The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Brenton Sanderson Archive
A Response to Francis M. Naumann
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Francis M. Naumann

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

My attention was recently drawn to a critical review of two of the essays that appear in my book Battle Lines: Essays on Western Culture, Jewish Influence, and Anti-Semitism (which, probably not coincidentally, was recently banned by Amazon). This review was penned by art writer and dealer Francis M. Naumann in the online and print journal The Brooklyn Rail. This website and publication claim to “provide an independent forum for arts, culture, and politics throughout New York City and far beyond.” The ideological tenor of The Brooklyn Rail is captured in the banner across the top of the website’s homepage which declares “Black Lives Matter. We stand in solidarity with those affected by generations of structural violence.” Readers will be shocked to learn that individuals with common Jewish names feature very prominently among the contributors to this journal.

Naumann, who is not Jewish, offers a review replete with ad hominem and straw man arguments, and nit-picking, inconsequential argumentation. Unable to debunk the central thesis of either essay, he resorts to ascribing malign motives and psychological imbalances to myself and Professor MacDonald. In his review, Naumann deploys the standard rhetorical devices arrayed against those critical of Jewish influence, or who just stand up for White interests: the tendentious terms “white supremacist” and “conspiracy” featuring prominently. He claims Kevin MacDonald is “accurately described” in his Wikipedia entry as “an American anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist” and “white supremacist.” Naumann, who doubtless has never actually read any of MacDonald’s academic work, claims this description is validated by MacDonald’s simple statement of fact in his foreword to Battle Lines that: “We simply can’t avoid discussing the Jews. Honest discussions of Jewish influence are absolutely necessary if White people are going to have a future.”

Naumann’s apparent a priori assumption is that Jewish influence on Western societies and culture is necessarily benevolent, and that, consequently, any criticism of this influence is inherently invalid and reflects negatively on the psychological health of the critic (hence the title of his review, “Pure Meshuggah: Anti-Semitism Invades Art History” with “Meshuggah” being the Yiddish word for crazy). This kind of illogic and intellectual dishonesty spills over into his discussion of my work.

In my essay entitled “Tristan Tzara and the Jewish Roots of Dada,” I argue that the Jewish origins and identities of prominent figures in the Dada movement (c. 1916–1924), and particularly of its founder, Tristan Tzara (born Samuel Rosenstock), were critical in shaping its intellectual tenor as a movement arrayed against every cultural tradition of the European past, including rationality itself. I describe Dada’s destructive influence in feeding into the conceptual art that has blighted Western art since the 1960s. I also note the conceptual parallels between Dada and the deconstruction of the Jewish poststructuralist intellectual Jacques Derrida. Both attempted to foster subjective individualism to disconnect Europeans from their familial, religious and ethnic bonds—reducing the salience of Jews as an outgroup and, consequently, the prevalence of anti-Semitism in Western societies.

Offering no real counter-arguments (or critical analysis of my sources), Naumann summarily dismisses this as a “conspiracy theory,” claiming that “Sanderson casts aside logic and reasoning in order to convince us that what he is saying is true.” While a prominent Israeli art historian admitted my essay “is well written and excellently researched” and from an “academic research viewpoint it is without reproach,” Naumann eschews any pretensions to objective analysis and resorts to amateur psychoanalysis. He proposes that my thesis reflects “Sanderson’s fear of the intellectual achievement of these Jewish writers; for like Hitler before him, the exceptional intelligence and success of so many Jews in all professions clearly terrifies him and threatens to undermine his painfully flawed illusion of white supremacy.” Naumann here unintentionally confesses to an ideologically-problematic (for him) strain of race realism: accepting that certain ethnic groups possess “exceptional intelligence” and thus achieve more than others. He is, however, unable to cite a single sentence from Battle Lines that demonstrates my alleged belief in “white supremacy.”

Appalled that anyone would draw negative conclusions about the influence of Dada, which he calls “a playful movement,” or of the Jews who dominated the movement, Naumann insists that “The revolutionary spirit that fueled Dada and abstract art has continued to affect the course of contemporary art, to the good fortune of all reasonable and sentient people.” In addition to being neither reasonable nor sentient, this author is also, according to Naumann, a contaminant. He sanctimoniously claims to never have “imagined that racist politics and white supremacist viewpoints could contaminate my profession.” His self-righteous indignation at the very existence of my work is compounded, moreover, by the fact that Battle Lines had “been awarded five stars from Amazon’s customer reviews.” Naumann sees my work as a “threat to civility and justice” that, left unchallenged, will “grow and fester like an unattended wound. And if we have learned anything from history, that is too dangerous a course of action to follow.”

While leaving the actual thesis of my Dada essay unchallenged, Naumann constructs a straw man from a passing reference I make to Lenin. I note that “living across the street from the Cabaret Voltaire [a Dadaist venue] in Zurich [in 1916] were Lenin, Karl Radek and Gregory Zinoviev who were preparing for the Bolshevik Revolution.” Naumann cavils at the supposed geographical imprecision of this statement (despite its ubiquity in the literature), and falsely claims my objective here is “to implicate Dadaists as Communists whose influence was felt in Russia, and later in Western Europe and America.” I never claim Dadaists were important political actors in the interwar period, but I do stress their destructive artistic and intellectual legacy. That Tzara and the other leading Dadaists were communists or radical leftists is, however, incontrovertible, and is illustrated by their own actions and statements (which are cited at length in my essay). Even the Wikipedia entry for “Dada” states plainly that the Dadaists “maintained political affinities with radical left-wing and far-left politics.”

Tzara joined the French Communist Party and interpreted both Dada and Surrealism as revolutionary currents, and presented them as such to the public.[1]Irina Livezeanu, “From Dada to Gaga: The Peripatetic Romanian Avant-Garde Confronts Communism,” Mihai Dinu Gheorghiu & Lucia Dragomir (Eds.), Littératures et pouvoir symbolique (Bucharest: Paralela 45, 2005), 245-6. The leading Dadaists in Germany were self-declared communists: Richard Huelsenbeck and Raoul Hausmann affirmed that Dada “is German Bolshevism”[2]Bernard Blisténe, A History of Twentieth Century Art (Paris: Fammarion, 2001), 62. and that “Dadaism demands: the international revolutionary union of all creative and intellectual men and women on the basis of radical Communism.”[3]Dawn Ades, “Dada and Surrealism,” David Britt (Ed.) Modern Art – Impressionism to Post-Modernism, (London, Thames & Hudson, 1974), 222. Robert Short notes that, among the German Dadaists, were those for whom: “Dada was a political weapon and those for whom communism was a Dadaistical weapon.”[4]Robert Short, Dada and Surrealism (London: Laurence King Publishing, 1994), 42.

Dada leader Tristan Tzara
Dada leader Tristan Tzara

Naumann insists it is “now well known” in the literature on Dada that “Lenin was a frequent visitor to the Cabaret Voltaire, where he went to see if what was going on there could contribute to his political aspirations.” Actually, this notion is widely disputed in the literature. Huelsenbeck stated that Lenin once visited the Café Voltaire, and Marcel Janko later made a similar claim. The veracity of these accounts is, however, strongly doubted. Jones, for example, questions “the wistful reminiscing on Richard Huelsenbeck’s part to suggest that Lenin actually visited the Cabaret Voltaire; similarly, Marcel Janko’s distant and apocryphal retrospection of the cabaret room, thick with smoke, ‘where some sudden apparition would loom up every now and then, like the impressive Mongol features of Lenin.’”[5]Daffyd Jones, Dada 1916 in Theory: Practices of Critical Resistance (Liverpool University Press, 2014), 176. Rappaport is similarly unconvinced, wondering if “the subversive nature of Dada as performance” was enough to arouse “Lenin’s curiosity enough to prompt him to cross the road and take a look.”[6]Helen Rappaport, Conspirator: Lenin in Exile (Basic Books; 2012), 256. The official website of the city of Zurich is similarly skeptical, noting: “Whether Lenin visited the Cabaret Voltaire, the birthplace of Dadaism, is still unknown but has fueled speculation as to whether Lenin was a secret Dadaist.”

Naumann falsely alleges that I claim that Lenin influenced Dada and abstract art, and, correcting a point I don’t make, declares: “But in reality, Lenin had no effect whatsoever on Dada or abstract art. In fact, he and the other Bolsheviks were against abstract art, since its emphasis on individualism was diametrically opposed to Communist ideals.” The first statement is correct, but things are more complicated than Naumann’s second point would suggest. The new Soviet state led by Lenin that emerged after the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 initially adopted a policy in favor of radical experimentation. As Christine Lindey notes:

Initially, most avant-garde artists welcomed the revolution because Lenin’s idea of a political avant-garde as an agent for social change legitimised their own calls for radical action to combat conservative attitudes to art and society. For Marxists like [the Russian painter Vladimir] Tatlin, here was an opportunity to make real and meaningful change. … Others, like Kandinsky, were not sympathetic to Bolshevik politics, but welcomed the artistic freedom which it brought, while aesthetically or/and politically conservative artists feared a loss of private patronage and critical status. Contrary to western propaganda, no artist was sent to the salt mines: Lenin and Lunacharsky, (Commissar of Enlightenment 1917–1929) pursued a pluralist arts policy.

With Stalin’s rise in power the avant-garde artists who flourished under Lenin were silenced. All avant-garde movements were forced out of the Soviet Union (or forced underground) until Stalin’s death in 1953. Locke observes that “Stalin squashed the entire evolution of avant-garde ingenuity in Russia and replaced it with his own brand of art, Soviet Realism.”

Naumann quibbles at the supposed chronological imprecision of my assertion that Hitler wrote Mein Kampf as Dada peaked in Paris. Hitler’s comments on Dada were written (or at least dictated to Rudolf Hess) in 1923 and Paris Dada was officially ended in 1924. Naumann insists that “Hitler knew virtually nothing about Dada, which he lumped together with Cubism and called an ‘artistic aberration.’” I make no assessment of Hitler’s knowledge of the movement in the essay besides quoting his brief statements about it in Mein Kampf. Naumann does make a single valid (though inconsequential) criticism: the American art collector Walter Arensberg is incorrectly identified as Jewish. This is something I will amend in future editions of Battle Lines.

In my essay I draw parallels between the ideas underpinning Dada and those of poststructuralist Jewish intellectual and founder of deconstruction, Jacques Derrida. Naumann takes issue with my description of Derrida as a “crypto-Jew intensely preoccupied with his own Jewish identity and the evils of European anti-Semitism.” He claims “By crypto-Jew, he implies that Derrida hid his Jewish identity.” Some basic research by Naumann would have revealed that my epithet is correct, and while Derrida posed as a leftist Parisian intellectual, a secularist and an atheist, he descended from a long line of crypto-Jews, and explicitly identified himself as such: “I am one of those marranes who no longer say they are Jews even in the secret of their own hearts.”[7]Jacques Derrida, “Circumfession,” In Jacques Derrida, Ed. G. Bennington & Jacques Derrida, Trans. G. Bennington (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993), 170.

Derrida was born into a Sephardic Jewish family that immigrated to Algeria from Spain in the nineteenth century. His family were crypto-Jews who retained their Jewish identity for 400 years in Spain during the period of the Inquisition. Derrida changed his first name to the French Christian sounding ‘Jacques’ in order better blend into the French scene. Furthermore, he took his crypto-Judaism to the grave:

When Derrida was buried, his elder brother, René, wore a tallit at the suburban French cemetery and recited the Kaddish to himself inwardly, since Jacques had asked for no public prayers. This discreet, highly personal, yet emotionally and spiritually meaningful approach to recognizing Derrida’s Judaism seems emblematic of this complex, imperfect, yet valuably nuanced thinker.

Derrida was a crypto-Jew until the end, even instructing his family to participate in the charade. Kevin MacDonald notes the obvious reason: “Intellectually one wonders how one could be a postmodernist and a committed Jew at the same time. Intellectual consistency would seem to require that all personal identifications be subjected to the same deconstructing logic, unless, of course, personal identity itself involves deep ambiguities, deception, and self-deception.”[8]Kevin MacDonald, The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth‑Century Intellectual and Political Movements (Bloomington, IN: 1stbooks Library, 2001), 198.

In his notebooks, Derrida underscores the centrality of Jewish issues in his writing: “Circumcision, that’s all I’ve ever talked about.” His experience of anti-Semitism during World War II in Algeria was traumatic and resulted in a deep consciousness of his own Jewishness. He was expelled from school at age 13 under the Vichy government because of official caps on the number of Jewish students, describing himself as a “little black and very Arab Jew who understood nothing about it, to whom no one ever gave the slightest reason, neither his parents nor his friends.”[9]Derrida, “Circumfession,” op. cit., 58) Later, in France, his “suffering subsided. I naively thought that anti-Semitism had disappeared. … But during adolescence, it was the tragedy, it was present in everything else.” These experiences led Derrida to develop “an exhausting aptitude to detect signs of racism, in its most discreet configurations or its noisiest disavowals.”[10]Jacques Derrida, Points… Interviews, 1974-1994, Trans. P. Kamuf et al (Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press, 1995), 120–21. Caputo notes how Jewish ethnic activism underpins Derrida’s deconstruction:

The idea behind deconstruction is to deconstruct the workings of strong nation-states with powerful immigration policies, to deconstruct the rhetoric of nationalism, the politics of place, the metaphysics of native land and native tongue. … The idea is to disarm the bombs… of identity that nation-states build to defend themselves against the stranger, against Jews and Arabs and immigrants, … all of whom… are wholly other. Contrary to the claims of Derrida’s more careless critics, the passion of deconstruction is deeply political, for deconstruction is a relentless, if sometimes indirect, discourse on democracy, on a democracy to come. Derrida’s democracy is a radically pluralistic polity that resists the terror of an organic, ethnic, spiritual unity, of the natural, native bonds of the nation (natus, natio), which grind to dust everything that is not a kin of the ruling kind and genus (Geschlecht). He dreams of a nation without nationalist or nativist closure, of a community without identity, of a non-identical community that cannot say I or we, for, after all, the very idea of a community is to fortify (munis, muneris) ourselves in common against the other. His work is driven by a sense of the consummate danger of an identitarian community, of the spirit of the “we” of “Christian Europe,” or of a “Christian politics,” lethal compounds that spell death of Arabs and Jews, for Africans and Asians, for anything other. The heaving and sighing of this Christian European spirit is a lethal air for Jews and Arabs, for all les juifs [i.e., Jews as prototypical others], even if they go back to father Abraham, a way of gassing them according to both the letter and the spirit.[11]J.D. Caputo, The Prayers and Tears of Jacques Derrida: Religion without Religion (Bloomington: University of Indiana Press, 1997), 231–2.

Derrida’s sociological preoccupations (and suggested solutions) replicated those of Tristan Tzara. Sandqvist links Tzara’s profound revolt against European social constraints directly to his Jewish identity, and his anger at the persistence of anti-Semitism. For Sandqvist, the treatment of Jews in Romania fueled the Dada leader’s revolt against Western civilization. Bodenheimer notes that:

As a Jew, Tzara had many reasons to call into question the so-called disastrous truths and rationalizations of European thinking, one result of which was the First World War — with the discrimination of Jews for centuries being another. … He came from a background in which jingoistic and anti-Semitic arguments had long reproached Jews for using impure, falsified language, from early examples in the sixteenth century … all the way to the arguments of the Romanian intellectuals in Tzara’s time, who attacked Jews as “foreigners” importing “diseased ideas” into Romanian literature and culture.

[Tzara consequently] seeks to unmask language itself as a construction that draws its value, and sometimes its claim to superiority, from an equally constructed concept of identities and values. In themselves, all languages are equal, but equal in their differences. This claim to the right of equality while upholding difference is the basic Jewish claim to a secular society. But the European peoples, be it first for religious or later for nationalist reasons, have never managed to actually understand this right, let alone grant it to minority societies.

Both the Dadaists and Derrida attacked the notion that the world really is as our concepts describe it (i.e., philosophical realism), and used nominalism (the view that concepts are nothing more than human artifacts that have no relation to the real world) to deconstruct and subvert Western realism. Both thought the idea of objective truth was dangerous because of the possibility that truth could be deployed against the “other.” For the Dadaists, the principles of Western rationality “were held to be highly problematic, because of its instrumental connections to social repressions and domination.”[12]Matthew Biro, The Dada Cyborg: Visions of the New Human in Weimar Berlin, (Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press, 2009), 154. The Jewish Dadaist Hans Richter declared that the abstract language of the Dadaists would be “beyond all national language frontiers,” and saw in Dadaist abstraction a new kind of communication “free from all kinds of nationalistic alliances.”[13]Hockensmith, “Artists’ Biographies,” Leah Dickerman (Ed.) Dada (Washington D.C., National Gallery of Art, 2005), 482. Like the Dadaists, Derrida decided, if you dislike the prevailing power, then strive to ruin its concepts. Dada used nonsense and absurdity to achieve this goal, while Derrida developed and deployed his methodology of deconstruction.

Jacques Derrida
Jacques Derrida

When the Frankfurt School established itself in the United States, it made a conscious effort to give its Jewish intellectual activism a “scientific” veneer by gathering “empirical data” (such as that which formed the basis for The Authoritarian Personality) in order to challenge existing ideas seen as inimical to Jewish interests (such as Darwinian anthropology). Derrida and the poststructuralists instead sought (like the Jews within Dada) to discredit threatening ideas by undermining the notion of objective truth that underpinned all Western knowledge production.

Despite the difference of critical approach, a common Jewish ethno-political thread runs through Tzara’s Dada, Derrida’s deconstruction, and the Critical Theory of the Frankfurt School. Each attempted to foster subjective individualism to disconnect the masses from their familial, religious and ethnic bonds in order to lessen the prevalence of anti-Semitism in Western societies. Like the other movements chronicled by Kevin MacDonald in Culture of Critique, these movements were preoccupied with undermining the evolutionarily adaptive precepts and practices that had historically dominated Western societies (e.g., social homogeneity via immigration control, the nuclear family based on ties of love and affection, ethnocentrism, the drawing of clear ingroup and outgroup distinctions, sexual restraint), with the implicit goal being to render White Europeans less effective competitors to Jews for access to resources and reproductive success and less able to develop a cohesive, ethnically homogeneous movement in opposition to Judaism.

I am far from alone in noting the conceptual parallels between Dada and Derrida’s deconstruction. Wicks observes how strongly Dada resonates “with the definitively poststructuralist conception of deconstruction advanced by Jacques Derrida in the 1960s.”[14]Robert J. Wicks, Modern French Philosophy: From Existentialism to Postmodernism (Oxford: Oneworld, 2007), 11. Pegrum likewise notes the “strong link between Dada and postmodern artistic theory, the most obvious point of contact being with the work of Derrida.”[15]Mark A. Pegrum, Challenging Modernity: Dada between Modern and Postmodern (New York: Berghahn Books, 2000), 269. The literary critic Frank Kermode also traces deconstruction back to Dada influences, while Richard Sheppard regards the poststructuralists “as more introverted, less politicized, and less carnivalesque descendants of their Dada daddies.”[16]Richard Sheppard, Modernism-Dada-Postmodernism (Evanston, Northwestern University Press, 1999), 365.

Yet, for Naumann, my thesis is just a “conspiracy theory.” But why wouldn’t Jews (as a highly ethnocentric group) use their high levels of intellectual and cultural influence to advance their group interests at the expense of a group they perceive as an immemorial and existential threat?

Switching attention to my essay on Mark Rothko and Abstract Expressionism, a key theme of which is this artist’s political radicalism and Jewish ethnocentrism (and that of his entire social milieu), Naumann asks: “If Jews were such great supporters of Communism in the 1940s—as both Sanderson and MacDonald posit (and to a certain degree they are right)—then why did they not support the efforts of Regionalist painters (Thomas Hart Benton, Grant Wood and John Steuart Curry) and the Social Realists (Ben Shahn, Diego Rivera)?” I address this point at length in my essay — which makes me wonder if he actually bothered to read it to the end. Jewish artists like Rothko regarded Regionalism as exactly the kind of American painting they most despised: scenic, provincial, anecdotal, and conservative. They associated rural America with nativism, anti-Semitism, nationalism, and fascism as well as with anti-intellectualism and provincialism.

Jewish gallery owners like Sam Kootz decried the “nationalist” art of the Regionalists and promoted the internationalist art of a rising generation of expressionist, surrealist and abstract artists. “America’s more important artists are consistently shying away from Regionalism and exploring the virtues of internationalism,” he commented in 1943. “This is the painting equivalent of our newly found political and social internationalism.”[17]Annie Cohen-Solal, Mark Rothko, Toward the Light in the Chapel (New Haven CT: Yale University Press, 2015), 90. Incensed by the awarding of an art prize to John Steuart Curry in 1942, Jewish abstract artist Barnett Newman denounced Regionialism as “isolationism” and as akin to National Socialism, declaring: “Isolationist painting, which they named the American Renaissance, is founded on politics and on an even worse aesthetic. Using the traditional chauvinism, isolationist brand of patriotism, and playing on the natural desire of American artists to have their own art, they succeeded in pushing across a false aesthetic that is inhibiting the production of any true art in this country. … Isolationism, we have learned by now, is Hitlerism.”[18]Ibid., 88.
(Annie Cohen-Solal, Mark Rothko, Toward the Light in the Chapel (New Haven CT: Yale University Press, 2015), 90.)

The Homestead by John Steuart Curry
The Homestead by John Steuart Curry

The hostility of Jewish artists and intellectuals to Regionalism is no great mystery. A subset of Jews did support the work of the Social Realists, but this changed with the failure of socialism to take hold in North America in the 1940s. As I explain in the essay:

For Jewish writer Alain Rogier, it seems “hardly a coincidence that Jews made up a large percentage of the leading Abstract Expressionists.”[19]Alain Rogier, “Jewish Artist Mark Rothko: An Outsider in Life and Death,” ReformJudaism.org, April 26, 2016. https://reformjudaism.org/blog/2016/04/26/jewish-art...-death It was an art movement where the culture of critique of Jewish artists, frustrated that the post-war American prosperity prevented the coming of international socialism, turned inward and instead “proposed individualistic modes of liberation.” This mirrored the ideological shift that occurred among the New York Intellectuals generally who “gradually evolved away from advocacy of socialist revolution toward a shared commitment to anti-nationalism and cosmopolitanism [i.e., the multicultural project], ‘a broad and inclusive culture’ in which cultural differences were esteemed.”[20]Ibid., 212.
(Alain Rogier, “Jewish Artist Mark Rothko: An Outsider in Life and Death,” ReformJudaism.org, April 26, 2016. https://reformjudaism.org/blog/2016/04/26/jewish-art...-death)
Doss notes how this ideological shift manifested itself among the artists who became the Abstract Expressionists:

As full employment returned, New Deal programs were terminated — including federal support for the arts — the reformist spirit that had flourished in the 1930s dissipated. Corporate liberalism triumphed: together, big government and big business forged a planned economy and engineered a new social contract based on free market expansion. … With New Deal dreams of reform in ruins, and the better “tomorrow” prophesied at the 1939–1940 New York World’s Fair having seemingly led only to the carnage of World War II, it is not surprising that post-war artists largely abandoned the art styles and political cultures associated with the Great Depression.[21]Erika Doss, Twentieth-Century American Art (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 124.

The avant-garde artists of the New York School instead embraced an “inherently ambiguous and unresolved, an open-ended modern art … which encouraged liberation through personal, autonomous acts of expression.” The works of the Abstract Expressionists were “revolutionary attempts” to liberate the larger American culture “from the alienating conformity and pathological fears [especially of communism] that permeated the post-war era.”[22]Ibid., 130-1.
(Erika Doss, Twentieth-Century American Art (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 124.)
Rothko claimed that “after the Holocaust and the Atom Bomb you couldn’t paint figures without mutilating them.” His friend and fellow artist Adolph Gottlieb, declared that: “Today when our aspirations have been reduced to a desperate attempt to escape from evil, and times are out of joint, our obsessive, subterranean and pictographic images are the expression of the neurosis which is our reality. To my mind … abstraction is not abstraction at all. … It is the realism of our time.”[23]Doss, Twentieth-Century American Art, 128.

At the heart of Abstract Expressionism lay a vision of the artist as alienated from mainstream society, a figure morally compelled to create a new type of art which would confront an irrational, absurd world — a mentality completely in accord with that of the alienated Jewish artists and intellectuals at the heart of the movement who viewed the White Christian society around them with hostility. MacDonald notes that the New York Intellectuals “conceived themselves as alienated, marginalized figures — a modern version of traditional Jewish separateness and alienation from gentile culture. …” Norman Podhoretz was asked in the 1950s “whether there was a special typewriter at Partisan Review with the word ‘alienation’ on a single key.”[24]MacDonald, Culture of Critique, 212.

During the 1950s, Jewish artists and intellectuals chafed against the social controls enforced by political conservatives and religious and cultural traditionalists who limited Jewish influence on the culture, “much to the chagrin of the Frankfurt School and the New York Intellectuals who prided themselves in their alienation from that very culture.” This all ended, together with Abstract Expressionism as an art movement embodying the alienation of the New York Intellectuals, with the triumph of the culture of critique in the 1960s, when Jews and their gentile allies usurped the old WASP establishment, and thus had far less reason to engage in the types of cultural criticism so apparent in the writings of the Frankfurt School and the New York Intellectuals. Hollywood and the rest of the American media were unleashed.

Naumann has no actual response to any of this. However, in assessing the Jewish domination of Abstract Expressionism, he claims that I envision “the whole enterprise as nothing short of a Jewish conspiracy, whereby Jews placed themselves in a position to be viewed by the intellectual establishment of the time as ‘self-appointed gatekeepers of Western culture.’” A major theme of my essay on Rothko and Abstract Expressionism is the power of Jewish ethnic networking and nepotism — which is abundantly demonstrated in Mark Rothko’s rise to fame on the New York art scene. Rothko biographer Annie Cohen-Solal emphasizes the role of Jewish ethnic networking in Rothko’s rise from obscurity to artistic celebrity. More broadly, Jewish artists (Rothko, Adolph Gottlieb, Barnett Newman), critics (Harold Rosenberg, Clement Greenberg, Thomas B. Hess), curators (Katherine Kuh, Peter Selz, Henry Geldzahler) and art dealers (Sidney Janis, Peggy Guggenheim, Samuel Kootz), were instrumental in the rise of Abstract Expressionism. Such an overwhelming representation from a group that comprised less than two percent of the American population is utterly remarkable and testament to the power of Jewish ethnic networking and nepotism.

Naumann falsely claims I “invent” a Jewish connection to the non-Jewish artist Willem de Kooning when I note that he had to ingratiate himself with the Jewish critics and intellectuals clustered around the leftist journal Partisan Review. It was hardly necessary for me to “invent” a connection between de Kooning and Jews. His wife, Elaine de Kooning, was half-Jewish (born Elaine Fried), and de Kooning shamelessly pimped her out to leading Jewish art critics like Harold Rosenberg and Thomas B. Hess, who, in return, helped further his career.[25]See: Lee Hall, Elaine and Bill: Portrait of a Marriage (HarperCollins, 1993). Hess, the editor of Art News, the oldest and most widely-circulated fine arts journal in the world, was hugely influential in promoting Abstract Expressionism. Mentored and promoted by the magazine’s editor in chief, Alfred Frankfurter (also Jewish), Hess was part of the triumvirate of Jews (with Clement Greenberg and Harold Rosenberg) who “were instrumental in championing Abstract Expressionism in the early stages of the movement.” Hess’s Abstract Painting: Background and American Phase (1951) was the first book on the movement to be published, and the critic and art historian Barbara E. Rose (also Jewish) described him as running a “propaganda vehicle for launching the New York School internationally.” While Hess’s Wikipedia entry doesn’t mention his ethnic background, a quick internet search reveals that his mother was buried at the Mount Zion Temple Cemetery in Minnesota.

Naumann claims that in pointing out the prominence of Jews in the art world I give “proof of how important and influential Jews were in shaping the culture of our times. If you were to remove the names of everyone who was Jewish from the roster of twentieth-century artists, writers, critics, collectors, and art dealers, you would find that very little of that history would exist.” Indeed.

He claims to be deeply offended by my custom of placing the word “Holocaust” in quotation marks – which I do to highlight the absurdity (not to say impossibility) of much of the official narrative, and also to protest its use as a tool of psychological warfare against White people. Naumann insists that, rather than Jews engaging in competitive victimhood (as I discuss in a recent article), it is “Sanderson and MacDonald [who] envision themselves as the ultimate victims … since they have found themselves ostracized from mainstream academia.” In all of the writing I have done for The Occidental Observer going back over a decade I have never described or presented myself as a victim.

Naumann concludes his review in the same vein in which he starts it — eschewing rational arguments in favor of baseless speculation about the mental health of yours truly and Professor MacDonald: “It does not take a trained psychiatrist to determine that the biased and racist rants of most white supremacists are the product of an innate psychiatric disorder, one that causes them to hate all people who are not like them.” Naumann’s total reliance on these kind of personal attacks reminds one of how little things have changed since the nineteenth century when Richard Wagner was declared to be suffering from a psychiatric disorder for daring to criticize Jewish influence. No doubt Naumann would lump Wagner in with his “many notable psychotics in history” whose criticisms of Jews he attributes to psychopathology. In the final analysis, none of this name-calling amounts to actual arguments, and only serves to highlight the weakness of his position.

Brenton Sanderson is the author of Battle Lines: Essays on Western Culture, Jewish Influence and Anti-Semitism, banned by Amazon, but available here.

Notes

[1] Irina Livezeanu, “From Dada to Gaga: The Peripatetic Romanian Avant-Garde Confronts Communism,” Mihai Dinu Gheorghiu & Lucia Dragomir (Eds.), Littératures et pouvoir symbolique (Bucharest: Paralela 45, 2005), 245-6.

[2] Bernard Blisténe, A History of Twentieth Century Art (Paris: Fammarion, 2001), 62.

[3] Dawn Ades, “Dada and Surrealism,” David Britt (Ed.) Modern Art – Impressionism to Post-Modernism, (London, Thames & Hudson, 1974), 222.

[4] Robert Short, Dada and Surrealism (London: Laurence King Publishing, 1994), 42.

[5] Daffyd Jones, Dada 1916 in Theory: Practices of Critical Resistance (Liverpool University Press, 2014), 176.

[6] Helen Rappaport, Conspirator: Lenin in Exile (Basic Books; 2012), 256.

[7] Jacques Derrida, “Circumfession,” In Jacques Derrida, Ed. G. Bennington & Jacques Derrida, Trans. G. Bennington (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993), 170.

[8] Kevin MacDonald, The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth‑Century Intellectual and Political Movements (Bloomington, IN: 1stbooks Library, 2001), 198.

[9] Derrida, “Circumfession,” op. cit., 58)

[10] Jacques Derrida, Points… Interviews, 1974-1994, Trans. P. Kamuf et al (Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press, 1995), 120–21.

[11] J.D. Caputo, The Prayers and Tears of Jacques Derrida: Religion without Religion (Bloomington: University of Indiana Press, 1997), 231–2.

[12] Matthew Biro, The Dada Cyborg: Visions of the New Human in Weimar Berlin, (Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press, 2009), 154.

[13] Hockensmith, “Artists’ Biographies,” Leah Dickerman (Ed.) Dada (Washington D.C., National Gallery of Art, 2005), 482.

[14] Robert J. Wicks, Modern French Philosophy: From Existentialism to Postmodernism (Oxford: Oneworld, 2007), 11.

[15] Mark A. Pegrum, Challenging Modernity: Dada between Modern and Postmodern (New York: Berghahn Books, 2000), 269.

[16] Richard Sheppard, Modernism-Dada-Postmodernism (Evanston, Northwestern University Press, 1999), 365.

[17] Annie Cohen-Solal, Mark Rothko, Toward the Light in the Chapel (New Haven CT: Yale University Press, 2015), 90.

[18] Ibid., 88.

[19] Alain Rogier, “Jewish Artist Mark Rothko: An Outsider in Life and Death,” ReformJudaism.org, April 26, 2016. https://reformjudaism.org/blog/2016/04/26/jewish-artist-mark-rothko-outsider-life-and-death

[20] Ibid., 212.

[21] Erika Doss, Twentieth-Century American Art (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 124.

[22] Ibid., 130-1.

[23] Doss, Twentieth-Century American Art, 128.

[24] MacDonald, Culture of Critique, 212.

[25] See: Lee Hall, Elaine and Bill: Portrait of a Marriage (HarperCollins, 1993).

(Republished from The Occidental Observer by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 52 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. If Brenton Sanderson is right about his thesis – then, Jews should be REALLY annoyed that the most famous Dadaist is Marcel Duchamp (not Jewish).
    Certainly, Duchamp didn’t achieve his status as “the greatest Dadaist” via “crypsis” (i.e. “Jews,” MacDonald et al. argues, “enrol non-Jews in their movements to HIDE the Jewishness of said movements”) – but by Duchamp’s own merits.

    I, by the by, Googled “Famous Dada artists”, and Google says Salvador Dalí was also a Dadaist – I didn’t know that.
    Dalí accepted the title of “Marquess” from the Spanish Crown – so, (at least, in his final years) he was a monarchist.
    .
    .
    .

    What is Dadaism? Its official organ, published at Zurich, tells us, mystifyingly at first, that “Dada” doesn’t mean anything.

    — 1919, “The Dadas”, in The New York Times

    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @Richard B
  2. Classic Shabbos. Rabbis need shabbis.

  3. Tom Verso says:

    The Jews have conquered Western Civilization!

    Another brilliantly scholarly article in terms of factual documentation and valid logical inferences joins the many other such that appear on these pages.

    All these articles prove beyond reasonable doubt that the Jewish nation is the dominate and most powerful group in Western economy (i.e. finance – which per Michael. Hudson is the essence of the economy), government, media (news and entertainment) and per this article and many others culture.

    Indeed, E. Michael Jones makes the case that the Catholic Pope’s theological and moral teachings are affected by Jewish consultation. This is historically significant because the origins Western Civilization (aka Christendom) was the Church.

    There is no force within the West to even challenge let alone defeat the Jewish nation.

    The only hope for the historic Christian West is Russian and China. They are forcing the Jewish oligarchs to make increasing irrational decision economically (destroy manufacturing, increasing debt, etc.). Since wealth is essence of power, the West is being bleed of its wealth and the Jews in turn are being bleed of power.

    This is evident in the Jewish foreign policy towards Russian and China. The Jewish Western Civilization cannot compete with the ever growing power (economic and military) of the Russian Orthodox Civilization and the Chinese Oriental Civilization.

  4. @Tom Verso

    Adam Green says that the jews are engineering a war with Russia and China to destroy America.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  5. Derrida is a Kierkegaardian.

    Was Kierkegaard subversive to his fellow Danish Protestants? Why, yes, he was. Should we dismiss Kierkegaard’s work because he perplexed average Christians? Emphatically, No!

    And…Derrida did not circumcise his sons.

    Kafka was similarily stuck between a rock and a hard place; at once hating his fellow Jews yet at the same time being its most pure example of disembodied alienation.

    Not saying Jewry should not be examined as a subversive whilst self-enriching force, but that perhaps trying to pin down Derrida is the fool’s errand par excellence.

  6. Anon[278] • Disclaimer says:

    There exists even today a healthy and vibrant representational art culture ( ie traditional painting and other fine arts) that is simply ignored by the Media.

    Support the good and boycott the bad. Even better, ignore the bad.

    BTW – the Avant Garde has become a parody of itself. When one‘s sole purpose is to shock, one‘s soon runs out of ideas. Its not worth spending 5 minutes on todays Avant- Garde .

  7. @Tom Verso

    …the Chinese Oriental Civilization.

    A “civilization” that borrows its reigning ideology from the dregs of the West, yet is afraid of little Edward Bear.

    And Peppa.

  8. Seraphim says:

    The second ‘founder’ of Dada was Marcel Janco, aka Marcel Hermann Iancu, born like S. Samyro (aka Samuel Rosenstock) in Romania, both in ‘upper middle class’ Jewish families.
    Both were active in the Romanian artistic landscape, founding (and funding) the magazine ‘Simbolul’, which despite a short life ”helped the transition toward avant-garde currents in Romanian literature and art, by publishing anti-establishment satirical pieces, and by popularizing modernist trends such as Fauvism and Cubism” and ”stood out for mocking the pastoral themes of dominant traditionalist or neoromantic literature”.
    In the pre-WW1 period, ”the young poet and many of his friends were adherents of an anti-war and anti-nationalist current, which progressively accommodated anti-establishment messages”.
    Wikipedia quotes from the Tom Sandqvist’s ” Dada East. The Romanians of Cabaret Voltaire”, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts & London, 2006: “With its unconventional prose and its new, subversive poetic images and metaphors, the journal was inspired by the antibourgeois and in many respects bohemian symbolism, while at the same time it contained absurd elements almost totally unfamiliar to the symbolist approach. The lack of national motifs was also remarkable within the framework of a culture in which almost every expression of whatever kind was connected in one way or another to the Romanian nation or to the Romanian people and its historical mission.” An influence of the socialist movement in Romania, brought by Russian Jews refugees like Constantin Dobrogeanu-Gherea (aka Solomon Katz), is undeniable.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  9. It is good to know that Walter Arensberg is not jooooish. For the last 38 years I have thought “well…the joooz suck but The Arensberg Collection is classy and awesome.” If you love Art, as I do, you should make a pilgrimage once in your life, to The Philidelphia Museum of Art, if only for The Arensberg Collection. Absolutely the best of Brancusi is found in the Arensberg. But the best, THE BEST, is the Marcel Duchamp rooms of The Arensberg Collection. Better than anything in Manhattan, and that’s saying alot. The Large Glass is there, but time has not been kind, in the material, not the artistic sense. But the glorious masterwork that defines Marcel Duchamp’s career is there. No one knew this work existed until after Marcel Duchamp died, when it was found disassembled and boxed in his Chelsea Manhattan studio with instructions on its reassembly as an “installation”. “Etants Donnes”. Better known as “Given: 1. The Waterfall, 2. The Illuminating Gas” is “Installation Art” at its most elegant and profound. Unlike, “The Large Glass”, it has materially aged beautifully. It integrates visual and aural components exquisitely but goes beyond simple presentation to bring time and the viewer’s presence into the completion of the artwork, as the piece is a voyeur’s fantasy, of a lovely disrobed lady, viewed through a hole in a rustic, highly collectable, wooden double door. Generations of viewers have left a worn, and slightly greasy, spot at “the viewing hole”. I also love Marcel Duchamp’s installation at the 1938 Surrealist Exhibition in Paris. “Twelve Hundred Coal Bags Suspended From The Ceiling Over A Stove”( there was no stove, unless one sees the attendees as “stoves”). This as literally 1200 coal sacks stapled onto the ceiling of the gallery hall. As any viewer at the time would know, coal dust, in sufficient concentration, made for an explosive environment, “coal dust explosions” were common. This installation was a subtle take on the viewer’s experience of great Art. The Art itself is not on the walls, but on the ceiling, the lowest status display place in the gallery, any “great artist” would be insulted to be relegated to that spot. The viewer, if he notices the piece at all, doesn’t realize he is showered with coal dust, an insult, a sign of low status. And yet, the entire atmosphere is a danger, explosive, the ultimate intensity, from the most despised and unnoticed materials, coal sacks, and compounded by the unnoticed presentation on the ceiling(as every Artist knows, the greatest artists are despised and their works purposely forgotten) . Marcel Duchamp, the greatest of the Dadaists, if he was one at all, Gentile White European genius at its finest, and most classy.

    • Thanks: Che Guava
  10. The ideological tenor of The Brooklyn Rail is captured in the banner across the top of the website’s homepage which declares “Black Lives Matter. We stand in solidarity with those affected by generations of structural violence.”

    The more plainly obvious the intellectual and cultural defects of Afficans, the louder (((woketards))) will howl that it’s the White system’s fault, a system from which White values have already been purged and replaced with anti-Whitism.

  11. Publius 2 says:

    Jews are ugly. Everything they do is intended to try to make the world as ugly as they. It is that simple.

  12. Che Guava says:

    This an interesting article, so far I have only read a fifth so far, but have one point of irony, a comment, and a refutation.

    Irony is that the Evola lauded by many chose to be a Jewish-led dadaist, rather than an Italian futurist, even though Italian and living in Italy at the time.

    Comment 1
    The latter (Italian Futurism)far more interesting to me. I have not read Evola, just the occasional quote but his Dada affilation is strange.

    Comment 2
    Two well-known Japanese artists were, for a time, members of Italian Futurism.

    Refutation
    Stalin and the new arts policy did not push artists making poor art on canvas out, just gave them a chance to work on practical things, prints on textiles, etc.

    I can make a Rothko in abt. half an hour, with chalk pastels and hairspray, and it is certainly not worth people to gape in awe.

    • Replies: @James J O'Meara
  13. gotmituns says:

    Whatever – The day of reading is at an end. Time is short. All good White men and their women should be making themselves good riflemen and preparing their families for the fighting ahead of us. Reading is for those intellectuals who think they can sit this out at some university and come out the other end unscratched – like we used to say back in the 60s, “Never happen GI.”

    • Replies: @Occasional lurker
  14. xyzxy says:

    There are at least two ‘theories’ of art. First, art as a cultural gauge, or mirror. Reflecting the spiritual core of the culture. In this, Jewish art serves a purpose, reminding us how sterile and ugly our modern world is.

    Second, the more traditional view, art as a means for approaching the transcendental, Beauty. In this aspect, Jewish art serves a purpose, reminding us how sterile and ugly the Jewish spirit is, in relation to Beauty.

  15. @Tom Verso

    This is evident in the Jewish foreign policy towards Russian and China. The Jewish Western Civilization cannot compete with the ever growing power (economic and military) of the Russian Orthodox Civilization and the Chinese Oriental Civilization.

    Chinese? Maybe. But Russia? Economically, demographically, culturally Russia seems to be going down by most indices. Not up. Tsar Putin restored some normalcy after the 1990s but he hasn’t turned the tide.

    Also who really rules in Russia?

    Lavrov – One daughter raised cosmoploitan, doesn’t speak Russian, married to Israeli dual citizen

    Surkov – Chechen

    Shoigu – More Mongolian than Genghis Khan

    And the list goes on…

    And of course the whole gaggle of non-Russian oligarchs who were not Khodorkovsky retain their wealth and influence. While so called “hate speech” against poor oppressed minorities and defamation of the glorious Red Army that liberated Europe from fascism is still banned on pain of imprisonment in the literal Gulag.

    I’m sure it’s a good thing that Russia exists as some kind of counterweight to the Atlanticist tyranny. But we should hope for nothing more than that from it. Old communists and inflation profiteers are poor guardians of some ageless Christian commonwealth.

  16. geokat62 says:

    Both attempted to foster subjective individualism to disconnect Europeans from their familial, religious and ethnic bonds—reducing the salience of Jews as an outgroup and, consequently, the prevalence of anti-Semitism in Western societies.

    … and according to this recent Pew Research Center survey, they’ve succeeded beyond their wildest dreams!

    • Thanks: Daniel Rich
  17. @gotmituns

    If you are making civil war plans (what wonderful things civil wars are!), maybe you should start out by placing lots of your allies in the military, because your rifle sure won’t do much against drones and missiles. The only thing an uprising at large scale will achieve is to make life even more miserable for decent non “elite” Americans.
    If I misunderstood you and you are only talking about preparing for self-protection in case of some possible future ani-white pogrom, okay, forget what I said.

    • Replies: @gotmituns
    , @anarchyst
  18. Sarah says:

    Just one essential point: if you want to buy this book (even if this book was not banned from Amacrap) and any other book – buy it anywhere but on this Amacrap monopoly. And never download any Kinkle books.

  19. In his review, Naumann deploys the standard rhetorical devices arrayed against those critical of Jewish influence, or who just stand up for White interests: the tendentious terms “white supremacist” and “conspiracy” featuring prominently.

    The Author has an archive here, and I examined the first few articles. In the Wagner piece the term White Race(s) turns up 5 times.
    In “Jews and Competitive Victimhood” white is present dozens of times.
    Within “Triggered by Beethoven” my browser word search found the word white in more than a hundred places scattered through the text.

    I’m going to award this contest to Mr. Naumann, and the score wasn’t even close.

    • Replies: @James Forrestal
  20. Mefobills says:
    @Robert Dolan

    Tom is right and Adam Green is confused.

    Finance and usury has been the Jewish method and their real religion since the times of the Haibaru donkey caravaneers.

    Russia is moving toward autarky, not international finance. Putin kicked out the mostly Jewish Oligarchs.

    China has adopted the former American system of Industrial Capitalism.

    The world wars were really all about the international finance usurers wanting to kill off nascent industrial capitalist economies. Germany, Italy, and Japan were threats.

    The US brain center was usurped and parasitized by 1912.

  21. gotmituns says:
    @Occasional lurker

    I’m talking about what’s coming, the all out onslaught to murder ever White person in the nation. There’s no way out now. White people fight or end up in a pot being eaten by blacks.

  22. Z-man says:

    Of course I didn’t read the entire article but kudos and good going Brenton Sanderson. My Jew-dar was proved correct as I did not think this guy, Francis M. Naumann, was a Jew. He is, however, a very white looking man which benefits his ‘Chosenite’ allies and masters. His story as described by Mr. Sanderson reminds me of a high school classmate of mine who went on to become a lawyer. He of course has had to work with and for the ‘Chosen Ones’. The poor fellow, who I keep in contact with because he is the brother-in-law of one of my other HS classmates and closer friend of mine, cannot admit to the wrongdoing of The Cabal which he deals with even if you shove the facts in his face. Humorous to me and his brother-in-law and others in our group. (Wry grin)

  23. anonymous[589] • Disclaimer says:
    @Vergissmeinnicht

    I often wonder how jews can claim to defend blacks and other “oppressed” minorities..considering that jews INVENTED slavery (Bible) and had profitted from it since the birth of humanity. Oppressed minorities by whom? Large Capitalists Financial oligrachy mainly jews. Those are real Historical facts. BUT can the issues of Slavery and Racism ever be settled in America moving forward?? Can Racism and slvery be adressed SEPARATLY??? Slavery of blacks in America probably began with the commerciliazition of BLACK labor during the European colonization of the New World…BUT Racism is a old as humanity and shall remain with us as long as humanity survives so how do you resolve both??? I pose that BLACKS will never be freed as long as they remain SLAVES of the Jewish capitalists that controlled their ECONOMIC resources human, non human…and Blacks will never be truly free as long as jews manipulate, use and abuse blacks for Racial Commercial profittering…which does not benefit blacks…BLM is a non black NGO,, awash in profits that will never reach poor black communities. The jews INVENTED white supremacy there is NO evidence of such movement…the KKK diasppeared completely long ago. There is a WAR to exterminate whites on all Western Nations…and the AG/DOJ are at the forefront of disarming whites and making their selfdefense a crime.

    • Agree: anarchyst
    • Replies: @geokat62
    , @anarchyst
  24. Anon[233] • Disclaimer says:

    I was in MOMA several years ago with my daughter, then a college student. We came across Mondrians and a Pollock. As art, they don’t touch me. I think you must be indoctrinated, that only modern and smart people understand their language.

    You see, people are smart, and when carefully indoctrinated they learn lies easily.

    “Wow,” I remarked, standing in front of a Mondrian. “Now that would make some really nice wallpaper.”

    The daughter says, “You don’t know anything. That’s Mondrian.”

    “Well, honey, pretty sunsets are just color. Don’t actually say anything. No real connection to any culture. Of course, good control of brush and color. Are they corny stuff, or no different than Mondrian color studies?”

    “Kerfloof & braw-haw-haw,” she says.

    We settled on a good place to have lunch.

  25. geokat62 says:
    @anonymous

    BLM is a non black NGO…

    All NGOs are Non-Goyim Organizations.

  26. Yeah, what this guy says

  27. @Zachary Smith

    If there is any actual point hidden somewhere in the roiling depths of your confused blabbering, it appears to be the implicit (and ludicrously ignorant) claim that any mention of collective identity by an indigenous European somehow amounts, ipso facto, to so-called “White supreeemism.”

    Do you also believe that any mention of collective semitic identity by a MOT similarly equates to “semitic supremacism?” Of course not — your virulent, unreasoning anti-White hatred derives diirectly from your toxic semitism.

  28. @Che Guava

    Excellent question re Evola. For some reason, all the Evola-quoting experts on the Right never address it.

    However, Piero Fenili’s series of articles in Politica Romana on “The Errors of Evola,” (which I know only from Joscelyn Godwin’s account). provides a clue. Fenili locates the source of these “errors” in the doctrine (found in Evola’s essays on “Magical Idealism” which followed his Dada period) that truth is secondary to Will, saying that “error is nothing but a feeble truth, truth but a potent error,” which Fenili (per Godwin) interprets to mean “the rare individual who has achieved (the level of the Absolute I) can make reality conform to his will.”

    It’s clear from his autobiography, Path of Cinnabar, that Evola from first to last was a complete Egoist, for whom any doctrine he held, sequentially — Dada, Idealism, Magic, Traditionalism, Fascism, Apolitea — was only a mask, by which he could “shock the bourgeoise”; not that different from Dada, and what you might expect from someone whose “greatest influence” in his teens was… Oscar Wilde.

    How “error is nothing but a feeble truth, truth but a potent error” can be reconciled with Sanderson’s locating the core of Western Civilization in “philosophical realism” is something the Evola fetishists have never tried and likely never will.

    • Replies: @Che Guava
  29. Naumann’s apparent a priori assumption is that Jewish influence on Western societies and culture is necessarily benevolent, and that, consequently, any criticism of this influence is inherently invalid and reflects negatively on the psychological health of the critic (hence the title of his review, “Pure Meshuggah: Anti-Semitism Invades Art History” with “Meshuggah” being the Yiddish word for crazy).

    You’re being too generous here. His a priori assumption is that jewish influence is both hegemonic and “sacred”, and that any criticism of this influence is blasphemous — and, depending on the content of that criticism, marks the criticizer as a heretic at minimum, and quite likely an apostate.

    As Sanderson notes, Naumann progresses from shrieking and moaning about how any mention of a disproportionate role of MOTs in the decline of visual art is automatically a so-called “anti-semiticist conspiracy theory” [aka a mortal sin/ rank heresy], to this:

    Naumann claims that in pointing out the prominence of Jews in the art world I give “proof of how important and influential Jews were in shaping the culture of our times. If you were to remove the names of everyone who was Jewish from the roster of twentieth-century artists, writers, critics, collectors, and art dealers, you would find that very little of that history would exist.” Indeed.

    Celebration parallax. Mentioning disproportionate semitic influence in the art world is a very grave transgression… if the mentioner so much as intimates that this influence might have had any negative consequences whatsoever. But cite the same facts in a properly-worshipful manner — as Naumann does — and you’re A-OK (semitically correct, as it were). Another good example is Biden gushing about the semitic role in the sacralization of sodomy. That’s perfectly fine, even laudable — but if someone cited the exact same facts as part of a more critical narrative… Oy vey! Like anuddah shoah all over again.

    Clearly, truth vs. falsehood is not the real issue here. The actual “crime” that Naumann is accusing you of here is not lying, nor is it failure to construct a coherent hypothesis with adequate empirical support — it’s defilement/ desecration/ profanation of a sacred object; violation of one of the most important taboos of the state religion in the current year. Look at it in those terms, and his “argument” seems at least slightly more coherent.

    But since he sees himself as a rational, “objective” interpreter of the facts, driven by the purest of motives… there’s no way he will ever understand his role is actually that of an official of the dominant religion, dedicated to stamping out heresy and punishing the profanation of sacred idols. Even shitlibs have some limit to their tolerance for cognitive dissonance.

    • Agree: W
  30. Naumann falsely claims I “invent” a Jewish connection to the non-Jewish artist Willem de Kooning when I note that he had to ingratiate himself with the Jewish critics and intellectuals clustered around the leftist journal Partisan Review. His wife, Elaine de Kooning, was half-Jewish (born Elaine Fried), and de Kooning shamelessly pimped her out to leading Jewish art critics like Harold Rosenberg and Thomas B. Hess, who, in return, helped further his career.

    https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2014/10/17/susan-sontags-jewish-world/

    When Rubenfeld* (1997, 97) lists people Greenberg invited to social occasions at his apartment in New York, the only gentile mentioned is artist William de Kooning.

    Perhaps Mr. Rubenfeld is one of those “anti-semiticist conspiracy theorists” as well. A “self-hating semite?”

    *Rubenfeld, F. (1997). Clement Greenberg: A Life. New York: Scribner.
    [Haven’t checked it myself, but KMac is usually pretty good with citations.]

  31. “Such an overwhelming representation from a group that comprised less than two percent of the American population is utterly remarkable and testament to the power of Jewish ethnic networking and nepotism.”

    Don’t tell them that they are powerful because they have always known it but it’s the goyim that are ignorant of it.

  32. @John Regan

    America and Russia are two peas of the Israeli pod and both will be used against China and Chinaman She will be the next and newest Hitler to advance the goals of the one world, with the highest court in the “eternal” city, not to mention the world bank and I mean truly the bank of world, where wealth of all nations will deposited and the Third Temple will be erected, as the symbol of Jewish supremacy.

    • Replies: @GomezAdddams
  33. anarchyst says:
    @anonymous

    To this day, enslavement of gentiles is not only approved, but encouraged in the jewish talmud. Different sets of laws apply only to gentiles, being much harsher than equivalent offenses committed by jews.
    Jewish supremacy is alive and well and is more prevalent today than ever before…

  34. anarchyst says:
    @Occasional lurker

    You would be surprised what low-tech hardware and methods can do against the high-tech military hardware of the day.
    From defeating thermal imaging systems to drones, there are low-tech solutions to either blind them or to make one’s self “unnoticed” and even “invisible”.
    I am not going to outline the methods used to defeat such systems, but it is not only doable but essential for those to know such methods of counterinsurgency operations.

  35. What is most needed is white/Arab or Christian/Islam alliance.

  36. Nobody ever cared about Kevin MacDonald and they still don’t. Get over it.

    I’ve read Kevin MacDonald’s “work” and I can only describe it as…well, unreadable.

    I’m surprised this guy you wrote 5000 words about bothered to give MacDonald the time of day. Obviously nobody cares what you have to say in McDonald’s defense with 35 comments in 4 days.

    Just another in-fucking-sufferable TLDR article on UNZ saying the same thing about MacDonald, Irving or Suvorov and the Jews. Yawn. At least Andrew Anglin can’t even take himself seriously. You mad, bro?

    • Troll: Pierre de Craon
    • Replies: @Automatic Slim
    , @geokat62
  37. @Johnny Rico

    1. Thanks for sharing that, Shlomo.

    2. I’ve seen other comments from you, and your English needs some work. But I suspect your Hebrew is quite good.

  38. Seraphim says:
    @Seraphim

    Irrespective of the fact whether ”Dadaists [were] Communists whose influence was felt in Russia, and later in Western Europe and America”, their contacts with the heavies of the Russian revolutionaries are incontrovertible and most probably of a not strictly artistic nature.
    There is a report of Hans Richter that Tzara ”profited from Swiss neutrality to play the Allies and Central Powers against each other, obtaining art works and funds from both, making use of their need to stimulate their respective propaganda efforts”. Whose ‘propaganda efforts’? In Romania there was a widespread rumor that Tzara had acted as an agent of influence for the Central Powers during the war. According to one account rendered by historian Robert Levy, in 1918, Tzara shared company with a group of Romanian communist students, and, as such, may have met with Ana Pauker (rather with her husband Marcel Pauker, a ‘founding father’ of the Communist Party of Romania-Section of the Comintern, who was to become a ‘victim’ of Stalin’s purges in 1938) who was later one of the Romanian Communist Party’s most prominent activists. The post-war years saw the disaffection of his former friends from the ‘Simbol’, Ion Vinea and Marcel Iancu, no doubt because of his turn to ‘Communism’ (Marcel Iancu turned to Zionism). There is a distinction to be made: Marcel Iancu was an ‘assimilated’ Jew, Romanian citizen, whereas Tzara was not.

  39. Richard B says:
    @Vergissmeinnicht

    Interesting comment.

    What is Dadaism? Its official organ, published at Zurich, tells us, mystifyingly at first, that “Dada” doesn’t mean anything.

    Behind every major figure that created Modernism can be found Nietzsche.

    The real message of his work was self-transcendence. And since we’re products of our culture, that means cultural transcendence. Dadaism was simply working in this tradition. It was also a response to the horror of WWI. Which explains why one of the themes of Dadaism is the absurd.

    Sanderson’s position seems to be that of a typical conservative critic, ie; art = order = value. European Romanticism (not Jewish Supremacy) reacted against this while proposing an alternative, cultural transcendence. That’s why Nietzsche was the culmination (though not completion) of Romanticism.

    What Jewish Supremacy Inc. did was simply ransack Romanticism for anything it could use against the old elite of the West and the general public. JSI weaponized everything from the West it got its hands on. Romanticism was European, not Jewish (though some Jews were associated with it).

    Unfortunately, Sanderson, and not just Sanderson, is unable to make a distinction between European Romanticism and Jewish Supremacy Inc, since both, for completely different reasons, were working against the template of art = order = value. Romanticism for the purpose of cultural transcendence. Jewish Supremacy Inc. for the purpose of civilizational destruction. Big difference.

    Because of his inability to tell the difference between the two, Sanderson is a perfect example of someone who grasps the situation while totally missing the point.

    • Replies: @Emerging Majority
  40. @Chinaman's Nightmare

    Go worry about your 780 military bases worldwide and Adolf Trump and Heinrich Biden—

    • Replies: @Chinaman's Nightmare
  41. @John Regan

    Donald Trump and John Hagee –both converted to Jew agenda —–Kushner is not British and his daddy forgiven by “move embassey to Jerusalem Trump—a clown and dimwit —

  42. @Priss Factor

    PayPal sure looks to be “on message”. True with all too much of corporate Amerikka. They have fallen into enemy hands—largely via the moneylender\$.

  43. @Richard B

    Trans-Abstract Realism is just around the corner. It’s first public appearance will come via Cosmographics, a graphic alphabet based on symbols replacing the wholly abstract alphabet we in the West use everyday. Abstraction creates obstructions. As a formulation it is composed of lineal logic and is formulaically rationalist. Those individuals ensorcelled by the Cartesian conundrum prefer to work with only half a mind.

    The mechanistic mindset of Abstract Expressionism, is in one sense the product of photography, which for a time denuded realism and representationalism. Photo offset printing, however, allows art –and graphic sensibility to transcend Marshall McLuhan’s Gutenberg Galaxy, a system mechanically based on set-type and its consequent linear fixation. The potential of a non-lineal alphabet, not particular to any culturally specific alphabet is global in its appeal.

    Today’s major art-scene, headquartered primarily in New York, wallows in the muck of a chaotic mirroring by urban artists of our shattered society. The flipside is the art-market, which has become a major investment field for los Ricos who have no primary interest in art, just in the monetary accretions they might gain from such ownership–that and bragging rights among the Gulfstream set.

    The pre-Pharoanic Egyptians had something going with their pictographic alphabet. It was based on a sense of universal connection as they perceived it, rather than the needs of commerce which inspired the Phoenician alphabet, the precursor of the Greek and Latin ones on which our current one is based. Pictographic symbology expands visual apperception beyond mere abstraction. At this time the only true value of our abstracted one, is its relative brevity and simplicity. Imagine for a moment if those 26 letters were transliterated symbologically.

    • Replies: @Che Guava
  44. geokat62 says:
    @Johnny Rico

    I’ve read Kevin MacDonald’s “work” and I can only describe it as…well, unreadable.

    Fran is that you?

  45. @GomezAdddams

    As long as you are paying for them with your bond purchases, we are ok with those vacation spots for our boys. How is the weather in Djibouti?

  46. Che Guava says:
    @James J O'Meara

    Thank you very much for the thoughtful and, although I am not understanding two or three referents, educational reply.

  47. Che Guava says:
    @Emerging Majority

    ‘Abstract expressionism’ as in the group of N.Y. Jewish artists that the CIA wanted to use in their anti-USSR Kulturkampf, the work of those ‘artists’ is at worst, childish, at best adolescent, drivel.

    As for being a universal language, GTFO.

    The whole was copied in the first place from an earlier European group Cobra (Copenhagen, Amsterdam, Brussels). They were partly inspired by east Asian calligraphy and landscape painting. Many good works, many faded from neglect now. One may question the validity, consider painters like Turner or Carravagio, a few square inches of sea or sky (or the border between them)contains more abstract expressionism than any retarded CIA and NYJ sponsored ‘abstract expressionist’.

    I repeat, those interested should look at the Cobra works. Worth a look, but ‘net repro. doesn’t do the work justice.

    South Korean work in a similar vein, later, ’90s to 2005 or so, maybe still now, very good.

    The difference is that, unlike the moronic colour bars of Rothko or the hebephrenic and falling-over-drunk paint-flinging of Pollock, Cobra artists and the south Koreans may have enjoyed drinking, but not enough to forget what they were working on.

    • Replies: @Emerging Majority
  48. @Che Guava

    Thanx for the info on Cobra & S. Korean works.

    Also in the works is trans-abstract sculpture based on an interplay with Wizard Willow (aka Diamond Willow) the most biomimetic life-form known. It is the mutual product of 5 sub-species of Salix with a fungus of unknown origins which infuses the branch-nodes of willing willows into forming diamond-shaped indents into the structure of the tree, as well as other modes of “recalibration” of the formulation/adaptation of that organism.

    Representational sculpture, particularly that of the human body, has remained essentially static ever since Praxiteles (ca. 500-400 BC) and Michelangelo. Who could possibly improve on virtual perfection? Abstract sculpture very occasionally reveals a gem, but that’s the exception and far from the rule. Trans-abstract realism, on the other hand, is open to revelatory exploration.

    Do not expect these sculptural developments to emanate from urban, and especially sub-urban America, as those particular denizens are not sufficiently (literally) grounded to initiate such a (R)evolutionary development. Keep those peepers open to announcements regarding Wizard Willow…quite possibly right here on UR.

    • Replies: @Che Guava
  49. @Priss Factor

    But muh “counterjihad,” tho! Muh “clash of civilizations!” Pamela “Nuke Europe” Geller is on my side against dem ebil ay-rabs — I can tell.

    Just read this book by an, uh, English woman named Gisèle Littman [née Orebi]. It will explain everything:

  50. Che Guava says:
    @Emerging Majority

    I will be open, but you are simplifying things by forgetting the very rich tradition of sculpture with symbolism, best represented with saints of Christianity and Bhodhisvatas, and images of both Christ and Hotoke.

    • Replies: @Emerging Majority
  51. @Che Guava

    Religious sculptures may well be rich in symbolism. My point, though, is that representation of the human form sculpturally hit its apogee a long, long time ago and briefly established another plateau on the cusp of what we like to call the Modern Era. In the Western world, the returns are in and there remains little new to express sculpturally when it comes to depiction of the human form.

    Breakthroughs in new dimensions of sculpture will look to elements of the natural world rather than mankind itself. That development lacking, it is my opinion that the field of sculpture will stagnate.

    • Replies: @Che Guava
  52. Che Guava says:
    @Emerging Majority

    Real sculpture has declined ever since Umberto Boccioni’s Unique Forms of Continuity in Space.

    I had seen photos, but nothing beat the real thing, when I first saw it in the enclosed part of the Hakone outdoor sculpture garden, it took my breath away.

    So many great works there, most outdoors. Of course, some crap, too,

    Our public sculpture is generally good, the little soldier, re-cast for placing around the areas near many train stations,

    That is a particular enample, I gather a few were opposed by Tokyo leftists of the old days, none of the little soldier here now. Still, many places here have good sculptures to people of the past in a few places, and to basic and abstract principles in many places.

    Even the old-school gyms have great relief sculptures on the walls, and that extends well into Tokyo, but not central districts.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Brenton Sanderson Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
Becker update V1.3.2
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
How America was neoconned into World War IV