RSS
Battle Lines: Essays on Western Culture, Jewish Influence, and Anti-Semitism”
By Brenton Sanderson
Paperback (558 pages) available at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Book Depository, AbeBooks, Alibris, and Indiebound
EBook available at Kobo
FOREWORD by Kevin MacDonald
Brenton Sanderson began writing for The Occidental Observer and The Occidental Quarterly in 2011. I have been an enthusiastic supporter of his work from the beginning – his first essays were on the “War on White Australia” which I am happy to learn will be coming out in a separate, much anticipated, volume.
As an editor, one quickly learns to appreciate essays that are well-researched and well-written, and Sanderson’s work has always been up to the highest standard. Each of these essays is a gem. The general theme of Battle Lines is the difficult question of Jewish influence – difficult at least partly because the literature is littered with apologetic writings, so that getting a firm grasp on such a topic requires great persistence and honesty. As he writes in the Introduction, “The Jewish Question is foundational to the demographic transformation of the West, the revolution in its sexual and ethical mores, and to the trajectory of Western politics, art and culture.” We can’t avoid talking about it if we want to be honest about what is happening. But doing so is a thankless task, a reason for being scorned and ostracized, fired from one’s job, barred from influential positions in the media and academic world. Sanderson quotes Richard Wagner writing in the nineteenth century, “It is distressing to me always to come back to the theme of the Jews. But one cannot escape it if one looks to the future.”
And 150 years after Wagner’s statement, it is still absolutely true. 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.
Much of Sanderson’s work has been on Jewish influence on culture, particularly in the arts and the media. These are major contributions. Beginning in the early twentieth century Jews have had enormous influence on the visual arts as artists, critics, dealers, and collectors. In 1973 Sophy Burnham published The Art Crowd, estimating that 80 per cent of the 2,500 core “art market personnel” – dealers, curators, gallery owners, collectors, critics, consultants and patrons of the arts – were Jewish.[1]Sophy Burnham, The Art Crowd (Philadelphia: David McKay Publications, 1973), 25.
So it’s not surprising that Jewish attitudes would be reflected in what counts as fine art and whose work gets promoted. As Sanderson notes in his essay on Tristan Tzara and the Dada movement, there was a “Jewish intellectual substructure of many of these twentieth century art movements… manifest in their unfailing hostility toward the political, cultural and religious traditions of Europe and European-derived societies.”
Given this reality, it is not difficult to envision Jewish critics championing Jewish artists or non-Jews like Jackson Pollock whose work can be seen as advancing this hostility toward the culture of the West. Nor is it difficult to imagine Jewish art dealers promoting such artists (e.g., Sidney Janis promoting Mark Rothko [Chapter 9] whose fame had nothing to do with any recognizable talent but was inextricably linked to his being a member of a Jewish sub-culture). The same goes for Jewish art museum curators (e.g., Katherine Kuh promoting Rothko), Jewish collectors (e.g., Charles Saatchi promoting Damien Hirst), and Jewish critics (Clement Greenberg promoting Jackson Pollock).
Gustav Mahler and Leonard Bernstein were doubtless very talented musicians and composers. However, their elevation to the status of cultural icons cannot be explained by talent alone. Once again Sanderson documents a coterie of Jews promoting these figures, including Bernstein promoting Mahler. Bernstein in particular has always fascinated me because of his flamboyant personality and style. Sanderson notes that his fame rivaled that of Elvis Presley or Marilyn Monroe. Even I, who was not particularly drawn to classical music at the time, was quite aware of him and recall being struck by his impassioned performances as a conductor. The issue of Jewish personality is relatively unexplored, but it seems that Jews often have extreme personalities – personalities that make people stand out in whatever their field of endeavor, with Bernstein being a prime example. In my first book on Jews, A People That Shall Dwell Alone, I summarized data indicating that, on average, Jews rated highly on all the personality systems.
And while Jews have been able to promote certain individuals to the status of cultural icon, they have also attempted to tear down others, Richard Wagner being the most prominent example. In the case of Wagner, his towering musical genius presents a major obstacle in this endeavor, but there can be little doubt that there has been a campaign against Wagner waged by Jewish music critics and producers. Sanderson provides an amazing quote from Bernstein, “‘I hate Wagner, but I hate him on my knees’ – a grudging acknowledgement of the scale of German composer’s achievement.” Despite his prodigious talent, Wagner is now routinely labeled a “deeply pathological personality” – a common description by Jews eagerly seeking out any flaw in a person they dislike for deeper reasons. The result has been that performances of Wagnerian works like The Ring “in the modern era have invariably sought to satirize the drama to subvert the message Wagner attempts to convey.” If they can’t ban him outright because the music is too powerful, they can nip at the edges with satire and false messaging.
Another aspect of Jewish influence on culture has been the sexual revolution. In writing The Culture of Critique I always thought of the chapter on Freud as pivotal for understanding what had happened since the 1960s. Freud’s war on sexual and family mores has had vastly more devastating effects on people at the lower end of the IQ distribution than the solidly middle class or upper class. Those at the lower end of the IQ distribution benefit more from the social supports embedded in religion and traditional culture, but these have essentially been destroyed since the 1960s. Since then, all the markers of family function have declined precipitously, including increases in divorce, lower rates of marriage, births out of wedlock, and single parenting – all of which are linked to negative effects on children and all more common in people of lower socioeconomic status. In recent decades this has been exacerbated by drug abuse, especially opioid abuse, which is again more common among people on the lower rungs of society.
Here Sanderson emphasizes how the ongoing sexual revolution, originated by a vastly disproportionate number of Jewish intellectuals, has filtered into the entertainment industry, focusing on the work of Jenji Kohan (Orange is the New Black) and Jill Soloway (Transparent). When I was growing up in the 1950s, religious and patriotic groups exercised significant power over the content of movies and television. Marriage and having children were generally depicted as rewarding life choices, and all the psychological research indicates that traditional married families are indeed more likely to result in well-adjusted children.
However, such families are a vanishing breed in the Western media landscape, replaced by shows presenting divorced families, single parenting, and homosexual and transgender relationships as normal and fulfilling. Both Kohan and Soloway are strongly identified Jews (Kohan wanted to become a rabbi and Soloway said that Jews in Hollywood are “recreating culture to defend ourselves post-Holocaust”). Their careers have taken place completely within a Jewish milieu – a good indication of the fundamentally Jewish nature of the entertainment industry. A non-Jew wishing to have a career in the industry could not possibly produce, write, or direct anything that offends Jewish sensibilities.
Another important theme in Battle Lines is Jewish apologia for the crimes of communism, a topic that must remain suppressed “regardless of how many historians (Jewish and non-Jewish) confirm the decisive role Jews played in providing the ideological basis for, and the establishment, governance and administration of, the former communist dictatorships of Central and Eastern Europe.” Daniel Goldhagen is typical of those Jews who want to totally suppress this history, asserting that any linking of Jews with communism is a “calumny.” However, Sanderson provides extensive reviews of two books by Jewish authors with a different slant – that yes, Jews were decisive, but whatever they did was justified by anti-Semitism. For example, the much-exaggerated pogroms of the late nineteenth century are used to justify the murder of millions and the oppressive police states, and Jews are absolved from any role in triggering the anti-Jewish attitudes widely felt by the peoples of Eastern and Central Europe. This is outright falsification of history. And as Sanderson notes,
Free discussion of the Jewish role in communist crimes undermines Jewish pretensions to moral authority grounded in their self-designated status as history’s preeminent victims. In contemporary academia there are, in addition, strong personal and professional disincentives for highlighting the Jewish role in communist crimes, and it is, therefore, not surprising that non-Jewish historians and intellectuals are equally reluctant to recognize the Jewish backgrounds of many revolutionaries and to explore how their Jewish identity influenced their beliefs and actions. The Jewish-controlled media organs in the U.S. have conditioned most Americans to suffer a sort of mental allergic reaction to topics sensitive to Jews.
This is an excellent general description of all topics related to Jewish influence. Jews are ethnically motivated to see themselves in a positive light, while non-Jews rightly fear their careers in academia, the media, or politics will be jeopardized if they honestly and openly discuss the impact of Jews on Western societies. The result is a plethora of glaring omissions, and disingenuous analyses often accompanied by a maudlin philo-Semitism.
The reasons White academics or journalists produce this drivel are easy to understand. Such endeavors are massively incentivized, whether by obtaining tenure in the university system or getting a position in the elite media or politics. The message from our latter-day commissars is clear: “Sell out and we’ll make you a star.” Brenton Sanderson has not sold out. These essays offer excellent scholarship, clear writing, and most of all, honesty – a rare trait indeed in the contemporary West.
Note
[1] Sophy Burnham, The Art Crowd (Philadelphia: David McKay Publications, 1973), 25.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Excellent foreword, Dr. McDonald. Good book it appears.
R.C.
Once again, blame the sexual revolution on Jews. This completely overlooks the fact that the philosophes in the Enlightenment promoted sexual freedom as one of their projects, and white men in later generations took up the cause. You can’t get much whiter than Jean-Baptiste de Boyer, Voltaire, Denis Diderot, Percy Shelley, H.G. Wells, D.H. Lawrence and Bertrand Russell.
I have a few textbooks on human sexuality published since the year 2000. Their historical sections devote a paragraph or two to Freud, but they usually treat him as a marginal figure compared to white sexologists like Havelock Ellis, Alfred Kinsey and Dr. William H. Masters.
I never watched those shows (I don’t watch TV, anyway), but this is hilarious…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joey_Soloway
………………
I fully agree. Just, for me, it is a bit strange to refer to most European Jews as non-white. Sure, some of them have these facial features so that we can easily identify them (Einstein, Henry Kissinger, Barbra Streisand, Golda Meir,…). But, many or most European Jews, and Freud was among them, simply don’t “look Jewish”. They “look white”.
Why don’t we exclude from whiteness those people who are, visually, either slightly mixed with Asians (Dostoevsky) or perhaps with Injuns (Raquel Welch), or southern Italians who may have god knows which ancestry (Joe Mantegna)?
In those cases, I would say that race truly is a “social construct”.
Or maybe you just notice the ones who are flamboyant. Duh. Confirmation bias.
You have blamed this on the Sacklers. There is no evidence that legal use of opioids for pain management created the street fentanyl epidemic. For that, you’d have to look at China, and criminal gangs from Mexico.
Was Dostoievsky part-Asian? I didn’t know. Lenin was part Kalmyk, and many Russians do have a slightly Asianesque look, from distant Asian admixture.
And there are white Americans who have a trace of African ancestry going back to Colonial Virginia, when indentured servants intermarried. As they say, you’d never tell.
There are no genealogical records that would show that Dostoevsky possessed some Asian ancestry. Just, he definitely had this slightly Asiatic look- unlike, say, Gogol, Chekhov or Turgenev.
Did you read those authors? I’m no specialist in literature and have some questions. Is it really the case that those authors played such a role? From Diderot I read Jacques le Fataliste and I don’t remember any passage of the book that might justify what you said, the same about Voltaire. Do they have other writings about this question? Voltaire defended some form of hedonism. Candide has one sentence in this direction (as far as I remember), but is it enough to justify your mention? The book by de Boyer seems to have been forbidden during the 19th century and probably had no influence after it was published. Bertrand Russell wrote about almost everything and whatever he might have said about sex probably got lost amid dozens of books about other themes. Even though, one author that I found now (I didn’t read the whole text and the whole picture may be more complex) says the following about him:
I also think that his examples are not quite adequately chosen (I mean, a part of it). But, when it comes to sexuality & sensuality, European culture, high & low, is saturated with it-and not some obscure authors, but the most spectacular bestsellers, as well as sexologists or “thinkers of sex”.
Pietro Aretino
John Cleland
La Mettrie (Machine Man)
Diderot (Memoirs of a Nun)
Fourier
E.T.A. Hoffman
Casanova
Havelock Ellis
Krafft Ebing
Kinsey
Graefenberg (G spot)
Masters & Johnson
…
Jews:
Freud
Hirschfeld (gay)
Reich
Literature: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erotic_literature
I dont know why so few people can understand this. Jew is an identity group that traces its lineage back to the middle east. Since they accept half breeds as jews if the mother is a jew, they have been able to absorb significant european dna in their 2000 years living with europeans.
White means european gentile. Jews that look white still identity as jews and hate whites because judaism teaches them to be hostile to all gentiles. Thats why you have barbara spectre types that pass as european but have a seething hatred of gentile europeans. Paul krugman and lord rothschild are two more of this type of white-hating white-passing jews.
Why Christian Zionists see themselves as winners in a Gulf pact with Israel
The deal between the UAE and Israel has energised the most fundamentalist parts of Trump’s base ahead of November’s election, experts say.In late June, John Hagee, a pastor and founder of Christians United for Israel (CUFI), offered Gulf states uncomfortable with Israel’s plan to annex large parts of the occupied West Bank a simple solution: step out of the shadows and publicly embrace Israel.
“Gulf states, who are claiming that Israeli ‘annexation’ would lead to an end to their not-so-secret relations with Israel, ought to put their requests in a positive light,” Hagee told the Jerusalem Post. “Rather than threaten to walk away, they should publicly and formally offer normalisation of ties between the broader Arab world and Israel.” https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/uae-israel-normalisation-christian-zionists-winners
How do the Christians embrace a person like Hagee or support an organization like CUFI? Corruption is oozing out of in the bowel of the beasts .
Weeks earlier Trump claimed that the most ardent supporters of him endorsed his ME polices .He expects more voters turnout in his favor because of the polices .
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2020/07/22/the-white-plague-part-i-an-empire-of-death-the-rise-of-the-house-of-sackler/
‘You have blamed this on the Sacklers. There is no evidence that legal use of opioids for pain management created the street fentanyl epidemic.’
Huh.
Ever heard of hillbilly heroin? (Opiates in the form of pills instead of injected heroin?)
Thanks anyway schlomo.
Sorry, it is the Jews. Anyone who went to college in the 60’s knows it, especially in the Ivy league, Berkeley, and the big ten, especially Wisconsin and Michigan.
When a corporation buys and bullies politicians and the healthcare system into deliberately turning millions of law-abiding citizens into addicts, they are the central evil.
Some of those addicts will then be catered to by illegal competitors of the legal monsters, true, but that’s a function of the initial evil. Suburban adults do not move to heroin if you do not first addict them to legal opioids and then abruptly stop the supply. Their kids to not start seeing opioids as something OK to experiment with, if the parents aren’t opioid junkies.
Back in the day 99% of pot smokers and acid heads and speed freaks knew to stay away from heroin. But not post-Sackler. They sure changed that.
Sure, maybe China is trying to hit back through fentanyl as an attempted asymmetrical reply for the jihadist ferment and the Hong Kong b.s. and the possible seeding with various pathogens against their livestock. But again, if a) there was nothing to reply to, and b) the Sacklers hadn’t turned suburbia into heroinists, this would not have happened.
And blaming the Mexican cartels profiting from all this, as if they were the grand master villain, is Bush Jr tier gibberish. The Mexican cartels will profit from any situation you create that they can profit from. If you a) stop creating these situations, and b) use one tenth of the resources poured into the Middle East to fix Mexico, the problem evaporates.
Bollocks (along with Barbara Spectre bugaboo).
East European Jews are a mixture of Mid Eastern newcomers & various European peoples. On genetic level, they may have from 10% to 60% Mid Eastern genotype (metaphorically speaking). Many of them look different from their Christian neighbors, some don’t.
It is true they retained their different culture (after all, they still stick out. although less than Muslims). Yet- there is no any grand plan, pathological aversion etc. toward European values & ways of life among secularized Jews (past 150-200 years).
White stands for phenotype, not culture. There can be no black English, though (s)he may be an Anglican & have no other culture than British. Jews in Britain, or any European country, are mostly white although their culture, religious & historical, is different. Bosnian Muslims are also white, although their culture is Islamic, hence non-European.
White is-looks. But, if one insists it must mean the whole package of Western culture, i.e. whites being only Europeans in both visual & cultural sense, this is quite another matter.
Erotic literature has always existed. I forgot that Diderot wrote The Indiscret Jewels (I read a part of it but never finished reading the book, I’ll see if I find it somewhere in my book shelves). But I think that these stories represented a kind of social transgression. In de Sade this is clear, extreme and openly so and because of that he spent a lot of time in prison (“Sade was incarcerated in various prisons and an insane asylum for about 32 years of his life”). In most cases this literature was probably accessible only to few upper class people. What is decisive is probably popular culture that you see in tv and films. From an article today in The Guardian:
I thought Russell cuckolded T S Eliot.
Even if (mind the “if”!) Dr MacDonald et al are right about the Jews, it’s counter-productive to talk about it.
If (mind the “if”, again!) the Jews are in a Darwinian competition with Whites (or whatever their ideas are; I ain’t certain, frankly…), all White Nationalists need to do is gain power and eventually the Jewry’s mask will slip (if there’s any mask at all, anyway…), and once that mask slips, MacDonald’s theses will be regarded as undeniable.
.
.
.
“When” is that point, exactly? Dunno. It’s murky. Probably when White Nationalists have enough political power to force secession.
Once again, blame Whites.
Jewish Supremacy Inc. is constitutionally incapable of grasping a manner of living that requires rigorous honesty. It simply can not do it.
JSI responds to accountability the way Dracula responds to the light of day.
Which means, whatever JSI controls it destroys.
Case in point, the capital of JSI itself – New York City.
The future of the human race is by no means guaranteed.
But, to the extent it does have a future, NYC will go down in history as a case study of the consequences of JSI’s lust for power.
And not just NYC. But the USA itself. Obviously.
These easily observable facts make Susan Sontag’s famous quote about the White race being the cancer of human history an obvious and typical example of JSI projection.
What we’re witnessing today is nothing less than
Absolutely!
A KM article at TUR functions like a Roach Motel for Trolls.
It traps them long enough to expose themselves and kill their own argument.
Every. Single. Time.
He is right, by the by. Let me throw in another if for you.
“If” white nationalists gain power…
Jews are really, really good at stopping that from happening. What Kevin says is overwhelmingly true. The denial of this truth is done by liars who will do everything in their power to prevent it even from being discussed. Case in point:
People that define themselves as White or Jew, are doing so mostly based on a mindset and ideology.
Many that define themselves or their as White, did so on the basis that they believe they are genetically/physically and or Euro culturally superior or at least exceptional.
Jews that do so, believe their Tribe are definitely Superior and Exceptional, as ordained by a higher being, God (however they may define) therefore are into now worshiping themselves.
Both Whites and Jews carry a major cultural and psychological flaw, believing themselves superior to the rest of humanity.
In the Islamic world, especially in the Arabstan of the south Mediterranean where many Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews had dwelled until recently, Jews were less likely to view themselves as so superior or exceptional to their neighbors, as that was not tolerated in the multi-cultural, ethnic, and even religious communities of those regions. Islamic governance had careful arrangements that allowed each religious community to rule themselves to great part. Also Islamic governance kept Jewish usurious lending practices in check, while in Renaissance Europe, the ruling princes and developing burgher class took advantage of the usurious money practices for their personal benefit without caring for the tax burden it placed on their societies.
Islamic tenets were in general opposition to concepts of superiority or exceptionalism, and general equalizer’s if one accepted any of the one God Abrahamic religions as followers of the book (s) you were basically equal in the eyes of God. Religions that were universal in outlook, Islam and less so Christianity, did not place any exceptionalism on race.color, ethnicity, language, or origin until Christian Europe developed its national and ethnic based states.
Initially upon Christianization, Europe did not define its self as White, but as Christian. Christian Europe was initially in fierce competition first with Islam to the South, which had a superior Culture and Civilization before being overtaken in the late Renaissance.
Europeans with their developing nationalism supplanted over their recent Christian identifies, then found themselves into a new competition this time with Ashkenazi Jews who were moving in from the Asian steppes and to a lesser extent Sephardic Jews ethnically cleansed from Andalusia who were moving north. Over the past 500 years or so there then emerged a fierce competition between these two groups, both claiming Exceptionalism and Superiority of their ethno-religious ethos, but actually it was one for economic and political ascendency in the new nation states.
The smaller but more clannish Jews immigrants proved far more aggressive and experienced in commercial and monetary matters and therefore and it was only natural that with time, they would get gain a major edge over their nominally agrarian and artisanal Christian counterparts.
Now such an economic and power gap is growing by leaps and bounds between the Jewish money and business elite and the American working and middle classes. who define themselves as European Whites are increasingly seeing themselves as the left outs or left behinds, while this position was previously relegated for the racially defined coloreds, Hispanic and Afro-Americans.
Thus the growing fear of anti-semitism by the Jewish community at large and further aggravated by their Zionized leaders. Whereas White Nationalism, usually misdirected against the Colored underclasses, is also a natural reaction to the perceived loss of economic and political power. There you have what I see as the growth of 2 competing nationalisms that are defining 21st century USA.
“But those pushing for it to happen, which included US President Donald Trump and his son-in-law and adviser Jared Kushner, see the prospect of a handshake between the men as a way to relaunch Mohammed bin Salman’s image as a young Arab peacemaker and shore up regional support for the US-brokered deal between the United Arab Emirates and Israel.
Not wanting to stay either in the Saudi embassy nor the ambassador’s residence, known locations which would have attracted demonstrations, four houses had been purchased at a secret location just for his stay, MEE was told.” David Hearst Middle East Eye
A prince who can’t even afford to stay in his own compound is seen as a trailblazer,a peacenik,a progressive by this administration worshiped by millions of Christian . They essentially are hiding their utter helplessness impotence against the selfish dishonest condescending Israeli authority .
MbS has been elevated to a statesman who can or is ready to challenge long standing assumption or break free from the bondage of the past . This narrtaive suits US media . If same guy decided to offer a handshake to Iran or Syria ,he would be called a monster, a threat, a terrorist sympathizer.
The words change the frame of reference and create user friendly back and foreground .
The viewers like theses stupid deplorable and their religious counterparts- Evangelicals see no disharmony ,contradictions or inconsistency or manipulation . They dont because they have long ago lost the bones of the back to the dogs of Israel
– ANONs
Over in Thailand,another struggle is brewing .Facebook has decided to sue the local authorities for them blocking the access of the site to the anti monarchy ant regime protesting citizen. Didn’t Facebook block the messages and the postings of the Palestinian activists ? It did. It actually gets worst . It has allowed the pro apartheid oppressive Zionsit regime to transmits its virulent racist rants ,posts and Israeli glorification of violence on the site .
Facebook has a system built in place . The postings have to be cleared by the state of Israel before Facebook would allow its on its site.
Anyone can ban block and limit exposure of Facebook,if Facebook can same .
I’m surprised no mention to Magnus Hirschfeld.
It’s not that uncommon: in modern displays of Gilbert & Sullivan (in ‘The Mikado’) the word “nigger” is never found.
It’s kind of like censoring the ‘f’ word, which would have happened automatically until recent times. Like it or not, the ‘n’ word is no longer socially acceptable. The censorship of Wagner is far more profound, amounting to a censorship of ideas and culture.
After decades of pondering the underlying causes of our political situation I have finally arrived at what I regard as the correct explanation: MONEY is the cause, assuming motives exist and are strong. Money drives all the other causes of the right’s helplessness.
The media, academe, politicians, all reflect the power of big money. Think about it: Suppose the local college hires a ranting professor of Marxist Queer Theory. Now suppose the big donors to that college are all strongly motivated Baptists or Roman Catholics and so are all the alternative big donors. Do you think for a minute the appointment would stand? Even if the college were public it would be faced with hostile politicians who depend on donations from the rich ‘homophobes.’ Similarly the media reflects the views of the people who own it. When the main Alabama papers ran their campaign against Roy Moore, I noticed that all three were owned by a single man in New Jersey.
We are all victims of the lingering assumption that money is on the side of the ‘right’ and the ‘left’ is anti-money. This has not been true for half a century at least, if it were ever true. Painful as it may be, the new right must work to diminish the role of money in politics. Of course, there’s nothing wrong with trying to enlist some billionaires on our side. Good luck with that.
Another consequence is that we simply cannot afford the luxury of being anti-black or anti-brown no matter how unfair and irrational the rhetoric of anti-racism may be. We have to divide and conquer using the same tactics as the contemporary left. The dominion of white liberals is grounded in their ability to manipulate the Democrat party via a coalition of ethnic bloc voters. Domination of the Republicans is mainly an insurance policy. An advantage of populism is that a populist is free to work for minority votes without having to tie that to salvation via inner city capitalism or apologize for defending the interests of Wall Street.
In the final analysis, a faction as destitute of power as the right cannot demand the moon. We must choose a goal and be willing to sacrifice other goals to have a chance of attaining it.
Kinsey, Ellis, and Masters were intellectual lightweights who commercially exploited the territory opened up by Freud. Freud turned our view of human nature upside down with his empirically unfounded claims that religion, love, idealism and art were all disguised versions of primitive sexual urges. Freud’s views might have been omitted from popular presentations because they are complex and implausible to the uninitiated.
Jews are a Middle Eastern ethnic group, like Arabs, who they are closely related to. Too often, this fact is not mentioned. These people didn’t come from nowhere, they came from the Middle East, outside of Europe and from a completely different cultural and genetic line than Europeans. We need to emphasize that Jews are Middle Eastern more than we do. Jewish traits — physical and psychological — are Arab like. Let’s center than fact. It has explanatory power and also counters false suggestions that somehow, Jews are not foreign to European societies.
This “Jain Plain” character is a new addition to the cast of Jewish apologists who infest this blog. I have seen terrible, flagrantly dishonest comments from this creature repeatedly.
Anyone in generation X or the millennial generation saw in real life how the increased availability of opiate pain pills starting in the late 90’s lead to the current heroin crisis. As recently as the early 90’s, heroin and opiates were taboo even among frequent drug users. People who used cocaine, amphetamines and LSD would not touch opiates. There were no opiate pills in most houses in America, it would have been very rare for anyone to have been given an opiate prescription. They were mostly used in hospitals for people with major surgeries or catastrophic injuries. Opiate pills, as rare as they were, were of interest only to heroin addicts, as depicted in the film “Drugstore Cowboys.” There were not seen as party drugs and were of no interest to drug using young people.
After the Sackler’s Oxycontin advertising and promotion drive, a flood oxycodone of pills suddenly started be given to people with minor surgeries and injuries. Everyone, I mean everyone, got them for wisdom teeth extraction. So almost all millennials got a totally unnecessary bottle of opiates in their late teens or early twenties. That lead to people experimenting and that lead to people getting addicted. It particularly created opiate addicts in rural areas that had never had heroin available on the street before.
Countless news articles, reports and books document these facts. “Jain Plain” makes bold faced lies in a shameless way that is characteristic of Jewish ethnic activists. Jewish ethnic activist “Jack D,” who the Occidental Observer has written about, has admitted that he is organizing and coordinating with other Jewish ethnic activists that he knows to post on this blog and promote Jewish narratives here. I wonder if there is a connection.
We have a hardcore group of Jewish ethnic activists who relentless lie and obfuscate in the comments here. Ron Unz has even called these people out for their outrageous lying.
Antonin Scalia had little use for this “prodigious talent”, having come from a race equal or better in musicality. It was Ruth Bader Ginsburg who nagged him repeatedly that Wagner was actually good if you give him a chance. He did finally give in, on one piece, grudgingly.
My sympathies are with Scalia on this. Wagner is one of those figures, like Picasso, who have much more talent than taste, and thus waste it. He always comes off to me as an overwrought Hollywood-soundtrack composer. Even when it’s good, it’s still frenetic.
Schoenberg had both talent and taste– he was quite conservative in his teaching– but suffered a serious lapse of common sense with the atonal stuff.
Are you suggesting opiates contain lead? They don’t even allow that in gasoline anymore.
Where is the FDA?
All jews are by nature self loathing, this is the root cause of all their behaviour.
This is very important because it seems like some on the right are trying to run away from the Jewish question for various self serving reasons. Greg Johnson of Counter Currents has decided to cuck on the JQ evidenced by his attacks on those who focus on the JQ and who Greg derided as “monomaniacal anti-semites”. At one time the JQ and holocaust revisionism was central to Greg’s work but apparently he got bought off or is afraid of getting his website deplatformed from the web.
Jared Taylor has always shied away from the JQ and disingenuously considers Jews to be huwhite Europeans. He knows better.
This isn’t an attack on either men because they both do very good work but unless and until we confront Jewish power and influence and come up with ways to check it our dire situation will not improve. Indeed, it will continue to get worse.
In order to smash Jewish power either the nation has to collapse into an ash heap or pro-whites have to obtain political power and with no money and no sympathetic media and elites (unlike the Jew led anti-white left) the former is the only solution.
As for sex, the official Jewish position in the early 20th century was: We Jews promote sane sex, in opposition to the Christian who promote insane asexuality and the pagans who promote inordinate perversion. A lot of Jews looked at homosexuality as a Fascist/Nazi perversion (the evangelical “Pink Swastika” relies on contemporary Jewish polemics). Jewish Leftists who were homosexual tended to stay in the closet – a situation which only changed in the 1960s.
As for poetry, art and music – it is obvious that Jews behaved extremely tribal and tried to promote their own people. But this implies that some other Jews -mostly the more traditional, conservative persons – remained unregarded and unacknowledged, because they didn’t meet the Jewish standards. – I think we have a certain opportunity to keep these “other” Jews in memory. (German examples are the poets Richard Beer-Hofmann or Lola Landau whose memory is rather more cultivated by Gentiles). Generally there ought to be a certain interest in Jews who are shunned by their own community.
He’s a mac not a mick. Watch that spelling.
They don’t teach English grammar and syntax in schools anymore. In America’s case, this is not to overtax the mental capacity of the dindus. It might take them a couple of years to grasp what preterite means.
Kevin MacDonald is of Scots Highland ancestry, as he has averred himself.
The vast majority of Scots Macs spell it as Mac, although a minority use Mc. In the past, some used M’ – as in M’Ghie. Irish Macs, as you implied , tend to spell it Mc.
There is of course a class/social status aspect to this. In Scotland, Mc tends to be a lower class form. Clan chiefs are invariably Macs. Mackie ( pronounced MA kae ) is much superior to McKie ( pronounced ma KEE).
The Professor is very much a MacDonald, not some burger called McDonald !
Gustav Mahler and Leonard Bernstein were doubtless very talented musicians and composers. However, their elevation to the status of cultural icons cannot be explained by talent alone
Hard to say.
Bernstein elevated Mahler.
TV, NYT/NYC media, personalities indebted to Yid,
awards from other Yid elevated Bernstein.
Just keep inflating until greatness is obvious,
so they claim.
I have not formed an opinion on the issue because of a few elements (I don’t care about Nazi controversies etc.)
1. my technical knowledge of music is scarce & I am, re music, literally a barbarian. It doesn’t mean I haven’t listened to most so called greatest works & enjoyed them. But, I have so little technical knowledge I cannot be a serious interlocutor re these matters. On the other hand, I’ve read not few serious books on musical aesthetics & found them thought-provoking (at least those parts not addressing technicalities).
2. I don’t care for opera, so much of Wagner is lost on me. Except instrumental parts.
3. evidently, his influence had been huge: Bruckner, Schoenberg, Debussy, Mahler, … they all stem from Wagner. So I’ve been told. It seems that most greatest composers from 1890 to 1920 had been influenced by him & acknowledged his greatness. Wagner can be considered the founding father of modern music, much like Flaubert of modern novel & Cezanne & Van Gogh of modern painting.
Politics aside, I would say that Wagner- his musical genius aside- was not primarily a composer, but a dramatist & his open contempt for “pure music” has contributed to animus towards him. For him, music was just a means to an end.
Jesus Christ called the Pharisees liars. But the Pharisees put the Old Testament together.The Old Testament is full of lies ,why do Christians continue to read the Old Testament?If any part of the Old Testament is not in harmony with the New,then it is a lie. Jesus Christ never hurt or threatened anybody.Yet the god of the Old Testament caused a lot of destruction and murdered countless people including the Canaanites. Some people believe that God will destroy the world as in Revelation. But the careful reader will see that it is the evil one who is allowed by God to destroy the world just like the evil one killed Jobs children,not God. God will save mankind.The Church is built on the New Testament and Holy Tradition. Stop believing the Old Testament.