human ethnicity consider Ashkenazi a sub group of white Euro ethnicity. Just like Russian, English, German, and Italian, are all distinct sub-ethnicities of white, Ashkenazi is a sub-ethnicity of white.

    Group interests aren't perfect. Hillary Clinton is white: specifically Dutch, English, Scottish, and Welsh. I certainly feel a closer affiliation to black Republicans than to a white Hillary Clinton or Nancy Pelosi.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. syonredux says:

    So there are basically three areas advanced for why Jews would involve themselves in the struggle for racial equality. All three turn out to be false. But the first would be the history argument, that says blacks and Jews share a common history, and therefore Jews empathize with the historical experience of blacks, and therefore they’re willing to help. Right?

    When I talk generally with white Jews about why Jews are involved in social justice or civil rights or racial equality, they’ll talk about this shared history of oppression.

    And yet, there was little in the way of Jewish sympathy for Blacks in the antebellum era. The movement to end the trans-Atlantic Slave Trade and Abolitionism were Protestant affairs. Indeed, elite Jewish opinion regarding Blacks could even be characterized as hostile:

    Diplomat, playwright, and journalist Mordecai M. Noah, the “most important Jew in America” during the 1830s and 1840s, according to his biographer Jonathan D. Sarna, wrote that blacks were “anatomically and mentally inferior to the white” and could find contentment only in servile labor. Noah dreaded the thought of a slave revolt and viciously condemned abolitionists. Emmanuel Hart, the first Jewish congressman from New York in the 1850s, was a leader of the conservative “hunker” Democrats, a faction that opposed any agitation against slavery and worked to uphold the interests of the slaveholding states. Editor Robert Lyon of the Asmonean, a self-described progressive who hired Reform Judaism’s leading proponent, Isaac Mayer Wise, as his literary editor, endorsed James Buchanan in 1856 as a “progressionist,” defended the Fugitive Slave Act, and called abolitionists “the foul Fiend which stalks among us.” Lyon included among the abolitionists both “Frederick Douglass the ******,” and a “heterogeneous stew of fanatics and imposters.” The notion of black suffrage was, he said, “preposterous.”

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/the-gay-jew-who-made-the-confederacy-tick/?highlight=raphall#comment-988247

    The third one, the one we get today, is Judaism: that the religion of the Jews argues for social justice, tikkun olam. Prophetic Judaism, the Reform movement, is involved with all of that.

    The problem is, if one’s adherence to Judaism informs social justice, one would expect the Orthodox, those for whom traditional Judaism is most present in their everyday life, to be in the lead in racial equality. And in fact it’s the opposite. …

    Well said. For the bulk of Jewish history, tikkun olam was seen as a call for proper observance of Jewish Law, not as a cry for social justice among the goyim….

    And while the traditional thinking is, you know, Aren’t Jews great because they became Zionist in ’67? as a student of American Jewish history, I’m really curious why the reaction was stronger in ’67 than even in 1948. So when I did the research, I learned that the rise of black nationalism and the purge of Jews from leadership and civil rights organizations, got Jews thinking about their own nationalism.

    You know, if blacks can advocate for blackness, then Jews can advocate for Jewishness. And in this sense, the Six Day War occurring in June of 1967 was perfectly timed to capture a whole bunch of young Jews who were nationalists in their proclivities, but didn’t have a place to put it. And there they could put it in Zionism.

    Yeah, but that doesn’t take into account the fact that the Six Day War engendered a similar uptick in Jewish nationalism outside the US…..Frankly, I tend to think that the sight of Jews kicking so much Arab ass simply triggered a massive testosterone surge among Jewish men across the globe….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  8. TheBoom says:

    This article’s self awareness is very sanitized. It doesn’t, for example, mention key things like Jews’ experience being slaves didn’t stop them from owning slaves and helping run the slave trade in the Confederacy just as blacks’ experience with being slaves didn’t stop them from getting into the trade when sent back to Africa. But knowing those things is anti Semitic (and racist!)

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Right, what you're getting here is a more respectable and focused version of the Nation of Islam book. In fact, what Dollinger is really doing is repositioning the Jews as whites just as some thought leaders had begun to proudly reject Jewish whiteness. The slavery connection isn't just too hot, it's downright elegant in its elimination of any natural sympathy.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. syonredux says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    I think it was more about the other side being Muslim, and being associated with arguably the nadir of American postwar prestige, the siege of the US embassy in Tehran and the failed hostage rescue.

    I think it was more about the other side being Muslim, and being associated with arguably the nadir of American postwar prestige, the siege of the US embassy in Tehran and the failed hostage rescue.

    Probably something to that….One could also add the chiliastic enthusiasm for Israel among many American fundamentalists….And there was also the Hollywood pro-Israel propaganda machine:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exodus_(1960_film)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raid_on_Entebbe_(film)

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

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

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. There has to be a better word than retconning. The only place I’ve ever seen it is here and when I had to look it up.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    There has to be a better word than retconning. The only place I’ve ever seen it is here and when I had to look it up.
     
    I think that it works. And it's used quite a bit in the comics:

    The first published use of the phrase "retroactive continuity" is found in theologian E. Frank Tupper's 1973 book The Theology of Wolfhart Pannenberg:[6][page needed] "Pannenberg's conception of retroactive continuity ultimately means that history flows fundamentally from the future into the past, that the future is not basically a product of the past."
     

    The first known printed use of "retroactive continuity" referring to the altering of history in a fictional work is in All-Star Squadron #18 (February 1983) from DC Comics. The series was set on DC's Earth-Two, an alternate universe in which Golden Age comic characters age in real time. All-Star Squadron was set during World War II on Earth-Two; as it was in the past of an alternate universe, all its events had repercussions on the contemporary continuity of the DC multiverse. Each issue changed the history of the fictional world in which it was set. In the letters column, a reader remarked that the comic "must make you [the creators] feel at times as if you're painting yourself into a corner", and, "Your matching of Golden Age comics history with new plotlines has been an artistic (and I hope financial!) success." Writer Roy Thomas responded, "we like to think that an enthusiastic ALL-STAR booster at one of Adam Malin's Creation Conventions in San Diego came up with the best name for it a few months back: 'Retroactive Continuity'. Has kind of a ring to it, don't you think?"[7] The term then took firm root in the consciousness of fans of American superhero comics.
     

    At some point, "retroactive continuity" was shortened to "retcon", reportedly by Damian Cugley in 1988 on Usenet. Hard evidence of Cugley's abbreviation has yet to surface, though in a Usenet posting on August 18, 1990, Cugley posted a reply in which he identified himself as "the originator of the word retcon".[8] Cugley used the neologism to describe a development in the comic book Saga of the Swamp Thing, which reinterprets the events of the title character's origin by revealing facts that previously were not part of the narrative and were not intended by earlier writers.
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retroactive_continuity
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. anon[217] • Disclaimer says:

    The split occurred after the 60′s because Jews got rich, and powerful, and blacks stayed poor, and became their useful idiots whenever they needed to stick it to the WASPs. But blacks are violent and unpredictable, so the Jews created a new class of useful idiots, gays and feminists. They are much easier to control.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  12. syonredux says:
    @uilleam yr alban
    There has to be a better word than retconning. The only place I've ever seen it is here and when I had to look it up.

    There has to be a better word than retconning. The only place I’ve ever seen it is here and when I had to look it up.

    I think that it works. And it’s used quite a bit in the comics:

    The first published use of the phrase “retroactive continuity” is found in theologian E. Frank Tupper’s 1973 book The Theology of Wolfhart Pannenberg:[6][page needed] “Pannenberg’s conception of retroactive continuity ultimately means that history flows fundamentally from the future into the past, that the future is not basically a product of the past.”

    The first known printed use of “retroactive continuity” referring to the altering of history in a fictional work is in All-Star Squadron #18 (February 1983) from DC Comics. The series was set on DC’s Earth-Two, an alternate universe in which Golden Age comic characters age in real time. All-Star Squadron was set during World War II on Earth-Two; as it was in the past of an alternate universe, all its events had repercussions on the contemporary continuity of the DC multiverse. Each issue changed the history of the fictional world in which it was set. In the letters column, a reader remarked that the comic “must make you [the creators] feel at times as if you’re painting yourself into a corner”, and, “Your matching of Golden Age comics history with new plotlines has been an artistic (and I hope financial!) success.” Writer Roy Thomas responded, “we like to think that an enthusiastic ALL-STAR booster at one of Adam Malin’s Creation Conventions in San Diego came up with the best name for it a few months back: ‘Retroactive Continuity’. Has kind of a ring to it, don’t you think?”[7] The term then took firm root in the consciousness of fans of American superhero comics.

    At some point, “retroactive continuity” was shortened to “retcon”, reportedly by Damian Cugley in 1988 on Usenet. Hard evidence of Cugley’s abbreviation has yet to surface, though in a Usenet posting on August 18, 1990, Cugley posted a reply in which he identified himself as “the originator of the word retcon”.[8] Cugley used the neologism to describe a development in the comic book Saga of the Swamp Thing, which reinterprets the events of the title character’s origin by revealing facts that previously were not part of the narrative and were not intended by earlier writers.

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

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

    The thing is, some Jews can get prickly about the public self awareness of other Jews. What’s Dollinger’s escape plan?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. “And it’s used quite a bit in the comics”

    I’m not sure that’s a positive. A good neologism for an important phenomenon should suggest the nature of the phenomenon.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Right, because what cultural influence do superhero comics have today?
    , @syonredux

    “And it’s used quite a bit in the comics”

    I’m not sure that’s a positive. A good neologism for an important phenomenon should suggest the nature of the phenomenon.
     
    Seeing as how the SJWs (the most enthusiastic retconers) tend to view reality in terms of fantasy, a term derived from the comics seems quite appropriate....


    How Fiction Forms Our Politics : The Psychology of Narratives

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6RKnmJQ7HM
    , @Svigor
    IIRC, the term isn't just used to refer to comics, but has its origins with comic readers.

    It's pretty suggestive, IMO: "retroactive continuity."

    "Revisionist history" and "rewriting history" are the closest terms I can think of.
    , @Glaivester
    Actually, the term is now used in almost any fictional work where continuity plays a role: movie series, TV shows, etc.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. newrouter says:

    There’s “blackity black black” and there’s “jewity jew jew”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  16. Today marks the 50th anniversary of Robert Kennedy’s assassination in LA. His killer, Sirhan Sirhan, shot him because Kennedy voted to help Israel during the ‘67 Six Day War. That congressional vote cost him his life.

    Literally, Kennedy gave his life for Israel.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Also Don Drysdale's 6th straight shutout.
    , @AnotherDad

    Today marks the 50th anniversary of Robert Kennedy’s assassination in LA. His killer, Sirhan Sirhan, shot him because Kennedy voted to help Israel during the ‘67 Six Day War. That congressional vote cost him his life.
     
    Also it's the 76th anniversary of--the much more world historically significant--American destruction of the Japanese carriers at Midway, which essentially sealed Japan's fate in the war. Though much more fighting and dying had to occur.


    (Personally, as a half-Irish American, i'll be happy when this Kennedy deification and mythologization has finally burnt out, over and done with and we can stop pretending these crude mediocrities were some sort of great, world historical, American titans.)
    , @hyperbola
    Funny how Sirhan managed to stand 6 feet in front of Kennedy and administer a shot in the head from 6 inches behind.

    CIA role claim in Kennedy killing
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/6169006.stm
    New video and photographic evidence that puts three senior CIA operatives at the scene of Robert Kennedy's assassination has been brought to light.

    The evidence is a result of a three year investigation

    The evidence was shown in a report by Shane O'Sullivan, broadcast on BBC Newsnight.

    It reveals that the operatives and four unidentified associates were at the Ambassador Hotel, Los Angeles in the moments before and after the shooting on 5 June, 1968.

    The CIA had no domestic jurisdiction and some of the officers were based in South-East Asia at the time, with no reason to be in Los Angeles. .....

    Kennedy brothers likely killed by CIA on behalf of Israel: Scholar
    https://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/05/28/rfk-cia/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. @Uilleam yr alban
    “And it’s used quite a bit in the comics”

    I’m not sure that’s a positive. A good neologism for an important phenomenon should suggest the nature of the phenomenon.

    Right, because what cultural influence do superhero comics have today?

    Read More
    • Agree: syonredux
    • Replies: @uilleam yr alban
    Comics virtually none. Movies based on 50-year-old comics a lot.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. syonredux says:
    @Uilleam yr alban
    “And it’s used quite a bit in the comics”

    I’m not sure that’s a positive. A good neologism for an important phenomenon should suggest the nature of the phenomenon.

    “And it’s used quite a bit in the comics”

    I’m not sure that’s a positive. A good neologism for an important phenomenon should suggest the nature of the phenomenon.

    Seeing as how the SJWs (the most enthusiastic retconers) tend to view reality in terms of fantasy, a term derived from the comics seems quite appropriate….

    How Fiction Forms Our Politics : The Psychology of Narratives

    Read More
    • Agree: Simon in London
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. @Steve Sailer
    Right, because what cultural influence do superhero comics have today?

    Comics virtually none. Movies based on 50-year-old comics a lot.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Comics virtually none. Movies based on 50-year-old comics a lot.
     
    All the more fitting, then, that we use a comics derived term.....
    , @Anon
    And inside-baseball industry jargon from the people who make comics: yet less influence.

    Sooner or later it might catch on, as some post-modernist academic jargon has caught on. But that example "begs the question" <wink, where's my Garner>: jargon that goes mainstream tends to waffle and expand and go soft-focus in its meaning. Many use it; few use it correctly or really know what it means.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Today marks the 50th anniversary of Robert Kennedy’s assassination in LA. His killer, Sirhan Sirhan, shot him because Kennedy voted to help Israel during the ‘67 Six Day War. That congressional vote cost him his life.

    Literally, Kennedy gave his life for Israel.

    Also Don Drysdale’s 6th straight shutout.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Did Bobby attend the game at Dodger Stadium? Or did Don's shutout happen on the road?
    Being as '68 was the 'Year of the Pitcher', I assume that Drysdale's shutout was a complete game.

    By the way, Youtube has MLB's 1965 WS Highlights between LA and MIN, narrated by Vin Scully. What's striking is the color photography. LA's uniforms with the pure white and royal blue are iconic (as iconic as the NY pinstripes). Dodger Stadium is truly a jewel. Hopefully it won't be torn down anytime soon.

    I did not realize that Koufax pitched and lost game 2, won game 5 (Complete Game) and THEN on two days rest, pitched game 7 (Complete Game). It's like, Drysdale pitched game 1 (obviously due to Sandy's abscence for Yom Kippur), but you'd think that Don would've pitched game 7 as he pitched game 4, but nope. There was no doubt in Alston's mind that Sandy was going to pitch game 7 after having won game 5.

    Sandy "only" struck out 10 batters in game 5.
    , @Clyde
    "Don Drysdale was 56 when he died of a heart attack at Le Centre Sheraton in Montreal, Quebec, on July 3, 1993"

    As far as I know the last great side arm pitcher. He was 6ft 6in.


    Nicknamed "Big D" by fans, Drysdale used brushback pitches and a sidearm fastball to intimidate batters,[3] similar to his fierce fellow Hall of Famer Bob Gibson. His 154 hit batsmen remains a modern National League record.

    Drysdale was a good hitting pitcher. In 14 seasons he had 218 hits, including 29 home runs. Drysdale was occasionally used as a pinch-hitter, once during the World Series.[5]
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. Stogumber says:

    The Jewish-Black coalition had its real foundation
    1) before 1945 with Jewish leftist “political entrepeneurs” looking for a bulk of footsoldiers (as a possible alternative to the industrial-worker footsoldiers) – this was one particular strategy of Jewish ascent
    2) after 1945 with Jewish Leftists being ashamed and disturbed by the bad image of Communism and looking for a way out in order to reestablish themselves as a political “force for the good”. (And of course, Jewish Leftists felt marginalized even under Eisenhower.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  22. J.Ross says: • Website

    The “story” here is that a respectable academic is willing to attach his name to information we already knew and that a healthy society would not find controversial. It might be Cofnas’d or they might just under-publicize it. I doubt Dollinger will be Finkelsteined because he won’t be seen as comparably combative or directly threatening.
    State legislators are mandating more and more “Holocaust education” and one representative (Ted Deutsch from Florida) is trying to use civil rights anti-discrimination logic to effectively ban “anti-Semitism” (it is hard to see this getting off the ground or surviving a Supreme Court challenge). Between these trends and the increasing discussions about topics that, in the recent past were notable for their controversality, it looks like an elite fumbling their near-totalitarian control. As always with this crowd, had they grasped less tightly, their grip would have been more secure.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon

    State legislators are mandating more and more “Holocaust education” and one representative (Ted Deutsch from Florida) is trying to use civil rights anti-discrimination logic to effectively ban “anti-Semitism” (it is hard to see this getting off the ground or surviving a Supreme Court challenge).
     
    It's hard to see that happening with a lot of things: the overturning of the fundamental meaning of a thousands-of-years-old social institution (marriage), the idea that men and women are no different, the normalization of homosexuality, the acceptance of a small subset of weirdos who mutilate themselves and claim to be members of the opposite sex..............

    And yet all these things have happened or are happening.
    , @Karl
    22 J.Ross > The “story” here is that a respectable academic


    no one at Ariel University, thinks that a historian at SFSU is a "respectable academic"

    hells bells - no one at the agricultural junior college in Katzrin, thinks that a historian at SFSU is a "respectable academic"
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. J.Ross says: • Website
    @TheBoom
    This article's self awareness is very sanitized. It doesn't, for example, mention key things like Jews' experience being slaves didn't stop them from owning slaves and helping run the slave trade in the Confederacy just as blacks' experience with being slaves didn't stop them from getting into the trade when sent back to Africa. But knowing those things is anti Semitic (and racist!)

    Right, what you’re getting here is a more respectable and focused version of the Nation of Islam book. In fact, what Dollinger is really doing is repositioning the Jews as whites just as some thought leaders had begun to proudly reject Jewish whiteness. The slavery connection isn’t just too hot, it’s downright elegant in its elimination of any natural sympathy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @TheBoom
    It is almost as though a PR department was putting a good crisis management spin on a serious issue.
    , @Tyrion 2

    what Dollinger is really doing is repositioning the Jews as whites
     
    Why were Jews in nazi Germany required to wear yellow stars but American blacks were not required to wear any defining marker during anti-bellum slavery?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. syonredux says:
    @uilleam yr alban
    Comics virtually none. Movies based on 50-year-old comics a lot.

    Comics virtually none. Movies based on 50-year-old comics a lot.

    All the more fitting, then, that we use a comics derived term…..

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

    With the German Jews of the Francfort School things are rather simple: the more they felt betrayed by the German proles, the more they looked for an alternative “revolutionary class” (but as Germans they had no particular interest in the Blacks – Adorno disdained jazz music).

    But how went things in the United States? Did Jewish-Black relations improve because Jewish-”white proles” relation worsened? Were there simply no more interesting slots for young Jews in the labor unions (who in any way were no more apt for a revolution)?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  26. J.Ross says: • Website

    OT This is really good.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-06-03/modern-civil-war-being-fought-without-guns-so-far

    It’s Zero Hedge but the piece is from an Eastern Michigan University professor.

    How do civil wars happen?

    Two or more sides disagree on who runs the country. And they can’t settle the question through elections because they don’t even agree that elections are how you decide who’s in charge. That’s the basic issue here. Who decides who runs the country? When you hate each other but accept the election results, you have a country. When you stop accepting election results, you have a countdown to a civil war.

    The Mueller investigation is about removing President Trump from office and overturning the results of an election. We all know that. But it’s not the first time they’ve done this. The first time a Republican president was elected this century, they said he didn’t really win. The Supreme Court gave him the election. There’s a pattern here.

    What do sure odds of the Democrats rejecting the next Republican president really mean? It means they don’t accept the results of any election that they don’t win. It means they don’t believe that transfers of power in this country are determined by elections.

    That’s a civil war.

    There’s no shooting. At least not unless you count the attempt to kill a bunch of Republicans at a charity baseball game practice.

    And there was that “Time’s Up” garbage truck colliding with a congresscritter-loaded train that William Kristol knew about. But that’s just, like, two weird freak incidents. What was it Ian Fleming said? Wait till one more?

    Our system of government is based on the constitution, but that’s not the system that runs this country. The Democrat’s system is that any part of government that it runs gets total and unlimited power over the country.

    If the Democrats are in the White House, then the president can do anything. And I mean anything. He can have his own amnesty for illegal aliens. He can fine you for not having health insurance. His power is unlimited. He’s a dictator.

    But when Republicans get into the White House, suddenly the President can’t do anything. He isn’t even allowed to undo the illegal alien amnesty that his predecessor illegally invented. A Democrat in the White House has ‘discretion’ to completely decide every aspect of immigration policy. A Republican doesn’t even have the ‘discretion’ to reverse him. That’s how the game is played That’s how our country is run. Sad but true, although the left hasn’t yet won that particular fight.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  27. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says:

    If Tom Wolfe had grown up in the internet age.

    Read More
    • Replies: @sayless
    If Tom Wolfe...

    Who is he, Priss?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. The thing that Jews and blacks have in common is they are largely urbanites. Hence, both groups have a general interest in promoting progressive policies which tend to benefit people who live in big cities. However, since there is a big income gap between blacks and Jews, their interests are also likely to clash at times. For example, Clinton-style neoliberalism would no doubt be very popular with most Jews, but wouldn’t be very popular with a lot of poor blacks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  29. Kudos to this Marc Dollinger fellow for some intellectual honesty.

    The notable thing here is just how easily and completely the Jewish narrative falls apart given the least bit of honest scrutiny. It really is that flimsy.

    This “Jews are like blacks” propaganda is one of the most ridiculous things imaginable. Other than “minority” they could not be more polar opposites. The blacks were a poor working underclass class, kept separate by the white majority. Jews in contrast were a rich rent-seeking overclass, kept separate by their rejection of integration with the majority. Blacks–at least back in the day–would have been happy to integrate. (Where the barriers were more porous in Latin America, they did and there is a color continum produced by HBD, rather than a color line.) Jews (Ashkenazi) exist because of rejection of integration in favor of tribe. (And developed baroque practices and theology to reinforce such rejection.) The philosophy of Christian universalism underlying the famous “content of their character” lines of Martin Luther King are precisely what the Jews rejected.

    The reason for Jewish support of the blacks civil rights movement is easy to understand–minoritarianism. The fundamental principle that no majority people–but specifically and especially white gentiles–can be allowed to have their own stuff–businesses, country clubs, universities, neighborhoods or nations. Cause that means they could/might keep Jews from penetrating and exploiting.

    The reason, damn sure wasn’t “integration”. The Jews didn’t suddenly–after 2000 years–have some sort of come to Jesus moment and decide they were historically in the wrong and really want to be besties and integrate with the gentiles and dissolve as a people. And they damn sure didn’t want the blacks to come integrate *their* neighborhoods, *their* country clubs or *their* daughters. Hell no! No this was pretty simple–stop whitey from having his own whitey stuff. Break it up.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Moses
    Hmmm....you just might be onto something.

    I can't think of even one example of a prominent Jew marrying a schwartze either IRL or on TV/film. How about schwartzes joining Jewish country clubs?
    , @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Jews having a "come to Jesus" moment after 2,000 yrs.

    I see what you did.
    , @Jack D

    Jews in contrast were a rich rent-seeking overclass,
     
    Bzzt, wrong. There were a handful of rich German Jews who had a 50 year head start on the American dream, but the vast bulk of American Jews came as penniless immigrants from the Russian Empire in the great Ellis Island wave. When they got off the boat they had no money, no education and most of them started off as sweatshop labor in the NY garment industry making pennies per piece.

    As time has gone on, the differential in intelligence between blacks and Jews has seen the Jews pull farther and farther away from blacks economically but this is a one or two generation phenomenon for most as Jews were lifted in the great postwar boom. The story of my wife's family is typical - those in her generation are successful professionals, but growing up they lived modestly in a postwar tract home - their dad couldn't go back to college after the war because he needed to feed his family which he did with a modest sales job (and pre-WWII even that modest position would have not been open to Jews) and he in turn grew up in ghetto poverty as the son of an immigrant housepainter - constantly moving because they could not pay the rent.

    "Rich Jews/ Jewish bankers" (along with Jews as Bolsheviks - somehow Jews are both rich AND Bolshevik) is a favorite anti-Semitic meme going back to the Nazis and before. My grandfather in Poland was neither rich nor a Bolshevik - he was just a poor fisherman trying to scratch out a living like Tevye. And yet somehow he had to pay the price (his life) for all the supposed rich Jews and Bolshevik Jews.

    Yes there are a lot of Jews on the billionaires list but the entire billionaires list is only a few hundred people and there are millions of Jews in America, most of whom are neither rich nor members of the rent seeking class. Most don't live in dysfunctional ghetto poverty like blacks but they are just middle class folks and only a generation or two removed from poverty.
    , @Lot
    "The fundamental principle that no majority people–but specifically and especially white gentiles"

    Except nobody forced Jewish integration on anyone. What's the Jewish version of Brown v Board of Education, the Civil Rights Act, and the Fair Housing Act? In fact Jewish discrimination wasn't that extensive and ended because of private social pressure.

    We are simply better people than the anti-semites, and we've consistently won the affection of the majority of Americans.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. Veracitor says:

    Communism, dammit!

    Much American Jewish involvement in the Civil Rights movement was “revolutionary,” motivated by the Kremlin propaganda line about American capitalists keeping Negroes down to swell the reserve army of the unemployed and to distract the workers from class struggle by fomenting racial conflict. Jewish Communists and fellow travellers wanted integration to overturn all that and also to gall and provoke the American bourgeoisie and capitalists, to “heighten the contradictions” and thereby promote the revolution.

    Later, of course, the Jews like other American leftists almost completely mistook the tactic for the goal– they became so distracted by the amusements of racial conflict that they forgot about class struggle. They do get a lot of satisfaction from galling the bourgeoisie even now. Look at the way they rub Teh Genius Coates in people’s faces all the time.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  31. Anonymous[270] • Disclaimer says:

    Jews promoting blacks is a common thing. Was true in the USA, and was even more true in South Africa. The only reasonable explanation that I could find sounds somewhat unreasonable but still excels over others: Jews are possessed with criticism a.k.a. revolutionary spirit.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Jews promote blacks in order to increase the probability that white women will mate with black men. It really is that simple.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. Towel Ban says:

    It must be especially annoying because as constant archeological excavations have shown Jews never were “slaves” in Egypt. In fact it was quite the opposite, to whatever extent Semites occupied Egypt they in fact ruled as “kings” for a period after a successful invasion known as the “Hyksos Period”(1650 BC-1550 BC).

    Afterwards the Egyptian Empire Came to occupy Canaan for a period in order to ward off and prevent the many Semitic military invasions from its neighbor until around 1200 BC which is Steve’s favorite period in ancient history known as the Bronze Age Collapse.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    Towel, Thay was kangs?
    , @Druid
    True, and their story was not even in Egypt. Most likely from Yemen! Not a stitch of evidence for Egypt. Another fake!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. Tyrion 2 says:

    The third one, the one we get today, is Judaism: that the religion of the Jews argues for social justice, tikkun olam. Prophetic Judaism, the Reform movement, is involved with all of that.

    The problem is, if one’s adherence to Judaism informs social justice, one would expect the Orthodox, those for whom traditional Judaism is most present in their everyday life, to be in the lead in racial equality. And in fact it’s the opposite. …

    Reform Judaism is not simply a more relaxed version of Judaism. It is qualitatively different from the Orthodox variety. It also has very heterodox roots and was quite distinct in different places. The leading and first Reform synagogue in Britain, for example, had its entire structure designed around British identity and the more prosaic desire to have a place where your non-Jewish fellows might be invited and not leave with the inpression that you come from a long line of backwards savages.

    In Germany, as fits the relative stereotypes, the initial movement was more ideological and was imbued with heady and romantic ideas of miraculous progress and fixing the world.

    Of course, the assimilationist desire was always present in both. It must sure have been embarrassing to see the orderly and elegant services of your Christian friends but return to the bizarre bearded shucking and jiving in the klingon-like language of your own tradition. Sadly though, it’s no longer the Victorian age and the assimilationist desire trends more towards the achingly politically correct.

    This leads to the strange circumstance of Hebrew and ritual swaying finding its way back into services as the return to the primitive somehow carries the imprimatur of both being more authentic and somehow ‘progressive’.

    In this way, one can discern a flight to white (or rather – civilisation) in 19th and 20th Century Reform Judaism with a hesitating and confused 2 steps from, 1 step back, shuffle away today! Unsurprisingly, this is very much driven by trends in society and not some devious plot.

    Essentially, whereas your non-Jewish friends would once have been impressed with an orderly service and Amy Waxman’s ‘white bourgeois values’ we are now supposed to not preach what we practice.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    Interesting comment Tyrion.

    I confess, i'm so annoyed with the cucky Christians--unwilling to fight for their survival--i've pretty much lost interest in even polite attendence at Christian services. Attending services of people who want my nation exterminated ... definitely not on my agenda.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. Moses says:
    @AnotherDad
    Kudos to this Marc Dollinger fellow for some intellectual honesty.

    The notable thing here is just how easily and completely the Jewish narrative falls apart given the least bit of honest scrutiny. It really is that flimsy.

    This "Jews are like blacks" propaganda is one of the most ridiculous things imaginable. Other than "minority" they could not be more polar opposites. The blacks were a poor working underclass class, kept separate by the white majority. Jews in contrast were a rich rent-seeking overclass, kept separate by their rejection of integration with the majority. Blacks--at least back in the day--would have been happy to integrate. (Where the barriers were more porous in Latin America, they did and there is a color continum produced by HBD, rather than a color line.) Jews (Ashkenazi) exist because of rejection of integration in favor of tribe. (And developed baroque practices and theology to reinforce such rejection.) The philosophy of Christian universalism underlying the famous "content of their character" lines of Martin Luther King are precisely what the Jews rejected.

    The reason for Jewish support of the blacks civil rights movement is easy to understand--minoritarianism. The fundamental principle that no majority people--but specifically and especially white gentiles--can be allowed to have their own stuff--businesses, country clubs, universities, neighborhoods or nations. Cause that means they could/might keep Jews from penetrating and exploiting.

    The reason, damn sure wasn't "integration". The Jews didn't suddenly--after 2000 years--have some sort of come to Jesus moment and decide they were historically in the wrong and really want to be besties and integrate with the gentiles and dissolve as a people. And they damn sure didn't want the blacks to come integrate *their* neighborhoods, *their* country clubs or *their* daughters. Hell no! No this was pretty simple--stop whitey from having his own whitey stuff. Break it up.

    Hmmm….you just might be onto something.

    I can’t think of even one example of a prominent Jew marrying a schwartze either IRL or on TV/film. How about schwartzes joining Jewish country clubs?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Flip
    Edgar Bronfman Jr. had a black wife.
    , @Warner
    Lenny Kravitz's dad?
    , @YetAnotherAnon
    Minnie Riperton and Richard Rudolph.

    Daughter Maya starred in iSteve favourite Idiocracy.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXwCEp34ZkI
    , @Dissident

    I can’t think of even one example of a prominent Jew marrying a schwartze either IRL or on TV/film.
     
    I don't know about prominent but for what it's worth, I personally know of at least two cases of Jewish women marrying black men. One within my extended family, the other a daughter of a family friend.

    I might also present an example from the comment thread for a recent story at a hybrid blog/news site covering Manhattan's Upper West Side that I follow.

    What’s It Like To Be Racially Profiled? Two Upper West Siders Speak Out

    The first comment, by someone using the handle "JustSaying", read:

    And many blacks are racist against whites. It goes both ways and should be stopped.
     
    In reply, someone using the handle "NotImpressed" replied:

    that systematic racism that has kept whites down must have really affected you.
    I hope you manage to overcome your hardships.
     
    To which "Just Saying" replied:

    NotImpressed- It looks like you assuming I`m white because I said that many blacks are racist against whites. Assumptions about another person without knowing who they really are is in the root of Racism. I suggest you`ll look at yourself before you personally attacking others. and btw I`m a black man married to a Jewish white wife.
     
    [Emphasis mine- Dissident]

    In a thread filled with the kind of sanctimony, condescension, virtue-signalling and race denialist gymnastics and sleight-of-hand that most here are no doubt all-too-familiar with, that above quoted post seemed refreshing.
    , @Rosamond Vincy
    Peggy Lipton and Quincy Jones. It was posted on a previous article.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. OT-ish, but ultra Steve-bait: Howard Schultz may throw his kippah into the ring for 2020.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5805323/Starbucks-Howard-Schultz-steps-executive-chairman.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
    Because being fired by Starbucks is the best platform for running for President...
    , @Barnard
    I think he is more likely to go the philanthropy route. That is a much simpler, happier life than running for President today. Although if Schultz asks some consultants, they might tell him a convincing enough lie that he has a chance to win as an independent. Mike Murphy and John Weaver have bills to pay.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Today marks the 50th anniversary of Robert Kennedy’s assassination in LA. His killer, Sirhan Sirhan, shot him because Kennedy voted to help Israel during the ‘67 Six Day War. That congressional vote cost him his life.

    Literally, Kennedy gave his life for Israel.

    Today marks the 50th anniversary of Robert Kennedy’s assassination in LA. His killer, Sirhan Sirhan, shot him because Kennedy voted to help Israel during the ‘67 Six Day War. That congressional vote cost him his life.

    Also it’s the 76th anniversary of–the much more world historically significant–American destruction of the Japanese carriers at Midway, which essentially sealed Japan’s fate in the war. Though much more fighting and dying had to occur.

    (Personally, as a half-Irish American, i’ll be happy when this Kennedy deification and mythologization has finally burnt out, over and done with and we can stop pretending these crude mediocrities were some sort of great, world historical, American titans.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Hannagan
    "(Personally, as a half-Irish American, i’ll be happy when this Kennedy deification and mythologization has finally burnt out, over and done with and we can stop pretending these crude mediocrities were some sort of great, world historical, American titans.)"

    What a stupendously stupid and spiteful statement.

    The assassination of both Kennedy's had a great effect on the trajectory of the USA and the world in general. JFK's resulted in the Vietnam war (National Security Memo 273) and Robert's in Israel going nuclear.

    There was an essay on the latter recently at this very site: http://www.unz.com/article/did-israel-kill-the-kennedies/

    Btw, there would have been no need for "the much more world historically significant–American destruction of the Japanese carriers at Midway" were FDR (talk about a deified president) to take action when warned about the Japanese plans to attack Pearl Harbour. But, FDR had been goading the Japanese all along to do that very thing. Pearl Harbour was the culmination of the plan. Much like 9/11 (see General Wesley Clark's statement about plans for the Middle East post 9/11).

    But I suppose you reckon 9/11 was 100% kosher and ridgy-didge too.

    , @Buffalo Joe
    Another Dad, I was in an all boys Catholic HS when JFK was assassinated and a senior at a Jesuit College when RFK was assassinated, they had been deified by the teachers and profs at both schools. However, one of the most traumatic days of my life happened in HS, when the priests assembled the student body to go to confession and then communion, the reason being the Cuban Missle Crisis. The dems drag out whatever Kennedy they can find to validate their cause but I wish they would all just go away.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. @Tyrion 2

    The third one, the one we get today, is Judaism: that the religion of the Jews argues for social justice, tikkun olam. Prophetic Judaism, the Reform movement, is involved with all of that.

    The problem is, if one’s adherence to Judaism informs social justice, one would expect the Orthodox, those for whom traditional Judaism is most present in their everyday life, to be in the lead in racial equality. And in fact it’s the opposite. …
     
    Reform Judaism is not simply a more relaxed version of Judaism. It is qualitatively different from the Orthodox variety. It also has very heterodox roots and was quite distinct in different places. The leading and first Reform synagogue in Britain, for example, had its entire structure designed around British identity and the more prosaic desire to have a place where your non-Jewish fellows might be invited and not leave with the inpression that you come from a long line of backwards savages.

    In Germany, as fits the relative stereotypes, the initial movement was more ideological and was imbued with heady and romantic ideas of miraculous progress and fixing the world.

    Of course, the assimilationist desire was always present in both. It must sure have been embarrassing to see the orderly and elegant services of your Christian friends but return to the bizarre bearded shucking and jiving in the klingon-like language of your own tradition. Sadly though, it's no longer the Victorian age and the assimilationist desire trends more towards the achingly politically correct.

    This leads to the strange circumstance of Hebrew and ritual swaying finding its way back into services as the return to the primitive somehow carries the imprimatur of both being more authentic and somehow 'progressive'.

    In this way, one can discern a flight to white (or rather - civilisation) in 19th and 20th Century Reform Judaism with a hesitating and confused 2 steps from, 1 step back, shuffle away today! Unsurprisingly, this is very much driven by trends in society and not some devious plot.

    Essentially, whereas your non-Jewish friends would once have been impressed with an orderly service and Amy Waxman's 'white bourgeois values' we are now supposed to not preach what we practice.

    Interesting comment Tyrion.

    I confess, i’m so annoyed with the cucky Christians–unwilling to fight for their survival–i’ve pretty much lost interest in even polite attendence at Christian services. Attending services of people who want my nation exterminated … definitely not on my agenda.

    Read More
    • Agree: Stan d Mute
    • Replies: @Svigor
    Christians are a bunch of saps, waiting to be told what to think. Don't abandon that field to Jews.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. @Moses
    Jews, like any group, have group interests. And those interests often are not in alignment with White American interests.

    Simple as that.

    ? Jews are white Americans.

    No offense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Moses
    Nope. Jews are not "White Americans."

    Perhaps a better way to put it would be to substitute "European Christian Americans" for "White Americans," if you believe that "White" includes European Christians plus Jews (btw I never hear Jews refer to themselves as "White" except in "Dear Fellow White People" screeds -- it's always "Is it good for the Jews?" not "Is it good for the Whites?").

    Jews I've met certainly do NOT list themselves as a subgroup of European Christian Americans. They consider themselves entirely separate.

    Perhaps you'd prefer if I changed it to:


    Jews, like any group, have group interests. And those interests often are not in alignment with European Christian American interests.

    Simple as that.
     

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

    Off-topic:

    At 51.7% in 2017, we are fast approaching the point where non-white births outnumber white births in America. If it doesn’t happen this year, it looks like it will happen in 2019. I expect members of the intellectual dark web will complain the media isn’t giving Trump the credit he deserves for being in office when non-white babies outnumbered white babies for the first time when the historical milestone is reached!

    As has been pointed out numerous times previously, the sensational assertion based on Census estimates that this happened back in 2012 will turn out to merely be six or seven years premature.

    The four most populous states in the union are now natally majority-minority. In California, barely one-in-four babies are white. Future president Kamala Harris is California Dreaming this for the entire country.

    In Texas, it’s one-in-three. The putatively rock-ribbed Republican stronghold is undergoing a demographic transformation that will turn it purple and then blue. Texas is to my knowledge the only state in the country where whites vote more strongly Republican than non-whites vote Democrat. They do so only marginally, though–the white and non-white votes are essentially the inverse of one another. This means when non-whites reach an electoral majority in the lone star state, it’ll move to the Democrat column. The writing is on the exit polling walls:

    http://anepigone.blogspot.com/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mishra
    Not really off-topic. In fact in some ways the only topic.

    Yet we have people here imagining that wypipos is coming back.
    , @Travis
    if they stopped counting Arabs, Iranians and North Africans as white we would non-white births outnumber white births in America already.

    92 million white babies were born in America from 1950-1980
    68 million white babies were born in America from 1980-2010

    white people stopped having children , which is the reason there were actually more white people under the age of 55 in 1970 than today.
    , @Pat Hannagan
    Disturbing. And I agree with Mishra.
    , @Chris Renner
    I can't tell where these blockquotes originate, but they share the assumption common to every other projection of a white minority America: that Hispanics are not, and will never be, white.

    That assumption is questionable at the least. Hispanics already self-identify as white by large majorities, and at least a quarter intermarry with non-Hispanic whites. Eliminate the special treatment given to "Hispanic or Latino" ethnicity, and they'll likely become no more a distinct group than Italian-Americans are.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @Simon Tugmutton
    OT-ish, but ultra Steve-bait: Howard Schultz may throw his kippah into the ring for 2020.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5805323/Starbucks-Howard-Schultz-steps-executive-chairman.html

    Because being fired by Starbucks is the best platform for running for President…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    When was he fired by Starbucks?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Anon[413] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    Jews promoting blacks is a common thing. Was true in the USA, and was even more true in South Africa. The only reasonable explanation that I could find sounds somewhat unreasonable but still excels over others: Jews are possessed with criticism a.k.a. revolutionary spirit.

    Jews promote blacks in order to increase the probability that white women will mate with black men. It really is that simple.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    True. Pop bids for teen girls always portray White men as dorks and dindus as badass. Look at most watched video Uptown Funk by (((Mark Ronson))). All races of men repped as coil, except White Men, who are shoeshines. Limbic manipulation of dumb, impressionable, m/c White girls, yet the most reproductively valuable demographic.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. MLK’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” pleaded for clergy to join the Civil Rights Movement. He quoted Old Testament prophets and New Testaments apostles, St. Thomas Aquinas (Catholic), Reinhold Niebuhr (Protestant), and Martin Buber (Jewish). He said he himself would have tried to help Christians in the Soviet Union and Jews in Nazi Germany. He appealed to everybody except Muslims, who were the bad guys then.

    Clergy did join the movement in increased numbers, but it’s clear that few really wanted to do it, because MLK had to guilt-trip them into it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Logan
    He appealed to everybody except Muslims, who were the bad guys then.

    Nahh. What Muslims were in 1963 was invisible.
    , @another fred
    "Clergy did join the movement in increased numbers, but it’s clear that few really wanted to do it, because MLK had to guilt-trip them into it."

    There was a significant minority in the south that was not aligned with the segregationists, but who were reluctant to "join the movement" because of a fear of what happens once revolutions get started.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. You know, if blacks can advocate for blackness, then Jews can advocate for Jewishness. And in this sense, the Six Day War occurring in June of 1967 was perfectly timed to capture a whole bunch of young Jews who were nationalists in their proclivities, but didn’t have a place to put it. And there they could put it in Zionism.

    The possible relationship to black nationism banging around the campus fringe is an interesting angle.

    I’ve generally considered the Jewish Six-Day War identity flowering to have two main causes:

    1) Everyone loves a winner / bandwagon effect.

    2) Jews moving from seeking accomodation/acceptance from the WASPs to being in power. Essentially Jews were finally “out”–”we’re here, we’re Jewish, get used to it!”. But enying/copying the black power thing might have been a piece of this transition.

    This paradigm shift just seems to be the way “civil rights” works. I’ve seen it with the gays over my life from “leave us alone” to “we’re here”, to “pride”, to in your face, to “you must accept us”, to we’ll harass you and destroy your career, your business, your life is you don’t think correct thoughts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pericles

    This paradigm shift just seems to be the way “civil rights” works. I’ve seen it with the gays over my life from “leave us alone” to “we’re here”, to “pride”, to in your face, to “you must accept us”, to we’ll harass you and destroy your career, your business, your life is you don’t think correct thoughts.

     

    I'm sure you'll be happy to know we're now trying out a step or two beyond that. It's homophobic to be straight and transphobic to mind that your woman used to be a man.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. Anon[413] • Disclaimer says:
    @Tyrion 2
    Because being fired by Starbucks is the best platform for running for President...

    When was he fired by Starbucks?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
    As per the 'stepping down from his role as Executive Chairman' in the article linked to above. So just now.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. utu says:

    Now we can blame Blacks for Jews becoming Zionist. If Blacks did not purge Jews from leadership and civil rights organizations, Jews would be happily helping Back oblivious to their own ethnic identity and Israel.

    That suppose to be Jewish self-awareness? The most effective liars convince themselves first.

    Lest ask the question what is it all about? Why the narrative is being changed? Why this new narrative is good for Jews because it must be good for Jews otherwise it would not be produced?

    Simple: Blacks taught us how to be Jewish nationalists. Zionism is good. It it just like Black nationalism. Dual loyalty is good.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  46. Mr. Blank says:
    @Reg Cæsar
    A lot of the support for Israel in the general white population likewise might have been because the other side was notably swarthier, giving us the opportunity to root for the lighter side in a conflict, which was receding rapidly at home.

    Another way of looking at it:

    Islam was always going to be seen as The Enemy by a predominantly Christian West. Absent a total Third Reich victory in World War II — which even the most optimistic Nazis would probably regard as improbable — there was no alternative historical path in which Muslims and Christians might have joined together in happy shared hatred of the despised Jews. The only question was whether organized Judaism would align itself with the nominally Christian West or the less-nominally Muslim East.

    For the most part, Jews chose Western Christendom, however weak it might appear to be. So far their choice seems to have been the correct one.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. @Anon
    The more Jews promote their Jewishness, the more that they become a separate thing from whites in the general consciousness. And once that happens, the more people will look at and start to quantify the proportionality of representation in various elite and influential jobs. Blending in more might be the better strategy.

    the more people will look at and start to quantify the proportionality of representation in various elite and influential jobs.

    I would be grateful to anyone who who could provide some readily citable statistics for Jewish over-representation in positions of power, influence and wealth in both the public as well as the private sectors. I am trying to raise awareness among my fellow (and not-so-fellow, as the case may be) Jews. I need sources that stand a chance of being considered credible by “normies” and Respectables.

    Below is a comment I composed addressing this matter, the latest of several similar comments that I have submitted to a certain Respectable site. Perhaps unsurprisingly, none have made it past moderation.

    As we see from [any number of prominent examples], somehow it is considered quite acceptable for Jews to berate white gentiles for “racism” and “white privilege”– even to the point of demanding that persons-of-color and other minorities be favored over whites in the interest of promoting “diversity”. (E.g., Charles Schumer opposing judicial nominees on the grounds of them being white males.)

    Meanwhile, the fact is that in just about every area of wealth and influence: business, finance, government, academia, the media, etc., Jews hold positions in numbers that far exceed any proportionality to our percentage of the population. Yet, anyone who so much as notices, much less questions, this salient fact is reflexively denounced as an anti-Semite and forthwith blacklisted and unpersoned.

    As a Jew myself, I am not only ashamed of this rank double-standard but also quite apprehensive about where the inevitable increasing awareness and resentment of it may ultimately lead. Enough of the BS already! Either cut the sanctimonious moralizing about “diversity”, etc. or stop demanding that Jewish over-representation be excluded from such discussions. You cannot have it both ways.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Autochthon
    http://i.stack.imgur.com/PPhcg.jpg

    You're welcome.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Anon[409] • Disclaimer says:
    @uilleam yr alban
    Comics virtually none. Movies based on 50-year-old comics a lot.

    And inside-baseball industry jargon from the people who make comics: yet less influence.

    Sooner or later it might catch on, as some post-modernist academic jargon has caught on. But that example “begs the question” <wink, where's my Garner>: jargon that goes mainstream tends to waffle and expand and go soft-focus in its meaning. Many use it; few use it correctly or really know what it means.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I'm not Tom Wolfe, I don't have a knack for inventing terms that sweep the world.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. Mishra says:
    @syonredux
    Off-topic:

    At 51.7% in 2017, we are fast approaching the point where non-white births outnumber white births in America. If it doesn't happen this year, it looks like it will happen in 2019. I expect members of the intellectual dark web will complain the media isn't giving Trump the credit he deserves for being in office when non-white babies outnumbered white babies for the first time when the historical milestone is reached!
     

    As has been pointed out numerous times previously, the sensational assertion based on Census estimates that this happened back in 2012 will turn out to merely be six or seven years premature.

    The four most populous states in the union are now natally majority-minority. In California, barely one-in-four babies are white. Future president Kamala Harris is California Dreaming this for the entire country.
     

    In Texas, it's one-in-three. The putatively rock-ribbed Republican stronghold is undergoing a demographic transformation that will turn it purple and then blue. Texas is to my knowledge the only state in the country where whites vote more strongly Republican than non-whites vote Democrat. They do so only marginally, though--the white and non-white votes are essentially the inverse of one another. This means when non-whites reach an electoral majority in the lone star state, it'll move to the Democrat column. The writing is on the exit polling walls:
     
    http://anepigone.blogspot.com/

    Not really off-topic. In fact in some ways the only topic.

    Yet we have people here imagining that wypipos is coming back.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Neuday
    There will be partition, after an amount of bloodletting. Wypipo will come back, but in a smaller geographic area than what we have now. I see an awful lot of CA and TX plates moving to my Whitopia, looking for "good schools" or a safe place to retire.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. @Anon
    And inside-baseball industry jargon from the people who make comics: yet less influence.

    Sooner or later it might catch on, as some post-modernist academic jargon has caught on. But that example "begs the question" <wink, where's my Garner>: jargon that goes mainstream tends to waffle and expand and go soft-focus in its meaning. Many use it; few use it correctly or really know what it means.

    I’m not Tom Wolfe, I don’t have a knack for inventing terms that sweep the world.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Autochthon
    After just ten thousand hours of practicing you could cultivate the knack, Steve! Of course, then you'll despise the talent and never want to use it again....
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Dissident says:
    @Anon
    The more Jews promote their Jewishness, the more that they become a separate thing from whites in the general consciousness. And once that happens, the more people will look at and start to quantify the proportionality of representation in various elite and influential jobs. Blending in more might be the better strategy.

    [Please discard the nearly identical version of this comment that I submitted a few minutes ago (mistakenly using what is my posting handle and email address at a different site) in favor of this one. Thank you and apologies for the bother.]

    the more people will look at and start to quantify the proportionality of representation in various elite and influential jobs.

    I would be grateful to anyone who who could provide some readily citable statistics for Jewish over-representation in positions of power, influence and wealth in both the public as well as the private sectors. I am trying to raise awareness among my fellow (and not-so-fellow, as the case may be) Jews. I need sources that stand a chance of being considered credible by “normies” and “Respectables”.

    Below is a comment I composed addressing this matter, the latest version of what are several that I have submitted to a certain Respectable site. Perhaps unsurprisingly, none have made it past moderation.

    As we see from [any number of prominent examples], somehow it is considered quite acceptable for Jews to berate white gentiles for “racism” and “white privilege”– even to the point of demanding that persons-of-color and other minorities be favored over whites in the interest of promoting “diversity”. (E.g., Charles Schumer opposing judicial nominees on the grounds of them being white males.)

    Meanwhile, the fact is that in just about every area of wealth and influence: business, finance, government, academia, the media, etc., Jews hold positions in numbers that far exceed any proportionality to our percentage of the population. Yet, anyone who so much as notices, much less questions, this salient fact is reflexively denounced as an anti-Semite and forthwith blacklisted and unpersoned.

    As a Jew myself, I am not only ashamed of this rank double-standard but also quite apprehensive about where the inevitable increasing awareness and resentment of it may ultimately lead. Enough of the BS already! Either cut the sanctimonious moralizing about “diversity”, etc. or stop demanding that Jewish over-representation be excluded from such discussions. You cannot have it both ways.

    Read More
    • Replies: @TheBoom
    Have you found any other Jews who acknowledge that there is a rather dramatic hypocrisy with Jews condemning white privilege and being far more over represented among the elite and coveted jobs that whites while demanding that Jewish over representation not be noticed? If so, any common denominators among those Jews?
    , @Samuel Skinner
    http://jewishbusinessnews.com/2018/03/07/jews-make-19-forbes-200-worlds-richest-list/

    Jews are disproportionately represented on the roster of the richest business people, with 10 Jews among the top 50 (20%), and 38 (19%) Jews among first 200 world's wealthiest.
     
    As for your efforts, you would have better luck nailing jello to a wall. The problem is status signaling. To break it down to its simplest, not poking the tiger would mean the tiger is more powerful then you. So if you want to show how powerful you are, you gradually escalate to the most nonsensical and harmful position. You can't stop because if you do, other people will attack you because you aren't powerful.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. Tyrion 2 says:
    @Anon
    When was he fired by Starbucks?

    As per the ‘stepping down from his role as Executive Chairman’ in the article linked to above. So just now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Brutusale
    Yeah, it's a big deal when a guy goes from Chairman to Chairman Emeritus.

    He has the WASP in place as CEO, so he went back to The Tribe for a new chairman, Myron Ullman. But make no mistake about who's in charge.
    , @J.Ross
    Holy cow, deserves its own thread. This is a belated response to all the hairbrained racial-political stunts?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. US Jews went heavily Zionist after the Six Day War because everyone loves a winner – and Americans even moreso than most. Being Zionist in 1948 meant supporting something that might not win, it was a much bigger psychological risk.

    Read More
    • Replies: @TheBoom
    Yes. Jews kicked ass in 67 and Jews throughout the world wanted to be on the winning team.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. @Reg Cæsar
    A lot of the support for Israel in the general white population likewise might have been because the other side was notably swarthier, giving us the opportunity to root for the lighter side in a conflict, which was receding rapidly at home.

    A lot of Palestinians and other Levantines are very light skinned, and Mossad has no problem finding agents who make convincing Levantine Arabs. Palestinians Lebanese & Syrians don’t look much like Gulf Arabs.

    OTOH Egyptians are often noticeably darker, so there’s that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    No one claimed otherwise. But Palestinians are, on average, significantly swarthier than Jews, primarily due to the great deal of non-Semitic European ancestry most Jews have.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. utu says:

    Now we can blame Blacks for Jews becoming Zionist. If Blacks did not purge Jews from leadership in civil rights organizations, Jews would be happily helping Blacks oblivious of their own ethnic identity and Israel.

    That suppose to be Jewish self-awareness? The most effective liars convince themselves first.

    Lest ask the question what is it all about? Why the narrative is being changed? Why this new narrative is good for Jews because it must be good for Jews otherwise it would not be produced?

    Simple: Blacks taught us how to be Jewish nationalists. Zionism is good. It it just like Black nationalism. Dual loyalty is good.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  56. Tyrion 2 says:

    Only slightly OT but:

    I’ve created a blog to more comprehensively go over a few things that seem to be of interest here. I am not an experienced writer so feedback is welcome. I won’t take it personally.

    he first article is on ‘Birthright’ and how it confirmed me in British Nationalism. Somebody sort of requested it. I’ve only written a slightly navel-gazing introduction but I think it is interesting and that was important as the whole thing would be quite long and I’m still searching for the right tone.

    The link is now part of my profile here.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
    I didn't press update information. Sorry. Now the link is in.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. Just googled “when was slavery abolished in the usa” and it was 1865. The last convict transported to Oz was 10/01/1868.

    Therefore White Australians descended from convicts have more in common with African-Americans than Jews.

    Further, I don’t recall Jews ever getting all tikkun olam over us, in fact exactly the opposite: Jews were at the forefront of abolishing the White Australia Policy. A homeland for me and not for thee.

    I can’t get a definitive answer as to when “indentured servitude” ended for Whites in the USA, perhaps an iStever can help, but the the life of a White convict or indentured servent was far harsher and brutal than that of a slave in many instances due to the fact that slaves had a monetary value whereas convicts and servants were free and abundant.

    Lots of good books on the subject like Sean O’Callaghan’s “To Hell or Barbados: The Ethnic Cleansing of Ireland” wherein the origin of the term redneck is explained, or Michael Hoffman’s “They Were White and They Were Slaves: The Untold History of the Enslavement of Whites in Early America”.

    It’s interesting to think about why historic White slavery, whether convict or indentured servants, which lasted longer in the Western world than black slavery is not even considered a thing and that the descendants of those convicts and servants are asserted to owe a moral and financial debt to blacks. It’s also worth pondering that this perverse ahistorical moralism is promoted by the very same Jewish descendants of the majority slave owners, and convict ship transporters, who were Jews!

    Read More
    • Replies: @TheBoom
    Also worth noting is the capture of 1.3 million Europeans (many of whom were Irish and 2x the number of Africans brought to North America as slaves) by Barbary pirates who subsequently sold them into slavery. For some odd reason that is not mentioned in the discussion of slavery. Nor is the role Britain played in ending African slavery.
    , @Pericles

    I can’t get a definitive answer as to when “indentured servitude” ended for Whites in the USA, perhaps an iStever can help, but the the life of a White convict or indentured servent was far harsher and brutal than that of a slave in many instances due to the fact that slaves had a monetary value whereas convicts and servants were free and abundant.

     

    If memory serves, you could get whipped in the Navy long after slavery ended.
    , @Jake
    Yes, the history of chattel slavery in the US shows rather clearly that because black slaves were owned, they were far more valuable to an owner of a white term slave (an indentured servant was a slave for a term of years). Even more so, the black slave was more much, much valuable to the slave owner than was any white immigrant free man.

    The reason has nothing to do with work ability, much less honesty (black slaves are well attested as having stolen a lot of stuff, from their owners as well as from whites other than their owners and from each other - by the 1950s, Leftist academics were interpreting that history as blacks stealing to be social justice revolutionaries, not as blacks being criminally inclined blacks). The reason is that if a rich man in, say, New Orleans (which attracted a large number of penniless Irish immigrants starting after the Great Famine) had a dangerous project (and because of the heat-humidity factor combined with tons of disease carrying mosquitoes, almost all work was potentially very dangerous to health and life), and he used the slaves he owned, he could have lost a small fortune if even 3 dozen slaves died or became permanently incapacitated. But if he had hired immigrant Irish for the work, and 5 dozen died, he would have lose nothing. He could hire 5 dozen more immigrant whites and finish the job.

    No owner of black slaves, for example, would have risked losing big bucks having the slaves dig out a coal mine and then later mine the coal. Many men always die in that work; many more get crippled. If your slaves die or become crippled, you lose money. If immigrants die doing your hard, dangerous work, you hire more immigrants and don't give a damn about safety conditions.

    So much as acknowledging things like that is verboten, and has been for a very long time. And the source being protected by the unofficial censorship is much older than the existence of black slaves owned by a very few whites in the USA.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @Reg Cæsar
    A lot of the support for Israel in the general white population likewise might have been because the other side was notably swarthier, giving us the opportunity to root for the lighter side in a conflict, which was receding rapidly at home.

    I wouldn’t say that ended in 1967 or 1972 either. My impression, and that’s all it is, is that as Islam has increased its temporal power in the UK, whether by demography, or rape and bombings by its adherents, so Brits are less bothered about Muslims being mistreated in Palestine.

    The media helps this along – the siege of Aleppo got as much coverage in three months as the West Bank gets in a decade.

    The old British concern for ‘fair play’ was a product of people comfortable in their skins and in their country – as that comfort lessens, so will that concern.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon

    My impression, and that’s all it is, is that as Islam has increased its temporal power in the UK, whether by demography, or rape and bombings by its adherents, so Brits are less bothered about Muslims being mistreated in Palestine.
     
    That's a consequence the deal the Jews are offering the Muslims: "We're taking Palestine. To compensate we'll give you access to new territory in Europe and the United States."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. bjdubbs says:

    1967 is a neat explanation for the difference between the first generation of neocons, who often served in the military, and their children. Irving Kristol’s “On the Political Stupidity of the Jews” doesn’t read like anything the neocons would endorse today; the title alone is probably unacceptable today. For those keeping track of these kind of things, Bill Kristol’s mental breakdown can mostly be traced to his father’s death in 2009.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    You can accuse the Jews of many things, but political stupidity is not really one of them. If they were politically stupid then no one would fear making mild criticisms of them. "On the Political Stupidity of White People" could fill up volumes, OTOH. Then again, people would probably fear writing that too since it would contain unpleasant facts about other groups.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @Tyrion 2
    Only slightly OT but:

    I've created a blog to more comprehensively go over a few things that seem to be of interest here. I am not an experienced writer so feedback is welcome. I won't take it personally.

    he first article is on 'Birthright' and how it confirmed me in British Nationalism. Somebody sort of requested it. I've only written a slightly navel-gazing introduction but I think it is interesting and that was important as the whole thing would be quite long and I'm still searching for the right tone.

    The link is now part of my profile here.

    I didn’t press update information. Sorry. Now the link is in.

    Read More
    • Replies: @vinteuil
    Interesting & entertaining first post.

    But "Observe, Orient, Decide and Write?" OODW? What's up with that?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. TheBoom says:
    @J.Ross
    Right, what you're getting here is a more respectable and focused version of the Nation of Islam book. In fact, what Dollinger is really doing is repositioning the Jews as whites just as some thought leaders had begun to proudly reject Jewish whiteness. The slavery connection isn't just too hot, it's downright elegant in its elimination of any natural sympathy.

    It is almost as though a PR department was putting a good crisis management spin on a serious issue.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. TheBoom says:
    @Pat Hannagan
    Just googled "when was slavery abolished in the usa" and it was 1865. The last convict transported to Oz was 10/01/1868.

    Therefore White Australians descended from convicts have more in common with African-Americans than Jews.

    Further, I don't recall Jews ever getting all tikkun olam over us, in fact exactly the opposite: Jews were at the forefront of abolishing the White Australia Policy. A homeland for me and not for thee.

    I can't get a definitive answer as to when "indentured servitude" ended for Whites in the USA, perhaps an iStever can help, but the the life of a White convict or indentured servent was far harsher and brutal than that of a slave in many instances due to the fact that slaves had a monetary value whereas convicts and servants were free and abundant.

    Lots of good books on the subject like Sean O'Callaghan's "To Hell or Barbados: The Ethnic Cleansing of Ireland" wherein the origin of the term redneck is explained, or Michael Hoffman's "They Were White and They Were Slaves: The Untold History of the Enslavement of Whites in Early America".

    It's interesting to think about why historic White slavery, whether convict or indentured servants, which lasted longer in the Western world than black slavery is not even considered a thing and that the descendants of those convicts and servants are asserted to owe a moral and financial debt to blacks. It's also worth pondering that this perverse ahistorical moralism is promoted by the very same Jewish descendants of the majority slave owners, and convict ship transporters, who were Jews!

    Also worth noting is the capture of 1.3 million Europeans (many of whom were Irish and 2x the number of Africans brought to North America as slaves) by Barbary pirates who subsequently sold them into slavery. For some odd reason that is not mentioned in the discussion of slavery. Nor is the role Britain played in ending African slavery.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pericles
    Yet now the slavers should be invited to live in the homelands of their slaves. It's only fair, right?
    , @res

    Also worth noting is the capture of 1.3 million Europeans (many of whom were Irish and 2x the number of Africans brought to North America as slaves) by Barbary pirates who subsequently sold them into slavery.
     
    Any idea what conditions those slaves lived under and how their descendants did? Those would be interesting to compare to Black slaves in the US given their thriving population 150 years later.
    , @Anon
    What about the role of britons like Hawkins and drake in starting the Atlantic slave trade and the role of Britain in the 300 years of the Atlantic Slave trade?

    Personally, I think Britian owes America massive reparations for dumping Africans in America and creating the problem that will never, never end.. America’s biggest problem is Africans in our midst; 12 percent of the population 80% of our problems forever and ever.
    , @Anon
    The famous sharpshooter Annie Oakley was born in 1860. She wasn’t a westerner she was from Ohio. She was an indentured slave in childhood.

    Her father died and he mother sold her to a farm family when she was about 8. She was fed so little she never grew to normal adult size and could not have children. She was beaten and abused. She called her owners the monsters all her life.

    Mother remarried when she was about 12 and bought her back. She started shouting ducks pheasants and other birds for the local butchers and was in her way to fame.

    She was an indentured servant in the 1870s.

    There was some form of slavery indentured servitude in Scotland that lasted well into the 1830s.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. TheBoom says:
    @Simon in London
    US Jews went heavily Zionist after the Six Day War because everyone loves a winner - and Americans even moreso than most. Being Zionist in 1948 meant supporting something that might not win, it was a much bigger psychological risk.

    Yes. Jews kicked ass in 67 and Jews throughout the world wanted to be on the winning team.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. TheBoom says:
    @Dissident
    [Please discard the nearly identical version of this comment that I submitted a few minutes ago (mistakenly using what is my posting handle and email address at a different site) in favor of this one. Thank you and apologies for the bother.]

    the more people will look at and start to quantify the proportionality of representation in various elite and influential jobs.
     
    I would be grateful to anyone who who could provide some readily citable statistics for Jewish over-representation in positions of power, influence and wealth in both the public as well as the private sectors. I am trying to raise awareness among my fellow (and not-so-fellow, as the case may be) Jews. I need sources that stand a chance of being considered credible by "normies" and "Respectables".

    Below is a comment I composed addressing this matter, the latest version of what are several that I have submitted to a certain Respectable site. Perhaps unsurprisingly, none have made it past moderation.


    As we see from [any number of prominent examples], somehow it is considered quite acceptable for Jews to berate white gentiles for "racism" and "white privilege"-- even to the point of demanding that persons-of-color and other minorities be favored over whites in the interest of promoting "diversity". (E.g., Charles Schumer opposing judicial nominees on the grounds of them being white males.)

    Meanwhile, the fact is that in just about every area of wealth and influence: business, finance, government, academia, the media, etc., Jews hold positions in numbers that far exceed any proportionality to our percentage of the population. Yet, anyone who so much as notices, much less questions, this salient fact is reflexively denounced as an anti-Semite and forthwith blacklisted and unpersoned.

    As a Jew myself, I am not only ashamed of this rank double-standard but also quite apprehensive about where the inevitable increasing awareness and resentment of it may ultimately lead. Enough of the BS already! Either cut the sanctimonious moralizing about "diversity", etc. or stop demanding that Jewish over-representation be excluded from such discussions. You cannot have it both ways.
     

    Have you found any other Jews who acknowledge that there is a rather dramatic hypocrisy with Jews condemning white privilege and being far more over represented among the elite and coveted jobs that whites while demanding that Jewish over representation not be noticed? If so, any common denominators among those Jews?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. Travis says:
    @syonredux
    Off-topic:

    At 51.7% in 2017, we are fast approaching the point where non-white births outnumber white births in America. If it doesn't happen this year, it looks like it will happen in 2019. I expect members of the intellectual dark web will complain the media isn't giving Trump the credit he deserves for being in office when non-white babies outnumbered white babies for the first time when the historical milestone is reached!
     

    As has been pointed out numerous times previously, the sensational assertion based on Census estimates that this happened back in 2012 will turn out to merely be six or seven years premature.

    The four most populous states in the union are now natally majority-minority. In California, barely one-in-four babies are white. Future president Kamala Harris is California Dreaming this for the entire country.
     

    In Texas, it's one-in-three. The putatively rock-ribbed Republican stronghold is undergoing a demographic transformation that will turn it purple and then blue. Texas is to my knowledge the only state in the country where whites vote more strongly Republican than non-whites vote Democrat. They do so only marginally, though--the white and non-white votes are essentially the inverse of one another. This means when non-whites reach an electoral majority in the lone star state, it'll move to the Democrat column. The writing is on the exit polling walls:
     
    http://anepigone.blogspot.com/

    if they stopped counting Arabs, Iranians and North Africans as white we would non-white births outnumber white births in America already.

    92 million white babies were born in America from 1950-1980
    68 million white babies were born in America from 1980-2010

    white people stopped having children , which is the reason there were actually more white people under the age of 55 in 1970 than today.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Lol. Persians are, what, 0.05% of the US population? 0.01? Arabs aren't more than half a percent either. And they almost all assimilate to whiteness within a generation or two anyway, at least the non-Muslim ones do.
    , @istevefan

    white people stopped having children ,
     
    From the figures you cited, white people did not stop having children.
    , @Bernardo Pizzaro Cortez Del Castro
    Good point. White fertility is a major reason for the current demographics
    , @Anon
    So what are you doing to increase the White birth rate Travis? And what are you doing to ensure that affirmative action will end so White children won’t be discriminated against when they grow up and apply for jobs.?

    If you don’t have at least 4 White children of your own STFU.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. Svigor says:
    @Reg Cæsar
    A lot of the support for Israel in the general white population likewise might have been because the other side was notably swarthier, giving us the opportunity to root for the lighter side in a conflict, which was receding rapidly at home.

    Support the rich guy across town, defending himself in court for shooting a burglar, even as his brother works to get your guns taken away and your house bulldozed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. Svigor says:
    @Uilleam yr alban
    “And it’s used quite a bit in the comics”

    I’m not sure that’s a positive. A good neologism for an important phenomenon should suggest the nature of the phenomenon.

    IIRC, the term isn’t just used to refer to comics, but has its origins with comic readers.

    It’s pretty suggestive, IMO: “retroactive continuity.”

    “Revisionist history” and “rewriting history” are the closest terms I can think of.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. Svigor says:
    @AnotherDad
    Interesting comment Tyrion.

    I confess, i'm so annoyed with the cucky Christians--unwilling to fight for their survival--i've pretty much lost interest in even polite attendence at Christian services. Attending services of people who want my nation exterminated ... definitely not on my agenda.

    Christians are a bunch of saps, waiting to be told what to think. Don’t abandon that field to Jews.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. I don’t think these two events are related at all. Simply, US Jews were happy with creation of Israel in 1948, but not elated. The shadow of holocaust loomed large, but it was generally confined to Jewish circles; also, there was pervasive low key antisemitism in the US, so they naturally resorted to chameleon-like behavior. Basically -don’t stick out too much.

    The 1967 war was something completely different. Jewish power in the has US increased dramatically; cultural changes that involved counter-cultural 60s were astonishing; re-ethnicization of American “ethnics” was present everywhere, not only among Jews, but also among Italians, Poles, Greeks, Irish,… Then, the Six Day War was a spectacular success & nothing succeeds like success. It gave US Jews the crucial element of ethnic-cultural-national pride only military victory can bestow & cannot be compensated by all high positions in academia, media or high finances.

    The 1967 victorious war was also crucial in re-awakening of Jewish national consciousness in Soviet Union, Poland, France, Hungary, Brazil… so I would say that black nationalism & its distancing from US Jews did not play a significant role in re-Judaisation of American Jews.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  70. AndrewR says:
    @Moses
    Jews, like any group, have group interests. And those interests often are not in alignment with White American interests.

    Simple as that.

    “White American interests” is essentially meaningless. There are no interests that all White Americans share that all human beings don’t also share. And there aren’t really that many interests which a majority of white Americans share.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alec Leamas

    “White American interests” is essentially meaningless. There are no interests that all White Americans share that all human beings don’t also share. And there aren’t really that many interests which a majority of white Americans share.
     
    I think it's safe to say that all White Americans now share an interest in slowing, arresting, or reversing the browning of America. First, all available evidence indicates that a browner America will be a less functional, more balkanized, and poorer declining power with less intelligent, less competent, and less well-behaved inhabitants. All White Americans have a vested interest in this - as do all non-white Americans. All White Americans also have a discrete self-interest in not becoming a hated minority in a plurality brown America in which de jure and de facto mistreatment and other pretexts for revenge are assured.

    Maybe in an 85%+ White America in the 1970s you could say that White Americans have no definite shared interests, but I don't think you can say this today in an America quickly degenerating into an all-against-all tribal conflict for diminishing spoils.
    , @Moses
    "Jewish American interests" is essentially meaningless. There are no interests that all Jewish Americans share that all human beings don't also share. And there aren't really that many interests which a majority of Jewish Americans share.
    , @Mr. Anon

    “White American interests” is essentially meaningless. There are no interests that all White Americans share that all human beings don’t also share. And there aren’t really that many interests which a majority of white Americans share.
     
    Nonsense. There are plenty of interests they share, as other posters have pointed out downthread. The have those interests even if they are not aware of them. Just as anyone of us has an interest in not dying from some threat of which we are unaware. Those interests they share that all human beings share are best defended as a group, and won't be defended outside of being in a group. Being a member of a group is the way to defend them.
    , @MBlanc46
    Merely because many whites don’t recognize those interests doesn’t imply that those interests don’t exist.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. Jake says:
    @Reg Cæsar
    A lot of the support for Israel in the general white population likewise might have been because the other side was notably swarthier, giving us the opportunity to root for the lighter side in a conflict, which was receding rapidly at home.

    Remarkably ignorant of you.

    American Christians, the product of WASP culture (and that has become increasingly true of Catholics as well, starting with assimilation toward the norms set by Mainline Protestants and increasing in pace with Vatican II), naturally would ally with Jews even against Palestinian Christians, not because of skin pigmentation but because of the cultural legacy of a Judaizing heresy: Anglo-Saxon Puritanism.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. tyrone says:
    @Reg Cæsar
    A lot of the support for Israel in the general white population likewise might have been because the other side was notably swarthier, giving us the opportunity to root for the lighter side in a conflict, which was receding rapidly at home.

    It’s bible prophecy plain and simple

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. Yak-15 says:

    So Jews should be great political allies with blacks because We Wuz Kangz enslaved their people a few thousand years ago and then fought to destroy the Jewish state in the 60s?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  74. Anonymous[386] • Disclaimer says:

    I get that Nixon was smart. I don’t get what he did for the country or for conservatives. He actually pushed a very liberal agenda.

    Read More
    • Replies: @snorlax
    A conservative congressman said he liked everything about Nixon except his foreign policy and his domestic policy.

    In seriousness, he did pursue a number of conservative agenda items, it's just that these were almost all blocked by the liberal congress or judges.
    , @Anonymous
    Nixon's great achievement was avoiding disaster - real disaster - for the U.S. in Vietnam.

    Retreat is more dangerous than attack. If he had done what critics wanted, and tried to suddenly pull all U.S. forces out of the country overnight, there would have been total chaos in South Vietnam. The U.S. would probably have found itself at war with South Vietnam as well as the North. If the North had invaded in the middle of this, the war might have ended with a hundred thousand U.S. troops in communist prison camps.

    Nixon needed to keep pressure on the North, and maintain the confidence of the South, while pulling out the troops. This is what he did and it's what he should be remembered for, not the stupid Watergate business.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @J.Ross
    Right, what you're getting here is a more respectable and focused version of the Nation of Islam book. In fact, what Dollinger is really doing is repositioning the Jews as whites just as some thought leaders had begun to proudly reject Jewish whiteness. The slavery connection isn't just too hot, it's downright elegant in its elimination of any natural sympathy.

    what Dollinger is really doing is repositioning the Jews as whites

    Why were Jews in nazi Germany required to wear yellow stars but American blacks were not required to wear any defining marker during anti-bellum slavery?

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Not even sophistry, you've read the same tweets and headlines I have about how "Jews were never white" and "Dear Fellow White People." This is easily observed and totally separate from literal skin color.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. Pericles says:
    @AnotherDad

    You know, if blacks can advocate for blackness, then Jews can advocate for Jewishness. And in this sense, the Six Day War occurring in June of 1967 was perfectly timed to capture a whole bunch of young Jews who were nationalists in their proclivities, but didn’t have a place to put it. And there they could put it in Zionism.
     
    The possible relationship to black nationism banging around the campus fringe is an interesting angle.


    I've generally considered the Jewish Six-Day War identity flowering to have two main causes:

    1) Everyone loves a winner / bandwagon effect.

    2) Jews moving from seeking accomodation/acceptance from the WASPs to being in power. Essentially Jews were finally "out"--"we're here, we're Jewish, get used to it!". But enying/copying the black power thing might have been a piece of this transition.


    This paradigm shift just seems to be the way "civil rights" works. I've seen it with the gays over my life from "leave us alone" to "we're here", to "pride", to in your face, to "you must accept us", to we'll harass you and destroy your career, your business, your life is you don't think correct thoughts.

    This paradigm shift just seems to be the way “civil rights” works. I’ve seen it with the gays over my life from “leave us alone” to “we’re here”, to “pride”, to in your face, to “you must accept us”, to we’ll harass you and destroy your career, your business, your life is you don’t think correct thoughts.

    I’m sure you’ll be happy to know we’re now trying out a step or two beyond that. It’s homophobic to be straight and transphobic to mind that your woman used to be a man.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. Pericles says:
    @Pat Hannagan
    Just googled "when was slavery abolished in the usa" and it was 1865. The last convict transported to Oz was 10/01/1868.

    Therefore White Australians descended from convicts have more in common with African-Americans than Jews.

    Further, I don't recall Jews ever getting all tikkun olam over us, in fact exactly the opposite: Jews were at the forefront of abolishing the White Australia Policy. A homeland for me and not for thee.

    I can't get a definitive answer as to when "indentured servitude" ended for Whites in the USA, perhaps an iStever can help, but the the life of a White convict or indentured servent was far harsher and brutal than that of a slave in many instances due to the fact that slaves had a monetary value whereas convicts and servants were free and abundant.

    Lots of good books on the subject like Sean O'Callaghan's "To Hell or Barbados: The Ethnic Cleansing of Ireland" wherein the origin of the term redneck is explained, or Michael Hoffman's "They Were White and They Were Slaves: The Untold History of the Enslavement of Whites in Early America".

    It's interesting to think about why historic White slavery, whether convict or indentured servants, which lasted longer in the Western world than black slavery is not even considered a thing and that the descendants of those convicts and servants are asserted to owe a moral and financial debt to blacks. It's also worth pondering that this perverse ahistorical moralism is promoted by the very same Jewish descendants of the majority slave owners, and convict ship transporters, who were Jews!

    I can’t get a definitive answer as to when “indentured servitude” ended for Whites in the USA, perhaps an iStever can help, but the the life of a White convict or indentured servent was far harsher and brutal than that of a slave in many instances due to the fact that slaves had a monetary value whereas convicts and servants were free and abundant.

    If memory serves, you could get whipped in the Navy long after slavery ended.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Karl
    76 Pericles > you could get whipped in the Navy long after slavery ended


    corporal punishment in the US Navy was abolished by commodore Levy

    the base synagogue at NOB has a plaque about it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. @AnotherDad

    Today marks the 50th anniversary of Robert Kennedy’s assassination in LA. His killer, Sirhan Sirhan, shot him because Kennedy voted to help Israel during the ‘67 Six Day War. That congressional vote cost him his life.
     
    Also it's the 76th anniversary of--the much more world historically significant--American destruction of the Japanese carriers at Midway, which essentially sealed Japan's fate in the war. Though much more fighting and dying had to occur.


    (Personally, as a half-Irish American, i'll be happy when this Kennedy deification and mythologization has finally burnt out, over and done with and we can stop pretending these crude mediocrities were some sort of great, world historical, American titans.)

    “(Personally, as a half-Irish American, i’ll be happy when this Kennedy deification and mythologization has finally burnt out, over and done with and we can stop pretending these crude mediocrities were some sort of great, world historical, American titans.)”

    What a stupendously stupid and spiteful statement.

    The assassination of both Kennedy’s had a great effect on the trajectory of the USA and the world in general. JFK’s resulted in the Vietnam war (National Security Memo 273) and Robert’s in Israel going nuclear.

    There was an essay on the latter recently at this very site: http://www.unz.com/article/did-israel-kill-the-kennedies/

    Btw, there would have been no need for “the much more world historically significant–American destruction of the Japanese carriers at Midway” were FDR (talk about a deified president) to take action when warned about the Japanese plans to attack Pearl Harbour. But, FDR had been goading the Japanese all along to do that very thing. Pearl Harbour was the culmination of the plan. Much like 9/11 (see General Wesley Clark’s statement about plans for the Middle East post 9/11).

    But I suppose you reckon 9/11 was 100% kosher and ridgy-didge too.

    Read More
    • Replies: @PV van der Byl
    "The assassination of both Kennedy’s had a great effect on the trajectory of the USA and the world in general. JFK’s resulted in the Vietnam war (National Security Memo 273)."

    Wrong. JFK's support for the assassination of President Ngo Dinh Diem resulted in large scale US involvement in the Vietnam War. Even before the deaths of Diem and JFK (within weeks of each other), the number of US military personnel had increased dramatically. From 700 on day 1 of the Kennedy administration to 17,000 in November of 1963.

    "and Robert’s in Israel going nuclear."

    Wrong again. CIA and other western intelligence agencies say that Israel's first usable nuclear device was complete in 1966 (two years before RFK was shot). Construction of the Israeli reactor at Dimona began in 1958.
    , @AnotherDad

    What a stupendously stupid and spiteful statement.

    The assassination of both Kennedy’s had a great effect on the trajectory of the USA and the world in general. JFK’s resulted in the Vietnam war (National Security Memo 273) and Robert’s in Israel going nuclear.
     
    Yawn.

    Pat, all US Presidents have some sort of "effect" on history, and ergo assassinated or otherwise dies in office or doesn't get elected has some sort of "effect" on history. That doesn't make them "great leaders".

    Your two examples are frankly ridiculous. Lyndon Johnson didn't drag us into Vietnam courtesy of the advice of all his advisors that he dragged into the White House from Southwest Texas State Teachers College. No we went into Vietnam on the advice of all of Kennedy's "best and brightest" crew from Harvard. Vietnam was a policy delivered by Kennedy, Harvard and the Democratic party's policy establishment. Heck, NSAM-273 that you reference was prepared by Kennedy's people, for Kennedy. Johnson signed it days after assuming office. Citing NSAM-273 is not making your point but disproving it. This was Kennedy administration policy--cooked up by his people for him.

    As for Robert Kennedy and Israel nuclearizing ... please. What sort of baroque stupidity.

    The Israelis developed nuclear weapons ... because they work! Nukes are the big swinging dick of "don't mess with me or else". Why China, India, South Africa, Pakistan, the Norks, Saddam, Iran ... were also interested in getting them, and a bunch of other folks (e.g. Japan) have probably done the work to be "ready" on short order.

    ~~~

    I don't deify prominent people just because they are of my ethnic group. Heck, swooning and slobbering all over anyone is embarassing. Much of this Kennedy stuff over the years reminds one of teeny boopers swooning over the Beatles. It's pathetic.

    Would America have been "saved" if Kennedy wasn't assinated? ... no. Was Kennedy some sort of exceptional leader with great policies to lead America? ... uh ... no. Mostly Kennedy had pretty ordinary establishment policies--unsurprising since his background and his team was "Eastern Establishment". If Kennedy deviated from "what we'd otherwise have gotten", it was probably for the worse. Bobby would have been worse, with more poorly thought out "liberalism".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. Pericles says:
    @TheBoom
    Also worth noting is the capture of 1.3 million Europeans (many of whom were Irish and 2x the number of Africans brought to North America as slaves) by Barbary pirates who subsequently sold them into slavery. For some odd reason that is not mentioned in the discussion of slavery. Nor is the role Britain played in ending African slavery.

    Yet now the slavers should be invited to live in the homelands of their slaves. It’s only fair, right?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. @syonredux
    Off-topic:

    At 51.7% in 2017, we are fast approaching the point where non-white births outnumber white births in America. If it doesn't happen this year, it looks like it will happen in 2019. I expect members of the intellectual dark web will complain the media isn't giving Trump the credit he deserves for being in office when non-white babies outnumbered white babies for the first time when the historical milestone is reached!
     

    As has been pointed out numerous times previously, the sensational assertion based on Census estimates that this happened back in 2012 will turn out to merely be six or seven years premature.

    The four most populous states in the union are now natally majority-minority. In California, barely one-in-four babies are white. Future president Kamala Harris is California Dreaming this for the entire country.
     

    In Texas, it's one-in-three. The putatively rock-ribbed Republican stronghold is undergoing a demographic transformation that will turn it purple and then blue. Texas is to my knowledge the only state in the country where whites vote more strongly Republican than non-whites vote Democrat. They do so only marginally, though--the white and non-white votes are essentially the inverse of one another. This means when non-whites reach an electoral majority in the lone star state, it'll move to the Democrat column. The writing is on the exit polling walls:
     
    http://anepigone.blogspot.com/

    Disturbing. And I agree with Mishra.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. Jake says:
    @Pat Hannagan
    Just googled "when was slavery abolished in the usa" and it was 1865. The last convict transported to Oz was 10/01/1868.

    Therefore White Australians descended from convicts have more in common with African-Americans than Jews.

    Further, I don't recall Jews ever getting all tikkun olam over us, in fact exactly the opposite: Jews were at the forefront of abolishing the White Australia Policy. A homeland for me and not for thee.

    I can't get a definitive answer as to when "indentured servitude" ended for Whites in the USA, perhaps an iStever can help, but the the life of a White convict or indentured servent was far harsher and brutal than that of a slave in many instances due to the fact that slaves had a monetary value whereas convicts and servants were free and abundant.

    Lots of good books on the subject like Sean O'Callaghan's "To Hell or Barbados: The Ethnic Cleansing of Ireland" wherein the origin of the term redneck is explained, or Michael Hoffman's "They Were White and They Were Slaves: The Untold History of the Enslavement of Whites in Early America".

    It's interesting to think about why historic White slavery, whether convict or indentured servants, which lasted longer in the Western world than black slavery is not even considered a thing and that the descendants of those convicts and servants are asserted to owe a moral and financial debt to blacks. It's also worth pondering that this perverse ahistorical moralism is promoted by the very same Jewish descendants of the majority slave owners, and convict ship transporters, who were Jews!

    Yes, the history of chattel slavery in the US shows rather clearly that because black slaves were owned, they were far more valuable to an owner of a white term slave (an indentured servant was a slave for a term of years). Even more so, the black slave was more much, much valuable to the slave owner than was any white immigrant free man.

    The reason has nothing to do with work ability, much less honesty (black slaves are well attested as having stolen a lot of stuff, from their owners as well as from whites other than their owners and from each other – by the 1950s, Leftist academics were interpreting that history as blacks stealing to be social justice revolutionaries, not as blacks being criminally inclined blacks). The reason is that if a rich man in, say, New Orleans (which attracted a large number of penniless Irish immigrants starting after the Great Famine) had a dangerous project (and because of the heat-humidity factor combined with tons of disease carrying mosquitoes, almost all work was potentially very dangerous to health and life), and he used the slaves he owned, he could have lost a small fortune if even 3 dozen slaves died or became permanently incapacitated. But if he had hired immigrant Irish for the work, and 5 dozen died, he would have lose nothing. He could hire 5 dozen more immigrant whites and finish the job.

    No owner of black slaves, for example, would have risked losing big bucks having the slaves dig out a coal mine and then later mine the coal. Many men always die in that work; many more get crippled. If your slaves die or become crippled, you lose money. If immigrants die doing your hard, dangerous work, you hire more immigrants and don’t give a damn about safety conditions.

    So much as acknowledging things like that is verboten, and has been for a very long time. And the source being protected by the unofficial censorship is much older than the existence of black slaves owned by a very few whites in the USA.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Milo Minderbinder
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Basin_Canal

    Work commenced the following year. Yellow fever ravaged workers in the swamp in back of town, and the loss of slaves was judged too expensive; so most of the work was done by Irish immigrant laborers. The Irish workers died in great numbers, but the Company had no trouble finding more men to take their place, as shiploads of poor Irishmen arrived in New Orleans. Many were willing to risk their lives in hazardous, back-breaking work for a chance to earn $1 a day. By 1838, after an expense of $1 million, the 60-foot (18 m) wide 3.17-mile (5.10 km) long canal was complete enough to be opened to small vessels drawing 6 feet (1.8 m), with $0.375 per ton charged for passage. Over the next decade the canal was enlarged to 12 feet (3.7 m) deep, 100 feet (30 m) wide, and with shell roads alongside.

    No official count was kept of the deaths of the immigrant workers; estimates ranging from 4,000 to 30,000 have been published, with most historical best guesses falling in the 8,000 to 20,000 dead range. Many were buried without a grave marker in the levee and roadway-fill beside the canal.
     
    , @Anonymous
    Is this to say that black slaves in general were better treated than white laboreres? What source is being protected by the censorship?
    , @Anon
    That canal was called the Irish channel because it was built by disposable Irish labor
    , @Svigor
    Great comment, but a fairly large percentage of Southerners owned slaves before the War of Northern Aggression.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. vinteuil says:
    @Tyrion 2
    I didn't press update information. Sorry. Now the link is in.

    Interesting & entertaining first post.

    But “Observe, Orient, Decide and Write?” OODW? What’s up with that?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
    It's from OODA loop. It is a bit silly. Any better suggestions?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. snorlax says:
    @Anonymous
    I get that Nixon was smart. I don't get what he did for the country or for conservatives. He actually pushed a very liberal agenda.

    A conservative congressman said he liked everything about Nixon except his foreign policy and his domestic policy.

    In seriousness, he did pursue a number of conservative agenda items, it’s just that these were almost all blocked by the liberal congress or judges.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Flip
    He governed in part from the left with affirmative action, wage and price controls, taking us off the gold standard, the EPA. Maybe a lot of it was the spirit of the times.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. @AndrewR
    "White American interests" is essentially meaningless. There are no interests that all White Americans share that all human beings don't also share. And there aren't really that many interests which a majority of white Americans share.

    “White American interests” is essentially meaningless. There are no interests that all White Americans share that all human beings don’t also share. And there aren’t really that many interests which a majority of white Americans share.

    I think it’s safe to say that all White Americans now share an interest in slowing, arresting, or reversing the browning of America. First, all available evidence indicates that a browner America will be a less functional, more balkanized, and poorer declining power with less intelligent, less competent, and less well-behaved inhabitants. All White Americans have a vested interest in this – as do all non-white Americans. All White Americans also have a discrete self-interest in not becoming a hated minority in a plurality brown America in which de jure and de facto mistreatment and other pretexts for revenge are assured.

    Maybe in an 85%+ White America in the 1970s you could say that White Americans have no definite shared interests, but I don’t think you can say this today in an America quickly degenerating into an all-against-all tribal conflict for diminishing spoils.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    You make good points, and they're hard to argue against, but I would say the term "interest" is rather meaningless without an implicit awareness of said interest. In other words, can someone be said to have an interest in something if they're not even aware of it? Perhaps this is philosophical trivia, but I'm not sure about that.

    More concretely, many white Americans have a clear short-term to medium-term self-interest in maintaining the status quo, if not worsening it. This will be true for the foreseeable future.
    , @Mishra

    Maybe in an 85%+ White America in the 1970s you could say that White Americans have no definite shared interests
     
    Your overall analysis hit the target perfectly, and this remark is excerpted because it helps to explain how the disaster happened in the first place. A lack of awareness while the foundation was being undermined. A lack of awareness which was promoted--and enforced--by MSM entertainment/propaganda.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. Anon[356] • Disclaimer says:

    As a self-aware Jew, I recommend you read further into Tikkun Olam. The author cited is wrong that Orthodox should be more active with Tikkun Olam. It is much more of a secular Jewish practical and worldly idea rather than what religious Jews would be dedicated too (namely God and torah.)

    The origin of Tikkun Olam has a lot to do with a strange branch of Judaism that originated in the 17th century. Too long to explain, but let’s just say that without understanding the story of Sabbatai Tzvi and later Frankism, you can’t really understand what the ((Jews)) are aiming for in the modern world. It represented a sharp break with Jewish ideas that came before. Ultimately contributing to Zionism, Jewish Communism, and modern social justice warriors. It’s never mentioned in the ((media)) but it’s like the Jewish Enlightenment. A major influence on the fate of the 19th century to our day. Hard to underestimate what the failure of supposed messiah Sabbatai Tzvi/Zevi meant to Jews in the 17th century. The crisis was nearly in proportion to the Holocaust two centuries later in terms of affecting Jewish identity. This is the root of the transition of Judaism from religion to ideology. Frankist Jews or children of such are hidden in history but all over European power in important moments of the 19th and 20th century.

    See Frankist “purification through transgression” to understand the origin of modern Tikkun Olam and why it us ultimately such an evil idiocy.

    Modern secular Jews for the most point don’t realize their ideology is based on a religious principle of committing evil to bring about a messianic good.

    To get you started:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbatai_Zevi

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Frank

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankism

    Internet overall seems weak in its discussion of this. Find some books!

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic

    Hard to underestimate what the failure of supposed messiah Sabbatai Tzvi/Zevi meant to Jews in the 17th century. The crisis was nearly in proportion to the Holocaust two centuries later in terms of affecting Jewish identity. This is the root of the transition of Judaism from religion to ideology.
     
    Very, very interesting comment. Please adopt a handle and comment more often.

    I wonder if the same thing is playing out in Protestant Christianity. Eschatology figured quite prominently in American Protestantism through the 20th century. I know a surprising number of people who have told me, with some sadness, that they always expected that the Lord would have returned by now. But here we still are, so Protestants now sacralize homosexuality and adopt social justice tropes in their own version of Tikkun Olam.

    One of the more famous "The End Is Near" types was Hal Lindsey. He even wrote a book titled, The 1980's: Countdown to Armageddon. He briefly moved to Israel to be in on the ground floor of the Eschaton. Hal is now 89 years old and still waiting on the Rapture.

    , @HA
    "Internet overall seems weak in its discussion of this."

    Mustafa Kemal Ataturk...Was he a crypto-Jew?

    Hillel Halkin, the respected New York native turned Israeli journalist who is a regular in Commentary and a columnist for the Jerusalem Post and the New York Sun, thinks so...[though, according to the Israeli Entsiklopedya]..."There is no proof of the belief, widespread among both Jews and Muslims in Turkey, that his family came from the Doenme"...an underground sect of Sabbetaians, Turkish Jews who took Muslim names and outwardly behaved like Muslims but secretly believed in Sabbetai Zevi, the 17th-century false messiah....
     

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/was-mustafa-kemal-ataturk-founder-of/
    , @HA
    "Hard to underestimate what the failure of supposed messiah Sabbatai Tzvi/Zevi meant to Jews in the 17th century...Internet overall seems weak in its discussion of this."

    Mustafa Kemal Ataturk...Was he a crypto-Jew?

    Hillel Halkin, the respected New York native turned Israeli journalist who is a regular in Commentary and a columnist for the Jerusalem Post and the New York Sun, thinks so...[though, according to the Israeli Entsiklopedya]..."There is no proof of the belief, widespread among both Jews and Muslims in Turkey, that his family came from the Doenme"...an underground sect of Sabbetaians, Turkish Jews who took Muslim names and outwardly behaved like Muslims but secretly believed in Sabbetai Zevi, the 17th-century false messiah....
     

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/was-mustafa-kemal-ataturk-founder-of/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. Barnard says:
    @Simon Tugmutton
    OT-ish, but ultra Steve-bait: Howard Schultz may throw his kippah into the ring for 2020.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5805323/Starbucks-Howard-Schultz-steps-executive-chairman.html

    I think he is more likely to go the philanthropy route. That is a much simpler, happier life than running for President today. Although if Schultz asks some consultants, they might tell him a convincing enough lie that he has a chance to win as an independent. Mike Murphy and John Weaver have bills to pay.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. AndrewR says:
    @Alec Leamas

    “White American interests” is essentially meaningless. There are no interests that all White Americans share that all human beings don’t also share. And there aren’t really that many interests which a majority of white Americans share.
     
    I think it's safe to say that all White Americans now share an interest in slowing, arresting, or reversing the browning of America. First, all available evidence indicates that a browner America will be a less functional, more balkanized, and poorer declining power with less intelligent, less competent, and less well-behaved inhabitants. All White Americans have a vested interest in this - as do all non-white Americans. All White Americans also have a discrete self-interest in not becoming a hated minority in a plurality brown America in which de jure and de facto mistreatment and other pretexts for revenge are assured.

    Maybe in an 85%+ White America in the 1970s you could say that White Americans have no definite shared interests, but I don't think you can say this today in an America quickly degenerating into an all-against-all tribal conflict for diminishing spoils.

    You make good points, and they’re hard to argue against, but I would say the term “interest” is rather meaningless without an implicit awareness of said interest. In other words, can someone be said to have an interest in something if they’re not even aware of it? Perhaps this is philosophical trivia, but I’m not sure about that.

    More concretely, many white Americans have a clear short-term to medium-term self-interest in maintaining the status quo, if not worsening it. This will be true for the foreseeable future.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @vinteuil
    Interesting & entertaining first post.

    But "Observe, Orient, Decide and Write?" OODW? What's up with that?

    It’s from OODA loop. It is a bit silly. Any better suggestions?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. AndrewR says:
    @Simon in London
    A lot of Palestinians and other Levantines are very light skinned, and Mossad has no problem finding agents who make convincing Levantine Arabs. Palestinians Lebanese & Syrians don't look much like Gulf Arabs.

    OTOH Egyptians are often noticeably darker, so there's that.

    No one claimed otherwise. But Palestinians are, on average, significantly swarthier than Jews, primarily due to the great deal of non-Semitic European ancestry most Jews have.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Karl
    89 AndrewR > But Palestinians are, on average, significantly swarthier than Jews

    if you go to the small city of Rosh ha'Ayin and hang out with the elderly, you can find the original stock of Yemenite-Jew immigrants to Israel. They run short-statured - and dark. Like all the other Yemenites.

    Their kids had no particular interest in maintaining the "tribe". So they all married whoever.

    Yemenites used to be the poster-child beloved of the jew-SJW's of New York..... now it's the ethiopians who get showered with extra money from America.

    I don't doubt that the ethiopian chicks are proud on their background. On the other hand, no Rosenstein ever lost money by stocking lots of hair-straightener and blonde hair-dye in his bodega in the Ethiopian neighborhood.

    Go watch the youtubes of the (Hebrew) local television show, entitled "The heart is full" SJW T.Aviv ashkenazi writers and producers making nice about how loveable the ethiopians are.

    please note: I got no problems with the ethiopians. They run low-IQ, and a bit criminal..... but they're loyal to the State. Like the Filipinos, in many ways.

    A little bit of hair-straightening, and the chicks are fuckable.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. Doug says:

    > Because if Jews have to go back to ancient Egypt to get the slavery metaphor

    For as much as Young-Earth Creationists get made fun of for believing in a literal interpretation of Genesis, I wish more people were aware that Exodus has absolutely zero basis in history. Even very educated people think that the Hebrews built pyramids or were enslaved in Egypt in the third millennia BCE.

    In reality, the Hebrews as a linguistic and cultural group only emerged in the 10th century BCE. Fifteen hundred years after the pyramids were built and when Exodus would be dated based on the Bible’s timeline. Furthermore there’s no evidence that the Hebrews were ever enslaved en masse at any point in history. In Egypt or anywhere else. The pyramids were likely built by native freeborn skilled laborers. Pharaoh Egypt never had a large slave population because it engaged in relatively little external wars of conquest.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    In ancient times the Nile was flooded for half the year and the Egyptian peasants had nothing to do until it subsided. There are your pyramid builders - not slaves but unemployed farmers.

    The flooding would also have facilitated water transport of stones, workers and other raw materials.
    , @Ian M.

    Even very educated people think that the Hebrews built pyramids or were enslaved in Egypt in the third millennia BCE.
     
    Well, there might not be any extra-Biblical evidence for the Exodus, but you can't blame the Bible for the foregoing.

    The Bible never says that the Hebrews built the pyramids.

    Moreover, it does not say that they were enslaved in the third millennia BC. Try second millennia. Based on the Bible's timeline, it's usually placed either ~1400 BC or ~1200 BC.
    , @Ian M.
    Also, regarding:

    In reality, the Hebrews as a linguistic and cultural group only emerged in the 10th century BCE.
     
    The Merneptah Stele contains the earliest known reference to Israel and is dated to the late 1200s BC.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. AndrewR says:
    @Travis
    if they stopped counting Arabs, Iranians and North Africans as white we would non-white births outnumber white births in America already.

    92 million white babies were born in America from 1950-1980
    68 million white babies were born in America from 1980-2010

    white people stopped having children , which is the reason there were actually more white people under the age of 55 in 1970 than today.

    Lol. Persians are, what, 0.05% of the US population? 0.01? Arabs aren’t more than half a percent either. And they almost all assimilate to whiteness within a generation or two anyway, at least the non-Muslim ones do.

    Read More
    • Replies: @3g4me
    @91 AndrewR: "Lol. Persians are, what, 0.05% of the US population? 0.01? Arabs aren’t more than half a percent either. And they almost all assimilate to whiteness within a generation or two anyway, at least the non-Muslim ones do."

    One might wonder why so many of your comments utilize utterly bizarre and inaccurate numbers and percentages to downplay the dramatic drop in the White proportion of America's population. Arabs, Persians, and other Mohammedans, last I read, are officially about 1% of the population. I don't trust official numbers, however, and adding in the illegals and rapid influx of rapefugees in the last few years of Obamantion's term, I'd say 1.5% conservatively. Jews and half-Jews (and even quarter Jews, who are often Jewier than the 100% ones) are about 3%. Add in those 85-95% White Latinos who lay claim to full European ancestry (these numbers are all based on self-reported census and other surveys, to the best of my knowledge), and Whites of European ancestry are perhaps 45% (the official percent being 51.7 non-hispanic White as of 2017, minus the others I've already listed).

    As far as "assimilation" goes (a piss-poor and overused word that means whatever the user intends at that moment), most Mohammedans remain Mohammedan and separate from the rest of America socially, culturally, and religiously. Only those Levantines who were/are Christians (primarily Lebanese and Syrian) and who generally arrived between 1880-1925 intermarried and truly assimilated, insofar as "assimilation" applies to any who arrived after the War between the States.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. Neuday says:
    @Mishra
    Not really off-topic. In fact in some ways the only topic.

    Yet we have people here imagining that wypipos is coming back.

    There will be partition, after an amount of bloodletting. Wypipo will come back, but in a smaller geographic area than what we have now. I see an awful lot of CA and TX plates moving to my Whitopia, looking for “good schools” or a safe place to retire.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot
    Crime is extremely low in California. San Diego is the lowest crime city in the USA with more than a million people, San Jose is number two. Simi Valley is the lowest crime city over 100,000 (some years in might trade places with others).

    Crime isn't the reason people leave the state, it is taxes, cost of living, and cultural alienation. Though if you are an elderly middle class retired homeowner, taxes are lower on you than most of the USA due to Prop 13. Typical older retired boomer might have an $800,000 house and pay $750 a year in property taxes. The same house in many parts of NJ or TX they'd pay $10,000-$25,000 a year.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. @Steve Sailer
    Also Don Drysdale's 6th straight shutout.

    Did Bobby attend the game at Dodger Stadium? Or did Don’s shutout happen on the road?
    Being as ’68 was the ‘Year of the Pitcher’, I assume that Drysdale’s shutout was a complete game.

    By the way, Youtube has MLB’s 1965 WS Highlights between LA and MIN, narrated by Vin Scully. What’s striking is the color photography. LA’s uniforms with the pure white and royal blue are iconic (as iconic as the NY pinstripes). Dodger Stadium is truly a jewel. Hopefully it won’t be torn down anytime soon.

    I did not realize that Koufax pitched and lost game 2, won game 5 (Complete Game) and THEN on two days rest, pitched game 7 (Complete Game). It’s like, Drysdale pitched game 1 (obviously due to Sandy’s abscence for Yom Kippur), but you’d think that Don would’ve pitched game 7 as he pitched game 4, but nope. There was no doubt in Alston’s mind that Sandy was going to pitch game 7 after having won game 5.

    Sandy “only” struck out 10 batters in game 5.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    The game was at Dodger Stadium. In the pretty good 2005 (?) movie about the assassination Bobby Kennedy in LA made by Emilio Estevez, the busboy in the famous picture of the dying RFK is mad because he has a ticket to see Drysdale pitch but his boss makes him work that night. Don't know if that's true, but it was a good screenwriterly touch.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. istevefan says:
    @Travis
    if they stopped counting Arabs, Iranians and North Africans as white we would non-white births outnumber white births in America already.

    92 million white babies were born in America from 1950-1980
    68 million white babies were born in America from 1980-2010

    white people stopped having children , which is the reason there were actually more white people under the age of 55 in 1970 than today.

    white people stopped having children ,

    From the figures you cited, white people did not stop having children.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. Moses says:
    @AndrewR
    "White American interests" is essentially meaningless. There are no interests that all White Americans share that all human beings don't also share. And there aren't really that many interests which a majority of white Americans share.

    “Jewish American interests” is essentially meaningless. There are no interests that all Jewish Americans share that all human beings don’t also share. And there aren’t really that many interests which a majority of Jewish Americans share.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. @AnotherDad
    Kudos to this Marc Dollinger fellow for some intellectual honesty.

    The notable thing here is just how easily and completely the Jewish narrative falls apart given the least bit of honest scrutiny. It really is that flimsy.

    This "Jews are like blacks" propaganda is one of the most ridiculous things imaginable. Other than "minority" they could not be more polar opposites. The blacks were a poor working underclass class, kept separate by the white majority. Jews in contrast were a rich rent-seeking overclass, kept separate by their rejection of integration with the majority. Blacks--at least back in the day--would have been happy to integrate. (Where the barriers were more porous in Latin America, they did and there is a color continum produced by HBD, rather than a color line.) Jews (Ashkenazi) exist because of rejection of integration in favor of tribe. (And developed baroque practices and theology to reinforce such rejection.) The philosophy of Christian universalism underlying the famous "content of their character" lines of Martin Luther King are precisely what the Jews rejected.

    The reason for Jewish support of the blacks civil rights movement is easy to understand--minoritarianism. The fundamental principle that no majority people--but specifically and especially white gentiles--can be allowed to have their own stuff--businesses, country clubs, universities, neighborhoods or nations. Cause that means they could/might keep Jews from penetrating and exploiting.

    The reason, damn sure wasn't "integration". The Jews didn't suddenly--after 2000 years--have some sort of come to Jesus moment and decide they were historically in the wrong and really want to be besties and integrate with the gentiles and dissolve as a people. And they damn sure didn't want the blacks to come integrate *their* neighborhoods, *their* country clubs or *their* daughters. Hell no! No this was pretty simple--stop whitey from having his own whitey stuff. Break it up.

    Jews having a “come to Jesus” moment after 2,000 yrs.

    I see what you did.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Did Bobby attend the game at Dodger Stadium? Or did Don's shutout happen on the road?
    Being as '68 was the 'Year of the Pitcher', I assume that Drysdale's shutout was a complete game.

    By the way, Youtube has MLB's 1965 WS Highlights between LA and MIN, narrated by Vin Scully. What's striking is the color photography. LA's uniforms with the pure white and royal blue are iconic (as iconic as the NY pinstripes). Dodger Stadium is truly a jewel. Hopefully it won't be torn down anytime soon.

    I did not realize that Koufax pitched and lost game 2, won game 5 (Complete Game) and THEN on two days rest, pitched game 7 (Complete Game). It's like, Drysdale pitched game 1 (obviously due to Sandy's abscence for Yom Kippur), but you'd think that Don would've pitched game 7 as he pitched game 4, but nope. There was no doubt in Alston's mind that Sandy was going to pitch game 7 after having won game 5.

    Sandy "only" struck out 10 batters in game 5.

    The game was at Dodger Stadium. In the pretty good 2005 (?) movie about the assassination Bobby Kennedy in LA made by Emilio Estevez, the busboy in the famous picture of the dying RFK is mad because he has a ticket to see Drysdale pitch but his boss makes him work that night. Don’t know if that’s true, but it was a good screenwriterly touch.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Drysdale retired fairly young. He could easily have pitched another five or so more years after '69, and perhaps as middle reliever during LA's '74 NL Pennant winning season.
    , @FPD72
    I went to that game with two buddies from school, one of whose uncles was Elroy Face, the Pirates pitching coach, whom we stayed late after the game to meet. He invited us back to the Pirates’ hotel to share a late dinner, but we had to get back because we had class the next day. They may have been staying st the Ambassador, but I’m not sure.

    Anyway, when I got home an hour later my mom told me about the shooting. It and the game were the only topics of conversation at school the next day.

    The next game that Drysdale pitched, against the Phillies, ended the shutout and consecutive scoreless innings streak. The streak will long be remembered for an assist by the home plate umpire in the game against the Giants, when Drysdale hit a batter in the ninth inning with the bases loaded and no outs. The umpire refused to award the batter first base because he had moved into the pitch instead of trying to avoid it. The Giants’ manager went berserk, but to no avail. Drysdale got the next three batters out without allowing a run and the streak was preserved. One of the best games I’ve ever been to.

    The other memorable events associated with the streak were the several trips the home plate umpires made to the mound to search Drysdale for a foreign substance that opposing teams were accusing Drysdale of using to “load up the ball.” On several occasions they even ran their hands through his hair, which of course lead to a commercial for some men’s hair grooming product.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. Moses says:
    @Colin Wright
    ? Jews are white Americans.

    No offense.

    Nope. Jews are not “White Americans.”

    Perhaps a better way to put it would be to substitute “European Christian Americans” for “White Americans,” if you believe that “White” includes European Christians plus Jews (btw I never hear Jews refer to themselves as “White” except in “Dear Fellow White People” screeds — it’s always “Is it good for the Jews?” not “Is it good for the Whites?”).

    Jews I’ve met certainly do NOT list themselves as a subgroup of European Christian Americans. They consider themselves entirely separate.

    Perhaps you’d prefer if I changed it to:

    Jews, like any group, have group interests. And those interests often are not in alignment with European Christian American interests.

    Simple as that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    I think the distinction you imagine between Jewish whites, Catholic whites, Evangelical Christian whites and so on fades to insignificance in comparison to the difference between, say, Filipinos and white people in general.

    Once upon a time, back in the Old Country, in a completely white world, in which religion was of overwhelming importance, being Jewish was significant.

    In the multi-racial mosaic that is modern America, to see being Jewish as separating one from other white people would be as silly as seeing one's Polish or Italian or Irish ethnicity as making one 'not white.'

    Jews are white. As you say, simple as that.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. Mr. Anon says:
    @J.Ross
    The "story" here is that a respectable academic is willing to attach his name to information we already knew and that a healthy society would not find controversial. It might be Cofnas'd or they might just under-publicize it. I doubt Dollinger will be Finkelsteined because he won't be seen as comparably combative or directly threatening.
    State legislators are mandating more and more "Holocaust education" and one representative (Ted Deutsch from Florida) is trying to use civil rights anti-discrimination logic to effectively ban "anti-Semitism" (it is hard to see this getting off the ground or surviving a Supreme Court challenge). Between these trends and the increasing discussions about topics that, in the recent past were notable for their controversality, it looks like an elite fumbling their near-totalitarian control. As always with this crowd, had they grasped less tightly, their grip would have been more secure.

    State legislators are mandating more and more “Holocaust education” and one representative (Ted Deutsch from Florida) is trying to use civil rights anti-discrimination logic to effectively ban “anti-Semitism” (it is hard to see this getting off the ground or surviving a Supreme Court challenge).

    It’s hard to see that happening with a lot of things: the overturning of the fundamental meaning of a thousands-of-years-old social institution (marriage), the idea that men and women are no different, the normalization of homosexuality, the acceptance of a small subset of weirdos who mutilate themselves and claim to be members of the opposite sex…………..

    And yet all these things have happened or are happening.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Well, I want to hope against all facts that it will not come, because they way I understand it to work is literally Sesame Credit for America (you are tagged to all future employers and landlords as a "registered bigot"), but there really are good reasons to doubt it will succeed, for example within the Jewish community there are more and more people who are no longer on the '67 bandwagon.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. Mr. Anon says:
    @AndrewR
    "White American interests" is essentially meaningless. There are no interests that all White Americans share that all human beings don't also share. And there aren't really that many interests which a majority of white Americans share.

    “White American interests” is essentially meaningless. There are no interests that all White Americans share that all human beings don’t also share. And there aren’t really that many interests which a majority of white Americans share.

    Nonsense. There are plenty of interests they share, as other posters have pointed out downthread. The have those interests even if they are not aware of them. Just as anyone of us has an interest in not dying from some threat of which we are unaware. Those interests they share that all human beings share are best defended as a group, and won’t be defended outside of being in a group. Being a member of a group is the way to defend them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. @Dissident
    [Please discard the nearly identical version of this comment that I submitted a few minutes ago (mistakenly using what is my posting handle and email address at a different site) in favor of this one. Thank you and apologies for the bother.]

    the more people will look at and start to quantify the proportionality of representation in various elite and influential jobs.
     
    I would be grateful to anyone who who could provide some readily citable statistics for Jewish over-representation in positions of power, influence and wealth in both the public as well as the private sectors. I am trying to raise awareness among my fellow (and not-so-fellow, as the case may be) Jews. I need sources that stand a chance of being considered credible by "normies" and "Respectables".

    Below is a comment I composed addressing this matter, the latest version of what are several that I have submitted to a certain Respectable site. Perhaps unsurprisingly, none have made it past moderation.


    As we see from [any number of prominent examples], somehow it is considered quite acceptable for Jews to berate white gentiles for "racism" and "white privilege"-- even to the point of demanding that persons-of-color and other minorities be favored over whites in the interest of promoting "diversity". (E.g., Charles Schumer opposing judicial nominees on the grounds of them being white males.)

    Meanwhile, the fact is that in just about every area of wealth and influence: business, finance, government, academia, the media, etc., Jews hold positions in numbers that far exceed any proportionality to our percentage of the population. Yet, anyone who so much as notices, much less questions, this salient fact is reflexively denounced as an anti-Semite and forthwith blacklisted and unpersoned.

    As a Jew myself, I am not only ashamed of this rank double-standard but also quite apprehensive about where the inevitable increasing awareness and resentment of it may ultimately lead. Enough of the BS already! Either cut the sanctimonious moralizing about "diversity", etc. or stop demanding that Jewish over-representation be excluded from such discussions. You cannot have it both ways.
     

    http://jewishbusinessnews.com/2018/03/07/jews-make-19-forbes-200-worlds-richest-list/

    Jews are disproportionately represented on the roster of the richest business people, with 10 Jews among the top 50 (20%), and 38 (19%) Jews among first 200 world’s wealthiest.

    As for your efforts, you would have better luck nailing jello to a wall. The problem is status signaling. To break it down to its simplest, not poking the tiger would mean the tiger is more powerful then you. So if you want to show how powerful you are, you gradually escalate to the most nonsensical and harmful position. You can’t stop because if you do, other people will attack you because you aren’t powerful.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JerseyJeffersonian
    In this case, known as the Every Damn Time Effect.
    , @Dissident
    A belated thank you for the link.

    I am not sure about your theory. Perhaps it may apply to some of the shrewdest and most powerful Jews. Most Jews, however, I believe are simply largely unaware of the contradictions and hypocrisy that I pointed-out. (Just as most "normie" non-Jews seem to be.) Many may know, vaguely, that Jews are over-represented in positions of power and wealth but not realize the extent to which this is so. More importantly, I doubt that more than a relative few have ever actually given much, if any, serious thought or consideration to the matter and its implications.

    (Unfortunately, since posting my request for info, I have had little opportunity to pursue my efforts at increasing awareness in this area among my fellow Jews.)

    As anyone with any understanding of basic human psychology knows, a lack of self-awareness; a blind spot for one's own shortcomings, faults and contradictions; and the holding of others to a different standard than one holds oneself are all endemic to the human condition-- both at the individual as well as the group level. How many non-Jewish, Goodwhites and SJWs even realize (at least on a fully conscious level) the hypocrisy of their revealed preferences in any number of areas (choice of where to live, send their children to school, etc., etc.)?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. Stick says:

    A couple of points –

    Most all the 67 race riots started in Jewish merchant areas dominated by pawn shops, furniture, auto lots and appliance stores featuring easy credit. See DC and Newark for examples. The exception was Detroit. Most of the Jewish merchants were also involved in low end apartment rental markets as well (AKA Slum Lords). There wasn’t a WASP, Neo Nazi or Confederate anywhere near these areas.

    ‘Jewish social marginalization’ was the same experienced by Irish Catholic marginalization’. The similarity was the expectation by new arrivals that previous co-ethnics would welcome and help them. For the Jews entering during 1870 through 1920 the established Jewish order in these areas dated from 1690 through 1840 and were primarily German Jews. For the Irish is was the protestant Irish that arrived as early as 1640s through 1770s. For obvious reasons, the earlier settled co-ethnics had on average at least two generations of separation or more from the recently arrived and were for all intents and purposes not pleased to be compared with their less than worthy distant relatives. In both cases the hurt and hatred these recent arrivals felt morphed into a hatred of White Anglo Saxon Protestants. Projection is a real thing.

    The most noticeable Jewish behavior it that of projection of the object of hate from a Jew to a Christian white. The same can be seen in Hawaii with the Japanese projecting their behavior onto whites with respect to local Hawaiians and Samoans.

    One other feature of large blocs of ethnic and racial subgroup immigration is the phenomena of second generation crazy. First generation immigrants are normally humble and hardworking. For some odd reason their sons and daughters become excessively predatory and violent towards the established majority.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    The exception was Detroit.

    I got the impression reading up on it last year that the Detroit riot of 1967 broke out in the formerly Jewish 12th Street (?) shopping area. It seemed like kind of a touchy point, however, so the text wasn't too clear so perhaps I got this wrong.

    , @Clyde

    The same can be seen in Hawaii with the Japanese projecting their behavior onto whites with respect to local Hawaiians and Samoans.
     
    Japanese-Americans control Hawaii. Maybe it's the heat or that Hawaii is a supposed tropical paradise, but these are the most incompetent Japanese on the planet. Japan is governed 100x more competently. Maybe the Hawaiian Japanese just don't care because they got theirs and the rest of Hawaii can go down down the tubes. The government response to the recent volcano eruptions has been slow and pathetic compared to what is done in Iceland.

    And all they elect is Democrat Reps and Senators to go to DC and 99% of the time they are of Japanese heritage. What an Island Freakshow that also spawned Hussein Obama.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. @Travis
    if they stopped counting Arabs, Iranians and North Africans as white we would non-white births outnumber white births in America already.

    92 million white babies were born in America from 1950-1980
    68 million white babies were born in America from 1980-2010

    white people stopped having children , which is the reason there were actually more white people under the age of 55 in 1970 than today.

    Good point. White fertility is a major reason for the current demographics

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. And while the traditional thinking is, you know, Aren’t Jews great because they became Zionist in ’67? as a student of American Jewish history, I’m really curious why the reaction was stronger in ’67 than even in 1948.

    Probably because the ’67 war was televised. Jews got to see Moshe Dayan with his eye patch dashing across the desert, ordering people around and looking quite the alpha male. It was a narcotic. Jews can be highly influenced by them pitchers. As was mentioned in Kevin MacDonald’s recent story, many Jews decided who they would vote for in the 1980 election merely by looking at the convention attendees on television.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  105. Jack D says:
    @AnotherDad
    Kudos to this Marc Dollinger fellow for some intellectual honesty.

    The notable thing here is just how easily and completely the Jewish narrative falls apart given the least bit of honest scrutiny. It really is that flimsy.

    This "Jews are like blacks" propaganda is one of the most ridiculous things imaginable. Other than "minority" they could not be more polar opposites. The blacks were a poor working underclass class, kept separate by the white majority. Jews in contrast were a rich rent-seeking overclass, kept separate by their rejection of integration with the majority. Blacks--at least back in the day--would have been happy to integrate. (Where the barriers were more porous in Latin America, they did and there is a color continum produced by HBD, rather than a color line.) Jews (Ashkenazi) exist because of rejection of integration in favor of tribe. (And developed baroque practices and theology to reinforce such rejection.) The philosophy of Christian universalism underlying the famous "content of their character" lines of Martin Luther King are precisely what the Jews rejected.

    The reason for Jewish support of the blacks civil rights movement is easy to understand--minoritarianism. The fundamental principle that no majority people--but specifically and especially white gentiles--can be allowed to have their own stuff--businesses, country clubs, universities, neighborhoods or nations. Cause that means they could/might keep Jews from penetrating and exploiting.

    The reason, damn sure wasn't "integration". The Jews didn't suddenly--after 2000 years--have some sort of come to Jesus moment and decide they were historically in the wrong and really want to be besties and integrate with the gentiles and dissolve as a people. And they damn sure didn't want the blacks to come integrate *their* neighborhoods, *their* country clubs or *their* daughters. Hell no! No this was pretty simple--stop whitey from having his own whitey stuff. Break it up.

    Jews in contrast were a rich rent-seeking overclass,

    Bzzt, wrong. There were a handful of rich German Jews who had a 50 year head start on the American dream, but the vast bulk of American Jews came as penniless immigrants from the Russian Empire in the great Ellis Island wave. When they got off the boat they had no money, no education and most of them started off as sweatshop labor in the NY garment industry making pennies per piece.

    As time has gone on, the differential in intelligence between blacks and Jews has seen the Jews pull farther and farther away from blacks economically but this is a one or two generation phenomenon for most as Jews were lifted in the great postwar boom. The story of my wife’s family is typical – those in her generation are successful professionals, but growing up they lived modestly in a postwar tract home – their dad couldn’t go back to college after the war because he needed to feed his family which he did with a modest sales job (and pre-WWII even that modest position would have not been open to Jews) and he in turn grew up in ghetto poverty as the son of an immigrant housepainter – constantly moving because they could not pay the rent.

    “Rich Jews/ Jewish bankers” (along with Jews as Bolsheviks – somehow Jews are both rich AND Bolshevik) is a favorite anti-Semitic meme going back to the Nazis and before. My grandfather in Poland was neither rich nor a Bolshevik – he was just a poor fisherman trying to scratch out a living like Tevye. And yet somehow he had to pay the price (his life) for all the supposed rich Jews and Bolshevik Jews.

    Yes there are a lot of Jews on the billionaires list but the entire billionaires list is only a few hundred people and there are millions of Jews in America, most of whom are neither rich nor members of the rent seeking class. Most don’t live in dysfunctional ghetto poverty like blacks but they are just middle class folks and only a generation or two removed from poverty.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnotherDad

    As time has gone on, the differential in intelligence between blacks and Jews has seen the Jews pull farther and farther away from blacks economically but this is a one or two generation phenomenon for most as Jews were lifted in the great postwar boom.
     
    Jack, when I contrasted blacks and Jews, I wasn't even talking specifically about America, but about their long respective histories of interactions with whites.

    That anyone seriously even vaguely equates the experiences of blacks and Jews in the United States is just a pathetic joke. But there you go.

    Look, everyone has the hard struggling immigrant ancestor story. You want me to trot out my potato famine fleeing great-grandparents? Yawn. Heck, anyone who is pure WASP--unless they really kept the line assiduously clean--has hundreds of immigrant ancestors some of whom almost certainly came as indentured servants--quasi slaves. Sorry, your ancestors were not "oppressed" in America because they did sweatshop labor. Life was hard for most folks--you didn't have great skills or rich parents, you worked your ass off. The comfy life of we suburban boomers have had is not the human norm. If your ancestors didn't like it--go back.

    Again here's the side-by-side I actually said:

    Other than “minority” they could not be more polar opposites. The blacks were a poor working underclass class, kept separate by the white majority. Jews in contrast were a rich rent-seeking overclass, kept separate by their rejection of integration with the majority.
     
    Simplified:
    Blacks
    -- historically poor, mostly unskilled, originally slaves
    -- happy to integrate with whites; refused integration by whites
    Jews
    -- historically rich, mostly skilled, neither slaves nor serfs; free to leave
    -- refused to integrate with whites; developed an entire ideology to keep themselves separate as a tribe

    Again the reason we have all these poor Tevye style Jews by the 18th century is not because Jews were consistently on those patches of land the last 2000 years, scratching out a meager living. Rather, it's the reverse. It's because Jews were historically *rich*--from money lending, trading, tax-farming, skilled trades--relative to the median European and had such a large population expansion relative to their gentile neighbors, that they simply outstripped the carrying capacity of their middle-man minority "ecological niche" of those regions and the excess had to spill onto the land. (Contray to conventional wisdom today, we can't all make a living from "financial services"--trading and rent seeking--someone's actually gotta work.)

    Simply put the Jews as somehow kinda like the blacks of Europe is just utter nonsense. An analogy so ahistorical and ridiculous, it could only thrive in the sort of environment we have today--intense propaganda and blinders strapped on tight to keep anyone from noticing and questioning.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. @Stick
    A couple of points -

    Most all the 67 race riots started in Jewish merchant areas dominated by pawn shops, furniture, auto lots and appliance stores featuring easy credit. See DC and Newark for examples. The exception was Detroit. Most of the Jewish merchants were also involved in low end apartment rental markets as well (AKA Slum Lords). There wasn't a WASP, Neo Nazi or Confederate anywhere near these areas.

    'Jewish social marginalization' was the same experienced by Irish Catholic marginalization'. The similarity was the expectation by new arrivals that previous co-ethnics would welcome and help them. For the Jews entering during 1870 through 1920 the established Jewish order in these areas dated from 1690 through 1840 and were primarily German Jews. For the Irish is was the protestant Irish that arrived as early as 1640s through 1770s. For obvious reasons, the earlier settled co-ethnics had on average at least two generations of separation or more from the recently arrived and were for all intents and purposes not pleased to be compared with their less than worthy distant relatives. In both cases the hurt and hatred these recent arrivals felt morphed into a hatred of White Anglo Saxon Protestants. Projection is a real thing.

    The most noticeable Jewish behavior it that of projection of the object of hate from a Jew to a Christian white. The same can be seen in Hawaii with the Japanese projecting their behavior onto whites with respect to local Hawaiians and Samoans.

    One other feature of large blocs of ethnic and racial subgroup immigration is the phenomena of second generation crazy. First generation immigrants are normally humble and hardworking. For some odd reason their sons and daughters become excessively predatory and violent towards the established majority.

    The exception was Detroit.

    I got the impression reading up on it last year that the Detroit riot of 1967 broke out in the formerly Jewish 12th Street (?) shopping area. It seemed like kind of a touchy point, however, so the text wasn’t too clear so perhaps I got this wrong.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stick
    It may have been sparked there but the dynamic of 1967 Detroit is black versus Hillbillies. Then there were the Poles and other Eastern Europeans who didn't like blacks in their neighborhoods. Go back a checkout the 1943 Detroit race riot. The 67 versions pale in comparison. It was truly a race war not a race riot. Also check out the reaction to busing in Boston and Detroit that happened somewhere around 1969. They were shooting school buses with the kids in them there. Nothing like this ever happened during the integration of southern schools in 1964.
    , @Charles Pewitt

    I got the impression reading up on it last year that the Detroit riot of 1967 broke out in the formerly Jewish 12th Street (?) shopping area. It seemed like kind of a touchy point, however, so the text wasn’t too clear so perhaps I got this wrong.

     

    Baby boomer Bigelow would've buried that tidbit about the Detroit Riots starting in a Jew shopping area in her movie Detroit.

    Bigelow is a big, beautiful Saxon type broad but she's a coward compared to shorty firecracker Foster when it comes to dealing with the Deep State Jews who control Hollywood.

    Bigelow is another one with English and German ancestry. Sailer needs to talk more about Krauts and Limeys in the USA.

    All Jew talk and very little Kraut and Limey talk misses the big picture.

    , @Ian M.
    I'll have to ask my father. He witnessed it and has home video of it (shot by my grandfather).

    But I've never heard him mention that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. George says:

    “if blacks can advocate for blackness, then Jews can advocate for Jewishness”

    I am very suspicious of the idea that US elites take queues from Blacks. A better explanation is White Elites, exemplified by LBJ Nixon administrations’ inability to withdraw from Vietnam made Jews and everyone noticed the old ‘White’ elite was in a state of decay. Jews just filled a leadership void.

    This process happened before, British Americans aka WASPs, completely and corruptly handled WWI and its aftermath. Not exclusively British White Americans were the new elite. So you had Catholic Al Smith running for president.

    The war in Vietnam was the end of the White consensus Jews filled the gap. The war on terror will probably have the same effect on Jewish elites as people notice the people who know what they are doing are mostly Asian. I have no prediction if Jews will go down as peacefully as White, WASPS, and Yankees did or if they will go down like the Southern elites did. The Asian vs Jewish collision might be first manifesting itself in the regular accusation of Chinese American spying for China. It sort of reminds me of White America’s suspicion of Jewish spying for the Reds.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The Depression had earlier also damaged the reputation of America's traditional ruling class. Although Roosevelt was himself born into that class, he was a renegade from it who empowered new people and new ideas at the expense of the old.

    The Depression and Vietnam were the two biggest blows to the prestige of the WASP elites.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. BB753 says:

    Let’s be honest, Jews really never gave a hoot about Blacks and still don’t. It was always about themselves and their interests. In this case, mobilizing Blacks against the Wasp establishment to deal Wasps the final blow and take over.

    Read More
    • Agree: Charles Pewitt
    • Replies: @Anon
    The idea is to have blacks interbreed with whites so as to weaken white identity and change the white genome.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. Stick says:
    @Steve Sailer
    The exception was Detroit.

    I got the impression reading up on it last year that the Detroit riot of 1967 broke out in the formerly Jewish 12th Street (?) shopping area. It seemed like kind of a touchy point, however, so the text wasn't too clear so perhaps I got this wrong.

    It may have been sparked there but the dynamic of 1967 Detroit is black versus Hillbillies. Then there were the Poles and other Eastern Europeans who didn’t like blacks in their neighborhoods. Go back a checkout the 1943 Detroit race riot. The 67 versions pale in comparison. It was truly a race war not a race riot. Also check out the reaction to busing in Boston and Detroit that happened somewhere around 1969. They were shooting school buses with the kids in them there. Nothing like this ever happened during the integration of southern schools in 1964.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ian M.
    The '67 riot was mostly blacks behaving badly and destroying stuff and fighting cops rather than it being blacks versus hillbillies.

    But yeah, the '43 riot was a real race riot, white versus black.

    But I had thought there was more damage done in the '67 riot.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. @Jake
    Yes, the history of chattel slavery in the US shows rather clearly that because black slaves were owned, they were far more valuable to an owner of a white term slave (an indentured servant was a slave for a term of years). Even more so, the black slave was more much, much valuable to the slave owner than was any white immigrant free man.

    The reason has nothing to do with work ability, much less honesty (black slaves are well attested as having stolen a lot of stuff, from their owners as well as from whites other than their owners and from each other - by the 1950s, Leftist academics were interpreting that history as blacks stealing to be social justice revolutionaries, not as blacks being criminally inclined blacks). The reason is that if a rich man in, say, New Orleans (which attracted a large number of penniless Irish immigrants starting after the Great Famine) had a dangerous project (and because of the heat-humidity factor combined with tons of disease carrying mosquitoes, almost all work was potentially very dangerous to health and life), and he used the slaves he owned, he could have lost a small fortune if even 3 dozen slaves died or became permanently incapacitated. But if he had hired immigrant Irish for the work, and 5 dozen died, he would have lose nothing. He could hire 5 dozen more immigrant whites and finish the job.

    No owner of black slaves, for example, would have risked losing big bucks having the slaves dig out a coal mine and then later mine the coal. Many men always die in that work; many more get crippled. If your slaves die or become crippled, you lose money. If immigrants die doing your hard, dangerous work, you hire more immigrants and don't give a damn about safety conditions.

    So much as acknowledging things like that is verboten, and has been for a very long time. And the source being protected by the unofficial censorship is much older than the existence of black slaves owned by a very few whites in the USA.

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

    Work commenced the following year. Yellow fever ravaged workers in the swamp in back of town, and the loss of slaves was judged too expensive; so most of the work was done by Irish immigrant laborers. The Irish workers died in great numbers, but the Company had no trouble finding more men to take their place, as shiploads of poor Irishmen arrived in New Orleans. Many were willing to risk their lives in hazardous, back-breaking work for a chance to earn $1 a day. By 1838, after an expense of $1 million, the 60-foot (18 m) wide 3.17-mile (5.10 km) long canal was complete enough to be opened to small vessels drawing 6 feet (1.8 m), with $0.375 per ton charged for passage. Over the next decade the canal was enlarged to 12 feet (3.7 m) deep, 100 feet (30 m) wide, and with shell roads alongside.

    No official count was kept of the deaths of the immigrant workers; estimates ranging from 4,000 to 30,000 have been published, with most historical best guesses falling in the 8,000 to 20,000 dead range. Many were buried without a grave marker in the levee and roadway-fill beside the canal.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. Jack D says:

    You know, if blacks can advocate for blackness, then Jews can advocate for Jewishness. And in this sense, the Six Day War occurring in June of 1967 was perfectly timed to capture a whole bunch of young Jews who were nationalists in their proclivities, but didn’t have a place to put it. And there they could put it in Zionism.

    This is key to understanding Meir Kahane and all the Brooklyn born right wing settlers who populate the Israeli settlements in Judea & Samaria (aka the West Bank). Pre-1967 the trend among American Jews was toward total assimilation (Kahane himself went by “Mickey King” and had a Catholic girlfriend – when she found out that Kahane already had a wife and family she jumped off the Brooklyn Bridge and killed herself). Philip Roth used to say that in his entire 100% Jewish high school, not one kid wore a yarmulke – keeping your head covered was something that your bearded grandfather did (and maybe even not him) but that was all over with.

    But when black nationalism got going in ’60s America (and started pushing against Jewish interests – the Jews in Brooklyn were physically being pushed out/mugged out of their neighborhoods by blacks and there was a brief experiment in NY with school decentralization where the local black controlled school boards tried to get rid of their Jewish school teachers) the lightbulb went on in the heads of some American Jews that they should follow the example of the blacks. Kahane’s “Jewish Defense League” was patterned after the Black Panthers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Um, when have Jews ever NOT advocated for jewishness?
    , @Ian M.
    Another manifestation of the Jewish desire for assimilation pre-'60s is the Christian names a lot of them had.

    After the '60s, it seems like Jews started giving their children more typically Jewish names.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. Flip says:
    @snorlax
    A conservative congressman said he liked everything about Nixon except his foreign policy and his domestic policy.

    In seriousness, he did pursue a number of conservative agenda items, it's just that these were almost all blocked by the liberal congress or judges.

    He governed in part from the left with affirmative action, wage and price controls, taking us off the gold standard, the EPA. Maybe a lot of it was the spirit of the times.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. res says:
    @TheBoom
    Also worth noting is the capture of 1.3 million Europeans (many of whom were Irish and 2x the number of Africans brought to North America as slaves) by Barbary pirates who subsequently sold them into slavery. For some odd reason that is not mentioned in the discussion of slavery. Nor is the role Britain played in ending African slavery.

    Also worth noting is the capture of 1.3 million Europeans (many of whom were Irish and 2x the number of Africans brought to North America as slaves) by Barbary pirates who subsequently sold them into slavery.

    Any idea what conditions those slaves lived under and how their descendants did? Those would be interesting to compare to Black slaves in the US given their thriving population 150 years later.

    Read More
    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    "Any idea what conditions those slaves lived under and how their descendants did? Those would be interesting to compare to Black slaves in the US given their thriving population 150 years later."

    IIRC the usual fate for male slaves captured by corsairs was to be sent to the oars in a Mediterranean galley - a death sentence unless you were ransomed. So the males had no descendants to agitate for civil rights.

    Domestic male slaves were routinely castrated, a procedure with a high death rate and again no offspring - so there aren't large numbers of sub-Saharan blacks in Egypt or Turkey.

    The girls (white or black) were used as servants and concubines.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gu%C3%B0r%C3%AD%C3%B0ur_S%C3%ADmonard%C3%B3ttir

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurrem_Sultan
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. Anon[151] • Disclaimer says:
    @YetAnotherAnon
    I wouldn't say that ended in 1967 or 1972 either. My impression, and that's all it is, is that as Islam has increased its temporal power in the UK, whether by demography, or rape and bombings by its adherents, so Brits are less bothered about Muslims being mistreated in Palestine.

    The media helps this along - the siege of Aleppo got as much coverage in three months as the West Bank gets in a decade.

    The old British concern for 'fair play' was a product of people comfortable in their skins and in their country - as that comfort lessens, so will that concern.

    My impression, and that’s all it is, is that as Islam has increased its temporal power in the UK, whether by demography, or rape and bombings by its adherents, so Brits are less bothered about Muslims being mistreated in Palestine.

    That’s a consequence the deal the Jews are offering the Muslims: “We’re taking Palestine. To compensate we’ll give you access to new territory in Europe and the United States.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde

    That’s a consequence the deal the Jews are offering the Muslims: “We’re taking Palestine. To compensate we’ll give you access to new territory in Europe and the United States.”
     
    Jews have collectively been blind and weak on mass third world immigration and flooding into America. They have no sway on this in Europe. Too many influential Chuck Schumer types are active open borders promoters to make a permanent Democrat majority.

    But the Jewish - Muslim "deal" you mention is 100% hallucination. Western Europe obviously has brought in lots more Muslims than America and Jews don't have much political pull there. Europeans have even caved on polygamous marriages and allowed multiple wife Muslim families to all clamp onto the generous social welfare teat. It would be racist - Islamophobic to do otherwise. (/sarcasm)

    Jack Straw? One eighth Jewish or less.

    , @Jack D

    To compensate we’ll give you access to new territory in Europe
     
    Most anti-Semites are delusional to some extent but the idea that the Jews ran the show in postwar Europe to the extent that they had the ability to grant/deny access to Muslims is ESPECIALLY delusional.

    Jews had absolutely nothing to do with the decisions that led to millions of Muslims being allowed into Western Europe. None, nada, zilch. If you want to blame someone, blame Hitler and the Kaiser whose decisions led to the slaughter of millions of young European men, leading to postwar labor shortages.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. Lot says:
    @AnotherDad
    Kudos to this Marc Dollinger fellow for some intellectual honesty.

    The notable thing here is just how easily and completely the Jewish narrative falls apart given the least bit of honest scrutiny. It really is that flimsy.

    This "Jews are like blacks" propaganda is one of the most ridiculous things imaginable. Other than "minority" they could not be more polar opposites. The blacks were a poor working underclass class, kept separate by the white majority. Jews in contrast were a rich rent-seeking overclass, kept separate by their rejection of integration with the majority. Blacks--at least back in the day--would have been happy to integrate. (Where the barriers were more porous in Latin America, they did and there is a color continum produced by HBD, rather than a color line.) Jews (Ashkenazi) exist because of rejection of integration in favor of tribe. (And developed baroque practices and theology to reinforce such rejection.) The philosophy of Christian universalism underlying the famous "content of their character" lines of Martin Luther King are precisely what the Jews rejected.

    The reason for Jewish support of the blacks civil rights movement is easy to understand--minoritarianism. The fundamental principle that no majority people--but specifically and especially white gentiles--can be allowed to have their own stuff--businesses, country clubs, universities, neighborhoods or nations. Cause that means they could/might keep Jews from penetrating and exploiting.

    The reason, damn sure wasn't "integration". The Jews didn't suddenly--after 2000 years--have some sort of come to Jesus moment and decide they were historically in the wrong and really want to be besties and integrate with the gentiles and dissolve as a people. And they damn sure didn't want the blacks to come integrate *their* neighborhoods, *their* country clubs or *their* daughters. Hell no! No this was pretty simple--stop whitey from having his own whitey stuff. Break it up.

    “The fundamental principle that no majority people–but specifically and especially white gentiles”

    Except nobody forced Jewish integration on anyone. What’s the Jewish version of Brown v Board of Education, the Civil Rights Act, and the Fair Housing Act? In fact Jewish discrimination wasn’t that extensive and ended because of private social pressure.

    We are simply better people than the anti-semites, and we’ve consistently won the affection of the majority of Americans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D

    In fact Jewish discrimination wasn’t that extensive and ended because of private social pressure.
     
    It depends what you mean by "extensive" - while there was no formal Jim Crow for Jews (and in fact, as Steve has pointed out, local (not Yankee carpetbagger) Jews were even more well accepted in the South than in other regions), private discrimination in the '20s and '30s was quite pervasive - not just the proverbial country clubs but ordinary hotels, employment with big corporations, enrollment in universities, eligibility to be on staff at hospitals, etc. When Augusta National was founded, local Jewish industrialists were among its founding members, but later on when it became truly national (and when the great smelly Ellis Island wave lowered the public estimation of Jews) Jews were excluded - the situation of Jews in America actually deteriorated after WWI.

    The situation of Jews was better than for blacks and better than it was in Europe but it was far from perfect. It didn't just mean that a few rich Jews couldn't join a WASP country club - it had real everyday implications for ordinary American Jews. When you went on a trip you had to be sure to book a hotel that was not restricted. My step FIL was advised to study civil engineering instead of chemical because you could practice the former privately while no big publicly traded chemical company would hire Jews. Jews were certainly able to make a life for themselves in America but certain doors were shut to them and they weren't just the doors to the country club as Steve would have you believe.

    The end of discrimination against Jew was driven in part by the civil rights movement and laws - the same laws that prohibited race discrimination also prohibited religious discrimination. My MIL was able to get a job with Yale & Towne (as a draftswoman) during WWII because Federal contracts (even then) had non-discrimination requirements - before war, Y&T, like most big Philadelphia corporations, would never have hired a Jew. The Civil Rights Act of '64 put the last nail in the coffin of most forms of discrimination.

    Also the Holocaust made anti-Semitism (and eugenics) disreputable. Before WWII, "polite" discrimination (and in the US it was mostly polite - even as discrimination was practiced it was shrouded in euphemism - hotels advertised that they were "restricted" but you were supposed to understand what "restricted" meant) was accepted as being part of the social order - not everyone agreed with it but if you practiced it, that was considered within the range of legitimate opinion. But after the war, anti-Semitism was understood as leading to the Holocaust and its practice by people in the mainstream was no longer seen as tolerable.
    , @Ozymandias
    "We are simply better people than the anti-semites, and we’ve consistently won the affection of the majority of Americans."

    We consider ourselves better people than the gentiles, and we’ve consistently used our positions of influence to shut down any dissent from the majority of Americans.

    FIFY.
    , @AnotherDad

    In fact Jewish discrimination wasn’t that extensive and ended because of private social pressure.
     
    Lot, you're argument isn't with me. As i've repeatedly said, no middle man minority in the history of the world has ever been treated better than Jews have been treated by Americans.

    But JackD will go chapter and verse with you on his poor put-upon tail of woe.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. anon[117] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon
    Jews promote blacks in order to increase the probability that white women will mate with black men. It really is that simple.

    True. Pop bids for teen girls always portray White men as dorks and dindus as badass. Look at most watched video Uptown Funk by (((Mark Ronson))). All races of men repped as coil, except White Men, who are shoeshines. Limbic manipulation of dumb, impressionable, m/c White girls, yet the most reproductively valuable demographic.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. Anon[151] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    You know, if blacks can advocate for blackness, then Jews can advocate for Jewishness. And in this sense, the Six Day War occurring in June of 1967 was perfectly timed to capture a whole bunch of young Jews who were nationalists in their proclivities, but didn’t have a place to put it. And there they could put it in Zionism.
     
    This is key to understanding Meir Kahane and all the Brooklyn born right wing settlers who populate the Israeli settlements in Judea & Samaria (aka the West Bank). Pre-1967 the trend among American Jews was toward total assimilation (Kahane himself went by "Mickey King" and had a Catholic girlfriend - when she found out that Kahane already had a wife and family she jumped off the Brooklyn Bridge and killed herself). Philip Roth used to say that in his entire 100% Jewish high school, not one kid wore a yarmulke - keeping your head covered was something that your bearded grandfather did (and maybe even not him) but that was all over with.

    But when black nationalism got going in '60s America (and started pushing against Jewish interests - the Jews in Brooklyn were physically being pushed out/mugged out of their neighborhoods by blacks and there was a brief experiment in NY with school decentralization where the local black controlled school boards tried to get rid of their Jewish school teachers) the lightbulb went on in the heads of some American Jews that they should follow the example of the blacks. Kahane's "Jewish Defense League" was patterned after the Black Panthers.

    Um, when have Jews ever NOT advocated for jewishness?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    When they advocated for assimilation. Look at all the pre-WWII Hollywood moguls - they were very careful to disguise their Jewishness. If there were any Jewish movie stars they took non-Jewish names (Issur Danielovich becomes Kirk Douglas). Many of them married non-Jewish wives, had Christmas trees in their house and even raised their children as Christians.

    There was in fact a generational shift from the "hide your Jewishness" of pre-1967 (the Holocaust was little spoken of then also, nothing like now) to the "I'm out (as Jewish) and I'm proud mentality of today - Irving Wallace's kids change their name BACK to Wallechinsky. The Holocaust was Jews as losers, the '67 War showed that Jews could be winners. Everyone (especially Americans) loves a winner.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. @syonredux
    Off-topic:

    At 51.7% in 2017, we are fast approaching the point where non-white births outnumber white births in America. If it doesn't happen this year, it looks like it will happen in 2019. I expect members of the intellectual dark web will complain the media isn't giving Trump the credit he deserves for being in office when non-white babies outnumbered white babies for the first time when the historical milestone is reached!
     

    As has been pointed out numerous times previously, the sensational assertion based on Census estimates that this happened back in 2012 will turn out to merely be six or seven years premature.

    The four most populous states in the union are now natally majority-minority. In California, barely one-in-four babies are white. Future president Kamala Harris is California Dreaming this for the entire country.
     

    In Texas, it's one-in-three. The putatively rock-ribbed Republican stronghold is undergoing a demographic transformation that will turn it purple and then blue. Texas is to my knowledge the only state in the country where whites vote more strongly Republican than non-whites vote Democrat. They do so only marginally, though--the white and non-white votes are essentially the inverse of one another. This means when non-whites reach an electoral majority in the lone star state, it'll move to the Democrat column. The writing is on the exit polling walls:
     
    http://anepigone.blogspot.com/

    I can’t tell where these blockquotes originate, but they share the assumption common to every other projection of a white minority America: that Hispanics are not, and will never be, white.

    That assumption is questionable at the least. Hispanics already self-identify as white by large majorities, and at least a quarter intermarry with non-Hispanic whites. Eliminate the special treatment given to “Hispanic or Latino” ethnicity, and they’ll likely become no more a distinct group than Italian-Americans are.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bernardo Pizzaro Cortez Del Castro
    True. If we count people like Senator Rubio, Ted Cruz and their children as white then America will still have a white majority population for another 50 years. Although American Blue eyed Blondes may no longer exist in the year 2100 , most of the mestizos may continue to self identify was white. The bigger concern is the African-American population. Within the next 45 years Blacks will become 20% of the population. Already the youth population of America is 15% Black.
    , @syonredux

    I can’t tell where these blockquotes originate,

     

    Audacious Epigone:

    http://anepigone.blogspot.com/


    , but they share the assumption common to every other projection of a white minority America: that Hispanics are not, and will never be, white.
     
    An understandable assumption. The overwhelming majority of Latinx in the USA are Mestizo:

     


     the median Native American ancestry for the Hispanic/Latino group is 38% 
      compared to 0.1% for the European American group (Figure 1B).  
     
    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/05/30/333609.full.pdf+html

    That assumption is questionable at the least. Hispanics already self-identify as white by large majorities,
     
    Default choice. There is no racial box for Mestizo. The more important question is: How many actually view themselves as White? I've never met a Mestizo who personally (i.e., in a non-census context) identifies as White.

    and at least a quarter intermarry with non-Hispanic whites
     
    But will the children think of themselves as Anglo-Whites? Or as Latinx?

    . Eliminate the special treatment given to “Hispanic or Latino” ethnicity,
     
    The chances of racial set-asides being eliminated for Latinx are somewhere between slim and none.

    and they’ll likely become no more a distinct group than Italian-Americans are.

     

    Italians are European. Latinx are Mestizo/Amerind:


    http://www.johnderbyshire.com/Miscellaneous/Other/aztecs.jpg

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. You know, if blacks can advocate for blackness, and Jews can advocate for Jewishness, then whites can advocate for whiteness.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  120. Anonymous[151] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jake
    Yes, the history of chattel slavery in the US shows rather clearly that because black slaves were owned, they were far more valuable to an owner of a white term slave (an indentured servant was a slave for a term of years). Even more so, the black slave was more much, much valuable to the slave owner than was any white immigrant free man.

    The reason has nothing to do with work ability, much less honesty (black slaves are well attested as having stolen a lot of stuff, from their owners as well as from whites other than their owners and from each other - by the 1950s, Leftist academics were interpreting that history as blacks stealing to be social justice revolutionaries, not as blacks being criminally inclined blacks). The reason is that if a rich man in, say, New Orleans (which attracted a large number of penniless Irish immigrants starting after the Great Famine) had a dangerous project (and because of the heat-humidity factor combined with tons of disease carrying mosquitoes, almost all work was potentially very dangerous to health and life), and he used the slaves he owned, he could have lost a small fortune if even 3 dozen slaves died or became permanently incapacitated. But if he had hired immigrant Irish for the work, and 5 dozen died, he would have lose nothing. He could hire 5 dozen more immigrant whites and finish the job.

    No owner of black slaves, for example, would have risked losing big bucks having the slaves dig out a coal mine and then later mine the coal. Many men always die in that work; many more get crippled. If your slaves die or become crippled, you lose money. If immigrants die doing your hard, dangerous work, you hire more immigrants and don't give a damn about safety conditions.

    So much as acknowledging things like that is verboten, and has been for a very long time. And the source being protected by the unofficial censorship is much older than the existence of black slaves owned by a very few whites in the USA.

    Is this to say that black slaves in general were better treated than white laboreres? What source is being protected by the censorship?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. Anon[151] • Disclaimer says:
    @BB753
    Let's be honest, Jews really never gave a hoot about Blacks and still don't. It was always about themselves and their interests. In this case, mobilizing Blacks against the Wasp establishment to deal Wasps the final blow and take over.

    The idea is to have blacks interbreed with whites so as to weaken white identity and change the white genome.

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

    Blacks and Jews? Blame Abe Saperstein.

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

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  123. @Steve Sailer
    The exception was Detroit.

    I got the impression reading up on it last year that the Detroit riot of 1967 broke out in the formerly Jewish 12th Street (?) shopping area. It seemed like kind of a touchy point, however, so the text wasn't too clear so perhaps I got this wrong.

    I got the impression reading up on it last year that the Detroit riot of 1967 broke out in the formerly Jewish 12th Street (?) shopping area. It seemed like kind of a touchy point, however, so the text wasn’t too clear so perhaps I got this wrong.

    Baby boomer Bigelow would’ve buried that tidbit about the Detroit Riots starting in a Jew shopping area in her movie Detroit.

    Bigelow is a big, beautiful Saxon type broad but she’s a coward compared to shorty firecracker Foster when it comes to dealing with the Deep State Jews who control Hollywood.

    Bigelow is another one with English and German ancestry. Sailer needs to talk more about Krauts and Limeys in the USA.

    All Jew talk and very little Kraut and Limey talk misses the big picture.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. Jack D says:
    @Anon
    Um, when have Jews ever NOT advocated for jewishness?

    When they advocated for assimilation. Look at all the pre-WWII Hollywood moguls – they were very careful to disguise their Jewishness. If there were any Jewish movie stars they took non-Jewish names (Issur Danielovich becomes Kirk Douglas). Many of them married non-Jewish wives, had Christmas trees in their house and even raised their children as Christians.

    There was in fact a generational shift from the “hide your Jewishness” of pre-1967 (the Holocaust was little spoken of then also, nothing like now) to the “I’m out (as Jewish) and I’m proud mentality of today – Irving Wallace’s kids change their name BACK to Wallechinsky. The Holocaust was Jews as losers, the ’67 War showed that Jews could be winners. Everyone (especially Americans) loves a winner.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosamond Vincy
    That last statement is true. Florence King said there was a huge turnaround in anti-Semitism among the good ol' boys after the Six-Day War. People said things like, "Durn, them Jew-boys sure can fight!" One wanted Moshe Dayan to run for president in the US, because "that one-eyed bastid could wipe the floor with anybody!"
    , @Dissident

    Look at all the pre-WWII Hollywood moguls – they were very careful to disguise their Jewishness. If there were any Jewish movie stars they took non-Jewish names (Issur Danielovich becomes Kirk Douglas). Many of them married non-Jewish wives, had Christmas trees in their house and even raised their children as Christians.
     
    Jack Benny (Benjamin Kubelsky, 1894-1974) did Christmas and Easter shows in which he not only freely extended "Merry Christmas" and "Happy Easter" greetings (respectively) but would appear to create the impression (or at least attempt to) that he was himself a gentile Christian. Listening to such broadcasts, they come across as comically odd, even absurd, to me, a fan of old time radio who was born well after its era.

    Did Benny ever mention or make reference to his Jewishness onstage/ in-character?

    Your mention of Jews having Christmas trees reminds me of my own childhood. Drawn to the colorful, aesthetically pleasing imagery and perhaps its association with a general spirit of merriment, I very much wanted a Christmas tree. My secular Jewish parents reluctantly allowed me a small one in my bedroom. This held no religious meaning or significance for me. By the time I was fourteen, I had begun seriously embracing actual Judaism.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. Jack D says:
    @Lot
    "The fundamental principle that no majority people–but specifically and especially white gentiles"

    Except nobody forced Jewish integration on anyone. What's the Jewish version of Brown v Board of Education, the Civil Rights Act, and the Fair Housing Act? In fact Jewish discrimination wasn't that extensive and ended because of private social pressure.

    We are simply better people than the anti-semites, and we've consistently won the affection of the majority of Americans.

    In fact Jewish discrimination wasn’t that extensive and ended because of private social pressure.

    It depends what you mean by “extensive” – while there was no formal Jim Crow for Jews (and in fact, as Steve has pointed out, local (not Yankee carpetbagger) Jews were even more well accepted in the South than in other regions), private discrimination in the ’20s and ’30s was quite pervasive – not just the proverbial country clubs but ordinary hotels, employment with big corporations, enrollment in universities, eligibility to be on staff at hospitals, etc. When Augusta National was founded, local Jewish industrialists were among its founding members, but later on when it became truly national (and when the great smelly Ellis Island wave lowered the public estimation of Jews) Jews were excluded – the situation of Jews in America actually deteriorated after WWI.

    The situation of Jews was better than for blacks and better than it was in Europe but it was far from perfect. It didn’t just mean that a few rich Jews couldn’t join a WASP country club – it had real everyday implications for ordinary American Jews. When you went on a trip you had to be sure to book a hotel that was not restricted. My step FIL was advised to study civil engineering instead of chemical because you could practice the former privately while no big publicly traded chemical company would hire Jews. Jews were certainly able to make a life for themselves in America but certain doors were shut to them and they weren’t just the doors to the country club as Steve would have you believe.

    The end of discrimination against Jew was driven in part by the civil rights movement and laws – the same laws that prohibited race discrimination also prohibited religious discrimination. My MIL was able to get a job with Yale & Towne (as a draftswoman) during WWII because Federal contracts (even then) had non-discrimination requirements – before war, Y&T, like most big Philadelphia corporations, would never have hired a Jew. The Civil Rights Act of ’64 put the last nail in the coffin of most forms of discrimination.

    Also the Holocaust made anti-Semitism (and eugenics) disreputable. Before WWII, “polite” discrimination (and in the US it was mostly polite – even as discrimination was practiced it was shrouded in euphemism – hotels advertised that they were “restricted” but you were supposed to understand what “restricted” meant) was accepted as being part of the social order – not everyone agreed with it but if you practiced it, that was considered within the range of legitimate opinion. But after the war, anti-Semitism was understood as leading to the Holocaust and its practice by people in the mainstream was no longer seen as tolerable.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot
    When you had a big wave of poor Russian Jewish immigrants, sure there was discrimination. That was an issue of numbers, not antisemitism. The same applied to Irish, German, Slavic, and Italian immigrants. The fact that Harvard's "Jewish quota" still allowed us about a 4x representation over our population share is indicative of the extent of this: not very much.

    I see your family anecdotes, and respond I don't have any at all. As in, I have never heard my family members born 1920-1950 ever complain of even the slightest discrimination.
    , @snorlax

    no big publicly traded chemical company would hire Jews.
     
    Bullshit, 2, 3, 4, 5.

    before war, Y&T, like most big Philadelphia corporations, would never have hired a Jew.
     
    Bullshit.
    , @AnotherDad
    Jack, let's say all your sob stories are true. (And yes, Jews did suffer the cruel lash of Protestants limiting Jewish enrollment in their Protestant unis to 5x Jewish population share rather than letting them become a majority. Those nasty Prods!) So what?

    In a free society, people are supposed to be … uh … free. Free to make whatever social arrangements they want. Free to associate or not with people according to their whims.

    Stereotypes are--statistically--true. Jews have certain patterns of behavior (pushy, crude, loud, arrogant) that some gentile groups find "unappealing". As Steve pointed out, the German Jews, generally found the eastern, pale-of-settlement Jews to be rude and crude … and these are their fellow Jews! Heck, certain gentile groups find other gentile groups to be "unappealing". This is the human norm practiced by Jews, whites, Chinese, Indians, Arabs, Latins, blacks, etc. etc. Someone I get the impression JackD doesn't knock off work and go knock back a pint with the bruthas of Philadelphia. Why not? Maybe they have some "patterns of behavior" you don't fancy? Some ethnic stereotyping at play?

    Furthermore, it's particularly ridiculous to get this "you're discriminating!" crap from Jews of all people--a people who specifically *rejected* integrated with their neighbors in favor of tribal loyalty and down through the centuries enforced that rejection of integration religiously. Jews complaining of exclusion is really the pot calling the kettle black.

    Jews having Jewish country clubs, organizations, civil society and doing ethnic networking--Jewish solidarity!
    Some gentile groups having gentile country clubs, organizations, civil society and networking--anti-Semitism!

    Sorry, no one is under any moral or ethnical obligation to socialize or do business with anyone else. Least of all with Ashkenazi Jews a group whose very existence is a rejection of integration with their neighbors.
    , @Ian M.

    ...the situation of Jews in America actually deteriorated after WWI.
     
    Did the Leo Frank case have anything to do with this?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. Clyde says:
    @Steve Sailer
    Also Don Drysdale's 6th straight shutout.

    “Don Drysdale was 56 when he died of a heart attack at Le Centre Sheraton in Montreal, Quebec, on July 3, 1993″

    As far as I know the last great side arm pitcher. He was 6ft 6in.

    Nicknamed “Big D” by fans, Drysdale used brushback pitches and a sidearm fastball to intimidate batters,[3] similar to his fierce fellow Hall of Famer Bob Gibson. His 154 hit batsmen remains a modern National League record.

    Drysdale was a good hitting pitcher. In 14 seasons he had 218 hits, including 29 home runs. Drysdale was occasionally used as a pinch-hitter, once during the World Series.[5]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. Clyde says:
    @Anon

    My impression, and that’s all it is, is that as Islam has increased its temporal power in the UK, whether by demography, or rape and bombings by its adherents, so Brits are less bothered about Muslims being mistreated in Palestine.
     
    That's a consequence the deal the Jews are offering the Muslims: "We're taking Palestine. To compensate we'll give you access to new territory in Europe and the United States."

    That’s a consequence the deal the Jews are offering the Muslims: “We’re taking Palestine. To compensate we’ll give you access to new territory in Europe and the United States.”

    Jews have collectively been blind and weak on mass third world immigration and flooding into America. They have no sway on this in Europe. Too many influential Chuck Schumer types are active open borders promoters to make a permanent Democrat majority.

    But the Jewish – Muslim “deal” you mention is 100% hallucination. Western Europe obviously has brought in lots more Muslims than America and Jews don’t have much political pull there. Europeans have even caved on polygamous marriages and allowed multiple wife Muslim families to all clamp onto the generous social welfare teat. It would be racist – Islamophobic to do otherwise. (/sarcasm)

    Jack Straw? One eighth Jewish or less.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. @Anon
    As a self-aware Jew, I recommend you read further into Tikkun Olam. The author cited is wrong that Orthodox should be more active with Tikkun Olam. It is much more of a secular Jewish practical and worldly idea rather than what religious Jews would be dedicated too (namely God and torah.)

    The origin of Tikkun Olam has a lot to do with a strange branch of Judaism that originated in the 17th century. Too long to explain, but let's just say that without understanding the story of Sabbatai Tzvi and later Frankism, you can't really understand what the ((Jews)) are aiming for in the modern world. It represented a sharp break with Jewish ideas that came before. Ultimately contributing to Zionism, Jewish Communism, and modern social justice warriors. It's never mentioned in the ((media)) but it's like the Jewish Enlightenment. A major influence on the fate of the 19th century to our day. Hard to underestimate what the failure of supposed messiah Sabbatai Tzvi/Zevi meant to Jews in the 17th century. The crisis was nearly in proportion to the Holocaust two centuries later in terms of affecting Jewish identity. This is the root of the transition of Judaism from religion to ideology. Frankist Jews or children of such are hidden in history but all over European power in important moments of the 19th and 20th century.

    See Frankist "purification through transgression" to understand the origin of modern Tikkun Olam and why it us ultimately such an evil idiocy.

    Modern secular Jews for the most point don't realize their ideology is based on a religious principle of committing evil to bring about a messianic good.

    To get you started:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbatai_Zevi

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Frank

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankism

    Internet overall seems weak in its discussion of this. Find some books!

    Hard to underestimate what the failure of supposed messiah Sabbatai Tzvi/Zevi meant to Jews in the 17th century. The crisis was nearly in proportion to the Holocaust two centuries later in terms of affecting Jewish identity. This is the root of the transition of Judaism from religion to ideology.

    Very, very interesting comment. Please adopt a handle and comment more often.

    I wonder if the same thing is playing out in Protestant Christianity. Eschatology figured quite prominently in American Protestantism through the 20th century. I know a surprising number of people who have told me, with some sadness, that they always expected that the Lord would have returned by now. But here we still are, so Protestants now sacralize homosexuality and adopt social justice tropes in their own version of Tikkun Olam.

    One of the more famous “The End Is Near” types was Hal Lindsey. He even wrote a book titled, The 1980′s: Countdown to Armageddon. He briefly moved to Israel to be in on the ground floor of the Eschaton. Hal is now 89 years old and still waiting on the Rapture.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Warner
    I usually comment with this handle. Realized I forgot to type it in just after I clicked send.

    Yes, it's very interesting. I was not raised religious, but have taken a great interest lately and it's very, very interesting the role religious beliefs play in today's non-religious ideologies.

    Nobody in media takes religion seriously (like it's a role-play card game or some weird hobby for freaks) but if you do, you don't have to be a believer of any sort, but it answers all sorts of questions about today's social and political climate that can't fully be explained otherwise.

    When I ask liberal friends to explain their social beliefs in depth, they all come down to religious questions. The secular eschatology of all mankind holding hands at some vague point in the future when their ideology is fully implemented. The secular creation story, secular morality. They all have a not-quite-scientific resonance. But whether you believe in one true church, false Gods, or all roads leading to the same truth, the religious history of the West is full of foreshadowing of today's ideological fights.

    How is the question "How many angels dance on the head of a pin?" different than the social reckoning over "How many genders exist." People actually think about these things. And the angels on the head of a pin is not as frivolous as it sounds. It was really a question about the nature of time, space, and matter brought up by Thomas Aquinas.

    Many of the modern interpretations of foolish religious questions come from centuries of Protestants trying to discredit Catholics by making their history look bloodthirsty and intellectual pursuits ridiculous. Most people think the "Inquisition" killed millions. That's Protestant propaganda. It was the equivalent in deaths of one September 11th taking place over the course of three and a half centuries. And mostly due to the Spanish government, not the Catholic Church.

    Jewish religious history is very important to what is going on now. And pay no attention to what 99% of modern Jews say about it. They know nothing. I know I was brought up only believing a) Israel is the greatest and most important achievement of human history, and b) all the stuff Jews believed from the beginning of time until the 1850's or so was hokum, but we ought to respect it anyway, but not believe a word of it. That's what most Jews know. I was lucky to meet some scholarly people who could bring me deeper into the real history, of the people, and the thought.
    , @Anonymous
    Apparently the reason Oliver Cromwell made no preparations for a smooth succession of power after his death was that he believed the end times were imminent.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. Chase says:

    All this writing to just hide the simple issue: Jews do what they (as in each Jew) think is best for Jews. They can and often do disagree what is best for Jews, but that doesn’t change that they will do what they think is best for their people. If it’s help black people in the 50′s and then toss them overboard in the 60′s, so be it. This is not complicated.

    White people have a really hard time not thinking like White people.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  130. @Chris Renner
    I can't tell where these blockquotes originate, but they share the assumption common to every other projection of a white minority America: that Hispanics are not, and will never be, white.

    That assumption is questionable at the least. Hispanics already self-identify as white by large majorities, and at least a quarter intermarry with non-Hispanic whites. Eliminate the special treatment given to "Hispanic or Latino" ethnicity, and they'll likely become no more a distinct group than Italian-Americans are.

    True. If we count people like Senator Rubio, Ted Cruz and their children as white then America will still have a white majority population for another 50 years. Although American Blue eyed Blondes may no longer exist in the year 2100 , most of the mestizos may continue to self identify was white. The bigger concern is the African-American population. Within the next 45 years Blacks will become 20% of the population. Already the youth population of America is 15% Black.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    If we count people like Senator Rubio, Ted Cruz and their children as white
     
    Cruz and Rubio are Cubans. Cubans are not at all representative of the American Latinx population.

    Although American Blue eyed Blondes may no longer exist in the year 2100 ,
     
    Americans with blue eyes and fair hair will still exist in 2100. There will just be far fewer of them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. Clyde says:
    @Stick
    A couple of points -

    Most all the 67 race riots started in Jewish merchant areas dominated by pawn shops, furniture, auto lots and appliance stores featuring easy credit. See DC and Newark for examples. The exception was Detroit. Most of the Jewish merchants were also involved in low end apartment rental markets as well (AKA Slum Lords). There wasn't a WASP, Neo Nazi or Confederate anywhere near these areas.

    'Jewish social marginalization' was the same experienced by Irish Catholic marginalization'. The similarity was the expectation by new arrivals that previous co-ethnics would welcome and help them. For the Jews entering during 1870 through 1920 the established Jewish order in these areas dated from 1690 through 1840 and were primarily German Jews. For the Irish is was the protestant Irish that arrived as early as 1640s through 1770s. For obvious reasons, the earlier settled co-ethnics had on average at least two generations of separation or more from the recently arrived and were for all intents and purposes not pleased to be compared with their less than worthy distant relatives. In both cases the hurt and hatred these recent arrivals felt morphed into a hatred of White Anglo Saxon Protestants. Projection is a real thing.

    The most noticeable Jewish behavior it that of projection of the object of hate from a Jew to a Christian white. The same can be seen in Hawaii with the Japanese projecting their behavior onto whites with respect to local Hawaiians and Samoans.

    One other feature of large blocs of ethnic and racial subgroup immigration is the phenomena of second generation crazy. First generation immigrants are normally humble and hardworking. For some odd reason their sons and daughters become excessively predatory and violent towards the established majority.

    The same can be seen in Hawaii with the Japanese projecting their behavior onto whites with respect to local Hawaiians and Samoans.

    Japanese-Americans control Hawaii. Maybe it’s the heat or that Hawaii is a supposed tropical paradise, but these are the most incompetent Japanese on the planet. Japan is governed 100x more competently. Maybe the Hawaiian Japanese just don’t care because they got theirs and the rest of Hawaii can go down down the tubes. The government response to the recent volcano eruptions has been slow and pathetic compared to what is done in Iceland.

    And all they elect is Democrat Reps and Senators to go to DC and 99% of the time they are of Japanese heritage. What an Island Freakshow that also spawned Hussein Obama.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Japanese-Americans control Hawaii. Maybe it’s the heat or that Hawaii is a supposed tropical paradise, but these are the most incompetent Japanese on the planet.
     
    Selective immigration? Weren't most of the Japanese who immigrated to Hawaii drawn from the bottom tiers of Japanese society?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. Jim Given says:

    Israel in the 1960′s was a David and Goliath story: tiny Israel, constantly warred upon by all the surrounding Arab countries, who were dedicated to the destruction of Israel, stood up and defended itself heroically. This was the exact opposite of the Vietnam War, to which one of course was opposed. One said, “Israel is different.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  133. @Lot
    "The fundamental principle that no majority people–but specifically and especially white gentiles"

    Except nobody forced Jewish integration on anyone. What's the Jewish version of Brown v Board of Education, the Civil Rights Act, and the Fair Housing Act? In fact Jewish discrimination wasn't that extensive and ended because of private social pressure.

    We are simply better people than the anti-semites, and we've consistently won the affection of the majority of Americans.

    “We are simply better people than the anti-semites, and we’ve consistently won the affection of the majority of Americans.”

    We consider ourselves better people than the gentiles, and we’ve consistently used our positions of influence to shut down any dissent from the majority of Americans.

    FIFY.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot
    I agree antisemitic dissent gets shut down in mainstream spaces these days. But it isn't because of Jewish power, but because Nazi Germany showed the world how evil antisemites are, and what they will do if they reach positions of power. If Jews had a lot of power in America, they would have seen that their cousins in Europe had refuge here or in Mandatory Palestine.

    It may also have something to do with the fact that antisemites rarely just have issues with Jews, but quite often extend their hate to our large population of Eastern and Southern European Americans.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. Logan says:
    @Rosamond Vincy
    MLK's "Letter from a Birmingham Jail" pleaded for clergy to join the Civil Rights Movement. He quoted Old Testament prophets and New Testaments apostles, St. Thomas Aquinas (Catholic), Reinhold Niebuhr (Protestant), and Martin Buber (Jewish). He said he himself would have tried to help Christians in the Soviet Union and Jews in Nazi Germany. He appealed to everybody except Muslims, who were the bad guys then.

    Clergy did join the movement in increased numbers, but it's clear that few really wanted to do it, because MLK had to guilt-trip them into it.

    He appealed to everybody except Muslims, who were the bad guys then.

    Nahh. What Muslims were in 1963 was invisible.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosamond Vincy
    Read it. He foresaw what the Nation of Islam would turn into, as well as the Black Panthers, MOVE in Philly, the LA Riots, Ferguson, etc. .... MLK had his flaws, but his church-goin' protesters were a thousand times preferable to the militants who followed and supplanted them.
    , @Rosamond Vincy
    http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. Jack D says:
    @Anon

    My impression, and that’s all it is, is that as Islam has increased its temporal power in the UK, whether by demography, or rape and bombings by its adherents, so Brits are less bothered about Muslims being mistreated in Palestine.
     
    That's a consequence the deal the Jews are offering the Muslims: "We're taking Palestine. To compensate we'll give you access to new territory in Europe and the United States."

    To compensate we’ll give you access to new territory in Europe

    Most anti-Semites are delusional to some extent but the idea that the Jews ran the show in postwar Europe to the extent that they had the ability to grant/deny access to Muslims is ESPECIALLY delusional.

    Jews had absolutely nothing to do with the decisions that led to millions of Muslims being allowed into Western Europe. None, nada, zilch. If you want to blame someone, blame Hitler and the Kaiser whose decisions led to the slaughter of millions of young European men, leading to postwar labor shortages.

    Read More
    • Agree: sayless
    • Replies: @Massimo Heitor

    Jews had absolutely nothing to do with the decisions that led to millions of Muslims being allowed into Western Europe. None, nada, zilch. If you want to blame someone,
     
    That's not true. Some of the top leadership that pushed the migration into Europe were absolutely Jewish. George Soros, lead Obama staffer Ben Rhodes who is half Jewish (half Episcopalian WASP?), and influential media figures like David Brooks or Bari Weiss, the Jewish writers at Vox, Jon Stewart have all advocated this. However, while these people may be Jewish by ancestry, their passionate tribal affiliation lies more with the political left than with Judaism. Most also side with the Arabs against Israel and oppose the premise of Israel as an ethno-state. The exceptions to that are Brooks and Weiss who have an active tribal affiliation with Judaism and stronger support for Israel.

    The other side that spoke critically of this freedom of migration also features many people who happen to be Jewish like Dennis Prager, Mickey Kaus, Ilana Mercer and in France there is Alain Finkielkraut and Eric Zemmour.

    I'm pro-Jewish, pro-Israel. I do see anti-Jewish sentiment on these corners of the Internet, I don't sympathize with that, but there is one criticism I do sympathize with that is reasonable: If white Americans and white Europeans are not supposed to prefer their culture to any other culture, and they aren't allowed to limit immigration, the same rule should apply to Jews. Most Jews mentioned above are completely consistent on this. The exception is David Brooks, Bari Weiss, and the commentarymagazine types who argue it's rank bigotry for white people in Europe or the US to keep any type of cultural identity that excludes others, while Jews can have their ethno nation state, and can have Jewish exclusive schools, and Jewish exclusive culture, and attempt to marry other Jews to produce exclusively Jewish children.
    , @hyperbola
    The Weaponisation of the Refugee
    Coercive Engineered Migration: Zionism's War on Europe (Part 2 of an 11 Part Series)
    https://dissidentvoice.org/2016/01/the-weaponisation-of-the-refugee/

    Artificial mass migration as imperial policy has a long history. To illustrate this, we will cite a few historical examples..... In the nineteenth century, Imperial Belgium imported hundreds of thousands of Rwandan Tutsi workers to the Congo to staff their work colonies. This artificial migration policy of Belgian imperialism has played a major role in the context fueling the current ethnic cleansing and ongoing neo-colonial proxy wars being carried out by the US/Israeli and European powers in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where the US /Israeli Tutsi puppet regime of Paul Kagame is murdering and pillaging on behalf of Western corporations. The Wall Street Journal has ironically described Kagame’s Zionist puppet regime ‘The Israel of Africa’......


    Rothschild’s “Slaughter Ships”
    Coercive Engineered Migration: Zionism's War on Europe (Part 4 of an 11 Part Series)
    https://dissidentvoice.org/2016/01/rothschilds-slaughter-ships/
    Austrian intelligence officials have reportedly revealed that US government agencies are paying for the transport of migrants to Europe. On August 5th, 2015 Austrian magazine Infodirekt reported:....
    , @Thea
    There is a long list of Jewish politicians in Great Britain that have been pushing for exactly this. Sure some were not Jewish. But it is undeniable they pushed for this and continue to support it.

    Modern urban life has pampered British men to the point that they are so effeminate they allowed this to happen and now pimp out their daughters to “grooming gangs” and arrest those who sound the alarm. So to some extent they did it to themselves but they were pushed this way in those shell shocked post wwii years.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. @Pat Hannagan
    "(Personally, as a half-Irish American, i’ll be happy when this Kennedy deification and mythologization has finally burnt out, over and done with and we can stop pretending these crude mediocrities were some sort of great, world historical, American titans.)"

    What a stupendously stupid and spiteful statement.

    The assassination of both Kennedy's had a great effect on the trajectory of the USA and the world in general. JFK's resulted in the Vietnam war (National Security Memo 273) and Robert's in Israel going nuclear.

    There was an essay on the latter recently at this very site: http://www.unz.com/article/did-israel-kill-the-kennedies/

    Btw, there would have been no need for "the much more world historically significant–American destruction of the Japanese carriers at Midway" were FDR (talk about a deified president) to take action when warned about the Japanese plans to attack Pearl Harbour. But, FDR had been goading the Japanese all along to do that very thing. Pearl Harbour was the culmination of the plan. Much like 9/11 (see General Wesley Clark's statement about plans for the Middle East post 9/11).

    But I suppose you reckon 9/11 was 100% kosher and ridgy-didge too.

    “The assassination of both Kennedy’s had a great effect on the trajectory of the USA and the world in general. JFK’s resulted in the Vietnam war (National Security Memo 273).”

    Wrong. JFK’s support for the assassination of President Ngo Dinh Diem resulted in large scale US involvement in the Vietnam War. Even before the deaths of Diem and JFK (within weeks of each other), the number of US military personnel had increased dramatically. From 700 on day 1 of the Kennedy administration to 17,000 in November of 1963.

    “and Robert’s in Israel going nuclear.”

    Wrong again. CIA and other western intelligence agencies say that Israel’s first usable nuclear device was complete in 1966 (two years before RFK was shot). Construction of the Israeli reactor at Dimona began in 1958.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Hannagan
    For those actually interested in the facts and not just anti-Irish onanists:

    1) http://www.jfklancer.com/NSAM273.html

    2) http://www.unz.com/article/did-israel-kill-the-kennedies/
    , @Anonymous
    U.S. problems in Vietnam began on Kennedy's watch and were largely his fault. The Viet Cong were quiet during the Eisenhower administration, but the Bay of Pigs debacle and other foreign policy mistakes by the new administration convinced them that it was time to launch a major insurgency, which by the end of 1961 had captured control of much of rural South Vietnam.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. Lot says:
    @Neuday
    There will be partition, after an amount of bloodletting. Wypipo will come back, but in a smaller geographic area than what we have now. I see an awful lot of CA and TX plates moving to my Whitopia, looking for "good schools" or a safe place to retire.

    Crime is extremely low in California. San Diego is the lowest crime city in the USA with more than a million people, San Jose is number two. Simi Valley is the lowest crime city over 100,000 (some years in might trade places with others).

    Crime isn’t the reason people leave the state, it is taxes, cost of living, and cultural alienation. Though if you are an elderly middle class retired homeowner, taxes are lower on you than most of the USA due to Prop 13. Typical older retired boomer might have an $800,000 house and pay $750 a year in property taxes. The same house in many parts of NJ or TX they’d pay $10,000-$25,000 a year.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    , and cultural alienation.
     
    A huge factor.As I know from personal experience, Living in a neighborhood that is majority Latinx is very depressing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. @Moses
    Jews, like any group, have group interests. And those interests often are not in alignment with White American interests.

    Simple as that.

    Jews, like any group, have group interests. And those interests often are not in alignment with White American interests.

    Most taxonomies of human ethnicity consider Ashkenazi a sub group of white Euro ethnicity. Just like Russian, English, German, and Italian, are all distinct sub-ethnicities of white, Ashkenazi is a sub-ethnicity of white.

    Group interests aren’t perfect. Hillary Clinton is white: specifically Dutch, English, Scottish, and Welsh. I certainly feel a closer affiliation to black Republicans than to a white Hillary Clinton or Nancy Pelosi.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ben tillman

    Most taxonomies of human ethnicity consider Ashkenazi a sub group of white Euro ethnicity.
     
    Who cares? It's false.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. @Steve Sailer
    The game was at Dodger Stadium. In the pretty good 2005 (?) movie about the assassination Bobby Kennedy in LA made by Emilio Estevez, the busboy in the famous picture of the dying RFK is mad because he has a ticket to see Drysdale pitch but his boss makes him work that night. Don't know if that's true, but it was a good screenwriterly touch.

    Drysdale retired fairly young. He could easily have pitched another five or so more years after ’69, and perhaps as middle reliever during LA’s ’74 NL Pennant winning season.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. Lot says:
    @Jack D

    In fact Jewish discrimination wasn’t that extensive and ended because of private social pressure.
     
    It depends what you mean by "extensive" - while there was no formal Jim Crow for Jews (and in fact, as Steve has pointed out, local (not Yankee carpetbagger) Jews were even more well accepted in the South than in other regions), private discrimination in the '20s and '30s was quite pervasive - not just the proverbial country clubs but ordinary hotels, employment with big corporations, enrollment in universities, eligibility to be on staff at hospitals, etc. When Augusta National was founded, local Jewish industrialists were among its founding members, but later on when it became truly national (and when the great smelly Ellis Island wave lowered the public estimation of Jews) Jews were excluded - the situation of Jews in America actually deteriorated after WWI.

    The situation of Jews was better than for blacks and better than it was in Europe but it was far from perfect. It didn't just mean that a few rich Jews couldn't join a WASP country club - it had real everyday implications for ordinary American Jews. When you went on a trip you had to be sure to book a hotel that was not restricted. My step FIL was advised to study civil engineering instead of chemical because you could practice the former privately while no big publicly traded chemical company would hire Jews. Jews were certainly able to make a life for themselves in America but certain doors were shut to them and they weren't just the doors to the country club as Steve would have you believe.

    The end of discrimination against Jew was driven in part by the civil rights movement and laws - the same laws that prohibited race discrimination also prohibited religious discrimination. My MIL was able to get a job with Yale & Towne (as a draftswoman) during WWII because Federal contracts (even then) had non-discrimination requirements - before war, Y&T, like most big Philadelphia corporations, would never have hired a Jew. The Civil Rights Act of '64 put the last nail in the coffin of most forms of discrimination.

    Also the Holocaust made anti-Semitism (and eugenics) disreputable. Before WWII, "polite" discrimination (and in the US it was mostly polite - even as discrimination was practiced it was shrouded in euphemism - hotels advertised that they were "restricted" but you were supposed to understand what "restricted" meant) was accepted as being part of the social order - not everyone agreed with it but if you practiced it, that was considered within the range of legitimate opinion. But after the war, anti-Semitism was understood as leading to the Holocaust and its practice by people in the mainstream was no longer seen as tolerable.

    When you had a big wave of poor Russian Jewish immigrants, sure there was discrimination. That was an issue of numbers, not antisemitism. The same applied to Irish, German, Slavic, and Italian immigrants. The fact that Harvard’s “Jewish quota” still allowed us about a 4x representation over our population share is indicative of the extent of this: not very much.

    I see your family anecdotes, and respond I don’t have any at all. As in, I have never heard my family members born 1920-1950 ever complain of even the slightest discrimination.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D

    I see your family anecdotes, and respond I don’t have any at all. As in, I have never heard my family members born 1920-1950 ever complain of even the slightest discrimination.
     
    My father discussed his wartime experiences fairly openly (although I now know from reading other survivor accounts from the same camps that things were even worse than he told me about even though what he told me about was already pretty bad - I don't know whether he repressed the worst of these memories himself or just didn't want to tell me about them, but either way I understand). But I know of Holocaust survivor families where their parents never said a word to their kids. Nada, nothing, zilch. Families react differently to trauma and how many "stories from the old days" they tell their kids (not that the trauma that American Jews experienced was anything remotely comparable to the Holocaust). If you watch the Skip Gates "Finding Your Roots" shows, most of the time people know little or nothing about their family history (and what they think they know is often wrong).

    1950 is casting the net too broadly. Aside from a few snooty clubs that held out until the '70s and beyond, institutional anti-Semitism in US took a hit after WWII and another hit after the '64 Civil Rights Act and was largely a dead letter for anyone who was born starting in the Roosevelt Administration and reached adulthood in the '50s. There are fewer and fewer people left who are still alive and lucid enough to remember adult life before 1945. I am fortunate in that my MIL (born '22) is still very much alive and kicking and has all her marbles and can speak lucidly about the pre-War period.

    Again, as I said before, Jews in America in that period could still have a happy and prosperous life (at least until the Depression) in a sort of separate but equal world where they lived in all Jewish neighborhoods, attended all Jewish public schools, patronized mostly Jewish businesses, went to Jewish doctors, etc. (And this was not that different than the experience of say Italian or Polish Catholic immigrants at the same time). But not all doors were open to them and even doors that had previously been open were later shut or left open only a crack - maybe this was an understandable backlash due to the large # of Jews who arrived at the turn of the century but whatever the cause it was real and is historically documented regardless of whether your family members chose not to speak of it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. AndrewR says:
    @bjdubbs
    1967 is a neat explanation for the difference between the first generation of neocons, who often served in the military, and their children. Irving Kristol's "On the Political Stupidity of the Jews" doesn't read like anything the neocons would endorse today; the title alone is probably unacceptable today. For those keeping track of these kind of things, Bill Kristol's mental breakdown can mostly be traced to his father's death in 2009.

    You can accuse the Jews of many things, but political stupidity is not really one of them. If they were politically stupid then no one would fear making mild criticisms of them. “On the Political Stupidity of White People” could fill up volumes, OTOH. Then again, people would probably fear writing that too since it would contain unpleasant facts about other groups.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. Tyrion 2 says: • Website

    1967 is up there with the greatest moments in warfare. It is especially admirable for how quick and relatively clean it was. Kutuzov’s tactical retreat to Moscow, it was not. It is therefore very easy to see how 1967 captured so many people’s imaginations especially as the antithesis to the fact that the West learned all of the wrong lessons from the Holocaust.

    If we are not to repeat history we must learn from it, and the twin lessons of the Holocaust are that one should not passively go into the night nor admire/respect others for doing so. Israel is well-placed among developed countries to understand this.

    Perhaps we can learn a bit from them?

    https://observeorientdecideandwrite.wordpress.com

    Read More
    • Replies: @hyperbola
    If we had "learned the lessons" we would have put an end to "chosen-people" propaganda aimed at estalishing privileges for themselves long ago.

    The oppressed become the oppressors: Post WWII Zionists used concentration camps in Palestine
    https://www.sott.net/article/387034-The-oppressed-become-the-oppressors-Post-WWII-Zionists-used-concentration-camps-in-Palestine

    Declassified documents have revealed that post World War II Jewish Zionists used ethnic cleansing in Palestine in the late 1940's. Israeli soldiers imprisoned thousands of Palestinian civilians within at least 22 Zionist-run concentration and labour camps that existed from 1948 to 1955. The documents reveal some horrific information regarding the living conditions and health concerns of men, women and children who were forced into these concentration camps. This may not come as a surprise to many historians as the facts have been documented. However, historically many people who have attempted to bring these facts to light have been condemned as anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists. The release of these documents conclusively proves this (once taboo) portion of history has in fact been covered up. [1], [2], [3]. ......
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Tyrion 2

    what Dollinger is really doing is repositioning the Jews as whites
     
    Why were Jews in nazi Germany required to wear yellow stars but American blacks were not required to wear any defining marker during anti-bellum slavery?

    Not even sophistry, you’ve read the same tweets and headlines I have about how “Jews were never white” and “Dear Fellow White People.” This is easily observed and totally separate from literal skin color.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
    Don't be silly. Nobody is claiming that Trump's son-in-law is a person of colour. Nor his daughter...

    Somehow you've decided that you're smart because you take the dumbest throwaway comments from the stupidest Jews and
    decide that they therefore must be true.

    This is ridiculous. And pathetic.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. @Independent

    the more people will look at and start to quantify the proportionality of representation in various elite and influential jobs.
     
    I would be grateful to anyone who who could provide some readily citable statistics for Jewish over-representation in positions of power, influence and wealth in both the public as well as the private sectors. I am trying to raise awareness among my fellow (and not-so-fellow, as the case may be) Jews. I need sources that stand a chance of being considered credible by "normies" and Respectables.

    Below is a comment I composed addressing this matter, the latest of several similar comments that I have submitted to a certain Respectable site. Perhaps unsurprisingly, none have made it past moderation.

    As we see from [any number of prominent examples], somehow it is considered quite acceptable for Jews to berate white gentiles for "racism" and "white privilege"-- even to the point of demanding that persons-of-color and other minorities be favored over whites in the interest of promoting "diversity". (E.g., Charles Schumer opposing judicial nominees on the grounds of them being white males.)

    Meanwhile, the fact is that in just about every area of wealth and influence: business, finance, government, academia, the media, etc., Jews hold positions in numbers that far exceed any proportionality to our percentage of the population. Yet, anyone who so much as notices, much less questions, this salient fact is reflexively denounced as an anti-Semite and forthwith blacklisted and unpersoned.

    As a Jew myself, I am not only ashamed of this rank double-standard but also quite apprehensive about where the inevitable increasing awareness and resentment of it may ultimately lead. Enough of the BS already! Either cut the sanctimonious moralizing about "diversity", etc. or stop demanding that Jewish over-representation be excluded from such discussions. You cannot have it both ways.
     

    You’re welcome.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dissident
    A belated thank you for that graphic.

    (I am the one who had posted the request; I had mistakenly entered "Independent", the handle I have used at another site, in the name field.)

    Do you know the source? How they determined Jewishness or lack thereof?

    You’re welcome.
     
    Are you clairvoyant? (Knowing at the time you posted it that I wouldn't acknowledge your reply until now?)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. syonredux says:
    @Chris Renner
    I can't tell where these blockquotes originate, but they share the assumption common to every other projection of a white minority America: that Hispanics are not, and will never be, white.

    That assumption is questionable at the least. Hispanics already self-identify as white by large majorities, and at least a quarter intermarry with non-Hispanic whites. Eliminate the special treatment given to "Hispanic or Latino" ethnicity, and they'll likely become no more a distinct group than Italian-Americans are.

    I can’t tell where these blockquotes originate,

    Audacious Epigone:

    http://anepigone.blogspot.com/

    , but they share the assumption common to every other projection of a white minority America: that Hispanics are not, and will never be, white.

    An understandable assumption. The overwhelming majority of Latinx in the USA are Mestizo:

     

     the median Native American ancestry for the Hispanic/Latino group is 38% 
      compared to 0.1% for the European American group (Figure 1B).  

    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/05/30/333609.full.pdf+html

    That assumption is questionable at the least. Hispanics already self-identify as white by large majorities,

    Default choice. There is no racial box for Mestizo. The more important question is: How many actually view themselves as White? I’ve never met a Mestizo who personally (i.e., in a non-census context) identifies as White.

    and at least a quarter intermarry with non-Hispanic whites

    But will the children think of themselves as Anglo-Whites? Or as Latinx?

    . Eliminate the special treatment given to “Hispanic or Latino” ethnicity,

    The chances of racial set-asides being eliminated for Latinx are somewhere between slim and none.

    and they’ll likely become no more a distinct group than Italian-Americans are.

    Italians are European. Latinx are Mestizo/Amerind:

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux
    "the median Native American ancestry for the Hispanic/Latino group is 38%
    compared to 0.1% for the European American group (Figure 1B). "


    Don't know why, but the Amerind percentage for the "Hispanic/Latino group" (38% ) was omitted from my post.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. @Logan
    He appealed to everybody except Muslims, who were the bad guys then.

    Nahh. What Muslims were in 1963 was invisible.

    Read it. He foresaw what the Nation of Islam would turn into, as well as the Black Panthers, MOVE in Philly, the LA Riots, Ferguson, etc. …. MLK had his flaws, but his church-goin’ protesters were a thousand times preferable to the militants who followed and supplanted them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. syonredux says:
    @Lot
    Crime is extremely low in California. San Diego is the lowest crime city in the USA with more than a million people, San Jose is number two. Simi Valley is the lowest crime city over 100,000 (some years in might trade places with others).

    Crime isn't the reason people leave the state, it is taxes, cost of living, and cultural alienation. Though if you are an elderly middle class retired homeowner, taxes are lower on you than most of the USA due to Prop 13. Typical older retired boomer might have an $800,000 house and pay $750 a year in property taxes. The same house in many parts of NJ or TX they'd pay $10,000-$25,000 a year.

    , and cultural alienation.

    A huge factor.As I know from personal experience, Living in a neighborhood that is majority Latinx is very depressing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. @Logan
    He appealed to everybody except Muslims, who were the bad guys then.

    Nahh. What Muslims were in 1963 was invisible.
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. syonredux says:
    @Clyde

    The same can be seen in Hawaii with the Japanese projecting their behavior onto whites with respect to local Hawaiians and Samoans.
     
    Japanese-Americans control Hawaii. Maybe it's the heat or that Hawaii is a supposed tropical paradise, but these are the most incompetent Japanese on the planet. Japan is governed 100x more competently. Maybe the Hawaiian Japanese just don't care because they got theirs and the rest of Hawaii can go down down the tubes. The government response to the recent volcano eruptions has been slow and pathetic compared to what is done in Iceland.

    And all they elect is Democrat Reps and Senators to go to DC and 99% of the time they are of Japanese heritage. What an Island Freakshow that also spawned Hussein Obama.

    Japanese-Americans control Hawaii. Maybe it’s the heat or that Hawaii is a supposed tropical paradise, but these are the most incompetent Japanese on the planet.

    Selective immigration? Weren’t most of the Japanese who immigrated to Hawaii drawn from the bottom tiers of Japanese society?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde

    Selective immigration? Weren’t most of the Japanese who immigrated to Hawaii drawn from the bottom tiers of Japanese society?
     
    Were brought in as agricultural laborers as far as I know. But still, my opinion, are from hi IQ stock and civilized by Nippon society.
    , @Anonymous

    Weren’t most of the Japanese who immigrated to Hawaii drawn from the bottom tiers of Japanese society?
     
    Many "Japanese" who immigrated to Hawaii were in fact Ryukyuans who were ethnically and linguistically distinct from Japanese. The Ryukyu Kingdom continued under Japanese suzerainty until 1879 before it was formally absorbed.

    Ryukyuans are ethnically distinct from main island Japanese. Their languages were distinct from but related to Japanese. The languages are now moribund as a result of systematic Japanization, especially after the U.S. returned the occupied Ryukyus to Japan in 1972.

    During the final phase of World War II, Okinawa was the only part of "Japan" to experience a land invasion. Soldiers from the main Japanese islands often treated Ryukyuans as a subject race. Tens of thousands of Ryukyuans including teams of young girls were forced into suicide missions armed only with sharpened bamboo poles. Ryukyuan peasant families were simply murdered by Japanese soldiers who took over defensive caves dug by Ryukyuans.

    The Japanese now insist on calling the territory "Okinawa" and continue to work hard to suppress any memory of the name "Ryukyu" and of the Ryukyuans' own ethnic and linguistic traditions.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. snorlax says:
    @Jack D

    In fact Jewish discrimination wasn’t that extensive and ended because of private social pressure.
     
    It depends what you mean by "extensive" - while there was no formal Jim Crow for Jews (and in fact, as Steve has pointed out, local (not Yankee carpetbagger) Jews were even more well accepted in the South than in other regions), private discrimination in the '20s and '30s was quite pervasive - not just the proverbial country clubs but ordinary hotels, employment with big corporations, enrollment in universities, eligibility to be on staff at hospitals, etc. When Augusta National was founded, local Jewish industrialists were among its founding members, but later on when it became truly national (and when the great smelly Ellis Island wave lowered the public estimation of Jews) Jews were excluded - the situation of Jews in America actually deteriorated after WWI.

    The situation of Jews was better than for blacks and better than it was in Europe but it was far from perfect. It didn't just mean that a few rich Jews couldn't join a WASP country club - it had real everyday implications for ordinary American Jews. When you went on a trip you had to be sure to book a hotel that was not restricted. My step FIL was advised to study civil engineering instead of chemical because you could practice the former privately while no big publicly traded chemical company would hire Jews. Jews were certainly able to make a life for themselves in America but certain doors were shut to them and they weren't just the doors to the country club as Steve would have you believe.

    The end of discrimination against Jew was driven in part by the civil rights movement and laws - the same laws that prohibited race discrimination also prohibited religious discrimination. My MIL was able to get a job with Yale & Towne (as a draftswoman) during WWII because Federal contracts (even then) had non-discrimination requirements - before war, Y&T, like most big Philadelphia corporations, would never have hired a Jew. The Civil Rights Act of '64 put the last nail in the coffin of most forms of discrimination.

    Also the Holocaust made anti-Semitism (and eugenics) disreputable. Before WWII, "polite" discrimination (and in the US it was mostly polite - even as discrimination was practiced it was shrouded in euphemism - hotels advertised that they were "restricted" but you were supposed to understand what "restricted" meant) was accepted as being part of the social order - not everyone agreed with it but if you practiced it, that was considered within the range of legitimate opinion. But after the war, anti-Semitism was understood as leading to the Holocaust and its practice by people in the mainstream was no longer seen as tolerable.

    no big publicly traded chemical company would hire Jews.

    Bullshit, 2, 3, 4, 5.

    before war, Y&T, like most big Philadelphia corporations, would never have hired a Jew.

    Bullshit.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    I was speaking of the interwar period, when American anti-Semitism really got going. The situation before the '20s was different (there were no Jewish quotas for American universities then, etc. either). The Epstein patents are all from 1917 or before . Epstein could get hired by Y&T in 1917 but not in 1937. At the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, the percentage of Jewish students fell to 6 percent from 47 percent between 1920 and 1940.

    There were always exceptions - you might try to keep Jews out of your corporation as much as possible but a few guys were just too good to turn away - these were businesses after all. But you would be careful to limit the numbers lest your company get a reputation as being a place where a lot of Jews work, which would be undesirable for your broader recruiting efforts. Maybe the Jewish quota was not set at zero but you would set it at some very low number and try to find Jews who were not too "Jewy". When Feynman applied to Princeton grad school in 1939, the head of the dept. wrote to his buddy at MIT : "Is Feynman Jewish? We have no definite rule against Jews but have to keep their proportion in our department reasonably small because of the difficulty of placing them." Morse wrote back that Feynman was indeed Jewish, but reassured Smyth that Feynman's "physiognomy and manner, however, show no trace of this characteristic".

    Is "David X Klein" even Jewish? X usually stands for Xavier which is usually a Catholic name. Klein (small) is a surname found among both Jews and non-Jews.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Mr. Anon

    State legislators are mandating more and more “Holocaust education” and one representative (Ted Deutsch from Florida) is trying to use civil rights anti-discrimination logic to effectively ban “anti-Semitism” (it is hard to see this getting off the ground or surviving a Supreme Court challenge).
     
    It's hard to see that happening with a lot of things: the overturning of the fundamental meaning of a thousands-of-years-old social institution (marriage), the idea that men and women are no different, the normalization of homosexuality, the acceptance of a small subset of weirdos who mutilate themselves and claim to be members of the opposite sex..............

    And yet all these things have happened or are happening.

    Well, I want to hope against all facts that it will not come, because they way I understand it to work is literally Sesame Credit for America (you are tagged to all future employers and landlords as a “registered bigot”), but there really are good reasons to doubt it will succeed, for example within the Jewish community there are more and more people who are no longer on the ’67 bandwagon.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. syonredux says:
    @Bernardo Pizzaro Cortez Del Castro
    True. If we count people like Senator Rubio, Ted Cruz and their children as white then America will still have a white majority population for another 50 years. Although American Blue eyed Blondes may no longer exist in the year 2100 , most of the mestizos may continue to self identify was white. The bigger concern is the African-American population. Within the next 45 years Blacks will become 20% of the population. Already the youth population of America is 15% Black.

    If we count people like Senator Rubio, Ted Cruz and their children as white

    Cruz and Rubio are Cubans. Cubans are not at all representative of the American Latinx population.

    Although American Blue eyed Blondes may no longer exist in the year 2100 ,

    Americans with blue eyes and fair hair will still exist in 2100. There will just be far fewer of them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. @Jack D
    When they advocated for assimilation. Look at all the pre-WWII Hollywood moguls - they were very careful to disguise their Jewishness. If there were any Jewish movie stars they took non-Jewish names (Issur Danielovich becomes Kirk Douglas). Many of them married non-Jewish wives, had Christmas trees in their house and even raised their children as Christians.

    There was in fact a generational shift from the "hide your Jewishness" of pre-1967 (the Holocaust was little spoken of then also, nothing like now) to the "I'm out (as Jewish) and I'm proud mentality of today - Irving Wallace's kids change their name BACK to Wallechinsky. The Holocaust was Jews as losers, the '67 War showed that Jews could be winners. Everyone (especially Americans) loves a winner.

    That last statement is true. Florence King said there was a huge turnaround in anti-Semitism among the good ol’ boys after the Six-Day War. People said things like, “Durn, them Jew-boys sure can fight!” One wanted Moshe Dayan to run for president in the US, because “that one-eyed bastid could wipe the floor with anybody!”

    Read More
    • Replies: @PV van der Byl
    It was also partly a Cold War result. The US had found it difficult to find militarily competent client states--ones that were both willing and able to destroy large numbers of MiGs and T-55s. It had been terribly frustrating rooting for the South Vietnamese Army during the 60s and 70s.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. hyperbola says:
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Today marks the 50th anniversary of Robert Kennedy’s assassination in LA. His killer, Sirhan Sirhan, shot him because Kennedy voted to help Israel during the ‘67 Six Day War. That congressional vote cost him his life.

    Literally, Kennedy gave his life for Israel.

    Funny how Sirhan managed to stand 6 feet in front of Kennedy and administer a shot in the head from 6 inches behind.

    CIA role claim in Kennedy killing

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/6169006.stm

    New video and photographic evidence that puts three senior CIA operatives at the scene of Robert Kennedy’s assassination has been brought to light.

    The evidence is a result of a three year investigation

    The evidence was shown in a report by Shane O’Sullivan, broadcast on BBC Newsnight.

    It reveals that the operatives and four unidentified associates were at the Ambassador Hotel, Los Angeles in the moments before and after the shooting on 5 June, 1968.

    The CIA had no domestic jurisdiction and some of the officers were based in South-East Asia at the time, with no reason to be in Los Angeles. …..

    Kennedy brothers likely killed by CIA on behalf of Israel: Scholar

    https://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/05/28/rfk-cia/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Flip
    I think that the CIA/military/LBJ offed JFK because they thought he was a soft on communism traitor (c.f. JFK and the Unspeakable by James Douglass or various Jacob Hornberger articles) and if that were the case then they would have to take out RFK as well to keep the cover up going once he got close to being elected.
    , @Anon
    The shot was in Kennedy’s ear, in the side of his head not the back.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. @Jack D

    To compensate we’ll give you access to new territory in Europe
     
    Most anti-Semites are delusional to some extent but the idea that the Jews ran the show in postwar Europe to the extent that they had the ability to grant/deny access to Muslims is ESPECIALLY delusional.

    Jews had absolutely nothing to do with the decisions that led to millions of Muslims being allowed into Western Europe. None, nada, zilch. If you want to blame someone, blame Hitler and the Kaiser whose decisions led to the slaughter of millions of young European men, leading to postwar labor shortages.

    Jews had absolutely nothing to do with the decisions that led to millions of Muslims being allowed into Western Europe. None, nada, zilch. If you want to blame someone,

    That’s not true. Some of the top leadership that pushed the migration into Europe were absolutely Jewish. George Soros, lead Obama staffer Ben Rhodes who is half Jewish (half Episcopalian WASP?), and influential media figures like David Brooks or Bari Weiss, the Jewish writers at Vox, Jon Stewart have all advocated this. However, while these people may be Jewish by ancestry, their passionate tribal affiliation lies more with the political left than with Judaism. Most also side with the Arabs against Israel and oppose the premise of Israel as an ethno-state. The exceptions to that are Brooks and Weiss who have an active tribal affiliation with Judaism and stronger support for Israel.

    The other side that spoke critically of this freedom of migration also features many people who happen to be Jewish like Dennis Prager, Mickey Kaus, Ilana Mercer and in France there is Alain Finkielkraut and Eric Zemmour.

    I’m pro-Jewish, pro-Israel. I do see anti-Jewish sentiment on these corners of the Internet, I don’t sympathize with that, but there is one criticism I do sympathize with that is reasonable: If white Americans and white Europeans are not supposed to prefer their culture to any other culture, and they aren’t allowed to limit immigration, the same rule should apply to Jews. Most Jews mentioned above are completely consistent on this. The exception is David Brooks, Bari Weiss, and the commentarymagazine types who argue it’s rank bigotry for white people in Europe or the US to keep any type of cultural identity that excludes others, while Jews can have their ethno nation state, and can have Jewish exclusive schools, and Jewish exclusive culture, and attempt to marry other Jews to produce exclusively Jewish children.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    I was simply pointing out that postwar Europe (especially Germany) was largely Judenrein so they couldn't possibly be calling the shots. Even now, I don't think Merkel is taking her marching orders from Bari Weiss if she even knows who Bari Weiss is.

    The main motivator for letting in millions of (Muslim) Turks into Germany was not the supposed Jooish desire for open borders but the needs of German industrialists to man their factories in the postwar boom and in the absence of millions of young German men whose frozen bodies are buried on the Russian steppes. Ditto for all the Pakis in Britain, Moroccans in France, etc. You can't blame Jon Stewart for this.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. hyperbola says:
    @Tyrion 2
    1967 is up there with the greatest moments in warfare. It is especially admirable for how quick and relatively clean it was. Kutuzov's tactical retreat to Moscow, it was not. It is therefore very easy to see how 1967 captured so many people's imaginations especially as the antithesis to the fact that the West learned all of the wrong lessons from the Holocaust.

    If we are not to repeat history we must learn from it, and the twin lessons of the Holocaust are that one should not passively go into the night nor admire/respect others for doing so. Israel is well-placed among developed countries to understand this.

    Perhaps we can learn a bit from them?

    https://observeorientdecideandwrite.wordpress.com

    If we had “learned the lessons” we would have put an end to “chosen-people” propaganda aimed at estalishing privileges for themselves long ago.

    The oppressed become the oppressors: Post WWII Zionists used concentration camps in Palestine

    https://www.sott.net/article/387034-The-oppressed-become-the-oppressors-Post-WWII-Zionists-used-concentration-camps-in-Palestine

    Declassified documents have revealed that post World War II Jewish Zionists used ethnic cleansing in Palestine in the late 1940′s. Israeli soldiers imprisoned thousands of Palestinian civilians within at least 22 Zionist-run concentration and labour camps that existed from 1948 to 1955. The documents reveal some horrific information regarding the living conditions and health concerns of men, women and children who were forced into these concentration camps. This may not come as a surprise to many historians as the facts have been documented. However, historically many people who have attempted to bring these facts to light have been condemned as anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists. The release of these documents conclusively proves this (once taboo) portion of history has in fact been covered up. [1], [2], [3]. ……

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. Flip says:
    @Moses
    Hmmm....you just might be onto something.

    I can't think of even one example of a prominent Jew marrying a schwartze either IRL or on TV/film. How about schwartzes joining Jewish country clubs?

    Edgar Bronfman Jr. had a black wife.

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

    I can’t tell where these blockquotes originate,

     

    Audacious Epigone:

    http://anepigone.blogspot.com/


    , but they share the assumption common to every other projection of a white minority America: that Hispanics are not, and will never be, white.
     
    An understandable assumption. The overwhelming majority of Latinx in the USA are Mestizo:

     


     the median Native American ancestry for the Hispanic/Latino group is 38% 
      compared to 0.1% for the European American group (Figure 1B).  
     
    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/05/30/333609.full.pdf+html

    That assumption is questionable at the least. Hispanics already self-identify as white by large majorities,
     
    Default choice. There is no racial box for Mestizo. The more important question is: How many actually view themselves as White? I've never met a Mestizo who personally (i.e., in a non-census context) identifies as White.

    and at least a quarter intermarry with non-Hispanic whites
     
    But will the children think of themselves as Anglo-Whites? Or as Latinx?

    . Eliminate the special treatment given to “Hispanic or Latino” ethnicity,
     
    The chances of racial set-asides being eliminated for Latinx are somewhere between slim and none.

    and they’ll likely become no more a distinct group than Italian-Americans are.

     

    Italians are European. Latinx are Mestizo/Amerind:


    http://www.johnderbyshire.com/Miscellaneous/Other/aztecs.jpg

    “the median Native American ancestry for the Hispanic/Latino group is 38%
    compared to 0.1% for the European American group (Figure 1B). ”

    Don’t know why, but the Amerind percentage for the “Hispanic/Latino group” (38% ) was omitted from my post.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. hyperbola says:
    @Jack D

    To compensate we’ll give you access to new territory in Europe
     
    Most anti-Semites are delusional to some extent but the idea that the Jews ran the show in postwar Europe to the extent that they had the ability to grant/deny access to Muslims is ESPECIALLY delusional.

    Jews had absolutely nothing to do with the decisions that led to millions of Muslims being allowed into Western Europe. None, nada, zilch. If you want to blame someone, blame Hitler and the Kaiser whose decisions led to the slaughter of millions of young European men, leading to postwar labor shortages.

    The Weaponisation of the Refugee
    Coercive Engineered Migration: Zionism’s War on Europe (Part 2 of an 11 Part Series)

    https://dissidentvoice.org/2016/01/the-weaponisation-of-the-refugee/

    Artificial mass migration as imperial policy has a long history. To illustrate this, we will cite a few historical examples….. In the nineteenth century, Imperial Belgium imported hundreds of thousands of Rwandan Tutsi workers to the Congo to staff their work colonies. This artificial migration policy of Belgian imperialism has played a major role in the context fueling the current ethnic cleansing and ongoing neo-colonial proxy wars being carried out by the US/Israeli and European powers in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where the US /Israeli Tutsi puppet regime of Paul Kagame is murdering and pillaging on behalf of Western corporations. The Wall Street Journal has ironically described Kagame’s Zionist puppet regime ‘The Israel of Africa’……

    Rothschild’s “Slaughter Ships”
    Coercive Engineered Migration: Zionism’s War on Europe (Part 4 of an 11 Part Series)

    https://dissidentvoice.org/2016/01/rothschilds-slaughter-ships/

    Austrian intelligence officials have reportedly revealed that US government agencies are paying for the transport of migrants to Europe. On August 5th, 2015 Austrian magazine Infodirekt reported:….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. @Jack D

    Jews in contrast were a rich rent-seeking overclass,
     
    Bzzt, wrong. There were a handful of rich German Jews who had a 50 year head start on the American dream, but the vast bulk of American Jews came as penniless immigrants from the Russian Empire in the great Ellis Island wave. When they got off the boat they had no money, no education and most of them started off as sweatshop labor in the NY garment industry making pennies per piece.

    As time has gone on, the differential in intelligence between blacks and Jews has seen the Jews pull farther and farther away from blacks economically but this is a one or two generation phenomenon for most as Jews were lifted in the great postwar boom. The story of my wife's family is typical - those in her generation are successful professionals, but growing up they lived modestly in a postwar tract home - their dad couldn't go back to college after the war because he needed to feed his family which he did with a modest sales job (and pre-WWII even that modest position would have not been open to Jews) and he in turn grew up in ghetto poverty as the son of an immigrant housepainter - constantly moving because they could not pay the rent.

    "Rich Jews/ Jewish bankers" (along with Jews as Bolsheviks - somehow Jews are both rich AND Bolshevik) is a favorite anti-Semitic meme going back to the Nazis and before. My grandfather in Poland was neither rich nor a Bolshevik - he was just a poor fisherman trying to scratch out a living like Tevye. And yet somehow he had to pay the price (his life) for all the supposed rich Jews and Bolshevik Jews.

    Yes there are a lot of Jews on the billionaires list but the entire billionaires list is only a few hundred people and there are millions of Jews in America, most of whom are neither rich nor members of the rent seeking class. Most don't live in dysfunctional ghetto poverty like blacks but they are just middle class folks and only a generation or two removed from poverty.

    As time has gone on, the differential in intelligence between blacks and Jews has seen the Jews pull farther and farther away from blacks economically but this is a one or two generation phenomenon for most as Jews were lifted in the great postwar boom.

    Jack, when I contrasted blacks and Jews, I wasn’t even talking specifically about America, but about their long respective histories of interactions with whites.

    That anyone seriously even vaguely equates the experiences of blacks and Jews in the United States is just a pathetic joke. But there you go.

    Look, everyone has the hard struggling immigrant ancestor story. You want me to trot out my potato famine fleeing great-grandparents? Yawn. Heck, anyone who is pure WASP–unless they really kept the line assiduously clean–has hundreds of immigrant ancestors some of whom almost certainly came as indentured servants–quasi slaves. Sorry, your ancestors were not “oppressed” in America because they did sweatshop labor. Life was hard for most folks–you didn’t have great skills or rich parents, you worked your ass off. The comfy life of we suburban boomers have had is not the human norm. If your ancestors didn’t like it–go back.

    Again here’s the side-by-side I actually said:

    Other than “minority” they could not be more polar opposites. The blacks were a poor working underclass class, kept separate by the white majority. Jews in contrast were a rich rent-seeking overclass, kept separate by their rejection of integration with the majority.

    Simplified:
    Blacks
    – historically poor, mostly unskilled, originally slaves
    – happy to integrate with whites; refused integration by whites
    Jews
    – historically rich, mostly skilled, neither slaves nor serfs; free to leave
    – refused to integrate with whites; developed an entire ideology to keep themselves separate as a tribe

    Again the reason we have all these poor Tevye style Jews by the 18th century is not because Jews were consistently on those patches of land the last 2000 years, scratching out a meager living. Rather, it’s the reverse. It’s because Jews were historically *rich*–from money lending, trading, tax-farming, skilled trades–relative to the median European and had such a large population expansion relative to their gentile neighbors, that they simply outstripped the carrying capacity of their middle-man minority “ecological niche” of those regions and the excess had to spill onto the land. (Contray to conventional wisdom today, we can’t all make a living from “financial services”–trading and rent seeking–someone’s actually gotta work.)

    Simply put the Jews as somehow kinda like the blacks of Europe is just utter nonsense. An analogy so ahistorical and ridiculous, it could only thrive in the sort of environment we have today–intense propaganda and blinders strapped on tight to keep anyone from noticing and questioning.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    I understand now. Hitler had to murder my poor fisherman grandfather (and his wife and 1/2 his kids and their infant families) because his ancestors were rich tax farmers in 17th century Poland. It's all clear to me know.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. Jack D says:
    @Lot
    When you had a big wave of poor Russian Jewish immigrants, sure there was discrimination. That was an issue of numbers, not antisemitism. The same applied to Irish, German, Slavic, and Italian immigrants. The fact that Harvard's "Jewish quota" still allowed us about a 4x representation over our population share is indicative of the extent of this: not very much.

    I see your family anecdotes, and respond I don't have any at all. As in, I have never heard my family members born 1920-1950 ever complain of even the slightest discrimination.

    I see your family anecdotes, and respond I don’t have any at all. As in, I have never heard my family members born 1920-1950 ever complain of even the slightest discrimination.

    My father discussed his wartime experiences fairly openly (although I now know from reading other survivor accounts from the same camps that things were even worse than he told me about even though what he told me about was already pretty bad – I don’t know whether he repressed the worst of these memories himself or just didn’t want to tell me about them, but either way I understand). But I know of Holocaust survivor families where their parents never said a word to their kids. Nada, nothing, zilch. Families react differently to trauma and how many “stories from the old days” they tell their kids (not that the trauma that American Jews experienced was anything remotely comparable to the Holocaust). If you watch the Skip Gates “Finding Your Roots” shows, most of the time people know little or nothing about their family history (and what they think they know is often wrong).

    1950 is casting the net too broadly. Aside from a few snooty clubs that held out until the ’70s and beyond, institutional anti-Semitism in US took a hit after WWII and another hit after the ’64 Civil Rights Act and was largely a dead letter for anyone who was born starting in the Roosevelt Administration and reached adulthood in the ’50s. There are fewer and fewer people left who are still alive and lucid enough to remember adult life before 1945. I am fortunate in that my MIL (born ’22) is still very much alive and kicking and has all her marbles and can speak lucidly about the pre-War period.

    Again, as I said before, Jews in America in that period could still have a happy and prosperous life (at least until the Depression) in a sort of separate but equal world where they lived in all Jewish neighborhoods, attended all Jewish public schools, patronized mostly Jewish businesses, went to Jewish doctors, etc. (And this was not that different than the experience of say Italian or Polish Catholic immigrants at the same time). But not all doors were open to them and even doors that had previously been open were later shut or left open only a crack – maybe this was an understandable backlash due to the large # of Jews who arrived at the turn of the century but whatever the cause it was real and is historically documented regardless of whether your family members chose not to speak of it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    in a sort of separate but equal world
     
    I do hope that you understand the absurdity of making comparisons to Jim Crow.....

    where they lived in all Jewish neighborhoods,
     
    Not hard to find Jews who lived in ethnically mixed neighborhoods....

    attended all Jewish public schools,
     
    Dunno. My Jewish grandfather used to talk about all the Irish and Italian kids in his High School......

    patronized mostly Jewish businesses,
     
    Lots of non-Jews patronized mostly Jewish businesses during that period....


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eoo8l-4vxhU
    , @Karl
    160 Jack D > my MIL (born ’22) is still very much alive and kicking and has all her marbles and can speak lucidly about the pre-War period

    ask her if there were any pizza joints outside of Little Italy, in those days.

    Mexican restuarants exploded next.

    then Vietnamese.

    Nowadays, I see bagel joints at US Navy base food courts.

    Which ethnic food is next?
    , @AnotherDad

    1950 is casting the net too broadly. Aside from a few snooty clubs that held out until the ’70s and beyond, institutional anti-Semitism in US took a hit after WWII and another hit after the ’64 Civil Rights Act and was largely a dead letter for anyone who was born starting in the Roosevelt Administration and reached adulthood in the ’50s.
     
    Can we talk about "snooty clubs" like say the Century Country Club? We're well past the 70s, but all sorts of heavyweights are at these clubs. Yet Bloomberg had to quit four of his clubs to run for mayor. But then rejoined afterwards. I guess there must still be "restricted" clubs … but not all "restrictions" are created equal.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. Flip says:
    @hyperbola
    Funny how Sirhan managed to stand 6 feet in front of Kennedy and administer a shot in the head from 6 inches behind.

    CIA role claim in Kennedy killing
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/6169006.stm
    New video and photographic evidence that puts three senior CIA operatives at the scene of Robert Kennedy's assassination has been brought to light.

    The evidence is a result of a three year investigation

    The evidence was shown in a report by Shane O'Sullivan, broadcast on BBC Newsnight.

    It reveals that the operatives and four unidentified associates were at the Ambassador Hotel, Los Angeles in the moments before and after the shooting on 5 June, 1968.

    The CIA had no domestic jurisdiction and some of the officers were based in South-East Asia at the time, with no reason to be in Los Angeles. .....

    Kennedy brothers likely killed by CIA on behalf of Israel: Scholar
    https://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/05/28/rfk-cia/

    I think that the CIA/military/LBJ offed JFK because they thought he was a soft on communism traitor (c.f. JFK and the Unspeakable by James Douglass or various Jacob Hornberger articles) and if that were the case then they would have to take out RFK as well to keep the cover up going once he got close to being elected.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. Jack D says:
    @AnotherDad

    As time has gone on, the differential in intelligence between blacks and Jews has seen the Jews pull farther and farther away from blacks economically but this is a one or two generation phenomenon for most as Jews were lifted in the great postwar boom.
     
    Jack, when I contrasted blacks and Jews, I wasn't even talking specifically about America, but about their long respective histories of interactions with whites.

    That anyone seriously even vaguely equates the experiences of blacks and Jews in the United States is just a pathetic joke. But there you go.

    Look, everyone has the hard struggling immigrant ancestor story. You want me to trot out my potato famine fleeing great-grandparents? Yawn. Heck, anyone who is pure WASP--unless they really kept the line assiduously clean--has hundreds of immigrant ancestors some of whom almost certainly came as indentured servants--quasi slaves. Sorry, your ancestors were not "oppressed" in America because they did sweatshop labor. Life was hard for most folks--you didn't have great skills or rich parents, you worked your ass off. The comfy life of we suburban boomers have had is not the human norm. If your ancestors didn't like it--go back.

    Again here's the side-by-side I actually said:

    Other than “minority” they could not be more polar opposites. The blacks were a poor working underclass class, kept separate by the white majority. Jews in contrast were a rich rent-seeking overclass, kept separate by their rejection of integration with the majority.
     
    Simplified:
    Blacks
    -- historically poor, mostly unskilled, originally slaves
    -- happy to integrate with whites; refused integration by whites
    Jews
    -- historically rich, mostly skilled, neither slaves nor serfs; free to leave
    -- refused to integrate with whites; developed an entire ideology to keep themselves separate as a tribe

    Again the reason we have all these poor Tevye style Jews by the 18th century is not because Jews were consistently on those patches of land the last 2000 years, scratching out a meager living. Rather, it's the reverse. It's because Jews were historically *rich*--from money lending, trading, tax-farming, skilled trades--relative to the median European and had such a large population expansion relative to their gentile neighbors, that they simply outstripped the carrying capacity of their middle-man minority "ecological niche" of those regions and the excess had to spill onto the land. (Contray to conventional wisdom today, we can't all make a living from "financial services"--trading and rent seeking--someone's actually gotta work.)

    Simply put the Jews as somehow kinda like the blacks of Europe is just utter nonsense. An analogy so ahistorical and ridiculous, it could only thrive in the sort of environment we have today--intense propaganda and blinders strapped on tight to keep anyone from noticing and questioning.

    I understand now. Hitler had to murder my poor fisherman grandfather (and his wife and 1/2 his kids and their infant families) because his ancestors were rich tax farmers in 17th century Poland. It’s all clear to me know.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Or, y'know, that whole Marxist revolution thing that was happening at the time and which contemporary Jews identified with enthusiastically.
    , @Anonymous
    Hitler had to murder my poor fisherman grandfather (and his wife and 1/2 his kids and their infant families)

    If you don't mind my asking, what were the circumstances of your grandfather's death?
    , @DFH

    I understand now. Hitler had to murder my poor fisherman grandfather (and his wife and 1/2 his kids and their infant families) because his ancestors were rich tax farmers in 17th century Poland. It’s all clear to me know.
     
    Where did he say that? Why did you go straight to hyper-emotionalising and personalising the topic? What does this have to do with the problems that Jews have caused for Europeans or the differences between them and blacks?
    , @Bardon Kaldian
    Your answer is tendentious & has nothing to do with OP's assertions, which are mostly true. It is evident that there are many loony antisemites here; but, also, to deny that Jewish historical ethnocentrism is a defining reality, and that in most historical periods from, say, 8th to 19th C Jews had it better in what in now Europe than local populations, with a few exceptions (Crusades, Khmelnitsky pogroms)- it is just blindness.

    Various historians have dispelled myths about eternal, unprovoked suffering & there is not much to dispute here. To refuse to acknowledge Jewish "shadow", to use Jungian term, is, seems, a permanent trait of Jewish national consciousness.

    https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41sgT5DN4eL._SX311_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

    https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51HKzrDXkeL._SX326_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

    https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41FeZfmzJKL._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg
    , @AnotherDad
    Jack, since you trotted out Hitler--instead of disputing even a single point i made about the black/Jewish comparison--i'll take that as "i've got no argument, but i'm mad about it". Understood.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. Karl says:
    @J.Ross
    The "story" here is that a respectable academic is willing to attach his name to information we already knew and that a healthy society would not find controversial. It might be Cofnas'd or they might just under-publicize it. I doubt Dollinger will be Finkelsteined because he won't be seen as comparably combative or directly threatening.
    State legislators are mandating more and more "Holocaust education" and one representative (Ted Deutsch from Florida) is trying to use civil rights anti-discrimination logic to effectively ban "anti-Semitism" (it is hard to see this getting off the ground or surviving a Supreme Court challenge). Between these trends and the increasing discussions about topics that, in the recent past were notable for their controversality, it looks like an elite fumbling their near-totalitarian control. As always with this crowd, had they grasped less tightly, their grip would have been more secure.

    22 J.Ross > The “story” here is that a respectable academic

    no one at Ariel University, thinks that a historian at SFSU is a “respectable academic”

    hells bells – no one at the agricultural junior college in Katzrin, thinks that a historian at SFSU is a “respectable academic”

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    You're pretending that you don't understand the meaning of the term. If academia worked they way you imply then what purpose would there be in hounding Finkelstein out of his job? Why would tenure exist?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. syonredux says:
    @Jack D

    I see your family anecdotes, and respond I don’t have any at all. As in, I have never heard my family members born 1920-1950 ever complain of even the slightest discrimination.
     
    My father discussed his wartime experiences fairly openly (although I now know from reading other survivor accounts from the same camps that things were even worse than he told me about even though what he told me about was already pretty bad - I don't know whether he repressed the worst of these memories himself or just didn't want to tell me about them, but either way I understand). But I know of Holocaust survivor families where their parents never said a word to their kids. Nada, nothing, zilch. Families react differently to trauma and how many "stories from the old days" they tell their kids (not that the trauma that American Jews experienced was anything remotely comparable to the Holocaust). If you watch the Skip Gates "Finding Your Roots" shows, most of the time people know little or nothing about their family history (and what they think they know is often wrong).

    1950 is casting the net too broadly. Aside from a few snooty clubs that held out until the '70s and beyond, institutional anti-Semitism in US took a hit after WWII and another hit after the '64 Civil Rights Act and was largely a dead letter for anyone who was born starting in the Roosevelt Administration and reached adulthood in the '50s. There are fewer and fewer people left who are still alive and lucid enough to remember adult life before 1945. I am fortunate in that my MIL (born '22) is still very much alive and kicking and has all her marbles and can speak lucidly about the pre-War period.

    Again, as I said before, Jews in America in that period could still have a happy and prosperous life (at least until the Depression) in a sort of separate but equal world where they lived in all Jewish neighborhoods, attended all Jewish public schools, patronized mostly Jewish businesses, went to Jewish doctors, etc. (And this was not that different than the experience of say Italian or Polish Catholic immigrants at the same time). But not all doors were open to them and even doors that had previously been open were later shut or left open only a crack - maybe this was an understandable backlash due to the large # of Jews who arrived at the turn of the century but whatever the cause it was real and is historically documented regardless of whether your family members chose not to speak of it.

    in a sort of separate but equal world

    I do hope that you understand the absurdity of making comparisons to Jim Crow…..

    where they lived in all Jewish neighborhoods,

    Not hard to find Jews who lived in ethnically mixed neighborhoods….

    attended all Jewish public schools,

    Dunno. My Jewish grandfather used to talk about all the Irish and Italian kids in his High School……

    patronized mostly Jewish businesses,

    Lots of non-Jews patronized mostly Jewish businesses during that period….

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Of course they didn't literally have gates on the ghettos in order to lock the Jews in every night like the Jews of Venice. Even on the Lower East Side, one block might be Jewish and a couple of blocks over it was Little Italy and there might be a borderline block that was somewhat mixed or shifting as immigrant groups came and went (and the local public school might draw from both sides of the line). It was not completely rigid (and yes certain trades were dominated by certain ethnic groups but even in the Hollywood movie clip they recognize that there are Irish pawnbrokers too, even if they close on Yom Kippur as a matter of professional courtesy).

    But day to day (and the same is true today in Hispanic areas) you could live such a Jewish/Italian/Polish life that a lot of the old people would never even learn more than rudimentary English (if any).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. Jack D says:
    @Massimo Heitor

    Jews had absolutely nothing to do with the decisions that led to millions of Muslims being allowed into Western Europe. None, nada, zilch. If you want to blame someone,
     
    That's not true. Some of the top leadership that pushed the migration into Europe were absolutely Jewish. George Soros, lead Obama staffer Ben Rhodes who is half Jewish (half Episcopalian WASP?), and influential media figures like David Brooks or Bari Weiss, the Jewish writers at Vox, Jon Stewart have all advocated this. However, while these people may be Jewish by ancestry, their passionate tribal affiliation lies more with the political left than with Judaism. Most also side with the Arabs against Israel and oppose the premise of Israel as an ethno-state. The exceptions to that are Brooks and Weiss who have an active tribal affiliation with Judaism and stronger support for Israel.

    The other side that spoke critically of this freedom of migration also features many people who happen to be Jewish like Dennis Prager, Mickey Kaus, Ilana Mercer and in France there is Alain Finkielkraut and Eric Zemmour.

    I'm pro-Jewish, pro-Israel. I do see anti-Jewish sentiment on these corners of the Internet, I don't sympathize with that, but there is one criticism I do sympathize with that is reasonable: If white Americans and white Europeans are not supposed to prefer their culture to any other culture, and they aren't allowed to limit immigration, the same rule should apply to Jews. Most Jews mentioned above are completely consistent on this. The exception is David Brooks, Bari Weiss, and the commentarymagazine types who argue it's rank bigotry for white people in Europe or the US to keep any type of cultural identity that excludes others, while Jews can have their ethno nation state, and can have Jewish exclusive schools, and Jewish exclusive culture, and attempt to marry other Jews to produce exclusively Jewish children.

    I was simply pointing out that postwar Europe (especially Germany) was largely Judenrein so they couldn’t possibly be calling the shots. Even now, I don’t think Merkel is taking her marching orders from Bari Weiss if she even knows who Bari Weiss is.

    The main motivator for letting in millions of (Muslim) Turks into Germany was not the supposed Jooish desire for open borders but the needs of German industrialists to man their factories in the postwar boom and in the absence of millions of young German men whose frozen bodies are buried on the Russian steppes. Ditto for all the Pakis in Britain, Moroccans in France, etc. You can’t blame Jon Stewart for this.

    Read More
    • Replies: @nearhorburian
    "Ditto for all the Pakis in Britain"

    Utter nonsense: less than 400,000 UK servicemen died in WW2. compared to 5 million Germans.

    And 220,000 Poles stayed in the UK after WW2 rather than return to Poland, together with tens of thousands of others who didn't want to experience Soviet rule, making up for much of the shortfall.
    , @Anon

    I was simply pointing out that postwar Europe (especially Germany) was largely Judenrein so they couldn’t possibly be calling the shots.
     
    Didn't the United States have a rather strong influence on postwar Europe (especially Germany)? And what group has disproportionate influence in the United States?

    (As an aside, there were still Jews in Berlin at the end of the war.)
    , @Anon
    The Turks were not brought to Germany until 1963. By that time all the boys born between 1930 and 1945 were between 33 and 18 years old and fully capable of filling all necessary jobs.

    The Turks were brought in for the standard capitalist purpose of keeping a vast army of the unemployed around to keep wages down. They and their descendants were mostly on welfare, not gainfully employed
    , @Massimo Heitor

    The main motivator for letting in millions of (Muslim) Turks into Germany was not the supposed Jooish desire for open borders but the needs of German industrialists to man their factories in the postwar boom
     
    The foreigners fighting to migrate to Europe/US are doing so to improve their own lives, not to help out a US/European factory's balance sheet. The main driver and "motivator" is the interests and living standards of the migrants. Arguing that this culture war over immigration is being fought to serve the interest of factory managers is so unreasonable it is dishonest.

    Bari Weiss and Jon Stewart do not directly hold offices of political power, but they are culturally influential people that engage in political advocacy. And one of the issues that they've chosen to advocate for is looser restrictions on immigration to the US and Europe. I also don't see the open border push as a particularly Jewish thing. Many leading figures, like Hillary Clinton or Nancy Pelossi are non-Jewish whites leading that political fight.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    I think it was more about the other side being Muslim, and being associated with arguably the nadir of American postwar prestige, the siege of the US embassy in Tehran and the failed hostage rescue.

    Attack on US embassy in Persia was 1979-80 12 years after the 67 Arab Israel war. The American sympathy for Israel was due to massive propaganda effort by American Jews. Remember book and movie Exodus?

    Plus every public high school and college library was full of WW2 history books emphazing Jewish martyrdom during WW2.

    Plus Rabbi Kahane was preparing the ground for a massive jump of Russian Jews from the Bolshevik disaster they created with endless propaganda about his Jews were sooooo abused in Russia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon

    The American sympathy for Israel was due to massive propaganda effort by American Jews.
     
    This.
    , @Hhsiii
    Two things: the New Deal and FDR (with Jewish supporters) starting hiving black voters away from GOP. More importantly, Jewish slavery may have been 2000 years old; or was it more recent? Serfdom. Or, closer to post-war, concentration camps and massmurder. Isn’t that more likely to lead to more Jews identifying with communist oppressor philosophy and drifting toward open support for blacks? Tortured explanations about them trying to divide and conquer versus WASP oppression when, hey, blacks were in fact discriminted against, and je s somewhat here, but massively in Germany, Italy, France, at that time quite recently. I am sure most thought they were just doing the decent thing. And many Christian agreed. Doesn’t make them all saps or cucks now.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. Karl says:
    @Pericles

    I can’t get a definitive answer as to when “indentured servitude” ended for Whites in the USA, perhaps an iStever can help, but the the life of a White convict or indentured servent was far harsher and brutal than that of a slave in many instances due to the fact that slaves had a monetary value whereas convicts and servants were free and abundant.

     

    If memory serves, you could get whipped in the Navy long after slavery ended.

    76 Pericles > you could get whipped in the Navy long after slavery ended

    corporal punishment in the US Navy was abolished by commodore Levy

    the base synagogue at NOB has a plaque about it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. @PV van der Byl
    "The assassination of both Kennedy’s had a great effect on the trajectory of the USA and the world in general. JFK’s resulted in the Vietnam war (National Security Memo 273)."

    Wrong. JFK's support for the assassination of President Ngo Dinh Diem resulted in large scale US involvement in the Vietnam War. Even before the deaths of Diem and JFK (within weeks of each other), the number of US military personnel had increased dramatically. From 700 on day 1 of the Kennedy administration to 17,000 in November of 1963.

    "and Robert’s in Israel going nuclear."

    Wrong again. CIA and other western intelligence agencies say that Israel's first usable nuclear device was complete in 1966 (two years before RFK was shot). Construction of the Israeli reactor at Dimona began in 1958.

    For those actually interested in the facts and not just anti-Irish onanists:

    1) http://www.jfklancer.com/NSAM273.html

    2) http://www.unz.com/article/did-israel-kill-the-kennedies/

    Read More
    • Replies: @PV van der Byl
    I have referred to easily verifiable facts. You haven't referred to facts of any kind. Whereas I refer to things that Kennedy actually did, your first link goes to a meaningless memorandum describing what he would, supposedly, like to at some indeterminate time in the future. Your second link goes to crank ravings of a French conspiracy theorist.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. sayless says:
    @Anon
    If Tom Wolfe had grown up in the internet age.

    https://youtu.be/6Km34EXxGZ4?t=4m2s

    If Tom Wolfe…

    Who is he, Priss?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. @Pat Hannagan
    "(Personally, as a half-Irish American, i’ll be happy when this Kennedy deification and mythologization has finally burnt out, over and done with and we can stop pretending these crude mediocrities were some sort of great, world historical, American titans.)"

    What a stupendously stupid and spiteful statement.

    The assassination of both Kennedy's had a great effect on the trajectory of the USA and the world in general. JFK's resulted in the Vietnam war (National Security Memo 273) and Robert's in Israel going nuclear.

    There was an essay on the latter recently at this very site: http://www.unz.com/article/did-israel-kill-the-kennedies/

    Btw, there would have been no need for "the much more world historically significant–American destruction of the Japanese carriers at Midway" were FDR (talk about a deified president) to take action when warned about the Japanese plans to attack Pearl Harbour. But, FDR had been goading the Japanese all along to do that very thing. Pearl Harbour was the culmination of the plan. Much like 9/11 (see General Wesley Clark's statement about plans for the Middle East post 9/11).

    But I suppose you reckon 9/11 was 100% kosher and ridgy-didge too.

    What a stupendously stupid and spiteful statement.

    The assassination of both Kennedy’s had a great effect on the trajectory of the USA and the world in general. JFK’s resulted in the Vietnam war (National Security Memo 273) and Robert’s in Israel going nuclear.

    Yawn.

    Pat, all US Presidents have some sort of “effect” on history, and ergo assassinated or otherwise dies in office or doesn’t get elected has some sort of “effect” on history. That doesn’t make them “great leaders”.

    Your two examples are frankly ridiculous. Lyndon Johnson didn’t drag us into Vietnam courtesy of the advice of all his advisors that he dragged into the White House from Southwest Texas State Teachers College. No we went into Vietnam on the advice of all of Kennedy’s “best and brightest” crew from Harvard. Vietnam was a policy delivered by Kennedy, Harvard and the Democratic party’s policy establishment. Heck, NSAM-273 that you reference was prepared by Kennedy’s people, for Kennedy. Johnson signed it days after assuming office. Citing NSAM-273 is not making your point but disproving it. This was Kennedy administration policy–cooked up by his people for him.

    As for Robert Kennedy and Israel nuclearizing … please. What sort of baroque stupidity.

    The Israelis developed nuclear weapons … because they work! Nukes are the big swinging dick of “don’t mess with me or else”. Why China, India, South Africa, Pakistan, the Norks, Saddam, Iran … were also interested in getting them, and a bunch of other folks (e.g. Japan) have probably done the work to be “ready” on short order.

    ~~~

    I don’t deify prominent people just because they are of my ethnic group. Heck, swooning and slobbering all over anyone is embarassing. Much of this Kennedy stuff over the years reminds one of teeny boopers swooning over the Beatles. It’s pathetic.

    Would America have been “saved” if Kennedy wasn’t assinated? … no. Was Kennedy some sort of exceptional leader with great policies to lead America? … uh … no. Mostly Kennedy had pretty ordinary establishment policies–unsurprising since his background and his team was “Eastern Establishment”. If Kennedy deviated from “what we’d otherwise have gotten”, it was probably for the worse. Bobby would have been worse, with more poorly thought out “liberalism”.

    Read More
    • Agree: PV van der Byl
    • Replies: @Pat Hannagan
    I was referring to http://www.jfklancer.com/NSAM273.html

    I understand you hate the Irish and are sick of the Kennedys, I understand that with a lot of the iSteve crew but having your President killed, and obviously not by a "lone nut" but as the result of a conspiracy which was deliberately whitewashed in the Warren Commission created by the succeeding Vice President, and then later that President's brother, who most certainly would have become president, also being murdered should get every red, white and blue Yank righteous to defend his sovereignty.

    Don't let your petty animosities get in the way of a quest for the truth. If you need your history spoon fed by those on the same political aisle as yourself then try reading Roger Stone's The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ.

    Hopefully Trump will release everything that he possible can in relation to JFK's assasination as he promised to do.

    , @Pat Hannagan
    What I said to the side, still love your work though, AnotherDad.

    You've been holding your own throughout this thread, mate.

    All power to you!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. Jack D says:
    @snorlax

    no big publicly traded chemical company would hire Jews.
     
    Bullshit, 2, 3, 4, 5.

    before war, Y&T, like most big Philadelphia corporations, would never have hired a Jew.
     
    Bullshit.

    I was speaking of the interwar period, when American anti-Semitism really got going. The situation before the ’20s was different (there were no Jewish quotas for American universities then, etc. either). The Epstein patents are all from 1917 or before . Epstein could get hired by Y&T in 1917 but not in 1937. At the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, the percentage of Jewish students fell to 6 percent from 47 percent between 1920 and 1940.

    There were always exceptions – you might try to keep Jews out of your corporation as much as possible but a few guys were just too good to turn away – these were businesses after all. But you would be careful to limit the numbers lest your company get a reputation as being a place where a lot of Jews work, which would be undesirable for your broader recruiting efforts. Maybe the Jewish quota was not set at zero but you would set it at some very low number and try to find Jews who were not too “Jewy”. When Feynman applied to Princeton grad school in 1939, the head of the dept. wrote to his buddy at MIT : “Is Feynman Jewish? We have no definite rule against Jews but have to keep their proportion in our department reasonably small because of the difficulty of placing them.” Morse wrote back that Feynman was indeed Jewish, but reassured Smyth that Feynman’s “physiognomy and manner, however, show no trace of this characteristic”.

    Is “David X Klein” even Jewish? X usually stands for Xavier which is usually a Catholic name. Klein (small) is a surname found among both Jews and non-Jews.

    Read More
    • Replies: @snorlax

    The Epstein patents are all from 1917 or before.
     
    1917-1923, with two from 1910 and 1914 that are lock-related but don't mention Y&T.

    Epstein could get hired by Y&T in 1917 but not in 1937.
     
    Just ask Abraham H Golden, 13 patents with Y&T between 1934 and 1967.

    At the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, the percentage of Jewish students fell to 6 percent from 47 percent between 1920 and 1940.
     
    Yentl comes to America, marries at 14 and has 8 kids, who go to medical school, marry at 33 and have 1.9.

    Medical school attendance tends to be much higher among first than later-generation immigrants. East Asian medical school attendance skyrocketed in the 80's and 90's, and is now just as quickly collapsing in favor of South Asians.

    There were always exceptions
     
    I thought it was "no" and "never."

    you might try to keep Jews out of your corporation as much as possible but a few guys were just too good to turn away
     
    If there's one thing that characterizes antisemites, it's their finely-tuned nuance.

    lest your company get a reputation as being a place where a lot of Jews work, which would be undesirable for your broader recruiting efforts.
     
    Who ever wanted to work for Goldman Sachs or Lord & Thomas?

    When Feynman applied to Princeton grad school in 1939, the head of the dept. wrote to his buddy at MIT
     
    Did they discriminate against or cause offense to him in any way?

    This is an example of "people in the 1930's say the darndest things" (especially in private letters). You have to remember that back then, Jews were a new thing, like the internet or seeing burkas on the street.

    It's the same as any bleeding heart these days is a heavy heart, thinking back on all their ignorant (no excuse!) past misdeeds, saying "illegal immigrant" or "tranny," or (unforgivable!) laughing at Apu.

    Is “David X Klein” even Jewish?
     
    I can't establish definitively, but this David X Klein is presumably his grandson and, well, I'll let you be the judge.

    https://lendedu.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/CommonBond-David-Klein.png

    X usually stands for Xavier which is usually a Catholic name.
     
    "X" (just the letter) is also a common Ellis Island middle name, for obvious reasons.
    , @Anon
    Could the fact that soviet Jews were massacring millions, that American Jews were writing lying propaganda praising what the soviet Jews were doing and that the CPUSA was so heavily Jewish Stalin had to order it to start using English instead of Yiddish have anything to do with American negative feelings against Jews?
    , @Captain Tripps

    At the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, the percentage of Jewish students fell to 6 percent from 47 percent between 1920 and 1940.
     
    Jack, according to this source:

    http://www.jewishdatabank.org/Studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=2921

    The Jewish percentage of the total US population from 1920-1940 was 3.12-3.68%

    Aside from the wildly discriminatory effect in FAVOR of Jews in that Jews composed 47% of the students at the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, 16X above their composition of the American population at the time (and certainly denied to a significant number of competent enough Gentiles who could have attended), even dropping to 6% was double their percentage of the US population of the time. I'd hardly call that discrimination AGAINST Jews. If anything, it moved much closer to their actual proportion of the US population at large.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. Karl says:
    @AndrewR
    No one claimed otherwise. But Palestinians are, on average, significantly swarthier than Jews, primarily due to the great deal of non-Semitic European ancestry most Jews have.

    89 AndrewR > But Palestinians are, on average, significantly swarthier than Jews

    if you go to the small city of Rosh ha’Ayin and hang out with the elderly, you can find the original stock of Yemenite-Jew immigrants to Israel. They run short-statured – and dark. Like all the other Yemenites.

    Their kids had no particular interest in maintaining the “tribe”. So they all married whoever.

    Yemenites used to be the poster-child beloved of the jew-SJW’s of New York….. now it’s the ethiopians who get showered with extra money from America.

    I don’t doubt that the ethiopian chicks are proud on their background. On the other hand, no Rosenstein ever lost money by stocking lots of hair-straightener and blonde hair-dye in his bodega in the Ethiopian neighborhood.

    Go watch the youtubes of the (Hebrew) local television show, entitled “The heart is full” SJW T.Aviv ashkenazi writers and producers making nice about how loveable the ethiopians are.

    please note: I got no problems with the ethiopians. They run low-IQ, and a bit criminal….. but they’re loyal to the State. Like the Filipinos, in many ways.

    A little bit of hair-straightening, and the chicks are fuckable.

    Read More
    • LOL: AndrewR
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    please note: I got no problems with the ethiopians. They run low-IQ, and a bit criminal….. but they’re loyal to the State. Like the Filipinos, in many ways.

     

    There are an awful lot of Ethiopian chiropractors in the Twin Cities, for some reason. That's spine-chilling, especially if you're in Ethiopia and have a sore back from carrying water for miles.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. Karl says:
    @Jack D

    I see your family anecdotes, and respond I don’t have any at all. As in, I have never heard my family members born 1920-1950 ever complain of even the slightest discrimination.
     
    My father discussed his wartime experiences fairly openly (although I now know from reading other survivor accounts from the same camps that things were even worse than he told me about even though what he told me about was already pretty bad - I don't know whether he repressed the worst of these memories himself or just didn't want to tell me about them, but either way I understand). But I know of Holocaust survivor families where their parents never said a word to their kids. Nada, nothing, zilch. Families react differently to trauma and how many "stories from the old days" they tell their kids (not that the trauma that American Jews experienced was anything remotely comparable to the Holocaust). If you watch the Skip Gates "Finding Your Roots" shows, most of the time people know little or nothing about their family history (and what they think they know is often wrong).

    1950 is casting the net too broadly. Aside from a few snooty clubs that held out until the '70s and beyond, institutional anti-Semitism in US took a hit after WWII and another hit after the '64 Civil Rights Act and was largely a dead letter for anyone who was born starting in the Roosevelt Administration and reached adulthood in the '50s. There are fewer and fewer people left who are still alive and lucid enough to remember adult life before 1945. I am fortunate in that my MIL (born '22) is still very much alive and kicking and has all her marbles and can speak lucidly about the pre-War period.

    Again, as I said before, Jews in America in that period could still have a happy and prosperous life (at least until the Depression) in a sort of separate but equal world where they lived in all Jewish neighborhoods, attended all Jewish public schools, patronized mostly Jewish businesses, went to Jewish doctors, etc. (And this was not that different than the experience of say Italian or Polish Catholic immigrants at the same time). But not all doors were open to them and even doors that had previously been open were later shut or left open only a crack - maybe this was an understandable backlash due to the large # of Jews who arrived at the turn of the century but whatever the cause it was real and is historically documented regardless of whether your family members chose not to speak of it.

    160 Jack D > my MIL (born ’22) is still very much alive and kicking and has all her marbles and can speak lucidly about the pre-War period

    ask her if there were any pizza joints outside of Little Italy, in those days.

    Mexican restuarants exploded next.

    then Vietnamese.

    Nowadays, I see bagel joints at US Navy base food courts.

    Which ethnic food is next?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Actually "Jewish delis" (many of which served non-kosher food) were, in their heyday, popular among non-Jews as well as Jews. Back in the day a lot of ethnic restaurant were found mostly in ethnic neighborhoods but people of all ethnic groups would journey to those neighborhoods to partake - you might go to Little Italy for "macaroni" (pasta), Chinatown for chop suey, etc. What is different now is that the pizza comes to you instead of you having to go to the pizza.
    , @Rosamond Vincy
    Bubble tea.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. @AnotherDad

    What a stupendously stupid and spiteful statement.

    The assassination of both Kennedy’s had a great effect on the trajectory of the USA and the world in general. JFK’s resulted in the Vietnam war (National Security Memo 273) and Robert’s in Israel going nuclear.
     
    Yawn.

    Pat, all US Presidents have some sort of "effect" on history, and ergo assassinated or otherwise dies in office or doesn't get elected has some sort of "effect" on history. That doesn't make them "great leaders".

    Your two examples are frankly ridiculous. Lyndon Johnson didn't drag us into Vietnam courtesy of the advice of all his advisors that he dragged into the White House from Southwest Texas State Teachers College. No we went into Vietnam on the advice of all of Kennedy's "best and brightest" crew from Harvard. Vietnam was a policy delivered by Kennedy, Harvard and the Democratic party's policy establishment. Heck, NSAM-273 that you reference was prepared by Kennedy's people, for Kennedy. Johnson signed it days after assuming office. Citing NSAM-273 is not making your point but disproving it. This was Kennedy administration policy--cooked up by his people for him.

    As for Robert Kennedy and Israel nuclearizing ... please. What sort of baroque stupidity.

    The Israelis developed nuclear weapons ... because they work! Nukes are the big swinging dick of "don't mess with me or else". Why China, India, South Africa, Pakistan, the Norks, Saddam, Iran ... were also interested in getting them, and a bunch of other folks (e.g. Japan) have probably done the work to be "ready" on short order.

    ~~~

    I don't deify prominent people just because they are of my ethnic group. Heck, swooning and slobbering all over anyone is embarassing. Much of this Kennedy stuff over the years reminds one of teeny boopers swooning over the Beatles. It's pathetic.

    Would America have been "saved" if Kennedy wasn't assinated? ... no. Was Kennedy some sort of exceptional leader with great policies to lead America? ... uh ... no. Mostly Kennedy had pretty ordinary establishment policies--unsurprising since his background and his team was "Eastern Establishment". If Kennedy deviated from "what we'd otherwise have gotten", it was probably for the worse. Bobby would have been worse, with more poorly thought out "liberalism".

    I was referring to http://www.jfklancer.com/NSAM273.html

    I understand you hate the Irish and are sick of the Kennedys, I understand that with a lot of the iSteve crew but having your President killed, and obviously not by a “lone nut” but as the result of a conspiracy which was deliberately whitewashed in the Warren Commission created by the succeeding Vice President, and then later that President’s brother, who most certainly would have become president, also being murdered should get every red, white and blue Yank righteous to defend his sovereignty.

    Don’t let your petty animosities get in the way of a quest for the truth. If you need your history spoon fed by those on the same political aisle as yourself then try reading Roger Stone’s The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ.

    Hopefully Trump will release everything that he possible can in relation to JFK’s assasination as he promised to do.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux
    "Don’t let your petty animosities get in the way of a quest for the truth. If you need your history spoon fed by those on the same political aisle as yourself then try reading Roger Stone’s The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ."

    Here's a vastly better book:

    Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy
    by Vincent Bugliosi

    https://www.amazon.com/dp/B002GKGBM8/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

    , @Brutusale
    Boyo, 99% of Americans couldn't care less that RFK has been dead for 50 years. The hullabaloo has been puffed up by the press to prop up the potential 2020 POTUS candidacy of one Joseph Kennedy III, affectionately know to us in MA as Joe Da Turd..

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/02/06/joe-kennedy-2020-democrats-off-message-216942

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. @Lot
    "The fundamental principle that no majority people–but specifically and especially white gentiles"

    Except nobody forced Jewish integration on anyone. What's the Jewish version of Brown v Board of Education, the Civil Rights Act, and the Fair Housing Act? In fact Jewish discrimination wasn't that extensive and ended because of private social pressure.

    We are simply better people than the anti-semites, and we've consistently won the affection of the majority of Americans.

    In fact Jewish discrimination wasn’t that extensive and ended because of private social pressure.

    Lot, you’re argument isn’t with me. As i’ve repeatedly said, no middle man minority in the history of the world has ever been treated better than Jews have been treated by Americans.

    But JackD will go chapter and verse with you on his poor put-upon tail of woe.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    America was supposed to be a special place that granted religious freedom and equality to all citizens and not just another shitty country, even if it was the least shitty country on the list of shitty countries. It was supposed to be a reboot of European history on a clean slate (never mind those Indians). On the Great Seal it says NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM - a new order for the ages. It is an ambitious claim for an ambitious nation. If it had said "We treat religious minorities slightly less shitty than elsewhere" then it wouldn't be the place that the Founders dreamed of - it would be Canada or Australia or something, not the defining nation of the last 2 centuries.

    Again, Washington understood this even if you don't. Lincoln too. But at certain times in American history Americans have lost sight of this. But usually we come back to our founding principles (our "better angels" as Lincoln put it) eventually.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Jack D
    I understand now. Hitler had to murder my poor fisherman grandfather (and his wife and 1/2 his kids and their infant families) because his ancestors were rich tax farmers in 17th century Poland. It's all clear to me know.

    Or, y’know, that whole Marxist revolution thing that was happening at the time and which contemporary Jews identified with enthusiastically.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Most of the Jews of Poland (where most of the Jews were) were religiously devout (ranging from what today would be called "modern Orthodox" to fanatically Hasidic) and did not identify with Marxism at all, let alone enthusiastically.

    Again this is some kind of strange contradiction - 1/2 my family died because they were supposed either, depending on who you ask, rich capitalists (per Another Dad) or Bolsheviks determined to overthrow the rich capitalists (per J. Ross) (when in fact they were neither) - which one were they? Either they loved capitalism too much or not enough. Which was the sin that they deserved to die for?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. Jack D says:
    @syonredux

    in a sort of separate but equal world
     
    I do hope that you understand the absurdity of making comparisons to Jim Crow.....

    where they lived in all Jewish neighborhoods,
     
    Not hard to find Jews who lived in ethnically mixed neighborhoods....

    attended all Jewish public schools,
     
    Dunno. My Jewish grandfather used to talk about all the Irish and Italian kids in his High School......

    patronized mostly Jewish businesses,
     
    Lots of non-Jews patronized mostly Jewish businesses during that period....


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eoo8l-4vxhU

    Of course they didn’t literally have gates on the ghettos in order to lock the Jews in every night like the Jews of Venice. Even on the Lower East Side, one block might be Jewish and a couple of blocks over it was Little Italy and there might be a borderline block that was somewhat mixed or shifting as immigrant groups came and went (and the local public school might draw from both sides of the line). It was not completely rigid (and yes certain trades were dominated by certain ethnic groups but even in the Hollywood movie clip they recognize that there are Irish pawnbrokers too, even if they close on Yom Kippur as a matter of professional courtesy).

    But day to day (and the same is true today in Hispanic areas) you could live such a Jewish/Italian/Polish life that a lot of the old people would never even learn more than rudimentary English (if any).

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux
    Leonard Nimoy Remembers Boston's West End Neighborhood

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXGuzek51Ho
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Karl
    22 J.Ross > The “story” here is that a respectable academic


    no one at Ariel University, thinks that a historian at SFSU is a "respectable academic"

    hells bells - no one at the agricultural junior college in Katzrin, thinks that a historian at SFSU is a "respectable academic"

    You’re pretending that you don’t understand the meaning of the term. If academia worked they way you imply then what purpose would there be in hounding Finkelstein out of his job? Why would tenure exist?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. Jack D says:
    @Karl
    160 Jack D > my MIL (born ’22) is still very much alive and kicking and has all her marbles and can speak lucidly about the pre-War period

    ask her if there were any pizza joints outside of Little Italy, in those days.

    Mexican restuarants exploded next.

    then Vietnamese.

    Nowadays, I see bagel joints at US Navy base food courts.

    Which ethnic food is next?

    Actually “Jewish delis” (many of which served non-kosher food) were, in their heyday, popular among non-Jews as well as Jews. Back in the day a lot of ethnic restaurant were found mostly in ethnic neighborhoods but people of all ethnic groups would journey to those neighborhoods to partake – you might go to Little Italy for “macaroni” (pasta), Chinatown for chop suey, etc. What is different now is that the pizza comes to you instead of you having to go to the pizza.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. Thea says:
    @Jack D

    To compensate we’ll give you access to new territory in Europe
     
    Most anti-Semites are delusional to some extent but the idea that the Jews ran the show in postwar Europe to the extent that they had the ability to grant/deny access to Muslims is ESPECIALLY delusional.

    Jews had absolutely nothing to do with the decisions that led to millions of Muslims being allowed into Western Europe. None, nada, zilch. If you want to blame someone, blame Hitler and the Kaiser whose decisions led to the slaughter of millions of young European men, leading to postwar labor shortages.

    There is a long list of Jewish politicians in Great Britain that have been pushing for exactly this. Sure some were not Jewish. But it is undeniable they pushed for this and continue to support it.

    Modern urban life has pampered British men to the point that they are so effeminate they allowed this to happen and now pimp out their daughters to “grooming gangs” and arrest those who sound the alarm. So to some extent they did it to themselves but they were pushed this way in those shell shocked post wwii years.

    Read More
    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    No Brits "pimp out" their daughters to grooming gangs. But often when they went to the police they were threatened with arrest for 'hate crime'.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @J.Ross
    Not even sophistry, you've read the same tweets and headlines I have about how "Jews were never white" and "Dear Fellow White People." This is easily observed and totally separate from literal skin color.

    Don’t be silly. Nobody is claiming that Trump’s son-in-law is a person of colour. Nor his daughter…

    Somehow you’ve decided that you’re smart because you take the dumbest throwaway comments from the stupidest Jews and
    decide that they therefore must be true.

    This is ridiculous. And pathetic.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. @Jack D

    In fact Jewish discrimination wasn’t that extensive and ended because of private social pressure.
     
    It depends what you mean by "extensive" - while there was no formal Jim Crow for Jews (and in fact, as Steve has pointed out, local (not Yankee carpetbagger) Jews were even more well accepted in the South than in other regions), private discrimination in the '20s and '30s was quite pervasive - not just the proverbial country clubs but ordinary hotels, employment with big corporations, enrollment in universities, eligibility to be on staff at hospitals, etc. When Augusta National was founded, local Jewish industrialists were among its founding members, but later on when it became truly national (and when the great smelly Ellis Island wave lowered the public estimation of Jews) Jews were excluded - the situation of Jews in America actually deteriorated after WWI.

    The situation of Jews was better than for blacks and better than it was in Europe but it was far from perfect. It didn't just mean that a few rich Jews couldn't join a WASP country club - it had real everyday implications for ordinary American Jews. When you went on a trip you had to be sure to book a hotel that was not restricted. My step FIL was advised to study civil engineering instead of chemical because you could practice the former privately while no big publicly traded chemical company would hire Jews. Jews were certainly able to make a life for themselves in America but certain doors were shut to them and they weren't just the doors to the country club as Steve would have you believe.

    The end of discrimination against Jew was driven in part by the civil rights movement and laws - the same laws that prohibited race discrimination also prohibited religious discrimination. My MIL was able to get a job with Yale & Towne (as a draftswoman) during WWII because Federal contracts (even then) had non-discrimination requirements - before war, Y&T, like most big Philadelphia corporations, would never have hired a Jew. The Civil Rights Act of '64 put the last nail in the coffin of most forms of discrimination.

    Also the Holocaust made anti-Semitism (and eugenics) disreputable. Before WWII, "polite" discrimination (and in the US it was mostly polite - even as discrimination was practiced it was shrouded in euphemism - hotels advertised that they were "restricted" but you were supposed to understand what "restricted" meant) was accepted as being part of the social order - not everyone agreed with it but if you practiced it, that was considered within the range of legitimate opinion. But after the war, anti-Semitism was understood as leading to the Holocaust and its practice by people in the mainstream was no longer seen as tolerable.

    Jack, let’s say all your sob stories are true. (And yes, Jews did suffer the cruel lash of Protestants limiting Jewish enrollment in their Protestant unis to 5x Jewish population share rather than letting them become a majority. Those nasty Prods!) So what?

    In a free society, people are supposed to be … uh … free. Free to make whatever social arrangements they want. Free to associate or not with people according to their whims.

    Stereotypes are–statistically–true. Jews have certain patterns of behavior (pushy, crude, loud, arrogant) that some gentile groups find “unappealing”. As Steve pointed out, the German Jews, generally found the eastern, pale-of-settlement Jews to be rude and crude … and these are their fellow Jews! Heck, certain gentile groups find other gentile groups to be “unappealing”. This is the human norm practiced by Jews, whites, Chinese, Indians, Arabs, Latins, blacks, etc. etc. Someone I get the impression JackD doesn’t knock off work and go knock back a pint with the bruthas of Philadelphia. Why not? Maybe they have some “patterns of behavior” you don’t fancy? Some ethnic stereotyping at play?

    Furthermore, it’s particularly ridiculous to get this “you’re discriminating!” crap from Jews of all people–a people who specifically *rejected* integrated with their neighbors in favor of tribal loyalty and down through the centuries enforced that rejection of integration religiously. Jews complaining of exclusion is really the pot calling the kettle black.

    Jews having Jewish country clubs, organizations, civil society and doing ethnic networking–Jewish solidarity!
    Some gentile groups having gentile country clubs, organizations, civil society and networking–anti-Semitism!

    Sorry, no one is under any moral or ethnical obligation to socialize or do business with anyone else. Least of all with Ashkenazi Jews a group whose very existence is a rejection of integration with their neighbors.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Jews complaining of exclusion is really the pot calling the kettle black.
     
    Jews complaining of exclusion is the perp crying out in pain as he strikes you
    , @Jack D
    What you don't seem to understand (even though George Washington did over 200 years ago) is that the United States doesn't "belong" to the Protestants. Protestants, Jews, Catholics - etc. have all been here right from the beginning and have equal claim to having stolen the place from the Indians.

    Here is Washington's letter to the Jews of Newport on the occasion of his visit to the Touro Synagogue:

    The citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for having given to mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy—a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship.

    It is now no more that toleration is spoken of as if it were the indulgence of one class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights, for, happily, the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.

     

    Washington understood this in 1790 and yet here we are in 2018 and you still don't get it.
    , @Lot
    "Least of all with Ashkenazi Jews a group whose very existence is a rejection of integration with their neighbors."

    My ancestry is about 15-20% Levantine Hebrew and 80-85% "old" Euro. There seems to have been plenty of embracing integration going on there.

    And speaking of rejection, my German ancestors kept really good records. From 1650 to about 1930, in Prussia, Canada, and in the Midwest, they only married other Prussian Lutherans. No Poles, no Jews, no German Catholics, not even any Germans from areas west of Berlin.
    , @Corvinus
    "In a free society, people are supposed to be … uh … free. Free to make whatever social arrangements they want. Free to associate or not with people according to their whims."

    Except when those whims interfere with the social arrangements of other groups, as deemed by the society at large.

    "Sorry, no one is under any moral or ethnical obligation to socialize or do business with anyone else."

    On one hand, that is a true statement. On the other hand, you are conveniently leaving out the legal aspect here.
    , @Ian M.

    In a free society, people are supposed to be … uh … free. Free to make whatever social arrangements they want. Free to associate or not with people according to their whims.
     
    Commitment to freedom as a political principle is precisely why we are beset with a tyrannical and totalitarian political correctness today.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. Warner says:
    @Moses
    Hmmm....you just might be onto something.

    I can't think of even one example of a prominent Jew marrying a schwartze either IRL or on TV/film. How about schwartzes joining Jewish country clubs?

    Lenny Kravitz’s dad?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Autochthon
    Was Kravitz' dad prominent or famous? I genuinely don't know, but since you called him "Lenny Kravitz' dad" maybie not. People don't often say "Ivanka Trump's dad" or "Keith Urban's wife" to refer to Donald Trump or Nicole Kidman.

    And if the guy is not prominent in his own right, does being a famous musician's father make him prominent? I mean, if I say "hardly any taxidermists are famous" but it turns out Axl Rose's nephew is a taxidermist, does that mean there is at least one prominent taxidermist after all, or only that someone knows relevant trivia about an actually prominent person's (Rose's) family?

    I'm not out to be a pedantic jerk. I genuinely think this phenomenon merits note because I see it pretty commonly in this forum and other contexts – citing a relation of a famous, successful, rich, handsome, whatever person as evidence people with that trait are also x...but I don't buy the logic and I think we should be wary of it.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. @Jack D
    I was simply pointing out that postwar Europe (especially Germany) was largely Judenrein so they couldn't possibly be calling the shots. Even now, I don't think Merkel is taking her marching orders from Bari Weiss if she even knows who Bari Weiss is.

    The main motivator for letting in millions of (Muslim) Turks into Germany was not the supposed Jooish desire for open borders but the needs of German industrialists to man their factories in the postwar boom and in the absence of millions of young German men whose frozen bodies are buried on the Russian steppes. Ditto for all the Pakis in Britain, Moroccans in France, etc. You can't blame Jon Stewart for this.

    “Ditto for all the Pakis in Britain”

    Utter nonsense: less than 400,000 UK servicemen died in WW2. compared to 5 million Germans.

    And 220,000 Poles stayed in the UK after WW2 rather than return to Poland, together with tens of thousands of others who didn’t want to experience Soviet rule, making up for much of the shortfall.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  186. syonredux says:
    @Pat Hannagan
    I was referring to http://www.jfklancer.com/NSAM273.html

    I understand you hate the Irish and are sick of the Kennedys, I understand that with a lot of the iSteve crew but having your President killed, and obviously not by a "lone nut" but as the result of a conspiracy which was deliberately whitewashed in the Warren Commission created by the succeeding Vice President, and then later that President's brother, who most certainly would have become president, also being murdered should get every red, white and blue Yank righteous to defend his sovereignty.

    Don't let your petty animosities get in the way of a quest for the truth. If you need your history spoon fed by those on the same political aisle as yourself then try reading Roger Stone's The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ.

    Hopefully Trump will release everything that he possible can in relation to JFK's assasination as he promised to do.

    “Don’t let your petty animosities get in the way of a quest for the truth. If you need your history spoon fed by those on the same political aisle as yourself then try reading Roger Stone’s The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ.”

    Here’s a vastly better book:

    Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy
    by Vincent Bugliosi

    https://www.amazon.com/dp/B002GKGBM8/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

    Read More
    • Agree: PV van der Byl
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  187. Warner says:
    @The Anti-Gnostic

    Hard to underestimate what the failure of supposed messiah Sabbatai Tzvi/Zevi meant to Jews in the 17th century. The crisis was nearly in proportion to the Holocaust two centuries later in terms of affecting Jewish identity. This is the root of the transition of Judaism from religion to ideology.
     
    Very, very interesting comment. Please adopt a handle and comment more often.

    I wonder if the same thing is playing out in Protestant Christianity. Eschatology figured quite prominently in American Protestantism through the 20th century. I know a surprising number of people who have told me, with some sadness, that they always expected that the Lord would have returned by now. But here we still are, so Protestants now sacralize homosexuality and adopt social justice tropes in their own version of Tikkun Olam.

    One of the more famous "The End Is Near" types was Hal Lindsey. He even wrote a book titled, The 1980's: Countdown to Armageddon. He briefly moved to Israel to be in on the ground floor of the Eschaton. Hal is now 89 years old and still waiting on the Rapture.

    I usually comment with this handle. Realized I forgot to type it in just after I clicked send.

    Yes, it’s very interesting. I was not raised religious, but have taken a great interest lately and it’s very, very interesting the role religious beliefs play in today’s non-religious ideologies.

    Nobody in media takes religion seriously (like it’s a role-play card game or some weird hobby for freaks) but if you do, you don’t have to be a believer of any sort, but it answers all sorts of questions about today’s social and political climate that can’t fully be explained otherwise.

    When I ask liberal friends to explain their social beliefs in depth, they all come down to religious questions. The secular eschatology of all mankind holding hands at some vague point in the future when their ideology is fully implemented. The secular creation story, secular morality. They all have a not-quite-scientific resonance. But whether you believe in one true church, false Gods, or all roads leading to the same truth, the religious history of the West is full of foreshadowing of today’s ideological fights.

    How is the question “How many angels dance on the head of a pin?” different than the social reckoning over “How many genders exist.” People actually think about these things. And the angels on the head of a pin is not as frivolous as it sounds. It was really a question about the nature of time, space, and matter brought up by Thomas Aquinas.

    Many of the modern interpretations of foolish religious questions come from centuries of Protestants trying to discredit Catholics by making their history look bloodthirsty and intellectual pursuits ridiculous. Most people think the “Inquisition” killed millions. That’s Protestant propaganda. It was the equivalent in deaths of one September 11th taking place over the course of three and a half centuries. And mostly due to the Spanish government, not the Catholic Church.

    Jewish religious history is very important to what is going on now. And pay no attention to what 99% of modern Jews say about it. They know nothing. I know I was brought up only believing a) Israel is the greatest and most important achievement of human history, and b) all the stuff Jews believed from the beginning of time until the 1850′s or so was hokum, but we ought to respect it anyway, but not believe a word of it. That’s what most Jews know. I was lucky to meet some scholarly people who could bring me deeper into the real history, of the people, and the thought.

    Read More
    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. Giraldi Goes Sailing Away T0 Where Sailer’s Going To With The Russia-Russia-Russia Obsession Of The Jews In The Media.

    Long title folks.

    Giraldi Blog Post titles:

    Hating Russia Is a Full-Time Job

    Neocons resurrect tribal memories to fan the flames

    I understand Sailer’s idea that some Jews are going gaga with the Russia stuff because of real or IMAGINED ancestral difficulties.

    But,

    I still like the idea that the heavily Jew-dominated Democrat Party is using the accusations of Russian meddling as a pseudo-nationalist mask to cover up the fact that the Democrat Party has gone post-national and transnational.

    My concept, which I probably stole from someone else on the internet, says that the Democrats are trying to sound patriotic and nationalistic when they are not. There might also be a baby boomer angle where the moron baby boomers still believe the Russians are coming to get them. These are the same baby boomer arseholes who won’t say a word in public about mass immigration, multiculturalism or Black criminality and Black misbehaviour, but they like the nostalgia of the Cold War.

    Trumpy must up the tempo on his psychological warfare against the Democrat Party and their pseudo-nationalist Russia-Russia-Russia meddling horseshit. White Core Americans are finally getting the idea that the Democrats are bullshit artists who push policies that harm Whites and all Americans. Make the Democrats froth at the mouth over Russia, Trumpy! Like a crazed raccoon walking down the middle of the road. It’ll make it easier for the voters to run them over.

    Now,

    Most of the Republicans are scum, too, and Thursday will be a day where the immigration brawl in the GOP will start. Paul Ryan is a globalizer dirtbag who pushes mass immigration and amnesty for illegal aliens, and that slob from California, Kevin McCarthy, is just as bad on immigration.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  189. @Pat Hannagan
    For those actually interested in the facts and not just anti-Irish onanists:

    1) http://www.jfklancer.com/NSAM273.html

    2) http://www.unz.com/article/did-israel-kill-the-kennedies/

    I have referred to easily verifiable facts. You haven’t referred to facts of any kind. Whereas I refer to things that Kennedy actually did, your first link goes to a meaningless memorandum describing what he would, supposedly, like to at some indeterminate time in the future. Your second link goes to crank ravings of a French conspiracy theorist.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Hannagan
    a French conspiracy theorist.

    Yet elsewhere you agreed with Syonredux who was promoting the works of one Vincent Bugliosi who is an... Italian-American conspiracy theorist!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincent_Bugliosi#RFK_assassination

    Do you have some sort of weighting scale as to allowable conspiracies by ethnicity?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  190. @Towel Ban
    It must be especially annoying because as constant archeological excavations have shown Jews never were "slaves" in Egypt. In fact it was quite the opposite, to whatever extent Semites occupied Egypt they in fact ruled as "kings" for a period after a successful invasion known as the "Hyksos Period"(1650 BC-1550 BC).

    Afterwards the Egyptian Empire Came to occupy Canaan for a period in order to ward off and prevent the many Semitic military invasions from its neighbor until around 1200 BC which is Steve's favorite period in ancient history known as the Bronze Age Collapse.

    Towel, Thay was kangs?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  191. @AnotherDad

    Today marks the 50th anniversary of Robert Kennedy’s assassination in LA. His killer, Sirhan Sirhan, shot him because Kennedy voted to help Israel during the ‘67 Six Day War. That congressional vote cost him his life.
     
    Also it's the 76th anniversary of--the much more world historically significant--American destruction of the Japanese carriers at Midway, which essentially sealed Japan's fate in the war. Though much more fighting and dying had to occur.


    (Personally, as a half-Irish American, i'll be happy when this Kennedy deification and mythologization has finally burnt out, over and done with and we can stop pretending these crude mediocrities were some sort of great, world historical, American titans.)

    Another Dad, I was in an all boys Catholic HS when JFK was assassinated and a senior at a Jesuit College when RFK was assassinated, they had been deified by the teachers and profs at both schools. However, one of the most traumatic days of my life happened in HS, when the priests assembled the student body to go to confession and then communion, the reason being the Cuban Missle Crisis. The dems drag out whatever Kennedy they can find to validate their cause but I wish they would all just go away.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  192. @Moses
    Nope. Jews are not "White Americans."

    Perhaps a better way to put it would be to substitute "European Christian Americans" for "White Americans," if you believe that "White" includes European Christians plus Jews (btw I never hear Jews refer to themselves as "White" except in "Dear Fellow White People" screeds -- it's always "Is it good for the Jews?" not "Is it good for the Whites?").

    Jews I've met certainly do NOT list themselves as a subgroup of European Christian Americans. They consider themselves entirely separate.

    Perhaps you'd prefer if I changed it to:


    Jews, like any group, have group interests. And those interests often are not in alignment with European Christian American interests.

    Simple as that.
     

    I think the distinction you imagine between Jewish whites, Catholic whites, Evangelical Christian whites and so on fades to insignificance in comparison to the difference between, say, Filipinos and white people in general.

    Once upon a time, back in the Old Country, in a completely white world, in which religion was of overwhelming importance, being Jewish was significant.

    In the multi-racial mosaic that is modern America, to see being Jewish as separating one from other white people would be as silly as seeing one’s Polish or Italian or Irish ethnicity as making one ‘not white.’

    Jews are white. As you say, simple as that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  193. syonredux says:
    @Jack D
    Of course they didn't literally have gates on the ghettos in order to lock the Jews in every night like the Jews of Venice. Even on the Lower East Side, one block might be Jewish and a couple of blocks over it was Little Italy and there might be a borderline block that was somewhat mixed or shifting as immigrant groups came and went (and the local public school might draw from both sides of the line). It was not completely rigid (and yes certain trades were dominated by certain ethnic groups but even in the Hollywood movie clip they recognize that there are Irish pawnbrokers too, even if they close on Yom Kippur as a matter of professional courtesy).

    But day to day (and the same is true today in Hispanic areas) you could live such a Jewish/Italian/Polish life that a lot of the old people would never even learn more than rudimentary English (if any).

    Leonard Nimoy Remembers Boston’s West End Neighborhood

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  194. Anonymous[186] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnotherDad
    Jack, let's say all your sob stories are true. (And yes, Jews did suffer the cruel lash of Protestants limiting Jewish enrollment in their Protestant unis to 5x Jewish population share rather than letting them become a majority. Those nasty Prods!) So what?

    In a free society, people are supposed to be … uh … free. Free to make whatever social arrangements they want. Free to associate or not with people according to their whims.

    Stereotypes are--statistically--true. Jews have certain patterns of behavior (pushy, crude, loud, arrogant) that some gentile groups find "unappealing". As Steve pointed out, the German Jews, generally found the eastern, pale-of-settlement Jews to be rude and crude … and these are their fellow Jews! Heck, certain gentile groups find other gentile groups to be "unappealing". This is the human norm practiced by Jews, whites, Chinese, Indians, Arabs, Latins, blacks, etc. etc. Someone I get the impression JackD doesn't knock off work and go knock back a pint with the bruthas of Philadelphia. Why not? Maybe they have some "patterns of behavior" you don't fancy? Some ethnic stereotyping at play?

    Furthermore, it's particularly ridiculous to get this "you're discriminating!" crap from Jews of all people--a people who specifically *rejected* integrated with their neighbors in favor of tribal loyalty and down through the centuries enforced that rejection of integration religiously. Jews complaining of exclusion is really the pot calling the kettle black.

    Jews having Jewish country clubs, organizations, civil society and doing ethnic networking--Jewish solidarity!
    Some gentile groups having gentile country clubs, organizations, civil society and networking--anti-Semitism!

    Sorry, no one is under any moral or ethnical obligation to socialize or do business with anyone else. Least of all with Ashkenazi Jews a group whose very existence is a rejection of integration with their neighbors.

    Jews complaining of exclusion is really the pot calling the kettle black.

    Jews complaining of exclusion is the perp crying out in pain as he strikes you

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  195. Anon[186] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon
    Attack on US embassy in Persia was 1979-80 12 years after the 67 Arab Israel war. The American sympathy for Israel was due to massive propaganda effort by American Jews. Remember book and movie Exodus?

    Plus every public high school and college library was full of WW2 history books emphazing Jewish martyrdom during WW2.

    Plus Rabbi Kahane was preparing the ground for a massive jump of Russian Jews from the Bolshevik disaster they created with endless propaganda about his Jews were sooooo abused in Russia.

    The American sympathy for Israel was due to massive propaganda effort by American Jews.

    This.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Travis
    if they stopped counting Arabs, Iranians and North Africans as white we would non-white births outnumber white births in America already.

    92 million white babies were born in America from 1950-1980
    68 million white babies were born in America from 1980-2010

    white people stopped having children , which is the reason there were actually more white people under the age of 55 in 1970 than today.

    So what are you doing to increase the White birth rate Travis? And what are you doing to ensure that affirmative action will end so White children won’t be discriminated against when they grow up and apply for jobs.?

    If you don’t have at least 4 White children of your own STFU.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  197. Anon[186] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D
    I was simply pointing out that postwar Europe (especially Germany) was largely Judenrein so they couldn't possibly be calling the shots. Even now, I don't think Merkel is taking her marching orders from Bari Weiss if she even knows who Bari Weiss is.

    The main motivator for letting in millions of (Muslim) Turks into Germany was not the supposed Jooish desire for open borders but the needs of German industrialists to man their factories in the postwar boom and in the absence of millions of young German men whose frozen bodies are buried on the Russian steppes. Ditto for all the Pakis in Britain, Moroccans in France, etc. You can't blame Jon Stewart for this.

    I was simply pointing out that postwar Europe (especially Germany) was largely Judenrein so they couldn’t possibly be calling the shots.

    Didn’t the United States have a rather strong influence on postwar Europe (especially Germany)? And what group has disproportionate influence in the United States?

    (As an aside, there were still Jews in Berlin at the end of the war.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  198. Anonymous[186] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D
    I understand now. Hitler had to murder my poor fisherman grandfather (and his wife and 1/2 his kids and their infant families) because his ancestors were rich tax farmers in 17th century Poland. It's all clear to me know.

    Hitler had to murder my poor fisherman grandfather (and his wife and 1/2 his kids and their infant families)

    If you don’t mind my asking, what were the circumstances of your grandfather’s death?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treblinka_extermination_camp#Gas_chambers
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  199. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @TheBoom
    Also worth noting is the capture of 1.3 million Europeans (many of whom were Irish and 2x the number of Africans brought to North America as slaves) by Barbary pirates who subsequently sold them into slavery. For some odd reason that is not mentioned in the discussion of slavery. Nor is the role Britain played in ending African slavery.

    What about the role of britons like Hawkins and drake in starting the Atlantic slave trade and the role of Britain in the 300 years of the Atlantic Slave trade?

    Personally, I think Britian owes America massive reparations for dumping Africans in America and creating the problem that will never, never end.. America’s biggest problem is Africans in our midst; 12 percent of the population 80% of our problems forever and ever.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  200. @Moses
    Hmmm....you just might be onto something.

    I can't think of even one example of a prominent Jew marrying a schwartze either IRL or on TV/film. How about schwartzes joining Jewish country clubs?

    Minnie Riperton and Richard Rudolph.

    Daughter Maya starred in iSteve favourite Idiocracy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  201. Canada will be the murrican rendition with Nafta aproximation or even ALCA.

    White culture is not white, nor of whites, it’s in the jewish hands.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  202. Jack D says:
    @J.Ross
    Or, y'know, that whole Marxist revolution thing that was happening at the time and which contemporary Jews identified with enthusiastically.

    Most of the Jews of Poland (where most of the Jews were) were religiously devout (ranging from what today would be called “modern Orthodox” to fanatically Hasidic) and did not identify with Marxism at all, let alone enthusiastically.

    Again this is some kind of strange contradiction – 1/2 my family died because they were supposed either, depending on who you ask, rich capitalists (per Another Dad) or Bolsheviks determined to overthrow the rich capitalists (per J. Ross) (when in fact they were neither) – which one were they? Either they loved capitalism too much or not enough. Which was the sin that they deserved to die for?

    Read More
    • Agree: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    So you're saying it was Lubavitchers that took over the German government, forced an end to the war, and talked about Bolshevism across Europe. I'm kidding, obviously you're not. But if everybody was this obtuse and emotional all the time no discussion would be possible. It's useless to have the motive force of Nazism be mysterious perpetual bigotry unless you're going to erase Rosa Luxembourg from history.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  203. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @TheBoom
    Also worth noting is the capture of 1.3 million Europeans (many of whom were Irish and 2x the number of Africans brought to North America as slaves) by Barbary pirates who subsequently sold them into slavery. For some odd reason that is not mentioned in the discussion of slavery. Nor is the role Britain played in ending African slavery.

    The famous sharpshooter Annie Oakley was born in 1860. She wasn’t a westerner she was from Ohio. She was an indentured slave in childhood.

    Her father died and he mother sold her to a farm family when she was about 8. She was fed so little she never grew to normal adult size and could not have children. She was beaten and abused. She called her owners the monsters all her life.

    Mother remarried when she was about 12 and bought her back. She started shouting ducks pheasants and other birds for the local butchers and was in her way to fame.

    She was an indentured servant in the 1870s.

    There was some form of slavery indentured servitude in Scotland that lasted well into the 1830s.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    In those days if you were too poor to care for your children they were sent to the poor house. The poor house in turn would farm these kids out to (usually farm) families where extra labor came in handy. Some treated them OK and some treated them as semi-slave labor. There were surplus orphans in the East and these would get put on trains and sent out West:

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

    The orphan trains ran until 1929.

    The Catholic Church in Ireland ran laundries in Ireland where unwed mothers worked in slave labor conditions . THe last one did not close until 1996.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalene_Laundries_in_Ireland
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  204. Jack D says:
    @AnotherDad
    Jack, let's say all your sob stories are true. (And yes, Jews did suffer the cruel lash of Protestants limiting Jewish enrollment in their Protestant unis to 5x Jewish population share rather than letting them become a majority. Those nasty Prods!) So what?

    In a free society, people are supposed to be … uh … free. Free to make whatever social arrangements they want. Free to associate or not with people according to their whims.

    Stereotypes are--statistically--true. Jews have certain patterns of behavior (pushy, crude, loud, arrogant) that some gentile groups find "unappealing". As Steve pointed out, the German Jews, generally found the eastern, pale-of-settlement Jews to be rude and crude … and these are their fellow Jews! Heck, certain gentile groups find other gentile groups to be "unappealing". This is the human norm practiced by Jews, whites, Chinese, Indians, Arabs, Latins, blacks, etc. etc. Someone I get the impression JackD doesn't knock off work and go knock back a pint with the bruthas of Philadelphia. Why not? Maybe they have some "patterns of behavior" you don't fancy? Some ethnic stereotyping at play?

    Furthermore, it's particularly ridiculous to get this "you're discriminating!" crap from Jews of all people--a people who specifically *rejected* integrated with their neighbors in favor of tribal loyalty and down through the centuries enforced that rejection of integration religiously. Jews complaining of exclusion is really the pot calling the kettle black.

    Jews having Jewish country clubs, organizations, civil society and doing ethnic networking--Jewish solidarity!
    Some gentile groups having gentile country clubs, organizations, civil society and networking--anti-Semitism!

    Sorry, no one is under any moral or ethnical obligation to socialize or do business with anyone else. Least of all with Ashkenazi Jews a group whose very existence is a rejection of integration with their neighbors.

    What you don’t seem to understand (even though George Washington did over 200 years ago) is that the United States doesn’t “belong” to the Protestants. Protestants, Jews, Catholics – etc. have all been here right from the beginning and have equal claim to having stolen the place from the Indians.

    Here is Washington’s letter to the Jews of Newport on the occasion of his visit to the Touro Synagogue:

    The citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for having given to mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy—a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship.

    It is now no more that toleration is spoken of as if it were the indulgence of one class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights, for, happily, the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.

    Washington understood this in 1790 and yet here we are in 2018 and you still don’t get it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    This is wrong, though. As a proposition nation -- whose proposition is the flowering of English common law tradition in the Constitution -- the United States belongs to anyone who signs onto the proposition. Theoretically anybody can do this, but it definitely came from a particular cultural sphere, and anyone plugged into that would have a natural head start. It cannot belong to "all of us" or to holders of geographical claims because then you very easily displace the proposition.
    , @Ian M.

    What you don’t seem to understand (even though George Washington did over 200 years ago) is that the United States doesn’t “belong” to the Protestants. Protestants, Jews, Catholics – etc. have all been here right from the beginning and have equal claim to having stolen the place from the Indians.
     
    No. There has to be a dominant culture that is given preference in order for a society to maintain itself, its heritage, and its norms. A society cannot treat all cultures or religions equally. This just results in the destruction of the dominant culture as well as the minority cultures.
    , @AnotherDad

    Washington understood this in 1790 and yet here we are in 2018 and you still don’t get it.
     
    Jack you've trotted this out a couple times before--it's apparently your zeroth amendment.

    I'll say first off, that Washington is being generous in spirit here--as was typical of his high character. Other founders--doing more "sociological" theorizing--said things that were a bit more reasonable. I.e. an understanding that the nation had a particular character--Anglo-Protestant--that enabled it to have the republican character it did. Furthermore i'd say that Washington was a bit naive about the Jews and if he'd seen how Jewish power/influence was used in America today, he'd probably be giving his remarks a big rethink.

    But put all that aside. You're a lawyer and are supposed to be able to parse language reasonably well. Washington simply does not say, what you--apparently--want to have him say. He's saying here that everyone is entitled their natural rights--Jews included. Not at the sufferance of Anglos, but simply because they are natural rights given to all men.

    This does not mean "Jews are entitled to other people's stuff" nor "Jews are entitled to attend--much less numerically dominate--Protestant universities" nor even "Jews ought to be invited to all private clubs". You carefully, edited off the concluding paragraph which makes this basic public/private dicotomy clear. (I include the whole thing below.)

    May the children of the Stock of Abraham, who dwell in this land, continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other Inhabitants; while every one shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig-tree, and there shall be none to make him afraid.
     
    "His own vine and fig tree." Very clear stuff. Natural rights for all, and then go about your own private business. Washington would have been appalled by the notion that the government should be running around *making* some people do business with other people or making some people associate with other people.

    ~
    I'll go further. This public/private distinction that Washington briefly sketches here is a critical one--in fact it is *the* critical one. It is precisely the freedom for people to have their own private stuff--property, businesses, schools, publications, organizations--that is not within the purview of the state to boss around that is the soul of freedom. Private stuff not being at the disposal of the thugs--whether commies or Nazis or kleptocratic globalist elites or "what's good for the Jews" busybodies like yourself--is what keeps a society free. When the state can order private persons and organizations around and tell them who they must admit or associate with, we are no longer free.

    Gentlemen,
    While I receive, with much satisfaction, your Address replete with expressions of affection and esteem; I rejoice in the opportunity of assuring you, that I shall always retain a grateful remembrance of the cordial welcome I experienced in my visit to Newport, from all classes of Citizens.

    The reflection on the days of difficulty and danger which are past is rendered the more sweet, from a consciousness that they are succeeded by days of uncommon prosperity and security. If we have wisdom to make the best use of the advantages with which we are now favored, we cannot fail, under the just administration of a good Government, to become a great and happy people.

    The Citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for having given to mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy: a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship. It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people, that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights. For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens, in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.

    It would be inconsistent with the frankness of my character not to avow that I am pleased with your favorable opinion of my Administration, and fervent wishes for my felicity. May the children of the Stock of Abraham, who dwell in this land, continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other Inhabitants; while every one shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig-tree, and there shall be none to make him afraid. May the father of all mercies scatter light and not darkness in our paths, and make us all in our several vocations useful here, and in his own due time and way everlastingly happy.
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  205. Lot says:
    @AnotherDad
    Jack, let's say all your sob stories are true. (And yes, Jews did suffer the cruel lash of Protestants limiting Jewish enrollment in their Protestant unis to 5x Jewish population share rather than letting them become a majority. Those nasty Prods!) So what?

    In a free society, people are supposed to be … uh … free. Free to make whatever social arrangements they want. Free to associate or not with people according to their whims.

    Stereotypes are--statistically--true. Jews have certain patterns of behavior (pushy, crude, loud, arrogant) that some gentile groups find "unappealing". As Steve pointed out, the German Jews, generally found the eastern, pale-of-settlement Jews to be rude and crude … and these are their fellow Jews! Heck, certain gentile groups find other gentile groups to be "unappealing". This is the human norm practiced by Jews, whites, Chinese, Indians, Arabs, Latins, blacks, etc. etc. Someone I get the impression JackD doesn't knock off work and go knock back a pint with the bruthas of Philadelphia. Why not? Maybe they have some "patterns of behavior" you don't fancy? Some ethnic stereotyping at play?

    Furthermore, it's particularly ridiculous to get this "you're discriminating!" crap from Jews of all people--a people who specifically *rejected* integrated with their neighbors in favor of tribal loyalty and down through the centuries enforced that rejection of integration religiously. Jews complaining of exclusion is really the pot calling the kettle black.

    Jews having Jewish country clubs, organizations, civil society and doing ethnic networking--Jewish solidarity!
    Some gentile groups having gentile country clubs, organizations, civil society and networking--anti-Semitism!

    Sorry, no one is under any moral or ethnical obligation to socialize or do business with anyone else. Least of all with Ashkenazi Jews a group whose very existence is a rejection of integration with their neighbors.

    “Least of all with Ashkenazi Jews a group whose very existence is a rejection of integration with their neighbors.”

    My ancestry is about 15-20% Levantine Hebrew and 80-85% “old” Euro. There seems to have been plenty of embracing integration going on there.

    And speaking of rejection, my German ancestors kept really good records. From 1650 to about 1930, in Prussia, Canada, and in the Midwest, they only married other Prussian Lutherans. No Poles, no Jews, no German Catholics, not even any Germans from areas west of Berlin.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    Lot, i'm not exactly sure what point you're trying to make.

    If it's to say that your blood proves that Jews were integrating and not rejectionist, then that's just ahistorical and false. The DNA stuff has given us a very good idea of the origin of the Ashkenazi and it's been discussed repeatedly on this blog. The Euro component was absorbed early--Jewish traders taking, mostly Italian, wives--and then the gene flow was really miniscule.

    As I've said many times, the Jews who defected to actually become part of their local community are my ancestors not the ancestors of your Jewish side relatives.

    As to the Lutherans marrying Lutherans--of course. This is just reinforcing my point: People like being in a community with people like themselves.

    For all the theological folderol most people did not sit down during the reformation and have a good think about their position on these issues. No, nations, duchies, whathaveyou flipped one way or another and most folks just went with whatever was the local settlement to be part of their local community.

    That's the thing, people like being part of a community, being around people with the same language, religion, traditions and values; doing business with people who you understand and trust, whose kids might marry your kids.

    The Jews rejected all that in favor of tribe. Their choice. But, of course, it has consequences. People are free to return the sentiment--they don't want to have anything to do with us, fine, i don't want to have anything to do with them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  206. Anonymous[393] • Disclaimer says:

    Oswald was convinced that Kennedy was a crazy warmonger – another Hitler – who needed to be stopped before he provoked World War III.

    This was actually the consensus opinion of Kennedy in left-wing circles at the time. It was only after his death that he became a “martyr for peace”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stan Adams
    Kennedy was killed by a leftist, and yet it was "rabidly far-right" Dallas that was vilified as the "city of hate" for decades after the massacre. Go figure.

    No one ever calls Los Angeles a "city of hate," even though RFK was killed by a genuine anti-Semite.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  207. @res

    Also worth noting is the capture of 1.3 million Europeans (many of whom were Irish and 2x the number of Africans brought to North America as slaves) by Barbary pirates who subsequently sold them into slavery.
     
    Any idea what conditions those slaves lived under and how their descendants did? Those would be interesting to compare to Black slaves in the US given their thriving population 150 years later.

    “Any idea what conditions those slaves lived under and how their descendants did? Those would be interesting to compare to Black slaves in the US given their thriving population 150 years later.”

    IIRC the usual fate for male slaves captured by corsairs was to be sent to the oars in a Mediterranean galley – a death sentence unless you were ransomed. So the males had no descendants to agitate for civil rights.

    Domestic male slaves were routinely castrated, a procedure with a high death rate and again no offspring – so there aren’t large numbers of sub-Saharan blacks in Egypt or Turkey.

    The girls (white or black) were used as servants and concubines.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gu%C3%B0r%C3%AD%C3%B0ur_S%C3%ADmonard%C3%B3ttir

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

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  208. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D
    I was simply pointing out that postwar Europe (especially Germany) was largely Judenrein so they couldn't possibly be calling the shots. Even now, I don't think Merkel is taking her marching orders from Bari Weiss if she even knows who Bari Weiss is.

    The main motivator for letting in millions of (Muslim) Turks into Germany was not the supposed Jooish desire for open borders but the needs of German industrialists to man their factories in the postwar boom and in the absence of millions of young German men whose frozen bodies are buried on the Russian steppes. Ditto for all the Pakis in Britain, Moroccans in France, etc. You can't blame Jon Stewart for this.

    The Turks were not brought to Germany until 1963. By that time all the boys born between 1930 and 1945 were between 33 and 18 years old and fully capable of filling all necessary jobs.

    The Turks were brought in for the standard capitalist purpose of keeping a vast army of the unemployed around to keep wages down. They and their descendants were mostly on welfare, not gainfully employed

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  209. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @hyperbola
    Funny how Sirhan managed to stand 6 feet in front of Kennedy and administer a shot in the head from 6 inches behind.

    CIA role claim in Kennedy killing
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/6169006.stm
    New video and photographic evidence that puts three senior CIA operatives at the scene of Robert Kennedy's assassination has been brought to light.

    The evidence is a result of a three year investigation

    The evidence was shown in a report by Shane O'Sullivan, broadcast on BBC Newsnight.

    It reveals that the operatives and four unidentified associates were at the Ambassador Hotel, Los Angeles in the moments before and after the shooting on 5 June, 1968.

    The CIA had no domestic jurisdiction and some of the officers were based in South-East Asia at the time, with no reason to be in Los Angeles. .....

    Kennedy brothers likely killed by CIA on behalf of Israel: Scholar
    https://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/05/28/rfk-cia/

    The shot was in Kennedy’s ear, in the side of his head not the back.

    Read More
    • Replies: @hyperbola
    There is a nice summary here about the cover-up.

    RFK and the End of an Era
    https://consortiumnews.com/2018/06/05/rfk-and-the-end-of-an-era/

    .... It’s not widely known that Sirhan Sirhan’s attorneys did not mount a defense to the charges against him. Instead they resorted to what’s known as an alternative defense called “stipulation to the evidence.” In legal terms this means the defense accepts the testimony and exhibits presented by prosecutor as valid. Therefore, there was no argument in court over the medical, eyewitness or ballistics evidence.

    What the trial was really about was Sirhan’s mental state. Since his legal team thought he was guilty, they tried to avoid capital punishment by arguing he was mentally unbalanced at the time. This failed, and Sirhan only escaped electrocution because California later outlawed the death penalty.

    As Tate and Johnson show, this defense strategy doomed Sirhan. For example, when coroner Thomas Noguchi was on the stand, lead defense lawyer Grant Cooper actually tried to curtail his testimony by saying, “Is all this detail necessary? I think he can express an opinion that death was due to a gunshot wound.”

    Noguchi should have been Sirhan’s star witness, and Cooper should have had him on the stand all day, the authors argue. Noguchi’s 62-page autopsy report proved that all the bullets that hit the senator entered from behind Kennedy. They also entered at extreme upward angles and at close range, i.e. from 1-3 inches.

    Sirhan Not Close Enough

    Every witness in the pantry of the Ambassador Hotel placed Sirhan in front of Kennedy, and at a distance of 2-5 feet. The fatal headshot struck RFK behind the right ear at point blank range, with the barrel almost touching his skin. As the authors note: How could not one single witness recall such a horrifying image? Witnesses put Sirhan in front of Bobby Kennedy and therefore he could not have been close enough to fire the shot that ended Kennedy’s life.....

    ..... RFK Jr. Visits Sirhan

    Robert Kennedy Jr. has now become the first Kennedy family member to openly question the verdict in the murder of his father. A few months ago, he did what what Martin Luther King’s son, Dexter King, did in 1997 when he visited James Earl Ray in prison, leading Dexter to believe in Ray’s innocence in the murder of his father.

    A few months ago, Kennedy Jr. quietly visited Sirhan in prison. After months of sifting through the evidence at the behest of Schrade, he came to the conclusion that Sirhan had not killed his father. This startling news was reported by the The Washington Post. Kennedy Jr. supports Schrade’s plea for a new investigation. Kennedy’s son is an experienced attorney who is partly responsible for getting his cousin Michael Skakel out of prison. Kennedy’s book on that case was a powerful exposé of how the justice system failed when it was improperly influenced by outside factors.

    Kennedy Jr.’s pronouncement may finally give his father’s case the attention and the serious analysis it deserves. Reading Tate and Johnson’s book shows how poor of a job the mainstream media has done.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  210. Jack D says:
    @AnotherDad

    In fact Jewish discrimination wasn’t that extensive and ended because of private social pressure.
     
    Lot, you're argument isn't with me. As i've repeatedly said, no middle man minority in the history of the world has ever been treated better than Jews have been treated by Americans.

    But JackD will go chapter and verse with you on his poor put-upon tail of woe.

    America was supposed to be a special place that granted religious freedom and equality to all citizens and not just another shitty country, even if it was the least shitty country on the list of shitty countries. It was supposed to be a reboot of European history on a clean slate (never mind those Indians). On the Great Seal it says NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM – a new order for the ages. It is an ambitious claim for an ambitious nation. If it had said “We treat religious minorities slightly less shitty than elsewhere” then it wouldn’t be the place that the Founders dreamed of – it would be Canada or Australia or something, not the defining nation of the last 2 centuries.

    Again, Washington understood this even if you don’t. Lincoln too. But at certain times in American history Americans have lost sight of this. But usually we come back to our founding principles (our “better angels” as Lincoln put it) eventually.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Faraday's Bobcat
    Jack, what has changed since Washington's time is the character of our government. In 1790, the state and federal governments had so little influence on the average person's life that he could afford not to worry about the Quakers in Pennsylvania or the Catholics in Maryland. Everyone could do their own thing.

    It's not like that anymore. The government now tells you what kind of light bulbs and toilet you can use, and what your kids will be taught in school down to the last jot and tittle. It decides which racial groups will be first in line for government contracts and college admissions. It takes a third of the money you earn and gives it to other people. I'd love to return to the days of "do your own thing" but until that happens, I have to pay very close attention to which groups are in our country (there, I said it), whether they're growing or shrinking, and how they're likely to vote.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  211. @Thea
    There is a long list of Jewish politicians in Great Britain that have been pushing for exactly this. Sure some were not Jewish. But it is undeniable they pushed for this and continue to support it.

    Modern urban life has pampered British men to the point that they are so effeminate they allowed this to happen and now pimp out their daughters to “grooming gangs” and arrest those who sound the alarm. So to some extent they did it to themselves but they were pushed this way in those shell shocked post wwii years.

    No Brits “pimp out” their daughters to grooming gangs. But often when they went to the police they were threatened with arrest for ‘hate crime’.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thea
    But a lot of the police where white British. They metaphorically pimped our the daughters of their people.

    British men could join together to make it clear there are consequences for gang raping these girls but they are pansies about it
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  212. @Anonymous
    Oswald was convinced that Kennedy was a crazy warmonger - another Hitler - who needed to be stopped before he provoked World War III.

    This was actually the consensus opinion of Kennedy in left-wing circles at the time. It was only after his death that he became a "martyr for peace".

    Kennedy was killed by a leftist, and yet it was “rabidly far-right” Dallas that was vilified as the “city of hate” for decades after the massacre. Go figure.

    No one ever calls Los Angeles a “city of hate,” even though RFK was killed by a genuine anti-Semite.

    Read More
    • Agree: Travis
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  213. Jack D says:
    @Anonymous
    Hitler had to murder my poor fisherman grandfather (and his wife and 1/2 his kids and their infant families)

    If you don't mind my asking, what were the circumstances of your grandfather's death?
    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    How did the family find out that he had been sent to that camp and had perished? Do you have details of how he died?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  214. FPD72 says:
    @Steve Sailer
    The game was at Dodger Stadium. In the pretty good 2005 (?) movie about the assassination Bobby Kennedy in LA made by Emilio Estevez, the busboy in the famous picture of the dying RFK is mad because he has a ticket to see Drysdale pitch but his boss makes him work that night. Don't know if that's true, but it was a good screenwriterly touch.

    I went to that game with two buddies from school, one of whose uncles was Elroy Face, the Pirates pitching coach, whom we stayed late after the game to meet. He invited us back to the Pirates’ hotel to share a late dinner, but we had to get back because we had class the next day. They may have been staying st the Ambassador, but I’m not sure.

    Anyway, when I got home an hour later my mom told me about the shooting. It and the game were the only topics of conversation at school the next day.

    The next game that Drysdale pitched, against the Phillies, ended the shutout and consecutive scoreless innings streak. The streak will long be remembered for an assist by the home plate umpire in the game against the Giants, when Drysdale hit a batter in the ninth inning with the bases loaded and no outs. The umpire refused to award the batter first base because he had moved into the pitch instead of trying to avoid it. The Giants’ manager went berserk, but to no avail. Drysdale got the next three batters out without allowing a run and the streak was preserved. One of the best games I’ve ever been to.

    The other memorable events associated with the streak were the several trips the home plate umpires made to the mound to search Drysdale for a foreign substance that opposing teams were accusing Drysdale of using to “load up the ball.” On several occasions they even ran their hands through his hair, which of course lead to a commercial for some men’s hair grooming product.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Funny thing about teammates Drysdale and Koufax. Drysdale was a mean son of a gun who led the league in hitting batters four years in a row, was often accused of doctoring the ball and doing other tricky stuff to win, and was extremely articulate and went on to a long career as a top broadcaster.

    Koufax almost never hit anybody, was never accused (IIRC) of cheating, never seemed to do anything clever or underhanded to win, just seemed to want to match strength against strength in a fair fight, was inarticulate, reticent, and no good as an announcer, and retired to mostly living in small rural towns.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  215. DFH says:
    @Jack D
    I understand now. Hitler had to murder my poor fisherman grandfather (and his wife and 1/2 his kids and their infant families) because his ancestors were rich tax farmers in 17th century Poland. It's all clear to me know.

    I understand now. Hitler had to murder my poor fisherman grandfather (and his wife and 1/2 his kids and their infant families) because his ancestors were rich tax farmers in 17th century Poland. It’s all clear to me know.

    Where did he say that? Why did you go straight to hyper-emotionalising and personalising the topic? What does this have to do with the problems that Jews have caused for Europeans or the differences between them and blacks?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  216. Anonymous[186] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treblinka_extermination_camp#Gas_chambers

    How did the family find out that he had been sent to that camp and had perished? Do you have details of how he died?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    They would run whole towns through Treblinka. Not only my grandfather and grandmother and aunts but everyone in the town was herded into the cattle cars.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  217. NPR Jews might be the most sanctimonious prissy hypocrites of the lot.

    That’s no small achievement.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  218. @Jack D
    I understand now. Hitler had to murder my poor fisherman grandfather (and his wife and 1/2 his kids and their infant families) because his ancestors were rich tax farmers in 17th century Poland. It's all clear to me know.

    Your answer is tendentious & has nothing to do with OP’s assertions, which are mostly true. It is evident that there are many loony antisemites here; but, also, to deny that Jewish historical ethnocentrism is a defining reality, and that in most historical periods from, say, 8th to 19th C Jews had it better in what in now Europe than local populations, with a few exceptions (Crusades, Khmelnitsky pogroms)- it is just blindness.

    Various historians have dispelled myths about eternal, unprovoked suffering & there is not much to dispute here. To refuse to acknowledge Jewish “shadow”, to use Jungian term, is, seems, a permanent trait of Jewish national consciousness.

    Read More
    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @Logan
    Something I've noticed. For some peculiar reason, it is verboten to criticize Jews as a group, or even individual Jews, in the same way we'd criticize anybody else.

    Jews must always have historically been utterly innocent victims of evil anti-Semites.

    This is, of course, nonsense. Jews are human and like other humans, sometimes they do bad things. Sometimes the bad things they do cause others to react negatively or even violently to them.

    I have zero tolerance for the anti-Semite Narrative in which the Joos are responsible for all the evil in the world, but I find the obligatory alternative POV, that they are and always have been, unlike any other group in history, utterly innocent, to be annoying also.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  219. Jack D says:
    @Anon
    The famous sharpshooter Annie Oakley was born in 1860. She wasn’t a westerner she was from Ohio. She was an indentured slave in childhood.

    Her father died and he mother sold her to a farm family when she was about 8. She was fed so little she never grew to normal adult size and could not have children. She was beaten and abused. She called her owners the monsters all her life.

    Mother remarried when she was about 12 and bought her back. She started shouting ducks pheasants and other birds for the local butchers and was in her way to fame.

    She was an indentured servant in the 1870s.

    There was some form of slavery indentured servitude in Scotland that lasted well into the 1830s.

    In those days if you were too poor to care for your children they were sent to the poor house. The poor house in turn would farm these kids out to (usually farm) families where extra labor came in handy. Some treated them OK and some treated them as semi-slave labor. There were surplus orphans in the East and these would get put on trains and sent out West:

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

    The orphan trains ran until 1929.

    The Catholic Church in Ireland ran laundries in Ireland where unwed mothers worked in slave labor conditions . THe last one did not close until 1996.

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

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Annie Oakley was not sent to the local poor house if there even was one. Her mother sold her to a farmer as an indentured servant. She was fed so little she never menstruated and never grew to adult size. In her autobiographies she repeatedly stated she was beaten often.

    You never read her autobiography did you? I have and I posted something I know about, unlike you who posted a piece of complete ignorance about Annie Oakley

    There are several biographies about her I’ve read two of them. Who are you to post your ignorance about Annie Oakley?. You don’t know what you are writing about do you? You just had to jump in with a totally ignorant statement.

    You are ignorant ignorant ignorant about Annie Oakley’s child hood. You never read her auto biography


    So why did you refute my post with some ignorant claim that all poor parents sent their kids to the poor houses and some totally irrelevant nonsense about Ireland?

    You should read some biographies of Annie Oakley Your post is very very typical of an arrogant Jew who thinks he is some sort of all knowing genius.

    You thought that your very superficial and shallow knowledge of 19th century poor houses you could refute knowledge that comes directly from specific knowledge of what happened to one specific 19th century child, Annie Oakley.

    BTW, poor houses were for adults. Poor children whose parents who couldn’t care for them went to orphanages along with children who had no parents.

    Your response is so typically Jewish ignorance masquerading as knowledge.

    Been around you people all my life and I always beat them in arguments because I know more than the Jews do about the subjects in which they claim knowledge
    , @YetAnotherAnon
    Jack D - I would treat anything on Wikipedia on a subject like that with caution. Wikipedia is great for the number of electrons on a carbon atom or the length of the Danube, not so great on a subject where there may be axes to be ground, be they anti-Catholic, anti-Christian, or feminist.

    "the motivations started to range from a need to maintain social and moral order within the bounds of patriarchal structure, to a desire to continue profiting from a free workforce" - no axes to grind there, no siree.

    (That's not to say that nothing bad ever happened to anyone btw).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  220. snorlax says:
    @Jack D
    I was speaking of the interwar period, when American anti-Semitism really got going. The situation before the '20s was different (there were no Jewish quotas for American universities then, etc. either). The Epstein patents are all from 1917 or before . Epstein could get hired by Y&T in 1917 but not in 1937. At the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, the percentage of Jewish students fell to 6 percent from 47 percent between 1920 and 1940.

    There were always exceptions - you might try to keep Jews out of your corporation as much as possible but a few guys were just too good to turn away - these were businesses after all. But you would be careful to limit the numbers lest your company get a reputation as being a place where a lot of Jews work, which would be undesirable for your broader recruiting efforts. Maybe the Jewish quota was not set at zero but you would set it at some very low number and try to find Jews who were not too "Jewy". When Feynman applied to Princeton grad school in 1939, the head of the dept. wrote to his buddy at MIT : "Is Feynman Jewish? We have no definite rule against Jews but have to keep their proportion in our department reasonably small because of the difficulty of placing them." Morse wrote back that Feynman was indeed Jewish, but reassured Smyth that Feynman's "physiognomy and manner, however, show no trace of this characteristic".

    Is "David X Klein" even Jewish? X usually stands for Xavier which is usually a Catholic name. Klein (small) is a surname found among both Jews and non-Jews.

    The Epstein patents are all from 1917 or before.

    1917-1923, with two from 1910 and 1914 that are lock-related but don’t mention Y&T.

    Epstein could get hired by Y&T in 1917 but not in 1937.

    Just ask Abraham H Golden, 13 patents with Y&T between 1934 and 1967.

    At the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, the percentage of Jewish students fell to 6 percent from 47 percent between 1920 and 1940.

    Yentl comes to America, marries at 14 and has 8 kids, who go to medical school, marry at 33 and have 1.9.

    Medical school attendance tends to be much higher among first than later-generation immigrants. East Asian medical school attendance skyrocketed in the 80′s and 90′s, and is now just as quickly collapsing in favor of South Asians.

    There were always exceptions

    I thought it was “no” and “never.”

    you might try to keep Jews out of your corporation as much as possible but a few guys were just too good to turn away

    If there’s one thing that characterizes antisemites, it’s their finely-tuned nuance.

    lest your company get a reputation as being a place where a lot of Jews work, which would be undesirable for your broader recruiting efforts.

    Who ever wanted to work for Goldman Sachs or Lord & Thomas?

    When Feynman applied to Princeton grad school in 1939, the head of the dept. wrote to his buddy at MIT

    Did they discriminate against or cause offense to him in any way?

    This is an example of “people in the 1930′s say the darndest things” (especially in private letters). You have to remember that back then, Jews were a new thing, like the internet or seeing burkas on the street.

    It’s the same as any bleeding heart these days is a heavy heart, thinking back on all their ignorant (no excuse!) past misdeeds, saying “illegal immigrant” or “tranny,” or (unforgivable!) laughing at Apu.

    Is “David X Klein” even Jewish?

    I can’t establish definitively, but this David X Klein is presumably his grandson and, well, I’ll let you be the judge.

    X usually stands for Xavier which is usually a Catholic name.

    “X” (just the letter) is also a common Ellis Island middle name, for obvious reasons.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Tour de force.
    , @J.Ross
    Simpsons and Futurama writer David X Cohen took it because there was already a David Cohen in the Screenwriter's Guild.
    , @Jack D

    At the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, the percentage of Jewish students fell to 6 percent from 47 percent between 1920 and 1940.

    Yentl comes to America, marries at 14 and has 8 kids, who go to medical school, marry at 33 and have 1.9.

    Medical school attendance tends to be much higher among first than later-generation immigrants. East Asian medical school attendance skyrocketed in the 80′s and 90′s, and is now just as quickly collapsing in favor of South Asians.
     

    This would be a much more convincing explanation if the school officials at that time did not confess (in private, never publicly) that they had imposed actual quotas. For example, the dean of Cornell University Medical College said in 1940,“We limit the number of Jews admitted to each class to roughly the proportion of Jews in the population of the state.”

    Occam's Butterknife posits that this is a much more straightforward and convincing explanation than a non-existent crash in Jewish birth rates.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  221. Clyde says:
    @syonredux

    Japanese-Americans control Hawaii. Maybe it’s the heat or that Hawaii is a supposed tropical paradise, but these are the most incompetent Japanese on the planet.
     
    Selective immigration? Weren't most of the Japanese who immigrated to Hawaii drawn from the bottom tiers of Japanese society?

    Selective immigration? Weren’t most of the Japanese who immigrated to Hawaii drawn from the bottom tiers of Japanese society?

    Were brought in as agricultural laborers as far as I know. But still, my opinion, are from hi IQ stock and civilized by Nippon society.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  222. @Jack D
    I was simply pointing out that postwar Europe (especially Germany) was largely Judenrein so they couldn't possibly be calling the shots. Even now, I don't think Merkel is taking her marching orders from Bari Weiss if she even knows who Bari Weiss is.

    The main motivator for letting in millions of (Muslim) Turks into Germany was not the supposed Jooish desire for open borders but the needs of German industrialists to man their factories in the postwar boom and in the absence of millions of young German men whose frozen bodies are buried on the Russian steppes. Ditto for all the Pakis in Britain, Moroccans in France, etc. You can't blame Jon Stewart for this.

    The main motivator for letting in millions of (Muslim) Turks into Germany was not the supposed Jooish desire for open borders but the needs of German industrialists to man their factories in the postwar boom

    The foreigners fighting to migrate to Europe/US are doing so to improve their own lives, not to help out a US/European factory’s balance sheet. The main driver and “motivator” is the interests and living standards of the migrants. Arguing that this culture war over immigration is being fought to serve the interest of factory managers is so unreasonable it is dishonest.

    Bari Weiss and Jon Stewart do not directly hold offices of political power, but they are culturally influential people that engage in political advocacy. And one of the issues that they’ve chosen to advocate for is looser restrictions on immigration to the US and Europe. I also don’t see the open border push as a particularly Jewish thing. Many leading figures, like Hillary Clinton or Nancy Pelossi are non-Jewish whites leading that political fight.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  223. Hhsiii says:
    @Anon
    Attack on US embassy in Persia was 1979-80 12 years after the 67 Arab Israel war. The American sympathy for Israel was due to massive propaganda effort by American Jews. Remember book and movie Exodus?

    Plus every public high school and college library was full of WW2 history books emphazing Jewish martyrdom during WW2.

    Plus Rabbi Kahane was preparing the ground for a massive jump of Russian Jews from the Bolshevik disaster they created with endless propaganda about his Jews were sooooo abused in Russia.

    Two things: the New Deal and FDR (with Jewish supporters) starting hiving black voters away from GOP. More importantly, Jewish slavery may have been 2000 years old; or was it more recent? Serfdom. Or, closer to post-war, concentration camps and massmurder. Isn’t that more likely to lead to more Jews identifying with communist oppressor philosophy and drifting toward open support for blacks? Tortured explanations about them trying to divide and conquer versus WASP oppression when, hey, blacks were in fact discriminted against, and je s somewhat here, but massively in Germany, Italy, France, at that time quite recently. I am sure most thought they were just doing the decent thing. And many Christian agreed. Doesn’t make them all saps or cucks now.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  224. Anon[151] • Disclaimer says:
    @snorlax

    The Epstein patents are all from 1917 or before.
     
    1917-1923, with two from 1910 and 1914 that are lock-related but don't mention Y&T.

    Epstein could get hired by Y&T in 1917 but not in 1937.
     
    Just ask Abraham H Golden, 13 patents with Y&T between 1934 and 1967.

    At the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, the percentage of Jewish students fell to 6 percent from 47 percent between 1920 and 1940.
     
    Yentl comes to America, marries at 14 and has 8 kids, who go to medical school, marry at 33 and have 1.9.

    Medical school attendance tends to be much higher among first than later-generation immigrants. East Asian medical school attendance skyrocketed in the 80's and 90's, and is now just as quickly collapsing in favor of South Asians.

    There were always exceptions
     
    I thought it was "no" and "never."

    you might try to keep Jews out of your corporation as much as possible but a few guys were just too good to turn away
     
    If there's one thing that characterizes antisemites, it's their finely-tuned nuance.

    lest your company get a reputation as being a place where a lot of Jews work, which would be undesirable for your broader recruiting efforts.
     
    Who ever wanted to work for Goldman Sachs or Lord & Thomas?

    When Feynman applied to Princeton grad school in 1939, the head of the dept. wrote to his buddy at MIT
     
    Did they discriminate against or cause offense to him in any way?

    This is an example of "people in the 1930's say the darndest things" (especially in private letters). You have to remember that back then, Jews were a new thing, like the internet or seeing burkas on the street.

    It's the same as any bleeding heart these days is a heavy heart, thinking back on all their ignorant (no excuse!) past misdeeds, saying "illegal immigrant" or "tranny," or (unforgivable!) laughing at Apu.

    Is “David X Klein” even Jewish?
     
    I can't establish definitively, but this David X Klein is presumably his grandson and, well, I'll let you be the judge.

    https://lendedu.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/CommonBond-David-Klein.png

    X usually stands for Xavier which is usually a Catholic name.
     
    "X" (just the letter) is also a common Ellis Island middle name, for obvious reasons.

    Tour de force.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  225. Corvinus says:
    @AnotherDad
    Jack, let's say all your sob stories are true. (And yes, Jews did suffer the cruel lash of Protestants limiting Jewish enrollment in their Protestant unis to 5x Jewish population share rather than letting them become a majority. Those nasty Prods!) So what?

    In a free society, people are supposed to be … uh … free. Free to make whatever social arrangements they want. Free to associate or not with people according to their whims.

    Stereotypes are--statistically--true. Jews have certain patterns of behavior (pushy, crude, loud, arrogant) that some gentile groups find "unappealing". As Steve pointed out, the German Jews, generally found the eastern, pale-of-settlement Jews to be rude and crude … and these are their fellow Jews! Heck, certain gentile groups find other gentile groups to be "unappealing". This is the human norm practiced by Jews, whites, Chinese, Indians, Arabs, Latins, blacks, etc. etc. Someone I get the impression JackD doesn't knock off work and go knock back a pint with the bruthas of Philadelphia. Why not? Maybe they have some "patterns of behavior" you don't fancy? Some ethnic stereotyping at play?

    Furthermore, it's particularly ridiculous to get this "you're discriminating!" crap from Jews of all people--a people who specifically *rejected* integrated with their neighbors in favor of tribal loyalty and down through the centuries enforced that rejection of integration religiously. Jews complaining of exclusion is really the pot calling the kettle black.

    Jews having Jewish country clubs, organizations, civil society and doing ethnic networking--Jewish solidarity!
    Some gentile groups having gentile country clubs, organizations, civil society and networking--anti-Semitism!

    Sorry, no one is under any moral or ethnical obligation to socialize or do business with anyone else. Least of all with Ashkenazi Jews a group whose very existence is a rejection of integration with their neighbors.

    “In a free society, people are supposed to be … uh … free. Free to make whatever social arrangements they want. Free to associate or not with people according to their whims.”

    Except when those whims interfere with the social arrangements of other groups, as deemed by the society at large.

    “Sorry, no one is under any moral or ethnical obligation to socialize or do business with anyone else.”

    On one hand, that is a true statement. On the other hand, you are conveniently leaving out the legal aspect here.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnotherDad

    “Sorry, no one is under any moral or ethnical obligation to socialize or do business with anyone else.”

    On one hand, that is a true statement. On the other hand, you are conveniently leaving out the legal aspect here.
     
    Correct Corvinus. I specifically, intentionally, did not say anything about the law. As I see it--feel it--freedom of association is a fundamental natural right, just like freedom of speech or press or religion.

    But what "the law" decrees is completely arbitrary. It can make those natural explicit and protect them, or it can thuggishly demand people hop and dance to the tune of the authorities. Do stuff like make Christian bakers bake wedding cakes for some homosexuals getting married who feel like harassing Christians. Talking about what is "legal" is not particularly interesting--it's just whatever the guys with guns are making people do right now.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  226. Anonymous[150] • Disclaimer says:
    @Doug
    > Because if Jews have to go back to ancient Egypt to get the slavery metaphor

    For as much as Young-Earth Creationists get made fun of for believing in a literal interpretation of Genesis, I wish more people were aware that Exodus has absolutely zero basis in history. Even very educated people think that the Hebrews built pyramids or were enslaved in Egypt in the third millennia BCE.

    In reality, the Hebrews as a linguistic and cultural group only emerged in the 10th century BCE. Fifteen hundred years after the pyramids were built and when Exodus would be dated based on the Bible's timeline. Furthermore there's no evidence that the Hebrews were ever enslaved en masse at any point in history. In Egypt or anywhere else. The pyramids were likely built by native freeborn skilled laborers. Pharaoh Egypt never had a large slave population because it engaged in relatively little external wars of conquest.

    In ancient times the Nile was flooded for half the year and the Egyptian peasants had nothing to do until it subsided. There are your pyramid builders – not slaves but unemployed farmers.

    The flooding would also have facilitated water transport of stones, workers and other raw materials.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  227. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Jack D
    Most of the Jews of Poland (where most of the Jews were) were religiously devout (ranging from what today would be called "modern Orthodox" to fanatically Hasidic) and did not identify with Marxism at all, let alone enthusiastically.

    Again this is some kind of strange contradiction - 1/2 my family died because they were supposed either, depending on who you ask, rich capitalists (per Another Dad) or Bolsheviks determined to overthrow the rich capitalists (per J. Ross) (when in fact they were neither) - which one were they? Either they loved capitalism too much or not enough. Which was the sin that they deserved to die for?

    So you’re saying it was Lubavitchers that took over the German government, forced an end to the war, and talked about Bolshevism across Europe. I’m kidding, obviously you’re not. But if everybody was this obtuse and emotional all the time no discussion would be possible. It’s useless to have the motive force of Nazism be mysterious perpetual bigotry unless you’re going to erase Rosa Luxembourg from history.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    So you’re saying it was Lubavitchers that took over the German government, forced an end to the war

    No, in the fall of 1918, the body that ran the German government, forced an end to the war, got the Kaiser to abdicate, and then dumped the responsibility on the Social Democrats was ... the German General Staff.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  228. J.Ross says: • Website
    @snorlax

    The Epstein patents are all from 1917 or before.
     
    1917-1923, with two from 1910 and 1914 that are lock-related but don't mention Y&T.

    Epstein could get hired by Y&T in 1917 but not in 1937.
     
    Just ask Abraham H Golden, 13 patents with Y&T between 1934 and 1967.

    At the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, the percentage of Jewish students fell to 6 percent from 47 percent between 1920 and 1940.
     
    Yentl comes to America, marries at 14 and has 8 kids, who go to medical school, marry at 33 and have 1.9.

    Medical school attendance tends to be much higher among first than later-generation immigrants. East Asian medical school attendance skyrocketed in the 80's and 90's, and is now just as quickly collapsing in favor of South Asians.

    There were always exceptions
     
    I thought it was "no" and "never."

    you might try to keep Jews out of your corporation as much as possible but a few guys were just too good to turn away
     
    If there's one thing that characterizes antisemites, it's their finely-tuned nuance.

    lest your company get a reputation as being a place where a lot of Jews work, which would be undesirable for your broader recruiting efforts.
     
    Who ever wanted to work for Goldman Sachs or Lord & Thomas?

    When Feynman applied to Princeton grad school in 1939, the head of the dept. wrote to his buddy at MIT
     
    Did they discriminate against or cause offense to him in any way?

    This is an example of "people in the 1930's say the darndest things" (especially in private letters). You have to remember that back then, Jews were a new thing, like the internet or seeing burkas on the street.

    It's the same as any bleeding heart these days is a heavy heart, thinking back on all their ignorant (no excuse!) past misdeeds, saying "illegal immigrant" or "tranny," or (unforgivable!) laughing at Apu.

    Is “David X Klein” even Jewish?
     
    I can't establish definitively, but this David X Klein is presumably his grandson and, well, I'll let you be the judge.

    https://lendedu.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/CommonBond-David-Klein.png

    X usually stands for Xavier which is usually a Catholic name.
     
    "X" (just the letter) is also a common Ellis Island middle name, for obvious reasons.

    Simpsons and Futurama writer David X Cohen took it because there was already a David Cohen in the Screenwriter’s Guild.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  229. Lot says:
    @Ozymandias
    "We are simply better people than the anti-semites, and we’ve consistently won the affection of the majority of Americans."

    We consider ourselves better people than the gentiles, and we’ve consistently used our positions of influence to shut down any dissent from the majority of Americans.

    FIFY.

    I agree antisemitic dissent gets shut down in mainstream spaces these days. But it isn’t because of Jewish power, but because Nazi Germany showed the world how evil antisemites are, and what they will do if they reach positions of power. If Jews had a lot of power in America, they would have seen that their cousins in Europe had refuge here or in Mandatory Palestine.

    It may also have something to do with the fact that antisemites rarely just have issues with Jews, but quite often extend their hate to our large population of Eastern and Southern European Americans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ozymandias
    "I agree antisemitic dissent... blah, blah, blah."

    Any examination of Jewish influence is immediately labeled "antisemitic dissent." If you dare to question those who consider themselves superior, they're quick to let you know that you are morally inferior. I didn't read the rest of your schtick.
    , @res

    it isn’t because of Jewish power
     
    Come on, Lot. Jewish power might not be the only factor, but are you really denying it is a significant part?!
    , @Tyrion 2

    I agree antisemitic dissent gets shut down in mainstream spaces these days. But it isn’t because of Jewish power, but because Nazi Germany showed the world how evil antisemites are, and what they will do if they reach positions of power.
     
    This is easily observable.

    No country has made 'antisemitic dissent' more taboo than Germany.

    Yet Germany has had few Jews since WWII.

    Clearly, both are the result of the nightmarish excesses of cuddly uncle Adolf.

    It's almost like losing the biggest war ever and being responsible millions of deaths in the process might not only ruin your reputation but also discredit your ideology.

    Personally, when something goes absolutely insanely wrong, I try to ensure that I am not associated with it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  230. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Jack D
    What you don't seem to understand (even though George Washington did over 200 years ago) is that the United States doesn't "belong" to the Protestants. Protestants, Jews, Catholics - etc. have all been here right from the beginning and have equal claim to having stolen the place from the Indians.

    Here is Washington's letter to the Jews of Newport on the occasion of his visit to the Touro Synagogue:

    The citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for having given to mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy—a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship.

    It is now no more that toleration is spoken of as if it were the indulgence of one class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights, for, happily, the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.

     

    Washington understood this in 1790 and yet here we are in 2018 and you still don't get it.

    This is wrong, though. As a proposition nation — whose proposition is the flowering of English common law tradition in the Constitution — the United States belongs to anyone who signs onto the proposition. Theoretically anybody can do this, but it definitely came from a particular cultural sphere, and anyone plugged into that would have a natural head start. It cannot belong to “all of us” or to holders of geographical claims because then you very easily displace the proposition.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  231. Druid says:
    @Towel Ban
    It must be especially annoying because as constant archeological excavations have shown Jews never were "slaves" in Egypt. In fact it was quite the opposite, to whatever extent Semites occupied Egypt they in fact ruled as "kings" for a period after a successful invasion known as the "Hyksos Period"(1650 BC-1550 BC).

    Afterwards the Egyptian Empire Came to occupy Canaan for a period in order to ward off and prevent the many Semitic military invasions from its neighbor until around 1200 BC which is Steve's favorite period in ancient history known as the Bronze Age Collapse.

    True, and their story was not even in Egypt. Most likely from Yemen! Not a stitch of evidence for Egypt. Another fake!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  232. @Lot
    I agree antisemitic dissent gets shut down in mainstream spaces these days. But it isn't because of Jewish power, but because Nazi Germany showed the world how evil antisemites are, and what they will do if they reach positions of power. If Jews had a lot of power in America, they would have seen that their cousins in Europe had refuge here or in Mandatory Palestine.

    It may also have something to do with the fact that antisemites rarely just have issues with Jews, but quite often extend their hate to our large population of Eastern and Southern European Americans.

    “I agree antisemitic dissent… blah, blah, blah.”

    Any examination of Jewish influence is immediately labeled “antisemitic dissent.” If you dare to question those who consider themselves superior, they’re quick to let you know that you are morally inferior. I didn’t read the rest of your schtick.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  233. res says:
    @Lot
    I agree antisemitic dissent gets shut down in mainstream spaces these days. But it isn't because of Jewish power, but because Nazi Germany showed the world how evil antisemites are, and what they will do if they reach positions of power. If Jews had a lot of power in America, they would have seen that their cousins in Europe had refuge here or in Mandatory Palestine.

    It may also have something to do with the fact that antisemites rarely just have issues with Jews, but quite often extend their hate to our large population of Eastern and Southern European Americans.

    it isn’t because of Jewish power

    Come on, Lot. Jewish power might not be the only factor, but are you really denying it is a significant part?!

    Read More
    • Replies: @JSM
    There's no point in arguing with him, is there? Just, utter denial.

    While Lot, et al, are whining to us White Americans of Christian Heritage about how bad his grampa had it, what I wanna know is, when are the rich Jews in America TODAY gonna start paying the medical and funeral bills and lost incomes of all the WACHs being mowed down TODAY by illegal-alien Mexican drunk drivers that their co-ethnics demanded not to be kept out?
    , @Lot
    It is a fairly minor factor. Jewish power didn't suddenly rise from 1930 to 1950, but antisemitism became much less respectful. And antisemitism is just as disreputable in Oklahoma as New Jersey, despite the large gap in Jewish influence.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  234. Jack D says:
    @snorlax

    The Epstein patents are all from 1917 or before.
     
    1917-1923, with two from 1910 and 1914 that are lock-related but don't mention Y&T.

    Epstein could get hired by Y&T in 1917 but not in 1937.
     
    Just ask Abraham H Golden, 13 patents with Y&T between 1934 and 1967.

    At the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, the percentage of Jewish students fell to 6 percent from 47 percent between 1920 and 1940.
     
    Yentl comes to America, marries at 14 and has 8 kids, who go to medical school, marry at 33 and have 1.9.

    Medical school attendance tends to be much higher among first than later-generation immigrants. East Asian medical school attendance skyrocketed in the 80's and 90's, and is now just as quickly collapsing in favor of South Asians.

    There were always exceptions
     
    I thought it was "no" and "never."

    you might try to keep Jews out of your corporation as much as possible but a few guys were just too good to turn away
     
    If there's one thing that characterizes antisemites, it's their finely-tuned nuance.

    lest your company get a reputation as being a place where a lot of Jews work, which would be undesirable for your broader recruiting efforts.
     
    Who ever wanted to work for Goldman Sachs or Lord & Thomas?

    When Feynman applied to Princeton grad school in 1939, the head of the dept. wrote to his buddy at MIT
     
    Did they discriminate against or cause offense to him in any way?

    This is an example of "people in the 1930's say the darndest things" (especially in private letters). You have to remember that back then, Jews were a new thing, like the internet or seeing burkas on the street.

    It's the same as any bleeding heart these days is a heavy heart, thinking back on all their ignorant (no excuse!) past misdeeds, saying "illegal immigrant" or "tranny," or (unforgivable!) laughing at Apu.

    Is “David X Klein” even Jewish?
     
    I can't establish definitively, but this David X Klein is presumably his grandson and, well, I'll let you be the judge.

    https://lendedu.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/CommonBond-David-Klein.png

    X usually stands for Xavier which is usually a Catholic name.
     
    "X" (just the letter) is also a common Ellis Island middle name, for obvious reasons.

    At the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, the percentage of Jewish students fell to 6 percent from 47 percent between 1920 and 1940.

    Yentl comes to America, marries at 14 and has 8 kids, who go to medical school, marry at 33 and have 1.9.

    Medical school attendance tends to be much higher among first than later-generation immigrants. East Asian medical school attendance skyrocketed in the 80′s and 90′s, and is now just as quickly collapsing in favor of South Asians.

    This would be a much more convincing explanation if the school officials at that time did not confess (in private, never publicly) that they had imposed actual quotas. For example, the dean of Cornell University Medical College said in 1940,“We limit the number of Jews admitted to each class to roughly the proportion of Jews in the population of the state.”

    Occam’s Butterknife posits that this is a much more straightforward and convincing explanation than a non-existent crash in Jewish birth rates.

    Read More
    • Replies: @snorlax

    Occam’s Butterknife posits that this is a much more straightforward and convincing explanation than a non-existent crash in Jewish birth rates.
     
    How about an existent crash?

    https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/family-american-jewish

    In 11 community-wide studies carried out between 1930 and 1940 Seligman (see Glazer, p. 34) reports on Jewish fertility ratios (the proportion of children under 5 per 1,000 persons aged 20–54) ranging from 81 to 122. Among non-Jewish Caucasians in 1940 from across the United States, the ratio is 154. Glazer comments that "in the late 'Thirties, it seem[s] fair to conclude that a modicum of relative prosperity had been accompanied by a very rapid drop in the size of the Jewish family" (ibid., p. 35). "By 1938," notes Feingold, "50 percent of Jewish families produced two or fewer children. Jews were on their way to becoming America's most efficient contraceptors" (p. 48). Sociologists and others at that time who were sensitive to these trends predicted a decline in the size of the American Jewish community.
     
    Columbia was probably getting many more applications from outside the immediate NYC area in 1940 than 1920, too.

    Those figures come from this NYT article from 1946:

    Statistical data purporting to show discrimination by the College of Physicians and Surgeons against applicants of Jewish and Italian ancestry were offered by Dr. Alexander H. Pelekis of the New School for Social Research, who made an investigation for the American Jewish Congress. These statistics indicated that the percentage of Jewish enrollment declined from 46.92 in 1920 to 6.4 in 1940.
     
    It's unclear what methodology Pelekis used, since he was not affiliated with Columbia and students' religion was non-public information, so in any event those figures are quite dubious.

    the dean of Cornell University Medical College said in 1940
     
    Or in other words, if true and generally applicable, the exact same quota system to which whites and Asians are now subjected. Which is, btw, fairly mild.

    Harvard had 20 Jewish students in 1906 vs. 7 Catholics in 1911 (I couldn't find numbers from the same year, but presumably the ratio would be even wider). Even adjusting for IQ, that's a massive overrepresentation, several multiples, of Jews relative to Catholics.

    The point being that plenty of other immigrants had it every bit as bad or worse. And none have any cause to complain, because there had heretofore been no country and people anywhere remotely as friendly to immigrants as the US and the eeeevul WASPs, who were under no obligation to share their stuff (or country) with foreign unbelievers but very generously did so anyway, a kindness unheard of in human history.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  235. JSM says:
    @res

    it isn’t because of Jewish power
     
    Come on, Lot. Jewish power might not be the only factor, but are you really denying it is a significant part?!

    There’s no point in arguing with him, is there? Just, utter denial.

    While Lot, et al, are whining to us White Americans of Christian Heritage about how bad his grampa had it, what I wanna know is, when are the rich Jews in America TODAY gonna start paying the medical and funeral bills and lost incomes of all the WACHs being mowed down TODAY by illegal-alien Mexican drunk drivers that their co-ethnics demanded not to be kept out?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  236. 3g4me says:
    @AndrewR
    Lol. Persians are, what, 0.05% of the US population? 0.01? Arabs aren't more than half a percent either. And they almost all assimilate to whiteness within a generation or two anyway, at least the non-Muslim ones do.

    @91 AndrewR: “Lol. Persians are, what, 0.05% of the US population? 0.01? Arabs aren’t more than half a percent either. And they almost all assimilate to whiteness within a generation or two anyway, at least the non-Muslim ones do.”

    One might wonder why so many of your comments utilize utterly bizarre and inaccurate numbers and percentages to downplay the dramatic drop in the White proportion of America’s population. Arabs, Persians, and other Mohammedans, last I read, are officially about 1% of the population. I don’t trust official numbers, however, and adding in the illegals and rapid influx of rapefugees in the last few years of Obamantion’s term, I’d say 1.5% conservatively. Jews and half-Jews (and even quarter Jews, who are often Jewier than the 100% ones) are about 3%. Add in those 85-95% White Latinos who lay claim to full European ancestry (these numbers are all based on self-reported census and other surveys, to the best of my knowledge), and Whites of European ancestry are perhaps 45% (the official percent being 51.7 non-hispanic White as of 2017, minus the others I’ve already listed).

    As far as “assimilation” goes (a piss-poor and overused word that means whatever the user intends at that moment), most Mohammedans remain Mohammedan and separate from the rest of America socially, culturally, and religiously. Only those Levantines who were/are Christians (primarily Lebanese and Syrian) and who generally arrived between 1880-1925 intermarried and truly assimilated, insofar as “assimilation” applies to any who arrived after the War between the States.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    How tragic
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  237. @J.Ross
    So you're saying it was Lubavitchers that took over the German government, forced an end to the war, and talked about Bolshevism across Europe. I'm kidding, obviously you're not. But if everybody was this obtuse and emotional all the time no discussion would be possible. It's useless to have the motive force of Nazism be mysterious perpetual bigotry unless you're going to erase Rosa Luxembourg from history.

    So you’re saying it was Lubavitchers that took over the German government, forced an end to the war

    No, in the fall of 1918, the body that ran the German government, forced an end to the war, got the Kaiser to abdicate, and then dumped the responsibility on the Social Democrats was … the German General Staff.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    I am completely wrong there.
    However Communists in Munich (and horror stories from Russian refugees) probably played more of a role in widespread, reasonable fears of imminent Bolshevism than the historical grievances of unrelated gentiles. One of those things makes logical (although not moral or perfectly correct) the sentiments of the day and one is an emotional appeal that amounts to shifting defamation from one party to another. As long as people are allowed in this topic to just babble -- while other people are legally for forbidden to talk -- the real popular consensus result will not be an authoritative belief system. Normies will see the seething revisionists and frothing high priesthood and conclude that it is a religious matter, although they will have the sense to steer clear and not (deliberately) offend people.
    , @SFG
    Yup. For all the 'blood and honor' types agitating over the 'stab in the back', it's useful to remember that the German Revolution was started by sailors who were asked to go on one last sortie *after the war had ended*. Can you imagine being asked to throw your life away for the glory of the Navy, after hostilities had ended?

    From what I can tell there was enough Jewish presence in German movements of the center-left and far-left to make 'Judeo-Bolshevism' a vaguely credible conspiracy theory. Of course, there were plenty of gentile Germans angry at the aristocracy and capitalists. Whether that justifies exterminating *every single Jew in Europe*, down to halfies and quarters, not to mention starting the hugest war in human history, is another story.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  238. @FPD72
    I went to that game with two buddies from school, one of whose uncles was Elroy Face, the Pirates pitching coach, whom we stayed late after the game to meet. He invited us back to the Pirates’ hotel to share a late dinner, but we had to get back because we had class the next day. They may have been staying st the Ambassador, but I’m not sure.

    Anyway, when I got home an hour later my mom told me about the shooting. It and the game were the only topics of conversation at school the next day.

    The next game that Drysdale pitched, against the Phillies, ended the shutout and consecutive scoreless innings streak. The streak will long be remembered for an assist by the home plate umpire in the game against the Giants, when Drysdale hit a batter in the ninth inning with the bases loaded and no outs. The umpire refused to award the batter first base because he had moved into the pitch instead of trying to avoid it. The Giants’ manager went berserk, but to no avail. Drysdale got the next three batters out without allowing a run and the streak was preserved. One of the best games I’ve ever been to.

    The other memorable events associated with the streak were the several trips the home plate umpires made to the mound to search Drysdale for a foreign substance that opposing teams were accusing Drysdale of using to “load up the ball.” On several occasions they even ran their hands through his hair, which of course lead to a commercial for some men’s hair grooming product.

    Funny thing about teammates Drysdale and Koufax. Drysdale was a mean son of a gun who led the league in hitting batters four years in a row, was often accused of doctoring the ball and doing other tricky stuff to win, and was extremely articulate and went on to a long career as a top broadcaster.

    Koufax almost never hit anybody, was never accused (IIRC) of cheating, never seemed to do anything clever or underhanded to win, just seemed to want to match strength against strength in a fair fight, was inarticulate, reticent, and no good as an announcer, and retired to mostly living in small rural towns.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    What small rural town was Sandy living in in Hawaii? Personality wise, Koufax seems to resemble another lefthander, "Mr. Slider", Steve Carlton. For years during his career he avoided talking to the media. Whatever became of him?
    , @Captain Tripps
    Sandy Koufax sounds like a guy that I'd like to share a bottle of whisky with pretty much any time. Don Drysdale sounds like a guy I would initially like, then he would eventually get on my nerves and I'd want to punch him.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  239. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Steve Sailer
    So you’re saying it was Lubavitchers that took over the German government, forced an end to the war

    No, in the fall of 1918, the body that ran the German government, forced an end to the war, got the Kaiser to abdicate, and then dumped the responsibility on the Social Democrats was ... the German General Staff.

    I am completely wrong there.
    However Communists in Munich (and horror stories from Russian refugees) probably played more of a role in widespread, reasonable fears of imminent Bolshevism than the historical grievances of unrelated gentiles. One of those things makes logical (although not moral or perfectly correct) the sentiments of the day and one is an emotional appeal that amounts to shifting defamation from one party to another. As long as people are allowed in this topic to just babble — while other people are legally for forbidden to talk — the real popular consensus result will not be an authoritative belief system. Normies will see the seething revisionists and frothing high priesthood and conclude that it is a religious matter, although they will have the sense to steer clear and not (deliberately) offend people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    The German General Staff might have had a plan to get out from under the blame for losing the war by shuffling responsibility off to the poor Social Democrats in 1918 -- they had plans for lots of thing. I don't know for sure though.

    But in the minds of lots of sore losers like Corporal Hitler, losing wasn't his new buddy General Ludendorff's fault, even though Ludendorff had been pretty close to military dictator of Germany in 1918.

    , @Anon
    The Bolshevik Jews who took over Munich murdered 10,000 in a few months. That was enough to convince Germans to not let it happen again.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  240. Glaivester says: • Website
    @Uilleam yr alban
    “And it’s used quite a bit in the comics”

    I’m not sure that’s a positive. A good neologism for an important phenomenon should suggest the nature of the phenomenon.

    Actually, the term is now used in almost any fictional work where continuity plays a role: movie series, TV shows, etc.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  241. Ian M. says:
    @Doug
    > Because if Jews have to go back to ancient Egypt to get the slavery metaphor

    For as much as Young-Earth Creationists get made fun of for believing in a literal interpretation of Genesis, I wish more people were aware that Exodus has absolutely zero basis in history. Even very educated people think that the Hebrews built pyramids or were enslaved in Egypt in the third millennia BCE.

    In reality, the Hebrews as a linguistic and cultural group only emerged in the 10th century BCE. Fifteen hundred years after the pyramids were built and when Exodus would be dated based on the Bible's timeline. Furthermore there's no evidence that the Hebrews were ever enslaved en masse at any point in history. In Egypt or anywhere else. The pyramids were likely built by native freeborn skilled laborers. Pharaoh Egypt never had a large slave population because it engaged in relatively little external wars of conquest.

    Even very educated people think that the Hebrews built pyramids or were enslaved in Egypt in the third millennia BCE.

    Well, there might not be any extra-Biblical evidence for the Exodus, but you can’t blame the Bible for the foregoing.

    The Bible never says that the Hebrews built the pyramids.

    Moreover, it does not say that they were enslaved in the third millennia BC. Try second millennia. Based on the Bible’s timeline, it’s usually placed either ~1400 BC or ~1200 BC.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  242. HA says:
    @Anon
    As a self-aware Jew, I recommend you read further into Tikkun Olam. The author cited is wrong that Orthodox should be more active with Tikkun Olam. It is much more of a secular Jewish practical and worldly idea rather than what religious Jews would be dedicated too (namely God and torah.)

    The origin of Tikkun Olam has a lot to do with a strange branch of Judaism that originated in the 17th century. Too long to explain, but let's just say that without understanding the story of Sabbatai Tzvi and later Frankism, you can't really understand what the ((Jews)) are aiming for in the modern world. It represented a sharp break with Jewish ideas that came before. Ultimately contributing to Zionism, Jewish Communism, and modern social justice warriors. It's never mentioned in the ((media)) but it's like the Jewish Enlightenment. A major influence on the fate of the 19th century to our day. Hard to underestimate what the failure of supposed messiah Sabbatai Tzvi/Zevi meant to Jews in the 17th century. The crisis was nearly in proportion to the Holocaust two centuries later in terms of affecting Jewish identity. This is the root of the transition of Judaism from religion to ideology. Frankist Jews or children of such are hidden in history but all over European power in important moments of the 19th and 20th century.

    See Frankist "purification through transgression" to understand the origin of modern Tikkun Olam and why it us ultimately such an evil idiocy.

    Modern secular Jews for the most point don't realize their ideology is based on a religious principle of committing evil to bring about a messianic good.

    To get you started:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbatai_Zevi

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Frank

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankism

    Internet overall seems weak in its discussion of this. Find some books!

    “Internet overall seems weak in its discussion of this.”

    Mustafa Kemal Ataturk…Was he a crypto-Jew?

    Hillel Halkin, the respected New York native turned Israeli journalist who is a regular in Commentary and a columnist for the Jerusalem Post and the New York Sun, thinks so…[though, according to the Israeli Entsiklopedya]…”There is no proof of the belief, widespread among both Jews and Muslims in Turkey, that his family came from the Doenme”…an underground sect of Sabbetaians, Turkish Jews who took Muslim names and outwardly behaved like Muslims but secretly believed in Sabbetai Zevi, the 17th-century false messiah….

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/was-mustafa-kemal-ataturk-founder-of/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I never saw anything besides that Halkin piece. Halkin is kind of a romantic who likes telling a good story about exotic stuff, which is fine, I just want more sources.

    Ataturk went to a Donme school for awhile as a child in Salonika, their main city. So he was kind of a fellow traveler.

    , @Warner
    Wow. Way back in 2006. That's amazing. And that's why I spend half my time on the internet with this site!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  243. HA says:
    @Anon
    As a self-aware Jew, I recommend you read further into Tikkun Olam. The author cited is wrong that Orthodox should be more active with Tikkun Olam. It is much more of a secular Jewish practical and worldly idea rather than what religious Jews would be dedicated too (namely God and torah.)

    The origin of Tikkun Olam has a lot to do with a strange branch of Judaism that originated in the 17th century. Too long to explain, but let's just say that without understanding the story of Sabbatai Tzvi and later Frankism, you can't really understand what the ((Jews)) are aiming for in the modern world. It represented a sharp break with Jewish ideas that came before. Ultimately contributing to Zionism, Jewish Communism, and modern social justice warriors. It's never mentioned in the ((media)) but it's like the Jewish Enlightenment. A major influence on the fate of the 19th century to our day. Hard to underestimate what the failure of supposed messiah Sabbatai Tzvi/Zevi meant to Jews in the 17th century. The crisis was nearly in proportion to the Holocaust two centuries later in terms of affecting Jewish identity. This is the root of the transition of Judaism from religion to ideology. Frankist Jews or children of such are hidden in history but all over European power in important moments of the 19th and 20th century.

    See Frankist "purification through transgression" to understand the origin of modern Tikkun Olam and why it us ultimately such an evil idiocy.

    Modern secular Jews for the most point don't realize their ideology is based on a religious principle of committing evil to bring about a messianic good.

    To get you started:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbatai_Zevi

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Frank

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankism

    Internet overall seems weak in its discussion of this. Find some books!

    “Hard to underestimate what the failure of supposed messiah Sabbatai Tzvi/Zevi meant to Jews in the 17th century…Internet overall seems weak in its discussion of this.”

    Mustafa Kemal Ataturk…Was he a crypto-Jew?

    Hillel Halkin, the respected New York native turned Israeli journalist who is a regular in Commentary and a columnist for the Jerusalem Post and the New York Sun, thinks so…[though, according to the Israeli Entsiklopedya]…”There is no proof of the belief, widespread among both Jews and Muslims in Turkey, that his family came from the Doenme”…an underground sect of Sabbetaians, Turkish Jews who took Muslim names and outwardly behaved like Muslims but secretly believed in Sabbetai Zevi, the 17th-century false messiah….

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/was-mustafa-kemal-ataturk-founder-of/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  244. @J.Ross
    I am completely wrong there.
    However Communists in Munich (and horror stories from Russian refugees) probably played more of a role in widespread, reasonable fears of imminent Bolshevism than the historical grievances of unrelated gentiles. One of those things makes logical (although not moral or perfectly correct) the sentiments of the day and one is an emotional appeal that amounts to shifting defamation from one party to another. As long as people are allowed in this topic to just babble -- while other people are legally for forbidden to talk -- the real popular consensus result will not be an authoritative belief system. Normies will see the seething revisionists and frothing high priesthood and conclude that it is a religious matter, although they will have the sense to steer clear and not (deliberately) offend people.

    The German General Staff might have had a plan to get out from under the blame for losing the war by shuffling responsibility off to the poor Social Democrats in 1918 — they had plans for lots of thing. I don’t know for sure though.

    But in the minds of lots of sore losers like Corporal Hitler, losing wasn’t his new buddy General Ludendorff’s fault, even though Ludendorff had been pretty close to military dictator of Germany in 1918.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    I don't know that a plan by the general staff would have been necessary because Commies make trouble and talk about Communist ideals all day without additional inspiration. Losing a war humiliates; it doesn't quickly lead to action. Communists taking over one empire and then briefly taking over one of your most important provinces guarantees a response.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  245. SFG says:
    @Steve Sailer
    So you’re saying it was Lubavitchers that took over the German government, forced an end to the war

    No, in the fall of 1918, the body that ran the German government, forced an end to the war, got the Kaiser to abdicate, and then dumped the responsibility on the Social Democrats was ... the German General Staff.

    Yup. For all the ‘blood and honor’ types agitating over the ‘stab in the back’, it’s useful to remember that the German Revolution was started by sailors who were asked to go on one last sortie *after the war had ended*. Can you imagine being asked to throw your life away for the glory of the Navy, after hostilities had ended?

    From what I can tell there was enough Jewish presence in German movements of the center-left and far-left to make ‘Judeo-Bolshevism’ a vaguely credible conspiracy theory. Of course, there were plenty of gentile Germans angry at the aristocracy and capitalists. Whether that justifies exterminating *every single Jew in Europe*, down to halfies and quarters, not to mention starting the hugest war in human history, is another story.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    The reason Hitler caused so much trouble was that by around 1928, people in France and Britain were thinking: "We won the Great War, but was it worth it? We used to think so, but now we see the answer is: No. Let's not do that again." So pacifism and disarmament become big.

    Meanwhile, Hitler is thinking: "We lost the Great War and nothing is more intolerable to my soul. We must do it all over again so that this time we can WIN!"

    Sports fans will likely recognize a little part of themselves in Hitler's feelings.

    In sports, however, not too many people get killed, so you just have another season next year, giving hope to the losers from last year.

    But with war, it's really not a good idea to do it all over again just so that this time you can experience the Thrill of Victory and impose on the other guys the Agony of Defeat.

    But it took human beings a long time to figure out that sports > war for emotional therapy.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  246. @HA
    "Internet overall seems weak in its discussion of this."

    Mustafa Kemal Ataturk...Was he a crypto-Jew?

    Hillel Halkin, the respected New York native turned Israeli journalist who is a regular in Commentary and a columnist for the Jerusalem Post and the New York Sun, thinks so...[though, according to the Israeli Entsiklopedya]..."There is no proof of the belief, widespread among both Jews and Muslims in Turkey, that his family came from the Doenme"...an underground sect of Sabbetaians, Turkish Jews who took Muslim names and outwardly behaved like Muslims but secretly believed in Sabbetai Zevi, the 17th-century false messiah....
     

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/was-mustafa-kemal-ataturk-founder-of/

    I never saw anything besides that Halkin piece. Halkin is kind of a romantic who likes telling a good story about exotic stuff, which is fine, I just want more sources.

    Ataturk went to a Donme school for awhile as a child in Salonika, their main city. So he was kind of a fellow traveler.

    Read More
    • Replies: @HA
    "I never saw anything besides that Halkin piece."

    Still, Sabbateans are a hotter topic in Turkey than in other places, which ensures the conversation will inevitably return to another perennial iSteve favorite. If anyone at home is playing the Steve Sailer drinking game, prepare to down another shot:


    Another interesting and recent product of the anti-Dönme mindset,... is the claim that is was not the Turks, but the Sabbateans, who both planned and implemented the 1915...mass slaughter and death of most of the Ottoman Empire’s Armenian population. According to this view the idea of mass deportation and slaughter emerged because the country’s Jewish bourgeoisie wished to take control of the empire’s economic life, and,...they proposed this plan to the committee as a way of eliminating their Armenian competitors. [It should be stressed that] no professional historian of the Armenian genocide has taken this conspiracy theory seriously.

    Mehmet Kamış, a writer for the daily Zaman, which is owned by the ‘moderate’ Islamist community of Fethullah Gülen, speaks of the Armenian deportations, but refers to it chief architect, Unionist Interior Minister Talât Pasha, as a ‘Sabbatean’...Kamış goes on in this column to depict the question of the Armenian massacres as the problem of Talat Pasha, whom he takes pains to portray as a Sabbatean: “The Armenian [D]eportation”, he claims, “is not a problem for the Ottomans and the Turks. It is the problem of Talat Pasha and his ilk”.
     

    https://armenianweekly.com/2009/12/07/a-recent-anti-semitic-theme-the-sabbatean-role-in-the-armenian-genocide/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  247. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Steve Sailer
    The German General Staff might have had a plan to get out from under the blame for losing the war by shuffling responsibility off to the poor Social Democrats in 1918 -- they had plans for lots of thing. I don't know for sure though.

    But in the minds of lots of sore losers like Corporal Hitler, losing wasn't his new buddy General Ludendorff's fault, even though Ludendorff had been pretty close to military dictator of Germany in 1918.

    I don’t know that a plan by the general staff would have been necessary because Commies make trouble and talk about Communist ideals all day without additional inspiration. Losing a war humiliates; it doesn’t quickly lead to action. Communists taking over one empire and then briefly taking over one of your most important provinces guarantees a response.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    But there are two quite different things going on:

    1. The German General Staff pulling the plug on the war and the Kaiser, and handing the whole thing off to the Social Democrats to deal with and take the blame for. Remember, the average German, like Corporal Hitler, had no idea that the German General Staff knew the war was lost. The German Army had conquered vast territories in the east and was still fighting on French soil, not on German soil. But the General Staff knew from all their secret projections that 1919 would be a complete disaster with a giant American army marching to Berlin. So the GS pulled the plug and handed power to the SD politicians from before the war. And then it turned out that Germany had no leverage left at the coming peace talks, which I imagine the GS knew, but corporals didn't understand.

    2. Then various Communist groups rebelled, such as in Munich. The Social Democrats and the Communists hated each other. The Social Democratic government eventually crushed the Communists, using the Army and rightist ex-soldiers.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  248. @Rosamond Vincy
    MLK's "Letter from a Birmingham Jail" pleaded for clergy to join the Civil Rights Movement. He quoted Old Testament prophets and New Testaments apostles, St. Thomas Aquinas (Catholic), Reinhold Niebuhr (Protestant), and Martin Buber (Jewish). He said he himself would have tried to help Christians in the Soviet Union and Jews in Nazi Germany. He appealed to everybody except Muslims, who were the bad guys then.

    Clergy did join the movement in increased numbers, but it's clear that few really wanted to do it, because MLK had to guilt-trip them into it.

    “Clergy did join the movement in increased numbers, but it’s clear that few really wanted to do it, because MLK had to guilt-trip them into it.”

    There was a significant minority in the south that was not aligned with the segregationists, but who were reluctant to “join the movement” because of a fear of what happens once revolutions get started.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  249. Ian M. says:
    @Doug
    > Because if Jews have to go back to ancient Egypt to get the slavery metaphor

    For as much as Young-Earth Creationists get made fun of for believing in a literal interpretation of Genesis, I wish more people were aware that Exodus has absolutely zero basis in history. Even very educated people think that the Hebrews built pyramids or were enslaved in Egypt in the third millennia BCE.

    In reality, the Hebrews as a linguistic and cultural group only emerged in the 10th century BCE. Fifteen hundred years after the pyramids were built and when Exodus would be dated based on the Bible's timeline. Furthermore there's no evidence that the Hebrews were ever enslaved en masse at any point in history. In Egypt or anywhere else. The pyramids were likely built by native freeborn skilled laborers. Pharaoh Egypt never had a large slave population because it engaged in relatively little external wars of conquest.

    Also, regarding:

    In reality, the Hebrews as a linguistic and cultural group only emerged in the 10th century BCE.

    The Merneptah Stele contains the earliest known reference to Israel and is dated to the late 1200s BC.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  250. @SFG
    Yup. For all the 'blood and honor' types agitating over the 'stab in the back', it's useful to remember that the German Revolution was started by sailors who were asked to go on one last sortie *after the war had ended*. Can you imagine being asked to throw your life away for the glory of the Navy, after hostilities had ended?

    From what I can tell there was enough Jewish presence in German movements of the center-left and far-left to make 'Judeo-Bolshevism' a vaguely credible conspiracy theory. Of course, there were plenty of gentile Germans angry at the aristocracy and capitalists. Whether that justifies exterminating *every single Jew in Europe*, down to halfies and quarters, not to mention starting the hugest war in human history, is another story.

    The reason Hitler caused so much trouble was that by around 1928, people in France and Britain were thinking: “We won the Great War, but was it worth it? We used to think so, but now we see the answer is: No. Let’s not do that again.” So pacifism and disarmament become big.

    Meanwhile, Hitler is thinking: “We lost the Great War and nothing is more intolerable to my soul. We must do it all over again so that this time we can WIN!”

    Sports fans will likely recognize a little part of themselves in Hitler’s feelings.

    In sports, however, not too many people get killed, so you just have another season next year, giving hope to the losers from last year.

    But with war, it’s really not a good idea to do it all over again just so that this time you can experience the Thrill of Victory and impose on the other guys the Agony of Defeat.

    But it took human beings a long time to figure out that sports > war for emotional therapy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @fnn
    Hitler's rearmament was rather modest in the terms of the time. It seemed great because he started from close to zero and he was a scary dude:
    https://youtu.be/HBLgZAv_Iqo?t=4m19s
    , @SFG
    World War II as frustrated sports fandom.

    I never thought of it that way. But, you're probably right!
    , @Anonymous
    Meanwhile, Hitler is thinking: “We lost the Great War and nothing is more intolerable to my soul. We must do it all over again so that this time we can WIN!”

    Come one, Steve. You make it sound like a flight of fancy. But Churchill's naval blockade caused the death of a million Germans at the end of the war (impressing on Hitler the importance of independent access to food). The Versailles peace terms were widely seen as oppressive, not just in Germany. Germany lost a significant portion of its native territory, and millions of Germans in those areas were forced to live under the rule of hostile ethnic groups. Moreover, a murderous, genocidal regime with aspirations of world domination had taken root just to Germany's east.
    , @Anonymous
    From someone's comment to Ron's article on David Irving:

    You have got to be joking.

    The British invented concentration camps specifically for the purpose of interning women and children and thus pressure the Boers to surrender.

    The British initiated the criminal blockade of Germany during the First World War, which was responsible for many hundreds of thousands of Germans dying of malnutrition and continued the blockade even after the war. The unrestricted German U-Boat warfare was a response to this blockade, just as the so called “Blitz” on London was a response to three months of unanswered deliberate terror bombing of German cities.

    So Hitler rearmed? So what? What was he supposed to do? Keep the tiny 100,000 man army allowed, with no tanks, no heavy artillery and no air force and only a small coastal fleet as under the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, while in the meantime France fielded the largest Army in the world, Britain the largest Navy, with a potential invasion by the USSR? Even Czechoslovakia had much larger and better equipped armed forces than Weimar Germany. Hitler’s so called “rearmament” was a great power seeking parity with its potential adversaries, not worldwide domination.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  251. Ian M. says:
    @Steve Sailer
    The exception was Detroit.

    I got the impression reading up on it last year that the Detroit riot of 1967 broke out in the formerly Jewish 12th Street (?) shopping area. It seemed like kind of a touchy point, however, so the text wasn't too clear so perhaps I got this wrong.

    I’ll have to ask my father. He witnessed it and has home video of it (shot by my grandfather).

    But I’ve never heard him mention that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  252. @J.Ross
    I don't know that a plan by the general staff would have been necessary because Commies make trouble and talk about Communist ideals all day without additional inspiration. Losing a war humiliates; it doesn't quickly lead to action. Communists taking over one empire and then briefly taking over one of your most important provinces guarantees a response.

    But there are two quite different things going on:

    1. The German General Staff pulling the plug on the war and the Kaiser, and handing the whole thing off to the Social Democrats to deal