The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 iSteve BlogTeasers
Tablet: "Jew Who Called in Bomb Threats Was Anti-Semitic"
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

From the Anti-Defamation League:

Jonathan A. Greenblatt, ADL CEO, issued the following statement:

We are relieved there’s been an arrest in the majority of the bomb threats against JCCs, schools, synagogues and several of our offices across the country. We are deeply grateful to the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, and the state and local law enforcement officials who made this investigation the highest priority.

While the details of this crime remain unclear, the impact of this individual’s actions is crystal clear: These were acts of anti-Semitism.

From The Tablet:

YES, THE JEW WHO CALLED IN BOMB THREATS WAS ANTI-SEMITIC
Being Jewish doesn’t immunize a person from being anti-Semitic. It just fuses their bigotry with betrayal.

By David Schraub
March 23, 2017 • 5:00 PM

On March 1, I penned a column excoriating Donald Trump and other mainstream conservatives for suggesting attacks on Jewish sites—bomb threats, vandalism, and otherwise—were false flag attacks designed to discredit the right.

Later that week, Juan Thompson—a former journalist for the left-wing outlet The Intercept—became the first man arrested for calling in some of these threats, allegedly in the hopes that he could blame his ex-girlfriend for the crime. Clearly, I lack the gift of timing.

Today, Israeli officials announced the arrest of a 19-year-old with dual Israeli-American citizenship who is alleged to have been behind many of the remaining bomb calls. …

For Jews, by contrast, this is agonizing. First having to endure these threats, we must now also deal with the painful knowledge that many of them were acts of betrayal. …

The man who did this was anti-Semitic.

As you know, I’m a big fan of Orwell’s adaptation of the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis to politics: the basic idea behind 1984′s Newspeak is that if you don’t have a word for a concept, it’s harder to think the thought.

For example, as this chart from Google Trends shows, the English-speaking world obsesses over who might be anti-Semitic. Is Trump anti-Semitic? Was Walt Disney anti-Semtic? Is PewDiePie anti-Semitic? These are pressing issues that modern Americans worry about.

Screenshot 2017-03-24 15.44.00

In contrast, the logically parallel term “anti-Gentilic” just doesn’t come up enough for Google Trends to notice it being used.

Similarly, the term “hate hoax” has never appeared in the New York Times since 1851:

Screenshot 2017-03-24 16.26.36

 
    []
  1. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Being Jewish doesn’t immunize a person from being anti-Semitic.

    Sometimes I’ve come across blog discussions where leftists are accused of being anti-white. And some respond by saying that it is impossible for them to be anti-white because they are white. I believe even Tim Wise once referenced one of his parents as being white as proof that he could not be anti-white.

    Well if you can have black uncle Tom’s and anti-Semitic Jews, then for sure you can have anti-white whites.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon

    then for sure you can have anti-white whites.
     
    yeah, it gets rounds their "you have to have power to be racist" thing too - fun for trolling with
    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.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /isteve/tablet-jew-who-called-in-bomb-threats-was-anti-semitic/#comment-1812652
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. anon says: • Disclaimer

    Only because he got caught.

    If he hadn’t got caught he’d have been a mensch for helping to keep other Jews at the proper level of paranoia.

    Read More
  3. Art says:

    For Jews, by contrast, this is agonizing. First having to endure these threats, we must now also deal with the painful knowledge that many of them were acts of betrayal. …

    Oh – the suffering – the suffering – when will it end?

    Read More
  4. SPMoore8 says:

    I think part of the problem here is that these graphs seem to indicate returns for the word “anti-semitic” alone, whereas antisemitisch (no hyphen) in Germanic, antisemitsky (no hyphen) in Slavic, antiszemita in Hungarian, antisemita in Spanish and Italian, and the French, being French, have “anti-Semetique” with a long accent on the first e.

    As to the underlying concept, not sure what to say. I think it’s partly true that Jews today who are not observant and/or who are not assimilationist get caught up in the notion of being persecuted as a way of marking their Jewish identity. But I think the whole process is too self-referential to really be ascribed to hatred of gentiles.

    I thought Schraub’s article was pretty stupid and I can’t believe that such pedestrian opinionating comes from Boalt Hall. The people (or person) involved were obviously mentally ill, calling them anti-Semites, even whey are Jewish, is kind of silly at this point. There certainly was an anti-Semitic effect, in the sense of conjuring old fears among American Jews. Along those lines, I am reminded of the other online posting that was referenced, written by some self-described American Jew, who wants this kid put in prison and raped and then told that he is hated, sort of the more graphic version of the Cynthia Ozick curse that Schraub seems to think so highly of.

    It’s best not to judge the Jewish people by their most loud mouthed representatives in the media, that also applies to the head of the Don Rickles Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect; the over the top rhetoric from that source is not designed to generate anything other than contempt and donations.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    "As to the underlying concept, not sure what to say. I think it’s partly true that Jews today who are not observant and/or who are not assimilationist get caught up in the notion of being persecuted as a way of marking their Jewish identity."


    I, raised Catholic, went to college (in the 90s) and was very good friends with Jews who grew up in NY suburbs amongst Jews and went to college in NY amongst Jews. I will guess a good portion of their humor was based on the idea that the KKK and other anti-semitic forces were always on the move against them.
    , @neutral

    get caught up in the notion of being persecuted as a way of marking their Jewish identity
     
    The story about being slaves in Egypt, Moses fleeing, being deported to Babylon, and some others - these are some of the major events in jewish mythology, so being persecuted is core to their identity.
    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    It’s best not to judge the Jewish people by their most loud mouthed representatives in the media, that also applies to the head of the Don Rickles Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect; the over the top rhetoric from that source is not designed to generate anything other than contempt and donations.

    Wrong. That's like saying a Jew in 1939 shouldn't don't judge the German people by their most loud mouthed representatives. Jew elites are trying to destroy whites around the globe via immigration. The fact that most Jews aren't exactly on board with this genocide doesn't mean anymore to us whites than the fact that most Germans likely weren't on board with the concentration camps.

    We're still getting killed by your elites. What do we care if you feel bad about it.
    , @European-American
    > the French, being French, have “anti-Semetique” with a long accent on the first e

    Huh? What on earth are you talking about. That's not even a word in any language.

    The French word is "antisémite", for the English noun and adjective "anti-Semite" and "anti-Semitic".

    http://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/antis%C3%A9mite
    , @Feeeney
    This comment is another demonstration of the problem. Steve's post is primarily about the problem of an anti-christian/anti-gentile/anti-white hate crimes, aka "hate crime hoax", that is presented in the media as its opposite. And the reason is because there is no common word for it, and that is, in part, an intentional lacuna. And yet your comment has eight occurence of 'anti-semitic', as well as many references to the Jews and Jewish concerns, but only one backhanded reference to something that you are unable to actually call anti-gentilism.
    , @Flinders Petrie

    The people (or person) involved were obviously mentally ill
     
    Calling this person mentally ill relieves him of much of the motive and responsibility of this actions. If the calls were made by someone in the alt-right, I doubt many people would just throw up their hands and say "what are you going to do, he was clearly mentally ill".

    His actions resulted in a few things that many left-leaning Jews would consider beneficial:

    1) Raised awareness of anti-Semitism in a major way
    2) Donations to SPLC skyrocketed
    3) Gave the impression that Trump's election emboldened an anti-semitic base
    4) Forced Trump and his administration to denounce the supposed acts as the worst form of hatred

    For all of these elements to come together through some random act of mental illness is just not believable. The odds are that his political leanings drove him to do this, and the use of sophisticated precautions to hide his tracks suggests that he didn't want to be caught and was behaving rationally.

  5. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @anonymous

    Being Jewish doesn’t immunize a person from being anti-Semitic.
     
    Sometimes I've come across blog discussions where leftists are accused of being anti-white. And some respond by saying that it is impossible for them to be anti-white because they are white. I believe even Tim Wise once referenced one of his parents as being white as proof that he could not be anti-white.

    Well if you can have black uncle Tom's and anti-Semitic Jews, then for sure you can have anti-white whites.

    then for sure you can have anti-white whites.

    yeah, it gets rounds their “you have to have power to be racist” thing too – fun for trolling with

    Read More
  6. We’ve been told that Blacks cannot be racist, but apparently a Jew can be an anti-semite. Maybe this is progress ;-)

    Read More
  7. FKA Max says:

    I would more readily buy the argument of him really being an “ethnically Jewish anti/counter-Semite” (I believe they exist, e.g. Brother Nathanael) if he didn’t live and wasn’t apprehended in Israel.

    If I was an “ethnically Jewish anti/counter-Semite” I surely would not voluntarily want to live in Israel, especially if I had dual Israeli-American citizenship. But that is just me.

    Why I Left Judaism

    Read More
  8. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    I love this Schraub guy.

    Here he argues that Berkeley students are as thoughtful and as open-minded as can be when you “disturb college shibboleths about the glories of intersectionality and the universal front of oppression we all share against the evil White man” if you just go about it the right way.

    So how did he challenge intersectionality?

    I suggested that the understanding of intersectionality as the idea that “all oppressions are linked as one”, such that they are best tackled by a universal front of “the oppressed” working in tandem elides important points of differentiation and tension among marginalized groups …

    1. Sexual violence on campus, and how it interacts with race. Programs and policies which make it easier for administrators to sanction persons accused of sexual misconduct may well be necessary for securing the equal educational status of women (including women of color) on campus. But given the central space “sexual misconduct” occupies as a tool of terrorizing black men, it is also likely that such reformations will exacerbate racist judgments against that community — particularly when dealing with subpopulations (like black male athletes) who are already racialized as hypersexual and predatory).

    2. The Israeli/Palestinian conflict, and the particular salience of the Mizrahi Jewish community which does not fit neatly into standard accounts of either the “Jewish” (coded as Ashkenazi-European) or “Middle Eastern” (coded as Arab-Muslim) narratives. Mizrahi Jews are suspicious of the left … suspicious of Ashkenazi Jewry … and suspicious of the Arab world … [therefore "Israel might not solely stand as a European colonial imposition that is the height of global imperial evil"] …

    Based on what the popular press tells us about University of California-Berkeley students, I should be dead by now.

    Wow, that was dynamite.

    Read More
  9. From the ancestry.com:
    “German Schraube ‘screw’; probably a metonymic occupational name for someone who made and sold this hardware… ”

    Just in case if you had any doubt about the real reason for which this latest Trump’s Minority Report represents such an agonizing, painful knowledge to David Scharaub, read this:

    David Cole on David Schraub :

    “… Before Thompson’s arrest, members of the press had tried to make Trump seem like a deranged conspiracy theorist by claiming that, at the attorneys general meeting, he’d called the bomb threats a “false flag.”

    The problem is, Trump hadn’t used the term “false flag,” but that didn’t stop journos from putting it in quotes anyway.

    I emailed more than two dozen prominent national reporters to ask why they chose to put “false flag” in quotes, and not a single one of them replied. There’s the modern American media in action, folks.

    You know, the responsible, accountable, totally not “the enemy of the people” media.

    But one guy did respond:

    David Schraub, a lecturer in law and senior research fellow at the California Constitution Center, UC Berkeley Law School.

    Schraub wrote an op-ed for Haaretz titled “Trump’s anti-Semitic ‘False Flag’ Allegation Is Dangerous (Or, how the ‘blame the Jews for their own victimization’ conspiracist fringe is going mainstream conservative).”

    Everything in that title is wrong.

    Trump didn’t say “false flag,” he didn’t blame Jews, and suggesting that a hate crime is a hoax is not “conspiracist fringe,” but a good bet.

    I’ll admit, I didn’t much care for Schraub, based on that piece and a few other things I’d read (the dude actually defends “trigger warnings”).

    Read More
  10. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @SPMoore8
    I think part of the problem here is that these graphs seem to indicate returns for the word "anti-semitic" alone, whereas antisemitisch (no hyphen) in Germanic, antisemitsky (no hyphen) in Slavic, antiszemita in Hungarian, antisemita in Spanish and Italian, and the French, being French, have "anti-Semetique" with a long accent on the first e.

    As to the underlying concept, not sure what to say. I think it's partly true that Jews today who are not observant and/or who are not assimilationist get caught up in the notion of being persecuted as a way of marking their Jewish identity. But I think the whole process is too self-referential to really be ascribed to hatred of gentiles.

    I thought Schraub's article was pretty stupid and I can't believe that such pedestrian opinionating comes from Boalt Hall. The people (or person) involved were obviously mentally ill, calling them anti-Semites, even whey are Jewish, is kind of silly at this point. There certainly was an anti-Semitic effect, in the sense of conjuring old fears among American Jews. Along those lines, I am reminded of the other online posting that was referenced, written by some self-described American Jew, who wants this kid put in prison and raped and then told that he is hated, sort of the more graphic version of the Cynthia Ozick curse that Schraub seems to think so highly of.

    It's best not to judge the Jewish people by their most loud mouthed representatives in the media, that also applies to the head of the Don Rickles Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect; the over the top rhetoric from that source is not designed to generate anything other than contempt and donations.

    “As to the underlying concept, not sure what to say. I think it’s partly true that Jews today who are not observant and/or who are not assimilationist get caught up in the notion of being persecuted as a way of marking their Jewish identity.”

    I, raised Catholic, went to college (in the 90s) and was very good friends with Jews who grew up in NY suburbs amongst Jews and went to college in NY amongst Jews. I will guess a good portion of their humor was based on the idea that the KKK and other anti-semitic forces were always on the move against them.

    Read More
  11. @Art

    For Jews, by contrast, this is agonizing. First having to endure these threats, we must now also deal with the painful knowledge that many of them were acts of betrayal. …
     
    Oh - the suffering - the suffering - when will it end?

    Read More
  12. Cortes says:

    Was Cain anti Semitic?

    Or is asking that question being anti Semitic?

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    Technically, the ethnic group doesn't exist before Abraham. So no.
  13. Ray P says:

    Alex Linder coined the word loxism for anti-gentile ideas more than a decade ago.

    Read More
  14. Mark Caplan says: • Website

    Jews were not only not “terrorized” (Tablet) by the bomb threats, they were ecstatic to be targeted by what they imagined were Trump-inspired Alt-Right Nazis. It’s safe to presume the 19-year-old Israeli saw matters this way too. He was spreading joy, not terror.

    Read More
  15. 1/ I’m puzzled (well I’m really not puzzled, I’m using the term for effect).

    The vast majority of the World’s Gentiles aren’t White Christians.

    Yet throughout articles and comments on Unz.com, Gentiles=White Christians. Nobody except me seems to argue otherwise. (And of course I’m right and everyone else here is wrong).

    pewdiepie?
    Walt Disney?
    Trump?

    Nobody uses the word ‘Anti-Gentilism’? Maybe there’s a word like that in Hindi.

    2/ Being concerned about anti-Semitism is a characteristic of the US, Canada, the UK, and Australia? Those are 4 of the richest countries in the World. Quite an advantageous concern then.

    If this was still an HBD site…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Broski
    To be a gentile is to not be a Jew. Antigentilism, Jewish antagonism of gentiles, is irrelevant where there are no Jews (with political power). Thus antigentilism only matters where there are Jews (with political power). Rather than flourishing with their Semitic cousins, Jews have flourished among their cousins (at least among the Ashkenazi) in global Europa. Thus Jews who can practice effective antigentilism only exist among global Europa.
  16. Chase says:

    “Is PewDiePie anti-semetic?”

    Truly the year cannot get more current.

    Read More
  17. SPMoore8 says:

    I just saw a video that invokes Steve’s very restricted definition of Sapir-Whorf, by Mayim Bialik: Not sure that Steve will be too happy with what she does with it.

    https://www.facebook.com/MissMayim/videos/10158471910985008/?hc_ref=NEWSFEED

    Read More
    • Replies: @Inquiring Mind
    I was in a store of a local supermarket chain that has customers covering a much broader range of races and socio-economic levels than, say, a Whole Foods. I was pushing my cart altogether too fast because I am an intense white person, I almost ran into a black woman who pulled into my path, and I stopped short and said something like, "I'm sorry!" for almost running into her.

    She called out back to me in relief of the averted collision, "Baby!"

    I am an adult male, but I took this as a kind of compliment rather than a criticism or a put down. I imagine black people have put-downs for whites who treat them obnoxiously, and I don't think this was one of them. No one else has called me "baby" before, but I kind of gather from popular music that black people call other adults that as a form of endearment? So in response to Mayim Bialik's concern about an adult white woman being called a "girl", I don't take offense as an adult white man being called "baby" by a black woman in the supermarket.
    , @Jim Don Bob
    Maybe, just maybe, Mayim Bialik is as stupid as her character on the BBT.
  18. gruff says:

    Maybe “anti-Japhetic” would be the better term? Japheth being the legendary father of the Europeans, as Shem was of the Semites and Ham of the blacks.

    Read More
  19. syonredux says:

    Likewise, I don’t yet know why the man who did this, did what he did. But I have no agony whatsoever saying:

    If he did this “for the lulz,” he is an anti-Semite.

    If he did this because he thought American Jews were soft, liberal, beholden to leftist ideology and insufficiently “pro-Israel,” he is an anti-Semite.

    If he did this because he wanted to discredit Donald Trump and the American political right, he is an anti-Semite who also did a grave injustice to President Trump and his supporters.

    Read More
  20. Sammy Davis Jr, upon hearing that blacks had been deemed to be anti-Semitic, quipped, “Great! Now I can hate myself!”

    Read More
  21. @SPMoore8
    I just saw a video that invokes Steve's very restricted definition of Sapir-Whorf, by Mayim Bialik: Not sure that Steve will be too happy with what she does with it.

    https://www.facebook.com/MissMayim/videos/10158471910985008/?hc_ref=NEWSFEED

    I was in a store of a local supermarket chain that has customers covering a much broader range of races and socio-economic levels than, say, a Whole Foods. I was pushing my cart altogether too fast because I am an intense white person, I almost ran into a black woman who pulled into my path, and I stopped short and said something like, “I’m sorry!” for almost running into her.

    She called out back to me in relief of the averted collision, “Baby!”

    I am an adult male, but I took this as a kind of compliment rather than a criticism or a put down. I imagine black people have put-downs for whites who treat them obnoxiously, and I don’t think this was one of them. No one else has called me “baby” before, but I kind of gather from popular music that black people call other adults that as a form of endearment? So in response to Mayim Bialik’s concern about an adult white woman being called a “girl”, I don’t take offense as an adult white man being called “baby” by a black woman in the supermarket.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    I thought the video was idiotic because men and women call groups "boys" and "girls" all the time and it's completely harmless and casual. In fact, to call a person a "man" or a "woman" in a bar is something you don't want; it's way too serious and forbidding.

    I've been called "dear", "sweetie", "honey", and "baby" by female acquaintances and service people frequently. Sometimes there's a momentary embarrassment and I will be honest when a random woman uses one of those terms of endearment with me I unconsciously start checking her out. In this case, the black lady used that term because she could relate to what you are doing. That's a moment you should remember.
  22. neutral says:
    @SPMoore8
    I think part of the problem here is that these graphs seem to indicate returns for the word "anti-semitic" alone, whereas antisemitisch (no hyphen) in Germanic, antisemitsky (no hyphen) in Slavic, antiszemita in Hungarian, antisemita in Spanish and Italian, and the French, being French, have "anti-Semetique" with a long accent on the first e.

    As to the underlying concept, not sure what to say. I think it's partly true that Jews today who are not observant and/or who are not assimilationist get caught up in the notion of being persecuted as a way of marking their Jewish identity. But I think the whole process is too self-referential to really be ascribed to hatred of gentiles.

    I thought Schraub's article was pretty stupid and I can't believe that such pedestrian opinionating comes from Boalt Hall. The people (or person) involved were obviously mentally ill, calling them anti-Semites, even whey are Jewish, is kind of silly at this point. There certainly was an anti-Semitic effect, in the sense of conjuring old fears among American Jews. Along those lines, I am reminded of the other online posting that was referenced, written by some self-described American Jew, who wants this kid put in prison and raped and then told that he is hated, sort of the more graphic version of the Cynthia Ozick curse that Schraub seems to think so highly of.

    It's best not to judge the Jewish people by their most loud mouthed representatives in the media, that also applies to the head of the Don Rickles Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect; the over the top rhetoric from that source is not designed to generate anything other than contempt and donations.

    get caught up in the notion of being persecuted as a way of marking their Jewish identity

    The story about being slaves in Egypt, Moses fleeing, being deported to Babylon, and some others – these are some of the major events in jewish mythology, so being persecuted is core to their identity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    Not to mention Purim, Hannukah, etc. I've heard it said that all Jewish Holidays celebrate their persecution, but that's not quite accurate, since the Delivery of the Torah (Shavuot), or as I like to call it, the Download of the Torah. Also Simchas Torah is another holiday that doesn't appear to be lachrymose.

    I think the actual core to 99% of Jewish identity is the fate of being born Jewish, and the underlying idea there is that there is a Supreme Being, and that being shapes your destiny. Even in the case of conversos, the idea is that fate and destiny are involved. And I have a lot of regard for that kind of thinking, generally.
    , @anon
    The story about being slaves in Egypt, Moses fleeing, being deported to Babylon, and some others

    That's something I've always thought about too.

    If you read the Old Testament, those are basically the main events. But they're separated by hundreds of years. Like, you read about Abraham's covenant, then a bunch of time passes, and the next big story is the whole Egypt thing. Then they get delivered from that, and they conquer their territory, and then they spend the next few centuries just sort of screwing around and pissing off God, and then the next thing you know, they're conquered by Babylon.

    It's basically two big persecution stories, separated by hundreds of years of the Jewish people kind of acting like a bunch of jerks, with really just a few years of them doing the right thing.

    I guess, if that was my history, I'd probably focus on the persecution parts too. I still doubt that that's very good for you in the long term, though.

    What's interesting, though, is that the Babylonian captivity was portrayed in the Bible as being the result of the way they acted. Which is a sentiment that seems to have been lost ever since then.

    It's also interesting that they actually threw in another story, in the book of Esther, of a persecution event that almost certainly never really happened. They still celebrate this made-up persecution to this day. Chelsea Clinton even tweets about it!

    I just think it's weird that, of all the stories you could choose to make up about your history, they chose to make up a story about being unfairly persecuted.
  23. Broski says:
    @anony-mouse
    1/ I'm puzzled (well I'm really not puzzled, I'm using the term for effect).

    The vast majority of the World's Gentiles aren't White Christians.

    Yet throughout articles and comments on Unz.com, Gentiles=White Christians. Nobody except me seems to argue otherwise. (And of course I'm right and everyone else here is wrong).

    pewdiepie?
    Walt Disney?
    Trump?

    Nobody uses the word 'Anti-Gentilism'? Maybe there's a word like that in Hindi.

    2/ Being concerned about anti-Semitism is a characteristic of the US, Canada, the UK, and Australia? Those are 4 of the richest countries in the World. Quite an advantageous concern then.

    If this was still an HBD site...

    To be a gentile is to not be a Jew. Antigentilism, Jewish antagonism of gentiles, is irrelevant where there are no Jews (with political power). Thus antigentilism only matters where there are Jews (with political power). Rather than flourishing with their Semitic cousins, Jews have flourished among their cousins (at least among the Ashkenazi) in global Europa. Thus Jews who can practice effective antigentilism only exist among global Europa.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anony-mouse
    '... Antigentilism, Jewish antagonism of gentiles,...'

    Why should 'antigentilism' be only about Jews? There are anti-White Whites, anti-Black Blacks, anti-Catholic Catholics, anti-male males, etc. Shouldn't there be Anti-Gentile Gentiles?

    '... Antigentilism, Jewish antagonism of gentiles, is irrelevant where there are no Jews (with political power)...'

    I thought Jews were supposed to have worldwide power.

    '... in global Europa...'

    Never heard that term. Maybe you should complain to Steve. Does it include Brazil, South Africa (then or now), Cyprus (part or all), Georgia or Armenia, Siberia, Bermuda, Nunavut, Hawaii, AVI...
  24. Nobody uses the term anti-Gentile?

    Well nobody uses the term anti-Infidel-and I’d be more concerned about that.

    Nobody uses the term anti-righthanddenness.
    Nobody uses the term anti-melanists.
    Nobody uses the term anti-nonBuddhists.

    vs sinisters, albinos, Buddhists.

    Seems that just about any characteristic that includes the vast majority of humanity has no anti-word associated with it.

    Read More
  25. donut says:

    “For Jews, by contrast, this is agonizing. First having to endure these threats, we must now also deal with the painful knowledge that many of them were acts of betrayal. …

    The man who did this was anti-Semitic.” So a woke Jew . I thank the Pagan Gods that I don’t lose any sleep over being an anti-semite .

    Read More
  26. SPMoore8 says:
    @neutral

    get caught up in the notion of being persecuted as a way of marking their Jewish identity
     
    The story about being slaves in Egypt, Moses fleeing, being deported to Babylon, and some others - these are some of the major events in jewish mythology, so being persecuted is core to their identity.

    Not to mention Purim, Hannukah, etc. I’ve heard it said that all Jewish Holidays celebrate their persecution, but that’s not quite accurate, since the Delivery of the Torah (Shavuot), or as I like to call it, the Download of the Torah. Also Simchas Torah is another holiday that doesn’t appear to be lachrymose.

    I think the actual core to 99% of Jewish identity is the fate of being born Jewish, and the underlying idea there is that there is a Supreme Being, and that being shapes your destiny. Even in the case of conversos, the idea is that fate and destiny are involved. And I have a lot of regard for that kind of thinking, generally.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon

    I’ve heard it said that all Jewish Holidays celebrate their persecution
     
    don't most of them celebrate mass killing of non-Jews?

    the egyptian first born
    the greeks for being too tolerant
    persians
  27. SPMoore8 says:
    @Inquiring Mind
    I was in a store of a local supermarket chain that has customers covering a much broader range of races and socio-economic levels than, say, a Whole Foods. I was pushing my cart altogether too fast because I am an intense white person, I almost ran into a black woman who pulled into my path, and I stopped short and said something like, "I'm sorry!" for almost running into her.

    She called out back to me in relief of the averted collision, "Baby!"

    I am an adult male, but I took this as a kind of compliment rather than a criticism or a put down. I imagine black people have put-downs for whites who treat them obnoxiously, and I don't think this was one of them. No one else has called me "baby" before, but I kind of gather from popular music that black people call other adults that as a form of endearment? So in response to Mayim Bialik's concern about an adult white woman being called a "girl", I don't take offense as an adult white man being called "baby" by a black woman in the supermarket.

    I thought the video was idiotic because men and women call groups “boys” and “girls” all the time and it’s completely harmless and casual. In fact, to call a person a “man” or a “woman” in a bar is something you don’t want; it’s way too serious and forbidding.

    I’ve been called “dear”, “sweetie”, “honey”, and “baby” by female acquaintances and service people frequently. Sometimes there’s a momentary embarrassment and I will be honest when a random woman uses one of those terms of endearment with me I unconsciously start checking her out. In this case, the black lady used that term because she could relate to what you are doing. That’s a moment you should remember.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Laugh Track

    I’ve been called “dear”, “sweetie”, “honey”, and “baby” by female acquaintances and service people frequently.
     
    I recently had my eyes examined by a young Chinese-American optometrist who kept calling me "my dear" throughout the whole exam. I thought to myself at the time, "good grief, she's called me 'my dear' more times in a half hour than my wife has in 40+ years!" I found it kind of charming. (And I will admit that my wife and I have never made use of the conventional terms of endearment listed above. Not sure why. It was probably a '70s thing.)
  28. WGG says:

    There is a much older and more accurate term for a hate hoax: blood libel. The motive (to frame an enemy people for crimes) is everything.

    Read More
  29. donut says:

    And now on a lighter note :

    And of course a couple of tunes:

    And what would a post from the donut be w/o a little Neo-Nazi flavoring ?

    Read More
  30. J.Ross says: • Website

    Drawing a blank on specifics, but didn’t they nudge through a hate crimes law or something on restricting internet speech, specifically in reaction to this particular wave of hoaxes?

    Read More
  31. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @neutral

    get caught up in the notion of being persecuted as a way of marking their Jewish identity
     
    The story about being slaves in Egypt, Moses fleeing, being deported to Babylon, and some others - these are some of the major events in jewish mythology, so being persecuted is core to their identity.

    The story about being slaves in Egypt, Moses fleeing, being deported to Babylon, and some others

    That’s something I’ve always thought about too.

    If you read the Old Testament, those are basically the main events. But they’re separated by hundreds of years. Like, you read about Abraham’s covenant, then a bunch of time passes, and the next big story is the whole Egypt thing. Then they get delivered from that, and they conquer their territory, and then they spend the next few centuries just sort of screwing around and pissing off God, and then the next thing you know, they’re conquered by Babylon.

    It’s basically two big persecution stories, separated by hundreds of years of the Jewish people kind of acting like a bunch of jerks, with really just a few years of them doing the right thing.

    I guess, if that was my history, I’d probably focus on the persecution parts too. I still doubt that that’s very good for you in the long term, though.

    What’s interesting, though, is that the Babylonian captivity was portrayed in the Bible as being the result of the way they acted. Which is a sentiment that seems to have been lost ever since then.

    It’s also interesting that they actually threw in another story, in the book of Esther, of a persecution event that almost certainly never really happened. They still celebrate this made-up persecution to this day. Chelsea Clinton even tweets about it!

    I just think it’s weird that, of all the stories you could choose to make up about your history, they chose to make up a story about being unfairly persecuted.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pericles

    It’s also interesting that they actually threw in another story, in the book of Esther, of a persecution event that almost certainly never really happened. They still celebrate this made-up persecution to this day.

     

    I see, it's a long standing tradition then.
  32. donut says:

    I do like my food spicy , nothing better than food that makes you break out in a sweat after a bite or two .

    Read More
    • Replies: @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever...
    "I do like my food spicy , nothing better than food that makes you break out in a sweat after a bite or two ."
    And it teaches you what your arse is for, Mr Floral Camper.
  33. jtgw says:

    The actual Sapir-Whorf hypothesis was a bit stronger than that: it was the claim that not having a word for something in a language prevented speakers of that language from the possibility of even conceiving of that thing, let alone expressing it. That idea is pretty demonstrably false. The weaker version here is probably correct as a statement of the correlation between absence of a word and absence of the concept in people’s minds, but that doesn’t tell us which causes the other.

    If there is no established word or phrase to express a concept in the language, i.e. the concept must be expressed in circumlocutions at best, that probably means most people aren’t talking much about the concept because most people aren’t thinking about it. So it isn’t clear what the order of causality is: does the lack of the word cause people not to think of the concept, or rather is it the lack of interest in the concept on the part of the community the cause of its absence in the language’s vocabulary?

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    We've talked about this before, my personal take on the issue is that we all have thoughts in terms of images and interrelations that we never conceptualize. In other words, we will notice a sequence of events or a similarity of incidents that we observe, and it might rise to an anecdote or two.

    In other words, we may notice that people or animals act in certain ways under certain conditions, and we may speak about this from time to time as odd or amusing. This is the realm of observational comedy and after dinner stories.

    Then what happens is that someone extracts some kind of maxim or lesson from these incidents, and expresses it in fewer words, taking these various incidents and boiling them down to something pithy. This is the level of folk wisdom, Poor Richard's Almanac, and poetry.

    After that, someone gives it a name that, as a concept, covers a whole class of observations amd which may even cross conceptual boundaries in a new way. And then everyone starts using the concept, and it becomes a readily available mental tool.

    So actually I think the evolution of concepts is the key, and that is not dependent on the events themselves, but the process of refining, generalizing, and putting into words.

    You are right, Steve's position re: Sapir-Whorf is a highly generalized version of Sapir-Whorf, and so is Bialik's, in another way. But she is wrong to call it "science" since it has been refuted, at least in the strong version, many times.
    , @Miro23

    If there is no established word or phrase to express a concept in the language, i.e. the concept must be expressed in circumlocutions at best, that probably means most people aren’t talking much about the concept because most people aren’t thinking about it. So it isn’t clear what the order of causality is: does the lack of the word cause people not to think of the concept, or rather is it the lack of interest in the concept on the part of the community the cause of its absence in the language’s vocabulary?
     
    The answer to this question seems to lie on a scale.

    At one end, the !Kung hunter-gatherers of the Kalahari don't have a word in !Kung for "semiconductor" because they seem to lack interest in the concept. If its meaning was taught and deliberately included in their vocabulary it would probably still be met with lack of interest (unless as a joke) because of its everyday uselessness.

    At the other end, English doesn't have a word for "Pleasure in someone else's misfortune" but the British do borrow the German word "Schadenfreude" which may have some role in promoting the concept.

    But in general, words are probably just another tool to help in handling environmental pressure (an aid to formulating necessary adaptive thought and speech).
  34. Moshe says:

    Well, one of you is right and one of you is wrong

    It was a hate hoax if he did it to gain sympathy for himself or his fellow jews.

    It was not a hate hoax is he actually wanted to bother jews.

    Read More
  35. @SPMoore8
    I think part of the problem here is that these graphs seem to indicate returns for the word "anti-semitic" alone, whereas antisemitisch (no hyphen) in Germanic, antisemitsky (no hyphen) in Slavic, antiszemita in Hungarian, antisemita in Spanish and Italian, and the French, being French, have "anti-Semetique" with a long accent on the first e.

    As to the underlying concept, not sure what to say. I think it's partly true that Jews today who are not observant and/or who are not assimilationist get caught up in the notion of being persecuted as a way of marking their Jewish identity. But I think the whole process is too self-referential to really be ascribed to hatred of gentiles.

    I thought Schraub's article was pretty stupid and I can't believe that such pedestrian opinionating comes from Boalt Hall. The people (or person) involved were obviously mentally ill, calling them anti-Semites, even whey are Jewish, is kind of silly at this point. There certainly was an anti-Semitic effect, in the sense of conjuring old fears among American Jews. Along those lines, I am reminded of the other online posting that was referenced, written by some self-described American Jew, who wants this kid put in prison and raped and then told that he is hated, sort of the more graphic version of the Cynthia Ozick curse that Schraub seems to think so highly of.

    It's best not to judge the Jewish people by their most loud mouthed representatives in the media, that also applies to the head of the Don Rickles Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect; the over the top rhetoric from that source is not designed to generate anything other than contempt and donations.

    It’s best not to judge the Jewish people by their most loud mouthed representatives in the media, that also applies to the head of the Don Rickles Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect; the over the top rhetoric from that source is not designed to generate anything other than contempt and donations.

    Wrong. That’s like saying a Jew in 1939 shouldn’t don’t judge the German people by their most loud mouthed representatives. Jew elites are trying to destroy whites around the globe via immigration. The fact that most Jews aren’t exactly on board with this genocide doesn’t mean anymore to us whites than the fact that most Germans likely weren’t on board with the concentration camps.

    We’re still getting killed by your elites. What do we care if you feel bad about it.

    Read More
  36. @SPMoore8
    I think part of the problem here is that these graphs seem to indicate returns for the word "anti-semitic" alone, whereas antisemitisch (no hyphen) in Germanic, antisemitsky (no hyphen) in Slavic, antiszemita in Hungarian, antisemita in Spanish and Italian, and the French, being French, have "anti-Semetique" with a long accent on the first e.

    As to the underlying concept, not sure what to say. I think it's partly true that Jews today who are not observant and/or who are not assimilationist get caught up in the notion of being persecuted as a way of marking their Jewish identity. But I think the whole process is too self-referential to really be ascribed to hatred of gentiles.

    I thought Schraub's article was pretty stupid and I can't believe that such pedestrian opinionating comes from Boalt Hall. The people (or person) involved were obviously mentally ill, calling them anti-Semites, even whey are Jewish, is kind of silly at this point. There certainly was an anti-Semitic effect, in the sense of conjuring old fears among American Jews. Along those lines, I am reminded of the other online posting that was referenced, written by some self-described American Jew, who wants this kid put in prison and raped and then told that he is hated, sort of the more graphic version of the Cynthia Ozick curse that Schraub seems to think so highly of.

    It's best not to judge the Jewish people by their most loud mouthed representatives in the media, that also applies to the head of the Don Rickles Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect; the over the top rhetoric from that source is not designed to generate anything other than contempt and donations.

    > the French, being French, have “anti-Semetique” with a long accent on the first e

    Huh? What on earth are you talking about. That’s not even a word in any language.

    The French word is “antisémite”, for the English noun and adjective “anti-Semite” and “anti-Semitic”.

    http://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/antis%C3%A9mite

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/L'Anti-S%C3%A9mitique
  37. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    If he is an antisemtic Jew, he should hate Jews as a Jew, not pretend to be a ‘nazi’.

    After all, SLW’s or Self-loathing whites don’t hide the fact that they are whites who hate whiteness.

    Read More
  38. SPMoore8 says:
    @jtgw
    The actual Sapir-Whorf hypothesis was a bit stronger than that: it was the claim that not having a word for something in a language prevented speakers of that language from the possibility of even conceiving of that thing, let alone expressing it. That idea is pretty demonstrably false. The weaker version here is probably correct as a statement of the correlation between absence of a word and absence of the concept in people's minds, but that doesn't tell us which causes the other.

    If there is no established word or phrase to express a concept in the language, i.e. the concept must be expressed in circumlocutions at best, that probably means most people aren't talking much about the concept because most people aren't thinking about it. So it isn't clear what the order of causality is: does the lack of the word cause people not to think of the concept, or rather is it the lack of interest in the concept on the part of the community the cause of its absence in the language's vocabulary?

    We’ve talked about this before, my personal take on the issue is that we all have thoughts in terms of images and interrelations that we never conceptualize. In other words, we will notice a sequence of events or a similarity of incidents that we observe, and it might rise to an anecdote or two.

    In other words, we may notice that people or animals act in certain ways under certain conditions, and we may speak about this from time to time as odd or amusing. This is the realm of observational comedy and after dinner stories.

    Then what happens is that someone extracts some kind of maxim or lesson from these incidents, and expresses it in fewer words, taking these various incidents and boiling them down to something pithy. This is the level of folk wisdom, Poor Richard’s Almanac, and poetry.

    After that, someone gives it a name that, as a concept, covers a whole class of observations amd which may even cross conceptual boundaries in a new way. And then everyone starts using the concept, and it becomes a readily available mental tool.

    So actually I think the evolution of concepts is the key, and that is not dependent on the events themselves, but the process of refining, generalizing, and putting into words.

    You are right, Steve’s position re: Sapir-Whorf is a highly generalized version of Sapir-Whorf, and so is Bialik’s, in another way. But she is wrong to call it “science” since it has been refuted, at least in the strong version, many times.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    The strong Sapir-Whorf is about grammar, a subject that I'm relatively terrible at and thus has almost zero interest to me.
  39. SPMoore8 says:
    @European-American
    > the French, being French, have “anti-Semetique” with a long accent on the first e

    Huh? What on earth are you talking about. That's not even a word in any language.

    The French word is "antisémite", for the English noun and adjective "anti-Semite" and "anti-Semitic".

    http://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/antis%C3%A9mite
    Read More
    • Replies: @European-American
    That's a link to a "no such article" page. And it also doesn't use the wrong spelling you originally used. What's your point?
  40. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    So, if a black burns a cross and blames it on KKK, is he anti-black?

    So, if a Christian burns down a church and blames it on Jews, he is primarily anti-Christian?
    Isn’t he anti-Jewish in trying to slander to Jews to win sympathy for Christians?

    It seems many Jews pull apparently anti-Jewish hoaxes to serve Jewish interests. Fear-mongering works. If anything, their objective is to make white Christians look bad.
    So, the act would be anti-Christian than anti-Jewish.

    Ultimately, the decisive factor is the not so much the deed but overall objective.

    Read More
    • Replies: @surly

    So, if a Christian burns down a church and blames it on Jews, he is primarily anti-Christian?
    Isn’t he anti-Jewish in trying to slander to Jews to win sympathy for Christians?

    It seems many Jews pull apparently anti-Jewish hoaxes to serve Jewish interests. Fear-mongering works. If anything, their objective is to make white Christians look bad.
     

    ^^ This ^^

    Sapir Whorf or not, it won't occur to almost anyone that this crap is crypto-anti-European.

  41. SFG says:
    @Cortes
    Was Cain anti Semitic?

    Or is asking that question being anti Semitic?

    Technically, the ethnic group doesn’t exist before Abraham. So no.

    Read More
  42. @SPMoore8
    https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/L'Anti-S%C3%A9mitique

    That’s a link to a “no such article” page. And it also doesn’t use the wrong spelling you originally used. What’s your point?

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    The link that I tried to provide (just go to wikipedia in French) indicates that the word "Anti-sémitique" does in fact exist, and that explains why I got that return when I looked it up. As a bonus, it indicates that the word that is preferred nowadays is "antisemitisme".

    https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antis%C3%A9mitisme

    So we're both wrong.
  43. SFG says:

    Come on, you can hate your own group. All the guilty SJW anti-whites do to some degree. ‘Self-hating Jew’ is an old trope.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius

    All the guilty SJW anti-whites do to some degree.
     
    After they've done their penance, white is no longer their primary identify. The purpose of SJW anti-whitism is deracination. Just because they want you to feel guilty and you consider yourself part of their group, it does not follow that they feel guilty. They don't agree with where you draw the identity boundaries.
  44. Abe says: • Website

    For Jews, by contrast, this is agonizing. First having to endure these threats,

    Why? As social science has established, you’re more likely to die in your bathtub after your BETAMAX player showing SCHINDLER’S LIST falls in and electrocutes you than you are at the hands of a white supremacist.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    That's something else I like about this story.

    Doesn't anybody else remember how, just a few weeks before the election, there was a Muslim running around New York and New Jersey, setting off actual bombs?

    If you remember the response, it was basically "Hey, what are you so worried about? It's just a few little bombs! I'm a New Yorker! It takes more than a few little bombs to scare me! So I'm just gonna keep chilling with my gelato!".

    So bombs aren't scary, but obviously false bomb threats, made by someone with a cartoonishly heavy Jewish accent, are a matter of national importance.

    Also. Remember when ISIS threatened all those Christian churches on Christmas Eve? Remember how they told everyone not to panic, since as you said, you're more likely to die in your own bathtub than in a terrorist attack? I guess the fact that ISIS is at least a real terrorist organization that really has bombed people just didn't affect the equation.
  45. We now see the world as events are occurring – that very moment. We see real persecution. People are beheaded. People are chopped to pieces. Shot. Bombed. Burned to death in cages. I think our visual age has driven us back to pure savagery. The camera needs crazier and crazier slaughter.

    It’s hard to keep humoring a permanent, apparently life-affirming and nurturing, persecution complex. For one thing, I don’t know why I should participate in propping it up if it’s really aimed as a weapon at me. It’s harder and harder to stay frightened of the consequences and that’s what will tear it down.

    Read More
  46. SPMoore8 says:
    @European-American
    That's a link to a "no such article" page. And it also doesn't use the wrong spelling you originally used. What's your point?

    The link that I tried to provide (just go to wikipedia in French) indicates that the word “Anti-sémitique” does in fact exist, and that explains why I got that return when I looked it up. As a bonus, it indicates that the word that is preferred nowadays is “antisemitisme”.

    https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antis%C3%A9mitisme

    So we’re both wrong.

    Read More
    • Replies: @European-American
    No, that's the French word for "anti-Semitism", and your initial wrong assertion was about the word for "anti-Semitic". This is trivial stuff, but it establishes two things: at least in this trivial area, you post as authoritative statements that are grossly wrong, and two, you can't stand being corrected on even a trivial point.

    It's ok, maybe you are super insightful and correct for important things, I don't know. But this tiny point doesn't do much for your credibility. Which I don't care about. I just thought you and people reading you might not want to be left believing a wrong fact, however trivial.

    And with that, I am done, wow, what a silly argument.
  47. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Abe

    For Jews, by contrast, this is agonizing. First having to endure these threats,
     
    Why? As social science has established, you're more likely to die in your bathtub after your BETAMAX player showing SCHINDLER'S LIST falls in and electrocutes you than you are at the hands of a white supremacist.

    That’s something else I like about this story.

    Doesn’t anybody else remember how, just a few weeks before the election, there was a Muslim running around New York and New Jersey, setting off actual bombs?

    If you remember the response, it was basically “Hey, what are you so worried about? It’s just a few little bombs! I’m a New Yorker! It takes more than a few little bombs to scare me! So I’m just gonna keep chilling with my gelato!”.

    So bombs aren’t scary, but obviously false bomb threats, made by someone with a cartoonishly heavy Jewish accent, are a matter of national importance.

    Also. Remember when ISIS threatened all those Christian churches on Christmas Eve? Remember how they told everyone not to panic, since as you said, you’re more likely to die in your own bathtub than in a terrorist attack? I guess the fact that ISIS is at least a real terrorist organization that really has bombed people just didn’t affect the equation.

    Read More
  48. We now see the world as events are occurring – those very moments. We see real persecution. People are beheaded. People are chopped to pieces. Shot. Bombed. Burned to death in cages. I think our visual age has driven us back to pure savagery. The camera needs crazier and crazier slaughter.

    Filmy, easy-to-fake persecution of grafitti and tipping headstones is part of another cosmos. It’s hard to keep humoring a permanent, apparently life-affirming and nurturing, persecution complex. For one thing, I don’t know why I should participate in propping it up if it’s really aimed as a weapon at me. It’s harder and harder to stay frightened of the consequences and that’s what will tear it down.

    Read More
  49. Feeeney says:
    @SPMoore8
    I think part of the problem here is that these graphs seem to indicate returns for the word "anti-semitic" alone, whereas antisemitisch (no hyphen) in Germanic, antisemitsky (no hyphen) in Slavic, antiszemita in Hungarian, antisemita in Spanish and Italian, and the French, being French, have "anti-Semetique" with a long accent on the first e.

    As to the underlying concept, not sure what to say. I think it's partly true that Jews today who are not observant and/or who are not assimilationist get caught up in the notion of being persecuted as a way of marking their Jewish identity. But I think the whole process is too self-referential to really be ascribed to hatred of gentiles.

    I thought Schraub's article was pretty stupid and I can't believe that such pedestrian opinionating comes from Boalt Hall. The people (or person) involved were obviously mentally ill, calling them anti-Semites, even whey are Jewish, is kind of silly at this point. There certainly was an anti-Semitic effect, in the sense of conjuring old fears among American Jews. Along those lines, I am reminded of the other online posting that was referenced, written by some self-described American Jew, who wants this kid put in prison and raped and then told that he is hated, sort of the more graphic version of the Cynthia Ozick curse that Schraub seems to think so highly of.

    It's best not to judge the Jewish people by their most loud mouthed representatives in the media, that also applies to the head of the Don Rickles Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect; the over the top rhetoric from that source is not designed to generate anything other than contempt and donations.

    This comment is another demonstration of the problem. Steve’s post is primarily about the problem of an anti-christian/anti-gentile/anti-white hate crimes, aka “hate crime hoax”, that is presented in the media as its opposite. And the reason is because there is no common word for it, and that is, in part, an intentional lacuna. And yet your comment has eight occurence of ‘anti-semitic’, as well as many references to the Jews and Jewish concerns, but only one backhanded reference to something that you are unable to actually call anti-gentilism.

    Read More
    • Agree: Opinionator
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    There is certainly a species of contempt among some Jews towards gentiles in general and against other specific groups of gentiles (e.g., Arabs, blacks). So just for the sake of the argument, let's stipulate that there is this phenomenon called "anti-Gentilism" and is found (obviously) in the non-Gentile, that is, Jewish community.

    Is the guy who made "Mad Men" "anti-Gentile"? Having never watched the show, but having read about his remarks, and his apparently carefully nursed resentments, I guess so. So now what? Is this really a widespread phenomenon?

    On the other hand, were these phone threats made for the purpose of encouraging hatred of gentiles? I really don't think so.

    I mean I suppose someone could write "The History of Anti-Gentilism", however, by definition, it would consist of nothing more than miscellaneous Jews saying and doing nasty things to non-Jews. So such a tome would probably be considered "anti-Semitic." Next up, Talmudic quotes that say nasty things about Jesus and Mary.

    I mean exactly what is the scope of Anti-Gentilism? It is not going to be same as Anti-White, which is already a word. It is not going to be the same as Anti-Christian, because that word also exists. What is being proposed is a new word describing a special kind of resentment Jews have for non-Jews. Okay, I'm fine with that. Except that I don't think the phenomenon is that widespread and I still don't think it applies in this case for the reasons given.

    This goes to the idea that a "hate hoax" is identical to a "blood libel." I would say this is wrong on three levels. In the case of a "hate hoax" I cannot think of gentiles being arrested, imprisoned, and put on trial for a hate crime that was later shown to be a hoax (I'm sure there must be some, I will let someone fill me in.) Certainly it did not happen in this case. But secondly, non-Jews (aka gentiles) do not feel that kind of group solidarity with other gentiles. I mean, both Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman were gentiles. So, for that matter, so is OJ Simpson and Pablo Gomez, Jr. Finally, third, the reason we do not feel solidarity with these individuals is that no one is saying to us, "As a gentile, please explain Pablo Gomez, Jr. to me." What, am I collectively responsible for everything any gentile does? To this day, anytime a Jew does anything wrong, any other Jew can expect someone to come up to them and expect them either to justify or condemn whatever it is.

    I suppose the best one could argue is that "hate hoaxes" bring shame and scorn to all gentiles in a case like this, and to all whites in the case of hate hoaxes perpetrated by blacks (whites in this instance include Jews), and so on. But the problem is that the members of all of these splinter groups that are constantly lecturing straight white males about their wickedness are mostly gentiles themselves.

    So anti-Gentilism has a certain utility in describing a certain type of Jewish resentment. And yet the term is still too broad. The Weiner guy, after all, didn't resent all gentiles: just the straight white male Christians he went to school with.

    Speaking as a straight white Christian male: I was not overly concerned about these threats, and I didn't feel any responsibility for them, no one asked me to speak out about them, and I don't feel any outrage at this spurious blot on my gentile escutcheon. If I were a more sensitive and self-absorbed person, I might write about how I lost sleep for weeks, my cheeks burning with hot tears as I thought about the terrible shame I felt that these crimes were being committed by a fellow gentile. But I didn't. I'm just not that kind of person.
  50. @donut
    I do like my food spicy , nothing better than food that makes you break out in a sweat after a bite or two .

    “I do like my food spicy , nothing better than food that makes you break out in a sweat after a bite or two .”
    And it teaches you what your arse is for, Mr Floral Camper.

    Read More
    • Replies: @donut
    Simpleton that I am I don't get the point of your comment . Could you elaborate ?
  51. @SFG
    Come on, you can hate your own group. All the guilty SJW anti-whites do to some degree. 'Self-hating Jew' is an old trope.

    All the guilty SJW anti-whites do to some degree.

    After they’ve done their penance, white is no longer their primary identify. The purpose of SJW anti-whitism is deracination. Just because they want you to feel guilty and you consider yourself part of their group, it does not follow that they feel guilty. They don’t agree with where you draw the identity boundaries.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    No, I haven't seen that. Identity isn't redrawn. I read a lot more liberal stuff, and they have article over article about white liberals being insufficiently undeferential/ignorant/patronizing to people of color. It's an ongoing responsibility to monitor yourself for traces of racism and eradicate them.

    I forget who it was who said that liberalism was a Christian heresy with no God, but it does sound an awful lot like the Christian idea of constantly battling against sinful thoughts.
  52. From Oklahoma, one of the reddest states in the union:

    http://www.normantranscript.com/news/city-councilor-pushes-to-remove-kkk-member-s-name-from/article_b6bd6c54-10c2-11e7-8483-0fcdec6343fb.html

    Of course, this was after the “Sooners are a offensive mascots and disrespectful to Native Americans” fiasco from earlier in the year. (We’ve kept the mascot…for now)

    I wonder, is there a little Terman Middle School/Confederate Flag controversy in every state?

    Once all the offensive street names are removed, hate hoaxes will be all that’s left to fuel the left. Goldstein will never die.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    Just following on your article, there's an awful lot of things in West Virginia that are going to have to be renamed:

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

    But maybe they can get around it by simply renaming the state West Trayvon.
  53. @Broski
    To be a gentile is to not be a Jew. Antigentilism, Jewish antagonism of gentiles, is irrelevant where there are no Jews (with political power). Thus antigentilism only matters where there are Jews (with political power). Rather than flourishing with their Semitic cousins, Jews have flourished among their cousins (at least among the Ashkenazi) in global Europa. Thus Jews who can practice effective antigentilism only exist among global Europa.

    ‘… Antigentilism, Jewish antagonism of gentiles,…’

    Why should ‘antigentilism’ be only about Jews? There are anti-White Whites, anti-Black Blacks, anti-Catholic Catholics, anti-male males, etc. Shouldn’t there be Anti-Gentile Gentiles?

    ‘… Antigentilism, Jewish antagonism of gentiles, is irrelevant where there are no Jews (with political power)…’

    I thought Jews were supposed to have worldwide power.

    ‘… in global Europa…’

    Never heard that term. Maybe you should complain to Steve. Does it include Brazil, South Africa (then or now), Cyprus (part or all), Georgia or Armenia, Siberia, Bermuda, Nunavut, Hawaii, AVI…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Broski

    Why should ‘antigentilism’ be only about Jews? There are anti-White Whites, anti-Black Blacks, anti-Catholic Catholics, anti-male males, etc. Shouldn’t there be Anti-Gentile Gentiles?
     
    I would suggest that as a fundamental principle to be anti-anything is to be pro-the thing's opposite, as subjectively perceived. So, to be anti-gentile (anti-nonJewish) is to be pro-Jewish in circumstances where gentile and Jewish interests diverge, as subjectively perceived. Some non-Jews, gentiles, would certainly fit into that definition.

    ‘… in global Europa…’

    Never heard that term.
     
    I made it up.
  54. SPMoore8 says:
    @Feeeney
    This comment is another demonstration of the problem. Steve's post is primarily about the problem of an anti-christian/anti-gentile/anti-white hate crimes, aka "hate crime hoax", that is presented in the media as its opposite. And the reason is because there is no common word for it, and that is, in part, an intentional lacuna. And yet your comment has eight occurence of 'anti-semitic', as well as many references to the Jews and Jewish concerns, but only one backhanded reference to something that you are unable to actually call anti-gentilism.

    There is certainly a species of contempt among some Jews towards gentiles in general and against other specific groups of gentiles (e.g., Arabs, blacks). So just for the sake of the argument, let’s stipulate that there is this phenomenon called “anti-Gentilism” and is found (obviously) in the non-Gentile, that is, Jewish community.

    Is the guy who made “Mad Men” “anti-Gentile”? Having never watched the show, but having read about his remarks, and his apparently carefully nursed resentments, I guess so. So now what? Is this really a widespread phenomenon?

    On the other hand, were these phone threats made for the purpose of encouraging hatred of gentiles? I really don’t think so.

    I mean I suppose someone could write “The History of Anti-Gentilism”, however, by definition, it would consist of nothing more than miscellaneous Jews saying and doing nasty things to non-Jews. So such a tome would probably be considered “anti-Semitic.” Next up, Talmudic quotes that say nasty things about Jesus and Mary.

    I mean exactly what is the scope of Anti-Gentilism? It is not going to be same as Anti-White, which is already a word. It is not going to be the same as Anti-Christian, because that word also exists. What is being proposed is a new word describing a special kind of resentment Jews have for non-Jews. Okay, I’m fine with that. Except that I don’t think the phenomenon is that widespread and I still don’t think it applies in this case for the reasons given.

    This goes to the idea that a “hate hoax” is identical to a “blood libel.” I would say this is wrong on three levels. In the case of a “hate hoax” I cannot think of gentiles being arrested, imprisoned, and put on trial for a hate crime that was later shown to be a hoax (I’m sure there must be some, I will let someone fill me in.) Certainly it did not happen in this case. But secondly, non-Jews (aka gentiles) do not feel that kind of group solidarity with other gentiles. I mean, both Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman were gentiles. So, for that matter, so is OJ Simpson and Pablo Gomez, Jr. Finally, third, the reason we do not feel solidarity with these individuals is that no one is saying to us, “As a gentile, please explain Pablo Gomez, Jr. to me.” What, am I collectively responsible for everything any gentile does? To this day, anytime a Jew does anything wrong, any other Jew can expect someone to come up to them and expect them either to justify or condemn whatever it is.

    I suppose the best one could argue is that “hate hoaxes” bring shame and scorn to all gentiles in a case like this, and to all whites in the case of hate hoaxes perpetrated by blacks (whites in this instance include Jews), and so on. But the problem is that the members of all of these splinter groups that are constantly lecturing straight white males about their wickedness are mostly gentiles themselves.

    So anti-Gentilism has a certain utility in describing a certain type of Jewish resentment. And yet the term is still too broad. The Weiner guy, after all, didn’t resent all gentiles: just the straight white male Christians he went to school with.

    Speaking as a straight white Christian male: I was not overly concerned about these threats, and I didn’t feel any responsibility for them, no one asked me to speak out about them, and I don’t feel any outrage at this spurious blot on my gentile escutcheon. If I were a more sensitive and self-absorbed person, I might write about how I lost sleep for weeks, my cheeks burning with hot tears as I thought about the terrible shame I felt that these crimes were being committed by a fellow gentile. But I didn’t. I’m just not that kind of person.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Nico

    Is the guy who made “Mad Men” “anti-Gentile”? Having never watched the show, but having read about his remarks, and his apparently carefully nursed resentments, I guess so. So now what? Is this really a widespread phenomenon?
     
    Yes, as a matter of fact, it is. Have you been paying attention to what Hollywood has been churning out since the demise of the Hays Code? And yes, this pop culture (films and also music and TV and public education) diffuses such notions into the popular mindset. In even most of red America you will still find (though heavy polarization is well underway) large swaths of seemingly normal folk who casually assume that Jews are persecuted, colonialism is bad, equality of the sexes is good, Europeans aren't nice enough to Muslims, etc. just because that is what the culture has told them to think.
  55. SPMoore8 says:
    @Senator Brundlefly
    From Oklahoma, one of the reddest states in the union:

    http://www.normantranscript.com/news/city-councilor-pushes-to-remove-kkk-member-s-name-from/article_b6bd6c54-10c2-11e7-8483-0fcdec6343fb.html

    Of course, this was after the "Sooners are a offensive mascots and disrespectful to Native Americans" fiasco from earlier in the year. (We've kept the mascot...for now)

    I wonder, is there a little Terman Middle School/Confederate Flag controversy in every state?

    Once all the offensive street names are removed, hate hoaxes will be all that's left to fuel the left. Goldstein will never die.

    Just following on your article, there’s an awful lot of things in West Virginia that are going to have to be renamed:

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

    But maybe they can get around it by simply renaming the state West Trayvon.

    Read More
  56. WGG says:

    I prefer the term “anti-white” to “anti-gentile” because gentile could technically mean all the non-Jewish brown people in the world, who are used as pets and props for anti-white diaspora Jews, but rarely attacked by them. Second, people need to understand that Jews are not racially white anymore than an African albino is racially white. And they don’t see themselves as “white” either, though they sometimes pretend to when they want to couch their relentless criticism of European peoples.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    I prefer the term “anti-white” to “anti-gentile” because gentile could technically mean all the non-Jewish brown people in the world, who are used as pets and props for anti-white diaspora Jews, but rarely attacked by them.

    I guess you haven't been following events in the Middle East for the past 100 years (or 15 years, or even one year) and you don't consume America's jewish-dominated media and its framing of that region and its people.

  57. Svigor says:

    Yet throughout articles and comments on Unz.com, Gentiles=White Christians. Nobody except me seems to argue otherwise. (And of course I’m right and everyone else here is wrong).

    You’re right, except it’s not Unz.com, it’s the English language. That’s the way it’s used. Ask the Jews, I guess. They sometimes use it in the correct, strict sense, but the overwhelmingly dominant usage is otherwise.

    So, like this:

    Gentile, n.
    (from heathen)

    1. White Christians
    2. Non-Jews
    3. Non-Mormons

    Read More
  58. Warner says:

    Any headline that starts with an emphatic, disputational “Yes,…” is fake news.

    Read More
  59. Svigor says:

    Seems that just about any characteristic that includes the vast majority of humanity has no anti-word associated with it.

    Anti-Gentilism is misanthropy. Sure, it excludes Jews, but they’re a rounding error.

    But hating all of humanity doesn’t even ping the radar. Only hating slices of humanity will get you un-personed, jailed, etc.

    Read More
  60. Whiskey says: • Website

    Steve gyrations on anti-gentilism — Occam’s Butterknife. The White Cold Civil War — Occam’s Razor.

    The Jewish dude was almost certainly not anti-Gentile — Hillary is a Gentile and no doubt if she won he would NOT have called in phony bomb threats to Jewish centers. It was about Global PC Multiculturalism in its roots White female resentment of White male lack of violent domination.

    No, the dude’s actions were not anti-Semitism. They were anti-Trump, anti-populist, and anti-White. The same way that say, Hillary’s Deplorables, any random Chelsea Clinton tweet, Jordan Peele’s movie, that “Birth of a Nation” dude, Father Pflegler, or a random Meryl Streep tweet are anti-White and anti-populist.

    Thought experiment — could you see: Bibi Netanyahu, Nichoals Stix, Lion of the Blogosphere, Jerry Seinfeld, or Howard Stern doing this? [No.] Could you see Trigglypuff, Jordan Peele, Ashley Judd, or Lena Dunham doing this [Yes! Yes! Yes! to quote Daniel Bryan]. That tells you all you need to know.

    White Cold Civil War. Now turning up HOT.

    Read More
  61. Svigor says:

    I just think it’s weird that, of all the stories you could choose to make up about your history, they chose to make up a story about being unfairly persecuted.

    1. Get yourself persecuted a lot.
    2. Notice the pattern.
    3. Notice change isn’t your thing.
    4. Get your tribe’s mind right by “explaining” the “unfair,” “inevitable” persecution.

    Anon says:
    March 25, 2017 at 2:36 am GMT • 100 Words

    The leftist hate for haters ends as soon as the haters are revealed as haters provocateur. This pretty much puts paid to all the squid ink over this issue.

    anon says:
    March 25, 2017 at 3:06 am GMT • 200 Words

    Excellent points.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    The leftist hate for haters ends as soon as the haters are revealed as haters provocateur. This pretty much puts paid to all the squid ink over this issue.
     
    This is what kills me. It's the worst crime in the world justifying endless diatribes against the supposed perpetrators, then, suddenly, it's no big deal and we should feel sympathy for the actual perpetrator. Well, that and never getting the point that if of every 10 of these incidents 1 is spurious (e.g. gravestones) and 2 have the wrong perpetrators (e.g. Juan Thompson and this Israeli) with the other 7 unsolved then the other 7 probably are not as advertised. Fascinating that such smart people seem not to understand Bayes' Rule.
  62. Svigor says:

    Thought experiment — could you see: Bibi Netanyahu, Nichoals Stix, Lion of the Blogosphere, Jerry Seinfeld, or Howard Stern doing this? [No.] Could you see Trigglypuff, Jordan Peele, Ashley Judd, or Lena Dunham doing this [Yes! Yes! Yes! to quote Daniel Bryan]. That tells you all you need to know.

    White Cold Civil War. Now turning up HOT.

    I thought Whiskey was supposed to improve with age. Your arguments seem to be getting worse.

    “OMG, can you see Soros persecuting Jews? Yes, of course, just look at his activism, his background in Hungary. Can you see Ashley Judd persecuting Jews? No way! Ergo, Hitler didn’t persecute Jews – anti-Semitism is a Jewish thing!”

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    I thought Whiskey was supposed to improve with age.

    OK, I rarely agree with you, but I laughed out loud at that one.
  63. @SPMoore8
    We've talked about this before, my personal take on the issue is that we all have thoughts in terms of images and interrelations that we never conceptualize. In other words, we will notice a sequence of events or a similarity of incidents that we observe, and it might rise to an anecdote or two.

    In other words, we may notice that people or animals act in certain ways under certain conditions, and we may speak about this from time to time as odd or amusing. This is the realm of observational comedy and after dinner stories.

    Then what happens is that someone extracts some kind of maxim or lesson from these incidents, and expresses it in fewer words, taking these various incidents and boiling them down to something pithy. This is the level of folk wisdom, Poor Richard's Almanac, and poetry.

    After that, someone gives it a name that, as a concept, covers a whole class of observations amd which may even cross conceptual boundaries in a new way. And then everyone starts using the concept, and it becomes a readily available mental tool.

    So actually I think the evolution of concepts is the key, and that is not dependent on the events themselves, but the process of refining, generalizing, and putting into words.

    You are right, Steve's position re: Sapir-Whorf is a highly generalized version of Sapir-Whorf, and so is Bialik's, in another way. But she is wrong to call it "science" since it has been refuted, at least in the strong version, many times.

    The strong Sapir-Whorf is about grammar, a subject that I’m relatively terrible at and thus has almost zero interest to me.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Spmoore8
    Just to be clear, I like your use of the idea. I think it is given short shrift by Pinker and others when they go after Sapir Whorf.
  64. @WGG
    I prefer the term "anti-white" to "anti-gentile" because gentile could technically mean all the non-Jewish brown people in the world, who are used as pets and props for anti-white diaspora Jews, but rarely attacked by them. Second, people need to understand that Jews are not racially white anymore than an African albino is racially white. And they don't see themselves as "white" either, though they sometimes pretend to when they want to couch their relentless criticism of European peoples.

    I prefer the term “anti-white” to “anti-gentile” because gentile could technically mean all the non-Jewish brown people in the world, who are used as pets and props for anti-white diaspora Jews, but rarely attacked by them.

    I guess you haven’t been following events in the Middle East for the past 100 years (or 15 years, or even one year) and you don’t consume America’s jewish-dominated media and its framing of that region and its people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @WGG
    That's why I wrote *diaspora Jews. Israel is the exception that proves the rule.
  65. syonredux says:

    Peter Beinart’s take:

    At a press conference in mid-February, Donald Trump said something that was, even for him, astonishing. He predicted that when authorities discovered the perpetrators of the anti-Semitic attacks that had broken out since his election, “It won’t be my people,” who had committed them. “It will be the people on the other side.” He repeated the thought later that month, reportedly telling state attorneys general that the bomb threats against Jewish Community Centers across the country may be “the reverse” of what they appear and may have been committed “to make others look bad.

    Democrats and officials of Jewish organizations officials were appalled. Jonathan Greenblatt, chief executive of the Anti-Defamation League, declared: “We are astonished by what the President reportedly said.” Steven Goldstein, executive director of the Anne Frank Center, which combats bigotry, asked, “Mr. President, have you no decency? To cast doubt on the authenticity of Anti-Semitic hate crimes in America constitutes Anti-Semitism in itself.” When the Trump adviser Anthony Scaramucci repeated Trump’s claims, Democratic Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer called them “absurd and obscene.”

    But it now appears that Trump may have been, partially, right. On Thursday, Israeli police arrested a Jewish Israeli American teenager for leveling some of the bomb threats. Earlier this month, prosecutors charged Juan Thompson, an African American who had previously worked at a left-leaning publication, with some of the others. There’s no evidence that either suspect tried to frame Trump supporters or white supremacists. And it’s still possible that right-wingers called in other bomb threats, or committed some of the other anti-Semitic incidents that have erupted since Trump’s election. Still, if two of the primary perpetrators of the JCC bomb scares turn out to be a Jewish Israeli and a left-leaning African American, that will, indeed, turn out to be “the reverse” of what Trump’s critics expected.

    Trump’s critics—and I’m one of them—should learn from that.

    Many critics have a narrative in their heads: That Trump and his supporters think and do bigoted things.

    It’s not just the JCC bomb scares. It’s become commonplace to hear Jewish liberals claim that, in the words of former Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Trump has given “license and permission to anti-Semites” and thus “opened the floodgates” for anti-Semitic attacks.

    But have the floodgates really opened? According to the FBI, anti-Semitic incidents did rise 9 percent between 2014 and 2015, when Trump announced his candidacy. And New York City has announced that there were substantially more anti-Semitic incidents during the first two months of 2017 than during the equivalent period in 2016. But neither the FBI nor the Anti-Defamation League has yet reported national data for 2016. And defining what constitutes an anti-Semitic incident is tricky. If the JCC bomb threats—many of which appear to have been carried out by an Israeli Jew—boost the numbers, does that really show that anti-Semitism is rising in Trump’s America?

    And a February Pew Research Center poll found that Republicans and evangelical Christians—two core Trump constituencies—feel even more favorably towards Jews than Democrats do. Since Trump’s takeover of the GOP, Republican fondness for Jews has actually increased.

    If liberals have been too quick to blame Trump supporters for anti-Semitism, they’ve also been too quick to blame Trump’s advisors. Liberals frequently hurl the charge at Steve Bannon or his old publication, Breitbart. But the two Breitbart articles critics most commonly call anti-Semitic—an attack on the Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol that called him a “renegade Jew” and an attack on the Washington Post columnist Anne Applebaum that called her “a Polish, Jewish, American elitist scorned”—were both written by Jews.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/03/the-dangers-of-blaming-trump-for-anti-semitism/520692/?utm_source=atltw

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    He had another one in the Forward basically arguing they should refrain from calling people antisemitic unless they had actually said something bad about Jews, i.e. Sebastian Gorka isn't antisemitic because he joined a Hungarian nationalist organization, maybe he just liked his heritage.

    http://forward.com/opinion/366818/who-you-callin-anti-semite-reserve-the-term-for-the-worst-offenders/

    There actually are a few liberals who believe in fairness, they just tend to be few and far between and on the older side.
    , @Desiderius
    Whoa, who got to Beinart with the truth serum?

    If this sort of thing gets around on the Left, Trump really could be in trouble.
  66. Sapir-Whorf indeed!

    “The man who did this was anti-Semitic.”

    Coming from a writer, Schraub, who would be expected to posses superior intelligence, that statement contains a surprising level of assumption without evidence.

    He doesn’t want his readers to consider the possibility that a hate hoax — one created to make people think there is anti-Semitism where there is none — might be an anti-Gentilic act, which is an obvious likelihood because the people who get blamed for anti-Semitism are Gentiles.

    (Just look at Trump. He gets blamed for everything, including the actions of an Israeli hoaxer.)

    To consider this possibility, I guess one has to be a Gentile made paranoid by all the anti-Gentilism now surrounding us. You know, you’d have to be spring-loaded to claim special status as a victim of hate when in fact you and your people have triumphed in so many areas.

    People like Schraub are either incapable of thinking of anti-Gentilism, or they are unwilling to talk about it. Thus something I’ve pointed out before: They are either being stupid or dishonest. Those are the only logical options.

    Read More
  67. Broski says:
    @anony-mouse
    '... Antigentilism, Jewish antagonism of gentiles,...'

    Why should 'antigentilism' be only about Jews? There are anti-White Whites, anti-Black Blacks, anti-Catholic Catholics, anti-male males, etc. Shouldn't there be Anti-Gentile Gentiles?

    '... Antigentilism, Jewish antagonism of gentiles, is irrelevant where there are no Jews (with political power)...'

    I thought Jews were supposed to have worldwide power.

    '... in global Europa...'

    Never heard that term. Maybe you should complain to Steve. Does it include Brazil, South Africa (then or now), Cyprus (part or all), Georgia or Armenia, Siberia, Bermuda, Nunavut, Hawaii, AVI...

    Why should ‘antigentilism’ be only about Jews? There are anti-White Whites, anti-Black Blacks, anti-Catholic Catholics, anti-male males, etc. Shouldn’t there be Anti-Gentile Gentiles?

    I would suggest that as a fundamental principle to be anti-anything is to be pro-the thing’s opposite, as subjectively perceived. So, to be anti-gentile (anti-nonJewish) is to be pro-Jewish in circumstances where gentile and Jewish interests diverge, as subjectively perceived. Some non-Jews, gentiles, would certainly fit into that definition.

    ‘… in global Europa…’

    Never heard that term.

    I made it up.

    Read More
  68. jim jones says:

    It seems that wearing a silly hat is sufficient to get your group hated, Jews and Muslims wear stuff on their heads that I always find irritating and confrontational.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    That's how it goes among gangs. See South Central LA, Chicago, etc.

    The jewish headgear of men serves the purpose of gang identification. It is an insignia, paraphernalia, a tattoo. It is a tool to provide advantage in intergroup competition.

    In the case of muslim and jewish females, head dressing serves more of an intragroup purpose.

    , @SFG
    Don't forget hipsters and trucker hats.
  69. Alden says:

    Black men often call women baby girl. It’s rather rude when a 22 year old black nurses aide calls a 50 yr old Dr baby girl

    Blacks tend to be motor mouths. Sometimes their blathering does not seem to be connected to their brains

    Read More
  70. @SPMoore8
    The link that I tried to provide (just go to wikipedia in French) indicates that the word "Anti-sémitique" does in fact exist, and that explains why I got that return when I looked it up. As a bonus, it indicates that the word that is preferred nowadays is "antisemitisme".

    https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antis%C3%A9mitisme

    So we're both wrong.

    No, that’s the French word for “anti-Semitism”, and your initial wrong assertion was about the word for “anti-Semitic”. This is trivial stuff, but it establishes two things: at least in this trivial area, you post as authoritative statements that are grossly wrong, and two, you can’t stand being corrected on even a trivial point.

    It’s ok, maybe you are super insightful and correct for important things, I don’t know. But this tiny point doesn’t do much for your credibility. Which I don’t care about. I just thought you and people reading you might not want to be left believing a wrong fact, however trivial.

    And with that, I am done, wow, what a silly argument.

    Read More
  71. @jim jones
    It seems that wearing a silly hat is sufficient to get your group hated, Jews and Muslims wear stuff on their heads that I always find irritating and confrontational.

    That’s how it goes among gangs. See South Central LA, Chicago, etc.

    The jewish headgear of men serves the purpose of gang identification. It is an insignia, paraphernalia, a tattoo. It is a tool to provide advantage in intergroup competition.

    In the case of muslim and jewish females, head dressing serves more of an intragroup purpose.

    Read More
  72. Nico says:
    @SPMoore8
    There is certainly a species of contempt among some Jews towards gentiles in general and against other specific groups of gentiles (e.g., Arabs, blacks). So just for the sake of the argument, let's stipulate that there is this phenomenon called "anti-Gentilism" and is found (obviously) in the non-Gentile, that is, Jewish community.

    Is the guy who made "Mad Men" "anti-Gentile"? Having never watched the show, but having read about his remarks, and his apparently carefully nursed resentments, I guess so. So now what? Is this really a widespread phenomenon?

    On the other hand, were these phone threats made for the purpose of encouraging hatred of gentiles? I really don't think so.

    I mean I suppose someone could write "The History of Anti-Gentilism", however, by definition, it would consist of nothing more than miscellaneous Jews saying and doing nasty things to non-Jews. So such a tome would probably be considered "anti-Semitic." Next up, Talmudic quotes that say nasty things about Jesus and Mary.

    I mean exactly what is the scope of Anti-Gentilism? It is not going to be same as Anti-White, which is already a word. It is not going to be the same as Anti-Christian, because that word also exists. What is being proposed is a new word describing a special kind of resentment Jews have for non-Jews. Okay, I'm fine with that. Except that I don't think the phenomenon is that widespread and I still don't think it applies in this case for the reasons given.

    This goes to the idea that a "hate hoax" is identical to a "blood libel." I would say this is wrong on three levels. In the case of a "hate hoax" I cannot think of gentiles being arrested, imprisoned, and put on trial for a hate crime that was later shown to be a hoax (I'm sure there must be some, I will let someone fill me in.) Certainly it did not happen in this case. But secondly, non-Jews (aka gentiles) do not feel that kind of group solidarity with other gentiles. I mean, both Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman were gentiles. So, for that matter, so is OJ Simpson and Pablo Gomez, Jr. Finally, third, the reason we do not feel solidarity with these individuals is that no one is saying to us, "As a gentile, please explain Pablo Gomez, Jr. to me." What, am I collectively responsible for everything any gentile does? To this day, anytime a Jew does anything wrong, any other Jew can expect someone to come up to them and expect them either to justify or condemn whatever it is.

    I suppose the best one could argue is that "hate hoaxes" bring shame and scorn to all gentiles in a case like this, and to all whites in the case of hate hoaxes perpetrated by blacks (whites in this instance include Jews), and so on. But the problem is that the members of all of these splinter groups that are constantly lecturing straight white males about their wickedness are mostly gentiles themselves.

    So anti-Gentilism has a certain utility in describing a certain type of Jewish resentment. And yet the term is still too broad. The Weiner guy, after all, didn't resent all gentiles: just the straight white male Christians he went to school with.

    Speaking as a straight white Christian male: I was not overly concerned about these threats, and I didn't feel any responsibility for them, no one asked me to speak out about them, and I don't feel any outrage at this spurious blot on my gentile escutcheon. If I were a more sensitive and self-absorbed person, I might write about how I lost sleep for weeks, my cheeks burning with hot tears as I thought about the terrible shame I felt that these crimes were being committed by a fellow gentile. But I didn't. I'm just not that kind of person.

    Is the guy who made “Mad Men” “anti-Gentile”? Having never watched the show, but having read about his remarks, and his apparently carefully nursed resentments, I guess so. So now what? Is this really a widespread phenomenon?

    Yes, as a matter of fact, it is. Have you been paying attention to what Hollywood has been churning out since the demise of the Hays Code? And yes, this pop culture (films and also music and TV and public education) diffuses such notions into the popular mindset. In even most of red America you will still find (though heavy polarization is well underway) large swaths of seemingly normal folk who casually assume that Jews are persecuted, colonialism is bad, equality of the sexes is good, Europeans aren’t nice enough to Muslims, etc. just because that is what the culture has told them to think.

    Read More
  73. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @SPMoore8
    Not to mention Purim, Hannukah, etc. I've heard it said that all Jewish Holidays celebrate their persecution, but that's not quite accurate, since the Delivery of the Torah (Shavuot), or as I like to call it, the Download of the Torah. Also Simchas Torah is another holiday that doesn't appear to be lachrymose.

    I think the actual core to 99% of Jewish identity is the fate of being born Jewish, and the underlying idea there is that there is a Supreme Being, and that being shapes your destiny. Even in the case of conversos, the idea is that fate and destiny are involved. And I have a lot of regard for that kind of thinking, generally.

    I’ve heard it said that all Jewish Holidays celebrate their persecution

    don’t most of them celebrate mass killing of non-Jews?

    the egyptian first born
    the greeks for being too tolerant
    persians

    Read More
  74. WGG says:
    @Opinionator
    I prefer the term “anti-white” to “anti-gentile” because gentile could technically mean all the non-Jewish brown people in the world, who are used as pets and props for anti-white diaspora Jews, but rarely attacked by them.

    I guess you haven't been following events in the Middle East for the past 100 years (or 15 years, or even one year) and you don't consume America's jewish-dominated media and its framing of that region and its people.

    That’s why I wrote *diaspora Jews. Israel is the exception that proves the rule.

    Read More
  75. SFG says:
    @Svigor

    Thought experiment — could you see: Bibi Netanyahu, Nichoals Stix, Lion of the Blogosphere, Jerry Seinfeld, or Howard Stern doing this? [No.] Could you see Trigglypuff, Jordan Peele, Ashley Judd, or Lena Dunham doing this [Yes! Yes! Yes! to quote Daniel Bryan]. That tells you all you need to know.

    White Cold Civil War. Now turning up HOT.
     
    I thought Whiskey was supposed to improve with age. Your arguments seem to be getting worse.

    "OMG, can you see Soros persecuting Jews? Yes, of course, just look at his activism, his background in Hungary. Can you see Ashley Judd persecuting Jews? No way! Ergo, Hitler didn't persecute Jews - anti-Semitism is a Jewish thing!"

    I thought Whiskey was supposed to improve with age.

    OK, I rarely agree with you, but I laughed out loud at that one.

    Read More
  76. SFG says:
    @syonredux
    Peter Beinart's take:

    At a press conference in mid-February, Donald Trump said something that was, even for him, astonishing. He predicted that when authorities discovered the perpetrators of the anti-Semitic attacks that had broken out since his election, “It won’t be my people,” who had committed them. “It will be the people on the other side.” He repeated the thought later that month, reportedly telling state attorneys general that the bomb threats against Jewish Community Centers across the country may be “the reverse” of what they appear and may have been committed “to make others look bad.
     

    Democrats and officials of Jewish organizations officials were appalled. Jonathan Greenblatt, chief executive of the Anti-Defamation League, declared: “We are astonished by what the President reportedly said.” Steven Goldstein, executive director of the Anne Frank Center, which combats bigotry, asked, “Mr. President, have you no decency? To cast doubt on the authenticity of Anti-Semitic hate crimes in America constitutes Anti-Semitism in itself.” When the Trump adviser Anthony Scaramucci repeated Trump’s claims, Democratic Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer called them “absurd and obscene.”
     

    But it now appears that Trump may have been, partially, right. On Thursday, Israeli police arrested a Jewish Israeli American teenager for leveling some of the bomb threats. Earlier this month, prosecutors charged Juan Thompson, an African American who had previously worked at a left-leaning publication, with some of the others. There’s no evidence that either suspect tried to frame Trump supporters or white supremacists. And it’s still possible that right-wingers called in other bomb threats, or committed some of the other anti-Semitic incidents that have erupted since Trump’s election. Still, if two of the primary perpetrators of the JCC bomb scares turn out to be a Jewish Israeli and a left-leaning African American, that will, indeed, turn out to be “the reverse” of what Trump’s critics expected.

     


    Trump’s critics—and I’m one of them—should learn from that.

    Many critics have a narrative in their heads: That Trump and his supporters think and do bigoted things.

     


    It’s not just the JCC bomb scares. It’s become commonplace to hear Jewish liberals claim that, in the words of former Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Trump has given “license and permission to anti-Semites” and thus “opened the floodgates” for anti-Semitic attacks.

    But have the floodgates really opened? According to the FBI, anti-Semitic incidents did rise 9 percent between 2014 and 2015, when Trump announced his candidacy. And New York City has announced that there were substantially more anti-Semitic incidents during the first two months of 2017 than during the equivalent period in 2016. But neither the FBI nor the Anti-Defamation League has yet reported national data for 2016. And defining what constitutes an anti-Semitic incident is tricky. If the JCC bomb threats—many of which appear to have been carried out by an Israeli Jew—boost the numbers, does that really show that anti-Semitism is rising in Trump’s America?
     

    And a February Pew Research Center poll found that Republicans and evangelical Christians—two core Trump constituencies—feel even more favorably towards Jews than Democrats do. Since Trump’s takeover of the GOP, Republican fondness for Jews has actually increased.
     

    If liberals have been too quick to blame Trump supporters for anti-Semitism, they’ve also been too quick to blame Trump’s advisors. Liberals frequently hurl the charge at Steve Bannon or his old publication, Breitbart. But the two Breitbart articles critics most commonly call anti-Semitic—an attack on the Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol that called him a “renegade Jew” and an attack on the Washington Post columnist Anne Applebaum that called her “a Polish, Jewish, American elitist scorned”—were both written by Jews.
     
    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/03/the-dangers-of-blaming-trump-for-anti-semitism/520692/?utm_source=atltw

    He had another one in the Forward basically arguing they should refrain from calling people antisemitic unless they had actually said something bad about Jews, i.e. Sebastian Gorka isn’t antisemitic because he joined a Hungarian nationalist organization, maybe he just liked his heritage.

    http://forward.com/opinion/366818/who-you-callin-anti-semite-reserve-the-term-for-the-worst-offenders/

    There actually are a few liberals who believe in fairness, they just tend to be few and far between and on the older side.

    Read More
  77. SFG says:
    @Desiderius

    All the guilty SJW anti-whites do to some degree.
     
    After they've done their penance, white is no longer their primary identify. The purpose of SJW anti-whitism is deracination. Just because they want you to feel guilty and you consider yourself part of their group, it does not follow that they feel guilty. They don't agree with where you draw the identity boundaries.

    No, I haven’t seen that. Identity isn’t redrawn. I read a lot more liberal stuff, and they have article over article about white liberals being insufficiently undeferential/ignorant/patronizing to people of color. It’s an ongoing responsibility to monitor yourself for traces of racism and eradicate them.

    I forget who it was who said that liberalism was a Christian heresy with no God, but it does sound an awful lot like the Christian idea of constantly battling against sinful thoughts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    It is, but the reward (sic) is that those who adopt it take their place among the elect, while those who aren't woke are relegated to the reprobate.

    The whole purpose is to create an identity of separation. This is why it doesn't make sense to talk about self-hate. They hate the reprobate (and the sin), not the elect (themselves). Aka badwhites and goodwhites, Trumpsters/SWPLs.
    , @Desiderius

    the Christian idea of constantly battling against sinful thoughts
     
    Meh.

    "And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you."

    - Luke 22

    This is the heart of the communion/Eucharist celebration. The word anamnesis translated "in remembrance" literally means "not forgetting," implying that the only thought that Christians are to be constantly in mind of is Christ himself, who was without sin.

    If you're constantly battling sinful thoughts, you're doing it wrong. In Christ we are a new creation.

    Literally.

    Look, the people I've seen whose characters have been transformed through a lifetime of regular spiritual discipline come to a place where they don't have to battle sinful thoughts - it's a sort of good sapir-whorf. It's the example of those lives that led me to commit my life to Christ, and I've seen his justifying/sanctifying work in my own over time.
  78. Spmoore8 says:
    @Steve Sailer
    The strong Sapir-Whorf is about grammar, a subject that I'm relatively terrible at and thus has almost zero interest to me.

    Just to be clear, I like your use of the idea. I think it is given short shrift by Pinker and others when they go after Sapir Whorf.

    Read More
  79. How sharper than a serpent’s tooth it is to have a thankless Jew. Away! Away!

    The Jewish moment is over in the American Empire. It is over in the Anglosphere as well.

    Globalization and multiculturalism are being rejected. Debt repudiation and central bank smashing are sure to follow. The nation-state and ethnonationalism as an organizing political fighting force are rising fast.

    The Jews have never found a more secure perch than in the Anglospheric nations — the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. That will ebb away to leave the Jews no safe harbor but Israel. Aliyah is calling and you can’t refuse.

    Read More
  80. @SPMoore8
    I just saw a video that invokes Steve's very restricted definition of Sapir-Whorf, by Mayim Bialik: Not sure that Steve will be too happy with what she does with it.

    https://www.facebook.com/MissMayim/videos/10158471910985008/?hc_ref=NEWSFEED

    Maybe, just maybe, Mayim Bialik is as stupid as her character on the BBT.

    Read More
  81. Ragno says:

    Figures. Let a white man use the phrase “race traitor”, and the Twitter lynch mob begin lighting their torches and heading down to his place of employment, as a appetizer before the main course. Antifa, ready your ski-masks!

    However. Simply parenthesize the culprit in triplicate, and suddenly “race traitor” becomes an important concept ripe for discussion, legislation and – hopefully – a little loot out of the treasury.

    Only don’t let those god-damned gentiles hijack the term – it’s OURS. Or at least, it is now.

    Read More
  82. @syonredux
    Peter Beinart's take:

    At a press conference in mid-February, Donald Trump said something that was, even for him, astonishing. He predicted that when authorities discovered the perpetrators of the anti-Semitic attacks that had broken out since his election, “It won’t be my people,” who had committed them. “It will be the people on the other side.” He repeated the thought later that month, reportedly telling state attorneys general that the bomb threats against Jewish Community Centers across the country may be “the reverse” of what they appear and may have been committed “to make others look bad.
     

    Democrats and officials of Jewish organizations officials were appalled. Jonathan Greenblatt, chief executive of the Anti-Defamation League, declared: “We are astonished by what the President reportedly said.” Steven Goldstein, executive director of the Anne Frank Center, which combats bigotry, asked, “Mr. President, have you no decency? To cast doubt on the authenticity of Anti-Semitic hate crimes in America constitutes Anti-Semitism in itself.” When the Trump adviser Anthony Scaramucci repeated Trump’s claims, Democratic Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer called them “absurd and obscene.”
     

    But it now appears that Trump may have been, partially, right. On Thursday, Israeli police arrested a Jewish Israeli American teenager for leveling some of the bomb threats. Earlier this month, prosecutors charged Juan Thompson, an African American who had previously worked at a left-leaning publication, with some of the others. There’s no evidence that either suspect tried to frame Trump supporters or white supremacists. And it’s still possible that right-wingers called in other bomb threats, or committed some of the other anti-Semitic incidents that have erupted since Trump’s election. Still, if two of the primary perpetrators of the JCC bomb scares turn out to be a Jewish Israeli and a left-leaning African American, that will, indeed, turn out to be “the reverse” of what Trump’s critics expected.

     


    Trump’s critics—and I’m one of them—should learn from that.

    Many critics have a narrative in their heads: That Trump and his supporters think and do bigoted things.

     


    It’s not just the JCC bomb scares. It’s become commonplace to hear Jewish liberals claim that, in the words of former Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Trump has given “license and permission to anti-Semites” and thus “opened the floodgates” for anti-Semitic attacks.

    But have the floodgates really opened? According to the FBI, anti-Semitic incidents did rise 9 percent between 2014 and 2015, when Trump announced his candidacy. And New York City has announced that there were substantially more anti-Semitic incidents during the first two months of 2017 than during the equivalent period in 2016. But neither the FBI nor the Anti-Defamation League has yet reported national data for 2016. And defining what constitutes an anti-Semitic incident is tricky. If the JCC bomb threats—many of which appear to have been carried out by an Israeli Jew—boost the numbers, does that really show that anti-Semitism is rising in Trump’s America?
     

    And a February Pew Research Center poll found that Republicans and evangelical Christians—two core Trump constituencies—feel even more favorably towards Jews than Democrats do. Since Trump’s takeover of the GOP, Republican fondness for Jews has actually increased.
     

    If liberals have been too quick to blame Trump supporters for anti-Semitism, they’ve also been too quick to blame Trump’s advisors. Liberals frequently hurl the charge at Steve Bannon or his old publication, Breitbart. But the two Breitbart articles critics most commonly call anti-Semitic—an attack on the Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol that called him a “renegade Jew” and an attack on the Washington Post columnist Anne Applebaum that called her “a Polish, Jewish, American elitist scorned”—were both written by Jews.
     
    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/03/the-dangers-of-blaming-trump-for-anti-semitism/520692/?utm_source=atltw

    Whoa, who got to Beinart with the truth serum?

    If this sort of thing gets around on the Left, Trump really could be in trouble.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    He's gone after PC as well. Everyone likes to divide people into lefties and righties, but the truth is that there's a huge variation of belief in the people who wind up voting for one of our two parties, and center-lefties can see what's wrong with more extreme people on their own side sometimes.
  83. @SFG
    No, I haven't seen that. Identity isn't redrawn. I read a lot more liberal stuff, and they have article over article about white liberals being insufficiently undeferential/ignorant/patronizing to people of color. It's an ongoing responsibility to monitor yourself for traces of racism and eradicate them.

    I forget who it was who said that liberalism was a Christian heresy with no God, but it does sound an awful lot like the Christian idea of constantly battling against sinful thoughts.

    It is, but the reward (sic) is that those who adopt it take their place among the elect, while those who aren’t woke are relegated to the reprobate.

    The whole purpose is to create an identity of separation. This is why it doesn’t make sense to talk about self-hate. They hate the reprobate (and the sin), not the elect (themselves). Aka badwhites and goodwhites, Trumpsters/SWPLs.

    Read More
  84. @SFG
    No, I haven't seen that. Identity isn't redrawn. I read a lot more liberal stuff, and they have article over article about white liberals being insufficiently undeferential/ignorant/patronizing to people of color. It's an ongoing responsibility to monitor yourself for traces of racism and eradicate them.

    I forget who it was who said that liberalism was a Christian heresy with no God, but it does sound an awful lot like the Christian idea of constantly battling against sinful thoughts.

    the Christian idea of constantly battling against sinful thoughts

    Meh.

    “And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.”

    - Luke 22

    This is the heart of the communion/Eucharist celebration. The word anamnesis translated “in remembrance” literally means “not forgetting,” implying that the only thought that Christians are to be constantly in mind of is Christ himself, who was without sin.

    If you’re constantly battling sinful thoughts, you’re doing it wrong. In Christ we are a new creation.

    Literally.

    Look, the people I’ve seen whose characters have been transformed through a lifetime of regular spiritual discipline come to a place where they don’t have to battle sinful thoughts – it’s a sort of good sapir-whorf. It’s the example of those lives that led me to commit my life to Christ, and I’ve seen his justifying/sanctifying work in my own over time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    Ah, thanks. I actually do believe you--there are volumes and volumes from the Middle Ages describing the best ways to go about strengthening your spirit. Maybe I was always hearing from people who couldn't pull it off. I do live in a liberal area.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    This is the heart of the communion/Eucharist celebration
     
    It's also the one sentence the Biblical literalists refuse to take literally. As if they fail their own litmus test.
  85. @SPMoore8
    I thought the video was idiotic because men and women call groups "boys" and "girls" all the time and it's completely harmless and casual. In fact, to call a person a "man" or a "woman" in a bar is something you don't want; it's way too serious and forbidding.

    I've been called "dear", "sweetie", "honey", and "baby" by female acquaintances and service people frequently. Sometimes there's a momentary embarrassment and I will be honest when a random woman uses one of those terms of endearment with me I unconsciously start checking her out. In this case, the black lady used that term because she could relate to what you are doing. That's a moment you should remember.

    I’ve been called “dear”, “sweetie”, “honey”, and “baby” by female acquaintances and service people frequently.

    I recently had my eyes examined by a young Chinese-American optometrist who kept calling me “my dear” throughout the whole exam. I thought to myself at the time, “good grief, she’s called me ‘my dear’ more times in a half hour than my wife has in 40+ years!” I found it kind of charming. (And I will admit that my wife and I have never made use of the conventional terms of endearment listed above. Not sure why. It was probably a ’70s thing.)

    Read More
  86. SFG says:
    @jim jones
    It seems that wearing a silly hat is sufficient to get your group hated, Jews and Muslims wear stuff on their heads that I always find irritating and confrontational.

    Don’t forget hipsters and trucker hats.

    Read More
  87. SFG says:
    @Desiderius
    Whoa, who got to Beinart with the truth serum?

    If this sort of thing gets around on the Left, Trump really could be in trouble.

    He’s gone after PC as well. Everyone likes to divide people into lefties and righties, but the truth is that there’s a huge variation of belief in the people who wind up voting for one of our two parties, and center-lefties can see what’s wrong with more extreme people on their own side sometimes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    He used to all the time, I just haven't seen it lately from much of anyone on that team.

    Alot of us voted for Trump to prompt just that sort of honest reflection. Nice to finally see some.
  88. @SFG
    He's gone after PC as well. Everyone likes to divide people into lefties and righties, but the truth is that there's a huge variation of belief in the people who wind up voting for one of our two parties, and center-lefties can see what's wrong with more extreme people on their own side sometimes.

    He used to all the time, I just haven’t seen it lately from much of anyone on that team.

    Alot of us voted for Trump to prompt just that sort of honest reflection. Nice to finally see some.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    There was a front-page article on ditching identity politics in the NYT shortly after the election. They're chewing it over, but there's no telling what they'll actually do.
  89. I’m shocked to see that Google is still using the racist, imperialist Mercator projection which shows Greenland as bigger than Africa. Time for a boycott of this “progressive” company!

    Read More
  90. Gabriel M says:

    I once lived in a predominantly Hassidic ultra-orthodox community, so I came across more anti-gentilism than I really care to remember. While it may be “logically parallel” to anti-semitism, it wasn’t structurally parallel. Anti-gentilists nothing gentiles. They positively revel in ignorance of gentiles and, if necessary, feign it. They make bizarre comments like “the goyim think it’s fine to steal”, which they pull out of their arse and then talk about something else. If you ask them to name a doctrine of Christianity/Islam/Hinduism they will stare at you blankly. If you ask them the capital of the country they live in they usually can’t answer. Conversely, they are minutely interested in every detail of rival ultra-orthodox sects. They can tell you umpteen completely boring details about the the differences between the Haredi community in Montreal, Lakewood, Stamford Hill, Williamsburg etc. but they couldn’t find any of them on a map.

    Anti-semites, on the other hand, love nothing more than to demonstrate their expertise in Judaism. An anti-gentilist would regard the idea of reading a four volume epic on the ways of the gentile by Kevin McHymiestein with bafflement. He would get bored 15 seconds into a youtube video.

    In short, the main thing anti-gentilists and anti-semites have in common is that they are obsessed with Jews.

    Anyway, what this has to do with American liberal Jews is not clear to me at all. Hillary is a gentile, Mikey Pooh Brown is a gentile, Obama is a gentile. They seem pretty fond of them. As usual Moldbug:

    I’m fascinated by the mind of the modern anti-Semite. While the story of the 20th century as a Jewish conspiracy is basically crazy, it is no crazier than many present-day beliefs that are considered normal and even fashionable. To be exact, the MacDonaldists attribute exactly the same pattern of behavior to Jews that folks like Jack O’Connell attribute to whites. The likes of Tanstaafl, NeoNietzsche, and Colin Laney certainly feel – quite genuinely, I’m sure – that they are having a “courageous conversation” about Jewish privilege.

    The problem with the Jack McConnell theory of the world is that if there is anywhere in the US where white people feel it is socially acceptable to suggest that white people should cooperate on the basis of their shared whiteness, it is certainly not in the circles of power and privilege. Unless cell block D at San Quentin counts as such. And the same is true for Jews: while there are ethnocentric Jewish communities in the US, these are not exactly the people who run the New York Times. To say the least!

    So to talk about modern, American white or Jewish ethnocentrism, without giving anyone the impression that you live on a different planet from the rest of us, you have to resort to the language of conspiracy theory. The motives of your enemies are either concealed, unconscious, or both. The more white people deny that they are racist, the more likely they are to be racist. And so on

    http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.co.il/2007/11/jewish-question-and-other-links.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @David Davenport
    ...And the same is true for Jews: while there are ethnocentric Jewish communities in the US, these are not exactly the people who run the New York Times....

    Ethnocentric Eskimos don't run the NY Times?

    , @Feeeney
    "Anti-gentilists nothing gentiles."

    Hmmm.
  91. SFG says:
    @Desiderius
    He used to all the time, I just haven't seen it lately from much of anyone on that team.

    Alot of us voted for Trump to prompt just that sort of honest reflection. Nice to finally see some.

    There was a front-page article on ditching identity politics in the NYT shortly after the election. They’re chewing it over, but there’s no telling what they’ll actually do.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    Which IIRC seemed to be followed by doubling down in favor of identity politics. Some might be chewing it over, but the most annoying have not only not gotten that message they have actually become worse post-election.
    , @Desiderius
    It will take a lot more than ditching identity politics. It could conceivably take less.

    It will certainly take picking a more beatable foe than reality (i.e. truth itself).
  92. Schraub forgot to write: “I apologize to Trump, I was wrong”. Instead he ventilates about his own high morality: “By Jove, I will always denounce anti-semitism, whatever the cost!”

    Now, he doesn’t know anything about the accused, but he KNOWS he’s an anti-semite FIRST:
    “If he did this because he wanted to discredit Donald Trump and the American political right, he is an anti-Semite who also did a grave injustice to President Trump and his supporters.”

    Never mind that the grave injustice was made by, among others, Mr. Schraub.

    Read More
  93. Svigor says:

    But have the floodgates really opened? According to the FBI, anti-Semitic incidents did rise 9 percent between 2014 and 2015, when Trump announced his candidacy.

    Ah, framing. What is more salient: Trump merely announcing his candidacy, or Hussein being in the 7th of his 8 years as Leader of the Free World?

    But the two Breitbart articles critics most commonly call anti-Semitic—an attack on the Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol that called him a “renegade Jew” and an attack on the Washington Post columnist Anne Applebaum that called her “a Polish, Jewish, American elitist scorned”—were both written by Jews.

    What’s astounding is that this is an astounding admission in our timeline.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    What’s astounding is that this is an astounding admission in our timeline.

    You haven't been to the ones where Hitler decided to stick to persecuting Gypsies and gay people. Moscow and London are radioactive and everyone speaks German. Scary!
  94. @SPMoore8
    I think part of the problem here is that these graphs seem to indicate returns for the word "anti-semitic" alone, whereas antisemitisch (no hyphen) in Germanic, antisemitsky (no hyphen) in Slavic, antiszemita in Hungarian, antisemita in Spanish and Italian, and the French, being French, have "anti-Semetique" with a long accent on the first e.

    As to the underlying concept, not sure what to say. I think it's partly true that Jews today who are not observant and/or who are not assimilationist get caught up in the notion of being persecuted as a way of marking their Jewish identity. But I think the whole process is too self-referential to really be ascribed to hatred of gentiles.

    I thought Schraub's article was pretty stupid and I can't believe that such pedestrian opinionating comes from Boalt Hall. The people (or person) involved were obviously mentally ill, calling them anti-Semites, even whey are Jewish, is kind of silly at this point. There certainly was an anti-Semitic effect, in the sense of conjuring old fears among American Jews. Along those lines, I am reminded of the other online posting that was referenced, written by some self-described American Jew, who wants this kid put in prison and raped and then told that he is hated, sort of the more graphic version of the Cynthia Ozick curse that Schraub seems to think so highly of.

    It's best not to judge the Jewish people by their most loud mouthed representatives in the media, that also applies to the head of the Don Rickles Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect; the over the top rhetoric from that source is not designed to generate anything other than contempt and donations.

    The people (or person) involved were obviously mentally ill

    Calling this person mentally ill relieves him of much of the motive and responsibility of this actions. If the calls were made by someone in the alt-right, I doubt many people would just throw up their hands and say “what are you going to do, he was clearly mentally ill”.

    His actions resulted in a few things that many left-leaning Jews would consider beneficial:

    1) Raised awareness of anti-Semitism in a major way
    2) Donations to SPLC skyrocketed
    3) Gave the impression that Trump’s election emboldened an anti-semitic base
    4) Forced Trump and his administration to denounce the supposed acts as the worst form of hatred

    For all of these elements to come together through some random act of mental illness is just not believable. The odds are that his political leanings drove him to do this, and the use of sophisticated precautions to hide his tracks suggests that he didn’t want to be caught and was behaving rationally.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    It also led Amazon to delete all of its Holocaust Denial titles.

    I'm not saying the guy (or the guy and his father) are not responsible for their actions.

    I think calling for the rape of this teenager is way, way overboard. So is the sacred curse. Just silly.

    I think the calls upset a lot of Jewish people, so in that respect they were "anti-semitic". However, to spend all of one's time (as Schraub does) in focusing on nomenclature and taxonomy is to my mind pretty stupid. Simple story: a Jewish guy, propelled by the prevailing moral panic among some Jews since Trump's election, decided to goose the project a bit by making threatening phone calls.

    So let's put him in prison for a few years.
  95. It’s instructive to read comments at the WaPo article: “Trump is flirting with the idea that anti-Semitic incidents are false flags — yet again” (02/28)

    For instance:

    Rand March 3/1/2017 4:41 PM GMT+0100
    Only a neo-Nazi could believe that Jews would desecrate the graves of our own families to make neo-Nazis look bad

    All comments by this Rand March are noteworthy.

    Read More
  96. res says:
    @Svigor

    I just think it’s weird that, of all the stories you could choose to make up about your history, they chose to make up a story about being unfairly persecuted.
     
    1. Get yourself persecuted a lot.
    2. Notice the pattern.
    3. Notice change isn't your thing.
    4. Get your tribe's mind right by "explaining" the "unfair," "inevitable" persecution.

    Anon says:
    March 25, 2017 at 2:36 am GMT • 100 Words
     
    The leftist hate for haters ends as soon as the haters are revealed as haters provocateur. This pretty much puts paid to all the squid ink over this issue.

    anon says:
    March 25, 2017 at 3:06 am GMT • 200 Words
    @Abe
     
    Excellent points.

    The leftist hate for haters ends as soon as the haters are revealed as haters provocateur. This pretty much puts paid to all the squid ink over this issue.

    This is what kills me. It’s the worst crime in the world justifying endless diatribes against the supposed perpetrators, then, suddenly, it’s no big deal and we should feel sympathy for the actual perpetrator. Well, that and never getting the point that if of every 10 of these incidents 1 is spurious (e.g. gravestones) and 2 have the wrong perpetrators (e.g. Juan Thompson and this Israeli) with the other 7 unsolved then the other 7 probably are not as advertised. Fascinating that such smart people seem not to understand Bayes’ Rule.

    Read More
  97. Pericles says:
    @anon
    The story about being slaves in Egypt, Moses fleeing, being deported to Babylon, and some others

    That's something I've always thought about too.

    If you read the Old Testament, those are basically the main events. But they're separated by hundreds of years. Like, you read about Abraham's covenant, then a bunch of time passes, and the next big story is the whole Egypt thing. Then they get delivered from that, and they conquer their territory, and then they spend the next few centuries just sort of screwing around and pissing off God, and then the next thing you know, they're conquered by Babylon.

    It's basically two big persecution stories, separated by hundreds of years of the Jewish people kind of acting like a bunch of jerks, with really just a few years of them doing the right thing.

    I guess, if that was my history, I'd probably focus on the persecution parts too. I still doubt that that's very good for you in the long term, though.

    What's interesting, though, is that the Babylonian captivity was portrayed in the Bible as being the result of the way they acted. Which is a sentiment that seems to have been lost ever since then.

    It's also interesting that they actually threw in another story, in the book of Esther, of a persecution event that almost certainly never really happened. They still celebrate this made-up persecution to this day. Chelsea Clinton even tweets about it!

    I just think it's weird that, of all the stories you could choose to make up about your history, they chose to make up a story about being unfairly persecuted.

    It’s also interesting that they actually threw in another story, in the book of Esther, of a persecution event that almost certainly never really happened. They still celebrate this made-up persecution to this day.

    I see, it’s a long standing tradition then.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    "in the book of Esther, of a persecution event that almost certainly never really happened. "

    Because it s not about persecution real, imagined, fabricated, false flagged, organic or synthetic but about the retribution for it. The 75,000 Persians were killed in the book of Esther for it.
  98. res says:
    @SFG
    There was a front-page article on ditching identity politics in the NYT shortly after the election. They're chewing it over, but there's no telling what they'll actually do.

    Which IIRC seemed to be followed by doubling down in favor of identity politics. Some might be chewing it over, but the most annoying have not only not gotten that message they have actually become worse post-election.

    Read More
  99. @SFG
    There was a front-page article on ditching identity politics in the NYT shortly after the election. They're chewing it over, but there's no telling what they'll actually do.

    It will take a lot more than ditching identity politics. It could conceivably take less.

    It will certainly take picking a more beatable foe than reality (i.e. truth itself).

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    If I were the Dems? The point is really to capitalize on whatever mistakes Trump makes. Filling his cabinet with Goldman Sachs and trying to kick people off their health insurance kind of makes their point for them. The broad outline of my strategy would be to use economic populism to blunt the negative appeal of social liberalism. But, who knows?
  100. SFG says:
    @Desiderius

    the Christian idea of constantly battling against sinful thoughts
     
    Meh.

    "And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you."

    - Luke 22

    This is the heart of the communion/Eucharist celebration. The word anamnesis translated "in remembrance" literally means "not forgetting," implying that the only thought that Christians are to be constantly in mind of is Christ himself, who was without sin.

    If you're constantly battling sinful thoughts, you're doing it wrong. In Christ we are a new creation.

    Literally.

    Look, the people I've seen whose characters have been transformed through a lifetime of regular spiritual discipline come to a place where they don't have to battle sinful thoughts - it's a sort of good sapir-whorf. It's the example of those lives that led me to commit my life to Christ, and I've seen his justifying/sanctifying work in my own over time.

    Ah, thanks. I actually do believe you–there are volumes and volumes from the Middle Ages describing the best ways to go about strengthening your spirit. Maybe I was always hearing from people who couldn’t pull it off. I do live in a liberal area.

    Read More
  101. SFG says:
    @Desiderius
    It will take a lot more than ditching identity politics. It could conceivably take less.

    It will certainly take picking a more beatable foe than reality (i.e. truth itself).

    If I were the Dems? The point is really to capitalize on whatever mistakes Trump makes. Filling his cabinet with Goldman Sachs and trying to kick people off their health insurance kind of makes their point for them. The broad outline of my strategy would be to use economic populism to blunt the negative appeal of social liberalism. But, who knows?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    Doesn't matter.

    Their philosophy is rotten at it's very heart, in that they don't recognize truth as a valid concept. Over time it's led them further and further from reality. When the contest comes down to who gets to be normal vs who gets to be extreme (as it is in American politics), the inability to comprehend reality places one at a continually worsening disadvantage.

    The bullshitters can pretend to be normal only as well as they can reliably tell where normal is.

  102. The idea that this self-obsessed Jew is “anti-semitic” is almost certainly wrong. If and when we find out his motivation, it will turn out to be that he “wanted the world to know how threatened Jews feel” or “how serious the threat Iran poses to Israel is” or something along those lines.

    Right now, organized Jewry is seeding the media environment with stories about his alleged mental illness. Well, either he’s mentally ill or he is anti-semitic or something.

    We’ve seen so many examples of faux “hate crimes” committed by aggrieved members of official victim groups that one more should not surprise us. But as with the UVA female, our compromised media just can’t call it what it is.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    Dude, he's crazy and may have a brain tumor. We have no clue what he's thinking. Juan Thompson wanted to get back at his girlfriend. This guy could have been trying to save the JCC people from the Martians who kept landing in the JCCs and poisoning the matzoh for all we know.
  103. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    I think Straub is ‘antisemitic’ because he makes Jewish logic come across as tarded.

    He has defamed the once venerable Jewish intelligence and integrity.

    Read More
  104. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    Wait a minute, I thought Berkeley is supposed to be a very proggy and diverse place.

    But look at the roster:

    https://www.law.berkeley.edu/our-faculty/faculty-profiles/

    Looks like lots of Jewish privilege.

    Read More
  105. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    Using Straubian ethical logic… if a Christian poisons a water-well in a Christian village and then blames Jews, the main lesson to draw from the incident is that the perpetrator must be ‘anti-Christian’ since he polluted a Christian water-well. Never mind that he pulled that stunt to slander and defame Jews to boost Christian solidarity against Jews.

    If this is what passes for legal scholarship, Woody Allen chose the wrong field. He shoulda been a lawyer. Mel Brooks too.

    Read More
  106. SPMoore8 says:
    @Flinders Petrie

    The people (or person) involved were obviously mentally ill
     
    Calling this person mentally ill relieves him of much of the motive and responsibility of this actions. If the calls were made by someone in the alt-right, I doubt many people would just throw up their hands and say "what are you going to do, he was clearly mentally ill".

    His actions resulted in a few things that many left-leaning Jews would consider beneficial:

    1) Raised awareness of anti-Semitism in a major way
    2) Donations to SPLC skyrocketed
    3) Gave the impression that Trump's election emboldened an anti-semitic base
    4) Forced Trump and his administration to denounce the supposed acts as the worst form of hatred

    For all of these elements to come together through some random act of mental illness is just not believable. The odds are that his political leanings drove him to do this, and the use of sophisticated precautions to hide his tracks suggests that he didn't want to be caught and was behaving rationally.

    It also led Amazon to delete all of its Holocaust Denial titles.

    I’m not saying the guy (or the guy and his father) are not responsible for their actions.

    I think calling for the rape of this teenager is way, way overboard. So is the sacred curse. Just silly.

    I think the calls upset a lot of Jewish people, so in that respect they were “anti-semitic”. However, to spend all of one’s time (as Schraub does) in focusing on nomenclature and taxonomy is to my mind pretty stupid. Simple story: a Jewish guy, propelled by the prevailing moral panic among some Jews since Trump’s election, decided to goose the project a bit by making threatening phone calls.

    So let’s put him in prison for a few years.

    Read More
  107. utu says:
    @Pericles

    It’s also interesting that they actually threw in another story, in the book of Esther, of a persecution event that almost certainly never really happened. They still celebrate this made-up persecution to this day.

     

    I see, it's a long standing tradition then.

    “in the book of Esther, of a persecution event that almost certainly never really happened. ”

    Because it s not about persecution real, imagined, fabricated, false flagged, organic or synthetic but about the retribution for it. The 75,000 Persians were killed in the book of Esther for it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pericles

    Because it s not about persecution real, imagined, fabricated, false flagged, organic or synthetic but about the retribution for it. The 75,000 Persians were killed in the book of Esther for it.

     

    Well, that's interesting too.
  108. SFG says:
    @Svigor

    But have the floodgates really opened? According to the FBI, anti-Semitic incidents did rise 9 percent between 2014 and 2015, when Trump announced his candidacy.
     
    Ah, framing. What is more salient: Trump merely announcing his candidacy, or Hussein being in the 7th of his 8 years as Leader of the Free World?

    But the two Breitbart articles critics most commonly call anti-Semitic—an attack on the Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol that called him a “renegade Jew” and an attack on the Washington Post columnist Anne Applebaum that called her “a Polish, Jewish, American elitist scorned”—were both written by Jews.
     
    What's astounding is that this is an astounding admission in our timeline.

    What’s astounding is that this is an astounding admission in our timeline.

    You haven’t been to the ones where Hitler decided to stick to persecuting Gypsies and gay people. Moscow and London are radioactive and everyone speaks German. Scary!

    Read More
  109. SFG says:
    @Oscar Peterson
    The idea that this self-obsessed Jew is "anti-semitic" is almost certainly wrong. If and when we find out his motivation, it will turn out to be that he "wanted the world to know how threatened Jews feel" or "how serious the threat Iran poses to Israel is" or something along those lines.

    Right now, organized Jewry is seeding the media environment with stories about his alleged mental illness. Well, either he's mentally ill or he is anti-semitic or something.

    We've seen so many examples of faux "hate crimes" committed by aggrieved members of official victim groups that one more should not surprise us. But as with the UVA female, our compromised media just can't call it what it is.

    Dude, he’s crazy and may have a brain tumor. We have no clue what he’s thinking. Juan Thompson wanted to get back at his girlfriend. This guy could have been trying to save the JCC people from the Martians who kept landing in the JCCs and poisoning the matzoh for all we know.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Oscar Peterson
    Well, he is marginally more pathological than the Jews in general.
    And the fact that Jewry, Inc. were in utter denial about the likelihood that the "anti-Semitic" bomb hoaxes were exactly what they turned out to be, strongly supports that view.

    Unser Ungluck.
  110. @SFG
    If I were the Dems? The point is really to capitalize on whatever mistakes Trump makes. Filling his cabinet with Goldman Sachs and trying to kick people off their health insurance kind of makes their point for them. The broad outline of my strategy would be to use economic populism to blunt the negative appeal of social liberalism. But, who knows?

    Doesn’t matter.

    Their philosophy is rotten at it’s very heart, in that they don’t recognize truth as a valid concept. Over time it’s led them further and further from reality. When the contest comes down to who gets to be normal vs who gets to be extreme (as it is in American politics), the inability to comprehend reality places one at a continually worsening disadvantage.

    The bullshitters can pretend to be normal only as well as they can reliably tell where normal is.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    And yes, of course Trump himself is a bullshitter with this very problem.

    One of the reasons we elected him is to hold up a mirror to our wayward elite.
  111. @Desiderius
    Doesn't matter.

    Their philosophy is rotten at it's very heart, in that they don't recognize truth as a valid concept. Over time it's led them further and further from reality. When the contest comes down to who gets to be normal vs who gets to be extreme (as it is in American politics), the inability to comprehend reality places one at a continually worsening disadvantage.

    The bullshitters can pretend to be normal only as well as they can reliably tell where normal is.

    And yes, of course Trump himself is a bullshitter with this very problem.

    One of the reasons we elected him is to hold up a mirror to our wayward elite.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pericles
    And yet Trump seems far more truthful than the carefully formulated juridical conundrums emitted by Obama and his class. "The attacker was born in Britain, bigots.", "Anonymous intelligence sources have informed us Trump rented hookers in Moscow to pee on Obama", etc.

    I wouldn't be surprised if we end up with:

    Fact check: Meeting minutes recovered from government shredder show Obama didn't order surveillance on Trump, he just asked "Shouldn't someone also do deep surveillance on Trump? They tell me we have nothing on that guy".

    Status: Trump lied!

     

  112. anon says: • Disclaimer

    making people believe there is more anti-semitism than actually exists is good for Jewish group cohesion and good for bullying Eurowhites

    the guy may be crazy but he’s following the ADL’s play book so his actions are no more crazy than theirs

    Read More
  113. surly says:
    @Anon
    So, if a black burns a cross and blames it on KKK, is he anti-black?

    So, if a Christian burns down a church and blames it on Jews, he is primarily anti-Christian?
    Isn't he anti-Jewish in trying to slander to Jews to win sympathy for Christians?

    It seems many Jews pull apparently anti-Jewish hoaxes to serve Jewish interests. Fear-mongering works. If anything, their objective is to make white Christians look bad.
    So, the act would be anti-Christian than anti-Jewish.

    Ultimately, the decisive factor is the not so much the deed but overall objective.

    So, if a Christian burns down a church and blames it on Jews, he is primarily anti-Christian?
    Isn’t he anti-Jewish in trying to slander to Jews to win sympathy for Christians?

    It seems many Jews pull apparently anti-Jewish hoaxes to serve Jewish interests. Fear-mongering works. If anything, their objective is to make white Christians look bad.

    ^^ This ^^

    Sapir Whorf or not, it won’t occur to almost anyone that this crap is crypto-anti-European.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    It might if it turns out Soros was paying for it.
  114. @surly

    So, if a Christian burns down a church and blames it on Jews, he is primarily anti-Christian?
    Isn’t he anti-Jewish in trying to slander to Jews to win sympathy for Christians?

    It seems many Jews pull apparently anti-Jewish hoaxes to serve Jewish interests. Fear-mongering works. If anything, their objective is to make white Christians look bad.
     

    ^^ This ^^

    Sapir Whorf or not, it won't occur to almost anyone that this crap is crypto-anti-European.

    It might if it turns out Soros was paying for it.

    Read More
  115. @Gabriel M
    I once lived in a predominantly Hassidic ultra-orthodox community, so I came across more anti-gentilism than I really care to remember. While it may be "logically parallel" to anti-semitism, it wasn't structurally parallel. Anti-gentilists nothing gentiles. They positively revel in ignorance of gentiles and, if necessary, feign it. They make bizarre comments like "the goyim think it's fine to steal", which they pull out of their arse and then talk about something else. If you ask them to name a doctrine of Christianity/Islam/Hinduism they will stare at you blankly. If you ask them the capital of the country they live in they usually can't answer. Conversely, they are minutely interested in every detail of rival ultra-orthodox sects. They can tell you umpteen completely boring details about the the differences between the Haredi community in Montreal, Lakewood, Stamford Hill, Williamsburg etc. but they couldn't find any of them on a map.


    Anti-semites, on the other hand, love nothing more than to demonstrate their expertise in Judaism. An anti-gentilist would regard the idea of reading a four volume epic on the ways of the gentile by Kevin McHymiestein with bafflement. He would get bored 15 seconds into a youtube video.

    In short, the main thing anti-gentilists and anti-semites have in common is that they are obsessed with Jews.

    Anyway, what this has to do with American liberal Jews is not clear to me at all. Hillary is a gentile, Mikey Pooh Brown is a gentile, Obama is a gentile. They seem pretty fond of them. As usual Moldbug:

    I'm fascinated by the mind of the modern anti-Semite. While the story of the 20th century as a Jewish conspiracy is basically crazy, it is no crazier than many present-day beliefs that are considered normal and even fashionable. To be exact, the MacDonaldists attribute exactly the same pattern of behavior to Jews that folks like Jack O'Connell attribute to whites. The likes of Tanstaafl, NeoNietzsche, and Colin Laney certainly feel - quite genuinely, I'm sure - that they are having a "courageous conversation" about Jewish privilege.

    The problem with the Jack McConnell theory of the world is that if there is anywhere in the US where white people feel it is socially acceptable to suggest that white people should cooperate on the basis of their shared whiteness, it is certainly not in the circles of power and privilege. Unless cell block D at San Quentin counts as such. And the same is true for Jews: while there are ethnocentric Jewish communities in the US, these are not exactly the people who run the New York Times. To say the least!

    So to talk about modern, American white or Jewish ethnocentrism, without giving anyone the impression that you live on a different planet from the rest of us, you have to resort to the language of conspiracy theory. The motives of your enemies are either concealed, unconscious, or both. The more white people deny that they are racist, the more likely they are to be racist. And so on
     
    http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.co.il/2007/11/jewish-question-and-other-links.html

    …And the same is true for Jews: while there are ethnocentric Jewish communities in the US, these are not exactly the people who run the New York Times….

    Ethnocentric Eskimos don’t run the NY Times?

    Read More
  116. @Desiderius

    the Christian idea of constantly battling against sinful thoughts
     
    Meh.

    "And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you."

    - Luke 22

    This is the heart of the communion/Eucharist celebration. The word anamnesis translated "in remembrance" literally means "not forgetting," implying that the only thought that Christians are to be constantly in mind of is Christ himself, who was without sin.

    If you're constantly battling sinful thoughts, you're doing it wrong. In Christ we are a new creation.

    Literally.

    Look, the people I've seen whose characters have been transformed through a lifetime of regular spiritual discipline come to a place where they don't have to battle sinful thoughts - it's a sort of good sapir-whorf. It's the example of those lives that led me to commit my life to Christ, and I've seen his justifying/sanctifying work in my own over time.

    This is the heart of the communion/Eucharist celebration

    It’s also the one sentence the Biblical literalists refuse to take literally. As if they fail their own litmus test.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    I take it you're speaking of the real presence?

    Calvin had an interesting way to solve that conundrum.
  117. Pericles says:
    @utu
    "in the book of Esther, of a persecution event that almost certainly never really happened. "

    Because it s not about persecution real, imagined, fabricated, false flagged, organic or synthetic but about the retribution for it. The 75,000 Persians were killed in the book of Esther for it.

    Because it s not about persecution real, imagined, fabricated, false flagged, organic or synthetic but about the retribution for it. The 75,000 Persians were killed in the book of Esther for it.

    Well, that’s interesting too.

    Read More
  118. Pericles says:
    @Desiderius
    And yes, of course Trump himself is a bullshitter with this very problem.

    One of the reasons we elected him is to hold up a mirror to our wayward elite.

    And yet Trump seems far more truthful than the carefully formulated juridical conundrums emitted by Obama and his class. “The attacker was born in Britain, bigots.”, “Anonymous intelligence sources have informed us Trump rented hookers in Moscow to pee on Obama”, etc.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if we end up with:

    Fact check: Meeting minutes recovered from government shredder show Obama didn’t order surveillance on Trump, he just asked “Shouldn’t someone also do deep surveillance on Trump? They tell me we have nothing on that guy”.

    Status: Trump lied!

    Read More
  119. @SFG
    Dude, he's crazy and may have a brain tumor. We have no clue what he's thinking. Juan Thompson wanted to get back at his girlfriend. This guy could have been trying to save the JCC people from the Martians who kept landing in the JCCs and poisoning the matzoh for all we know.

    Well, he is marginally more pathological than the Jews in general.
    And the fact that Jewry, Inc. were in utter denial about the likelihood that the “anti-Semitic” bomb hoaxes were exactly what they turned out to be, strongly supports that view.

    Unser Ungluck.

    Read More
  120. @Reg Cæsar

    This is the heart of the communion/Eucharist celebration
     
    It's also the one sentence the Biblical literalists refuse to take literally. As if they fail their own litmus test.

    I take it you’re speaking of the real presence?

    Calvin had an interesting way to solve that conundrum.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Calvin had an interesting way to solve that conundrum.
     
    I imagine he was predestined to.
  121. Feeeney says:
    @Gabriel M
    I once lived in a predominantly Hassidic ultra-orthodox community, so I came across more anti-gentilism than I really care to remember. While it may be "logically parallel" to anti-semitism, it wasn't structurally parallel. Anti-gentilists nothing gentiles. They positively revel in ignorance of gentiles and, if necessary, feign it. They make bizarre comments like "the goyim think it's fine to steal", which they pull out of their arse and then talk about something else. If you ask them to name a doctrine of Christianity/Islam/Hinduism they will stare at you blankly. If you ask them the capital of the country they live in they usually can't answer. Conversely, they are minutely interested in every detail of rival ultra-orthodox sects. They can tell you umpteen completely boring details about the the differences between the Haredi community in Montreal, Lakewood, Stamford Hill, Williamsburg etc. but they couldn't find any of them on a map.


    Anti-semites, on the other hand, love nothing more than to demonstrate their expertise in Judaism. An anti-gentilist would regard the idea of reading a four volume epic on the ways of the gentile by Kevin McHymiestein with bafflement. He would get bored 15 seconds into a youtube video.

    In short, the main thing anti-gentilists and anti-semites have in common is that they are obsessed with Jews.

    Anyway, what this has to do with American liberal Jews is not clear to me at all. Hillary is a gentile, Mikey Pooh Brown is a gentile, Obama is a gentile. They seem pretty fond of them. As usual Moldbug:

    I'm fascinated by the mind of the modern anti-Semite. While the story of the 20th century as a Jewish conspiracy is basically crazy, it is no crazier than many present-day beliefs that are considered normal and even fashionable. To be exact, the MacDonaldists attribute exactly the same pattern of behavior to Jews that folks like Jack O'Connell attribute to whites. The likes of Tanstaafl, NeoNietzsche, and Colin Laney certainly feel - quite genuinely, I'm sure - that they are having a "courageous conversation" about Jewish privilege.

    The problem with the Jack McConnell theory of the world is that if there is anywhere in the US where white people feel it is socially acceptable to suggest that white people should cooperate on the basis of their shared whiteness, it is certainly not in the circles of power and privilege. Unless cell block D at San Quentin counts as such. And the same is true for Jews: while there are ethnocentric Jewish communities in the US, these are not exactly the people who run the New York Times. To say the least!

    So to talk about modern, American white or Jewish ethnocentrism, without giving anyone the impression that you live on a different planet from the rest of us, you have to resort to the language of conspiracy theory. The motives of your enemies are either concealed, unconscious, or both. The more white people deny that they are racist, the more likely they are to be racist. And so on
     
    http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.co.il/2007/11/jewish-question-and-other-links.html

    “Anti-gentilists nothing gentiles.”

    Hmmm.

    Read More
  122. Svigor says:

    Gabriel M says:
    March 25, 2017 at 7:19 pm GMT • 500 Words

    Interesting comment. I found Moldbug weak tea (which is unusual, I usually find him TL;DR), but interesting, otherwise.

    I don’t care about the black hats. They may smuggle some diamonds or cheat welfare, but so what? No, my problem is organized and elite Jewry. That’s the part of Jewry where the Culture of Critique, mass media indoctrination, race-replacement and open borders agenda, etc., are coming from.

    It’s not difficult to have such overweening concern for one’s own people that one does harm to other groups while pursuing that interest, by way of total disregard for others. E.g., the recent business with the Israeli hate provocateur and Jewish cemeteries. Even here at iSteve you had Jews largely dismissing the harm he did to Whites. Never mind the media, where I expect ignoring the subject altogether will be the norm, with exceptions as rare as hen’s teeth.

    I don’t see why it’s such a stretch to attribute importance to the unconscious behavior to ethnic groups. Heck, even the conscious rules and goals are quite different for Jews and Whites. Whites are supposed to constantly police themselves with regard to their behavior toward non-Whites and Jews. Jews do not reciprocate that vis-a-vis Whites. On the contrary, Jews are supposed to constantly police themselves with regard to their behavior toward non-Whites, and each other; the difference between “White Guilt” and “Jewish Guilt” is roughly 180 degrees.

    The question then becomes, why aren’t Jews policing themselves? Why, in this age of White navel-gazing with regard to group relations, aren’t Jews reciprocating the sensitivity of Whites? The introspection?

    As far as I can tell, this issue is completely off Jews’ radar. All the thinking and writing and talking that they do, and it’s completely off their radar.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Gabriel M
    Who are you and what did you do with Svigor?

    On the contrary, Jews are supposed to constantly police themselves with regard to their behavior toward non-Whites, and each other; the difference between “White Guilt” and “Jewish Guilt” is roughly 180 degrees.
     
    Whites (or most of them) think it's important to have exaggerated concern for the welfare and sensitivities of ethnics and not important, and perhaps even immoral, to have concern for the welfare and sensitivities of white people qua white people. Jews (or most of them) think the same.

    An analogy I once saw on a Moldbug comments thread was this: imagine the human race was converted to religion consisting of endlessly confessing the sinfulness of all humanity and berating themselves. Then imagine aliens start professing the same religion, and, indeed, eagerly assert their status as the most passionate believers.
  123. If you search Google Trends for “Antisemitism” (unhyphenated), you get completely different results, with Israel, Sweden, Germany, and Austria in the lead: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=%2Fm%2F0m61

    However, if you search “cheeseburger” or “Weezer”, you get very similar (Anglo-dominant) results to those for “anti-semitism” (hyphenated). I think Steve mostly uncovered an anglophone quirk.

    Read More
  124. @Desiderius
    I take it you're speaking of the real presence?

    Calvin had an interesting way to solve that conundrum.

    Calvin had an interesting way to solve that conundrum.

    I imagine he was predestined to.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    It was serendipitous enough to be likely.

    His idea was that when we celebrate communion the Holy Spirit lifts us up into heaven where Jesus is seated at the right hand of the Father (i.e. really present).
  125. Gabriel M says:
    @Svigor

    Gabriel M says:
    March 25, 2017 at 7:19 pm GMT • 500 Words
     
    Interesting comment. I found Moldbug weak tea (which is unusual, I usually find him TL;DR), but interesting, otherwise.

    I don't care about the black hats. They may smuggle some diamonds or cheat welfare, but so what? No, my problem is organized and elite Jewry. That's the part of Jewry where the Culture of Critique, mass media indoctrination, race-replacement and open borders agenda, etc., are coming from.

    It's not difficult to have such overweening concern for one's own people that one does harm to other groups while pursuing that interest, by way of total disregard for others. E.g., the recent business with the Israeli hate provocateur and Jewish cemeteries. Even here at iSteve you had Jews largely dismissing the harm he did to Whites. Never mind the media, where I expect ignoring the subject altogether will be the norm, with exceptions as rare as hen's teeth.

    I don't see why it's such a stretch to attribute importance to the unconscious behavior to ethnic groups. Heck, even the conscious rules and goals are quite different for Jews and Whites. Whites are supposed to constantly police themselves with regard to their behavior toward non-Whites and Jews. Jews do not reciprocate that vis-a-vis Whites. On the contrary, Jews are supposed to constantly police themselves with regard to their behavior toward non-Whites, and each other; the difference between "White Guilt" and "Jewish Guilt" is roughly 180 degrees.

    The question then becomes, why aren't Jews policing themselves? Why, in this age of White navel-gazing with regard to group relations, aren't Jews reciprocating the sensitivity of Whites? The introspection?

    As far as I can tell, this issue is completely off Jews' radar. All the thinking and writing and talking that they do, and it's completely off their radar.

    Who are you and what did you do with Svigor?

    On the contrary, Jews are supposed to constantly police themselves with regard to their behavior toward non-Whites, and each other; the difference between “White Guilt” and “Jewish Guilt” is roughly 180 degrees.

    Whites (or most of them) think it’s important to have exaggerated concern for the welfare and sensitivities of ethnics and not important, and perhaps even immoral, to have concern for the welfare and sensitivities of white people qua white people. Jews (or most of them) think the same.

    An analogy I once saw on a Moldbug comments thread was this: imagine the human race was converted to religion consisting of endlessly confessing the sinfulness of all humanity and berating themselves. Then imagine aliens start professing the same religion, and, indeed, eagerly assert their status as the most passionate believers.

    Read More
  126. @Reg Cæsar

    Calvin had an interesting way to solve that conundrum.
     
    I imagine he was predestined to.

    It was serendipitous enough to be likely.

    His idea was that when we celebrate communion the Holy Spirit lifts us up into heaven where Jesus is seated at the right hand of the Father (i.e. really present).

    Read More
  127. donut says:
    @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever...
    "I do like my food spicy , nothing better than food that makes you break out in a sweat after a bite or two ."
    And it teaches you what your arse is for, Mr Floral Camper.

    Simpleton that I am I don’t get the point of your comment . Could you elaborate ?

    Read More
  128. […] the following quotation I’ll thank Steve Sailer, who dug it up. David Schraub wrote in the Jewish magazine Tablet (they did once a hatchet job on […]

    Read More
  129. Miro23 says:
    @jtgw
    The actual Sapir-Whorf hypothesis was a bit stronger than that: it was the claim that not having a word for something in a language prevented speakers of that language from the possibility of even conceiving of that thing, let alone expressing it. That idea is pretty demonstrably false. The weaker version here is probably correct as a statement of the correlation between absence of a word and absence of the concept in people's minds, but that doesn't tell us which causes the other.

    If there is no established word or phrase to express a concept in the language, i.e. the concept must be expressed in circumlocutions at best, that probably means most people aren't talking much about the concept because most people aren't thinking about it. So it isn't clear what the order of causality is: does the lack of the word cause people not to think of the concept, or rather is it the lack of interest in the concept on the part of the community the cause of its absence in the language's vocabulary?

    If there is no established word or phrase to express a concept in the language, i.e. the concept must be expressed in circumlocutions at best, that probably means most people aren’t talking much about the concept because most people aren’t thinking about it. So it isn’t clear what the order of causality is: does the lack of the word cause people not to think of the concept, or rather is it the lack of interest in the concept on the part of the community the cause of its absence in the language’s vocabulary?

    The answer to this question seems to lie on a scale.

    At one end, the !Kung hunter-gatherers of the Kalahari don’t have a word in !Kung for “semiconductor” because they seem to lack interest in the concept. If its meaning was taught and deliberately included in their vocabulary it would probably still be met with lack of interest (unless as a joke) because of its everyday uselessness.

    At the other end, English doesn’t have a word for “Pleasure in someone else’s misfortune” but the British do borrow the German word “Schadenfreude” which may have some role in promoting the concept.

    But in general, words are probably just another tool to help in handling environmental pressure (an aid to formulating necessary adaptive thought and speech).

    Read More
  130. […] la citation qui suit, je dois remercier Steve Sailer, qui l’a dénichée. David Schraub a écrit, dans le magazine juif Tablet (ils m’ont un jour […]

    Read More

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation
Confederate Flag Day, State Capitol, Raleigh, N.C. -- March 3, 2007
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored