The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewGilad Atzmon Archive
The Interpretation of (Left) Dreams
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
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

“Why do we dream? Freud’s answer is deceptively simple: the ultimate function of the dream is to enable the dreamer to stay asleep.” Slavoj Zizek (2006)

Traditional Left Ideology sets out a vision of how the world ‘ought to be.’ The Left’s view can be summed up as the belief that social justice is the primary requirement for improving the world, and that this better future entails the pursuit of equality in various forms. The Left ideologist believes that it is both ethical and moral to attempt to approach equality in terms of civil rights and material wealth.

But if the Left focuses on ‘what could be,’ the Right focuses on ‘what is.’ If the Left operates where people ‘could be,’ the Right operates where people ‘are’ or at least, where they believe themselves to be. The Right does not aim to change human social reality but rather to celebrate, and to even maximize it.

Left ideology, accordingly, is shaped like a ‘dream.’ Aiming for what ‘ought to be’ rather than ‘what is’ induces a level of utopian illusory detachment and depicts a phantasmal egalitarian world often removed from our abusive, oppressive and doomed reality. In this phantasmic future, people will just drift away from greed and gluttony, they will work less and learn to share, even to share that which they may not possess to start with.

This imaginary ‘dream’ helps explain why the (Western) Left’s ideology rarely appealed to the struggling classes; the masses, consumed by the pursuit of bread and butter, were hardly going to be interested in utopian ‘dreams’ or futuristic social experiments. Bitten by the daily struggle and chased by existence, working people have never really subscribed to ‘the revolution,’ usually because they were just too busy working. This perhaps explains why so often it was the middle-class and bourgeois agitators who became revolutionary icons. It was they who had access to that little bit extra to fund their revolutionary adventures.

The ‘Left dream’ is certainly appealing, perhaps a bit too appealing. Social justice, equality and even revolution may really be nothing but the addictive rush of effecting change and this is perhaps why hard-core Leftist agitators often find it impossible to wake from their social fantasy of transformation. They simply refuse to admit that reality has slipped from their grasp, preferring to remain in their cozy phantasmal and delusional universe, shielded by ghetto walls built from archaic terminology and political correctness.

In fact, the more appealing and convincing the revolutionary fantasy is, the less its supporters are willing to be awaken by reality. This blindness helps explain why the Western ideological and political Left has failed on so many fronts: it was daydreaming when the service economy was introduced, and it did not awaken when production and manufacturing were eviscerated. It yawned when it should have combatted corporate culture, big money and its worship, and it dozed when higher education became a luxury. The Left was certainly snoring noisily when, one after the other, its institutions were conquered by ‘New Left’ Identitarian politics.

It is most important to point at the contemporary American so-called ‘Left’ that was deeply asleep when the American working classes drifted away to the Republican party. The American Left was so deeply consumed by its ‘revolutionary fantasy’ that it didn’t notice the embarrassing fact that an abrasive multi-billionaire real estate tycoon morphed into a populist revolutionary icon for hard-working people. The American Left was so thrilled by its self-worship that it pretended not to see that its entire operation was practically sustained by Wall Street tycoons and globalists of the worst type. The American Left has become a controlled opposition apparatus. It practically went to bed with the bitterest enemies of peace and justice let alone anything that resembles ‘social justice’ and human harmony.

In one of his most insightful moments, Slavoj Zizek delved into a comparison between Freud and Lacan’s perception of the dream: “Why do we dream?” Zizek asked. “Freud’s answer is deceptively simple: the ultimate function of the dream is to enable the dreamer to stay asleep.”

According to this perception, the dream is there to sustain the slumber against all odds. It represses the external disturbance (whether it is depression, anxiety, noise or even an immediate threat) by incorporating it into the dream. In The Interpretation of Dreams, Freud tells a story of a father whose young son has just died. The father falls asleep and dreams that the child is standing by his bed in flames, whispering the horrifying reproach: ‘Father, can’t you see I’m burning?’ Soon afterwards, the father wakes to discover that a fallen candle has set fire to his dead son’s shroud. The father had smelled the smoke while asleep and incorporated the image of his burning son into his dream to prolong his sleep. Zizek wonders: did the father wake up because the external stimulus became too strong to be contained within the dream-scenario? Or was it the obverse, that the father constructed the dream in order to prolong his sleep, but what he encountered in the dream was even more unbearable than external reality, so that he woke up to escape it?

ORDER IT NOW

In the ‘Left Dream,’ the cosmopolitan revolution occurs by itself, as its conditions are ‘determined’ by an inevitable mass consciousness shift. In the ‘Left dream’ the revolution is inevitable so to say. In the ‘Left’s nightmare,’ however, reality proves the complete opposite; the condition for the revolution are ripe on the verge of ultimate but then, pretty much out of the blue, the same script keep repeating itself, a ‘Hitler’ figure appears ‘out of nowhere’ and steers the masses away from the ‘revolution’ to the ‘flag.’ But one thing is clear. In the Left Dream there is no escape route to reality. Unlike the father who awakes devastated by the image of his son being burned, there is no Left dream where the struggling masses can have their say. In the American Left Dream, for instance, there is no room for ‘White uneducated males’ who pop out of the blue and ask: what about us? Why have you forsaken us? In the American Left Dream these kinds of ‘white’ people are called ‘Trumpsters,’ ‘Deplorables,’ White Supremacists,’ white nationalists, and so forth. In the Contemporary American Left dream there is no path back to reality. Those few Leftists who are awaken by any sort of reality check are effectively pushed out, left with no other option but flipping (political) sides. This may explain why demographic studies reveal that people are most often born Leftists and die Conservatives. Maturity, so it seems, involves a growing acceptance of ‘realistic pessimism.’ People tend to wake up, but the dream doesn’t.

One may wonder: where was the German Left when Hitler’s popularity increased amongst Germany’s Working class at a speed that puts Covid-19 to shame? Where was the British Left when Margaret Thatcher, who destroyed many of Britain’s industries and undermined the unions, became so popular amongst British Working people for making it possible for them to own their homes? Where was the British Left when Corbyn and Labour’s popularity minced into dust? It is also fascinating to look at the Israeli Left, as Israel was formed around the idea of Labour Zionism. The Israeli Labour party that dominated Israeli politics until 1977 literally vanished as its ‘dream’ of a Hebraic proletarian metamorphosis couldn’t sustain itself. Due to the fact that Labour Zionism was shaped and operated in a dream mode, it could never adopt to a political reality that was molded by its own dream.

The Left is often too blind to the political and social conditions in which it operates. It never detects the growing wave of resentment it brings upon itself because operating in a dream mode inflicts a severe form of detachment. As Freud realised, the dream is there to sustain the slumber. It ignores political opposition by reducing it into an outer ‘noise.’ It either sets regions of blind spots (political correctness) or alternatively defines growing regions of ‘political outcasts’ (Trumpsters, Fascists, Racists, Deplorables, White supremacists etc.)

In November 2016 Hillary Clinton was in a state of a total shock when she woke up to learn that Donald Trump won the election. In her dream Hillary already won the election, the act of voting was just a formal procedure. Four years later, Biden, the DNC and pretty much the entire Mainstream media followed the exact same pollsters who were totally off-mark in 2016. They anticipated a ‘landslide victory.’ The fact that Donald Trump was meeting so many supporters in his open rallies must have been realised within the context of the ‘Left Dream’ as noisy disturbances. When Michael Moore warned the American Left that the GOP and Trump could make it again, not one in the American progressive universe cared to address his concerns. When people are asleep you are expected to walk on your tiptoes.

I assume that the contemporary American Left’s wet Dream is easy to describe: You go to sleep with Donald Trump in the White House, you wake up and he is gone. This simple dream describes exactly what happened in the early morning of the 4th of November. America went to sleep accepting that Trump, against all odds, did it again. In the wee small hours bookies all over the world put their money on his success by a rate as high as 7 to 1. In the morning suddenly the situation flipped: Trump was on his way out. On the face of it the American Left dream has materialised.

America is obviously divided in the middle. Those who favour Biden insist that he won the election. Those who support Trump are convinced that something unusually dishonest happened during that night and in the days to follow.

I do not have the means or the intention to tell or even try to determine who won the election but it is clear that the DNC, Biden, Harris and the entire American mainstream media do not let the tsunami of mistrust interfere with their ‘materialised dream.’ Biden doesn’t seem too concerned by the fact that America currently looks like a banana republic. Like in a banana republic, Americans do not trust their political system nor do they trust their institutions. People who live in banana republics learn quickly to expect the unexpectable to the point that the unexpectable is becomes the new normal. Biden doesn’t let reality interfere with the dream. As ‘president-elect’ he doesn’t waste time, he works with his transition team, he keeps the fantasy afloat. America is on the verge of a civil war but even that doesn’t bother the ‘president-elect’ and his transition team. In the progressive dream, vowing to ‘unite the nation’ is way more forceful that the reality of a sharp divide.

Back in 2006, Zizek provided a Lacanian insight into the reality that we currently see in the USA. “Reality,” Zizek wrote, “is for those who cannot sustain the dream.” It is always the hard-working people struggling for bread and butter who can’t sustain the fantasy of social change. It is always the working classes that push for concretization. They want America to be great again (Trump), they want Great Britain to be as ‘Great’ as implied by its name (Brexit), they want France to be French (Yellow Vests). Before it is too late, those who watched the so-called ‘Trumpsters’ yesterday in Washington DC should accept that the patriotic reality embodied by the flag must at least be as meaningful as the Identitarian ‘dream’ of ‘others united.’

 
Hide 167 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. This article was obviously composed by someone on the right, while dreaming. Dreaming that the right are realists, really? Where is the$21 trillion from the Pentagon? Where was the right when the entire nation was under house arrest and falsely imprisoned? Were they dreaming that people would believe that people would believe the health scare scamdemic was responsible for a banana republic economy that uses fraud as a business model under those who claim to be conservative, but still somehow always manage to increase the national debt even more than the Democrats? Were they believing that living under false arrest in house arrest is the consrvative American way of life?

    DITCH RNC and DNC TERROIST NETWORKS!

    The time is now with more urgency than ever before to abandon the domestic and international terrorist netorks of the RNC and the DNC.

    To willingly and knowingly choose to associate with criminal psychopathic terrorists is a really idiotic move. It cannot be denied any longer that both the RNC and DNC are terrorist networks.

    For any skeptical individuals, I present the following evidence for starters. :

    A.) 9/11 was an inside job of controlled demolition which has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt and nothing has been done to bring the terrorists to justice. Only 3,000 people died in builidings that held hundreds of thousands of people. The rest all had hair cut appointments, or other reasons not to go into work that day, proving mass conspiracy to commit terrorism at all levels.

    B.) The health scare scamdemic is the second known domestic terrorism act. It is based on scientific fraud to cover for financial fraud. It was a pre-meditated act of terrorism based on the movie V for Vendetta, as Paul Craig Roberts pointed out, and was planned by David Rockefeller in 2003 and by Bill Gates and WHO, the UN, and the WEF planned as Event 201 in 2019. 

    C.)  The RNC and DNC support and affiliate with and work in collusion with known terrorists and drug lords including Al Qaeda, ISIS, IS, Daesh, The White Helmets, The MEK, FARC, Ukrainian Neo-Nazis, and many more.

    D.) Most illicit online activity takes place on TOR and it is fully funded by the U.S. government. The police are running for profit child porn websites. The military and CIA have conitiously imported massive quantities of heroin and cocaine into the country, and then had the audacity to imprison people for using the drugs that the government sold to them, and got them addicted to, and destroyed their lives as well as their families, and has resulted in over 500,000 deaths in the past two decades alone, and that is just opioids. 

    E.) They continuosly sign confessions of high crimes that they pretend are laws, but they are 100% illegal, regardless of how illiterate they may be because the constitution is explicitly clear and places strict limits on the government which they repeatedly violate. Every single one of them swore under oath and affirmation to uphold the U.S. Constition. Every single one of them have failed epically to uphold that simple oath.

    Andrea Iravani

  2. karel says:

    Yes indeed ‘

    ‘One may wonder: where was the German Left when Hitler’s popularity increased amongst Germany’s Working class at a speed that puts Covid-19 to shame?

    ” The left was very much around and the combined electorate of communists and social democrats exceeded in November 1932 that of the NSDAP. I cannot think of a single plausible explanation for the rise in popularity of NSDA. As always and more probably, there was a multitude of reasons, not easily identified then and now. My guess is that during the economic collapse of Germany the citizens have lost patience with the left wing parties as the communist and socialists did little, or perhaps could do little, to alleviate their hardship. Then there was a novelty feature of the NSDAP and the belief or a hope that nationalism could reduce the foreign interference in the affairs of Germany. Furthermore, the legend of the ”Dolchstoss” was steadily gaining in popularity with the increasingly distant armistice of 1918. Feelings that ”we were cheated” and dreams that Germany could be great again were also on the rise. Finally, die NSDAP propaganda apparatus was much better at identifying the ”enemies” of the working classes and unemployed by pointing out the factual dominance of the Jews in running the state.

  3. You are right Gilad, everybody was forced to take the blue-pill and stayed plugged in.

  4. And yet the working class agrees with, approves of, and wholeheartedly desires most non-ID-politics left proposals to improve their lives. National healthcare. Debt jubilee. Rent control. End to endless war. Taxing the living shit out of the rich. Ain’t that a hoot?

    • Agree: Skeptikal
  5. Wielgus says:
    @karel

    No. The NSDAP vote actually declined in the November 1932 election, from 37% to 33%. The KPD vote rose to 16.9% and they received 100 seats in the Reichstag, the first and last time the KPD made it to three figures in parliament. The SPD vote declined but never collapsed in free elections under Weimar and much of the decline went to the KPD.
    There were a number of reasons the NSDAP vote declined, but there was a slight recovery in the economy and some of their essentially rightist conservative support won from parties like the DNVP returned to their former political home. Some of this support was annoyed by NSDAP members supporting a Berlin transport workers’ strike alongside KPD members – this sector of the electorate wanted strikes crushed, not supported. DNVP voters may actually have been more consistently anti-Communist than those of the NSDAP. The DNVP also campaigned with anti-Semitic propaganda floats during elections – the Nazis did not have a monopoly on this kind of thing. Basically, conservatives like von Papen thought the weakening of the Nazis and their inexperience meant that they could be manipulated.
    “The factual dominance of the Jews running the state” – they didn’t. They had no significant footing in the armed forces or the civil service in Germany. The Nazis called Weimar the Judenrepublik but had it actually been so, they would have encountered more resistance and less cooperation from state elements than they did. In reality, this was a state that in the 1920s thought about deporting Hitler back to Austria (he did not gain actual German citizenship until relatively late) but never did.

  6. geokat62 says:

    They want America to be great again (Trump), they want Great Britain to be as ‘Great’ as implied by its name (Brexit), they want France to be French (Yellow Vests).

    It comes down to a battle between those who think we should revert to what nationalism always meant, what is now referred to as ethno-nationalism (i.e., blood and soil) and those who think we should instead embrace the newly invented breed of faux nationalism, otherwise known as civic-nationalism (i.e., multiculti).

    The New Left abandoned the principles of the Old Left because the latter could no longer sustain the dream. It is becoming increasingly obvious to more and more people that the principles of the New Left are just as unfit to do the job.

    Bottom Line: We want our homelands back!

  7. Intriguing analysis. Thank you.

  8. @karel

    There’s no mystery why the NSDAP had an advantage over the Left parties — the Capitalists MUCH preferred them to the Left.

    • Replies: @karel
    , @The Shadow
    , @Skeptikal
  9. Silly article.
    The silliness is overt by the time the author gets to the point of aligning Biden/the Dem’s with the “Left”.
    Freud & “Dreams” was a pretty big give away, itself.
    Bollocks.

    • Agree: AReply
    • Disagree: James N. Kennett
  10. MarkU says:

    Both the right and the left have their ideologues, both are guilty of attempting to shoehorn reality into their ideological frameworks. Both have a tendency towards the promotion of economic fundamentalism which concentrates power in too few hands and leads to tyranny and oppression.

    Young people tend to be idealists, they haven’t seen enough of the world to know what really happens if their ideological aims are achieved, usually they grow out of it and become more pragmatic.

    • Agree: botazefa
    • Replies: @Gilad Atzmon
  11. TG says:

    The article is absurd. There is no “Left,” at least not as an organized institution. The “Left” is the party of Wall Street and War, and as far as “equality” oh sure, they are happy to pit the proles against each other in a zero-sum competition for increasingly scarce and crappy jobs, but does “equality” apply to the 600 billionaires that run this country, and own most of it, including both political parties and the institutionalized “Left?” Somehow, no, “equality” is never an issue.

    It is pathetic how today’s fake “conservatives” keep dragging out the old bogeyman of “communism” when applied to politicians whose policies would embarrass Simon Legree.

  12. karel says:
    @animalogic

    Not quite so fast. The NSDAP seemed for a long time quite suspect to the captains of German industry. It was only after several secret meetings with Hitler, when the ”Partei” won the seal of approval and gained the support from the ”capitalists” but it materialized only after 1933, as you can find out from the following account.

    https://www.zeitklicks.de/top-menu/zeitstrahl/navigation/topnav/jahr/1933/geheimes-treffen-hitlers-mit-vertretern-der-wirtschaft/

    Hence, your knee jerk conclusion has no basis in reality.

    • Replies: @animalogic
  13. karel says:
    @Wielgus

    No secret and no great discovery that the popular vote of NSDAP dropped in 1933 but not so much to get overexcited about it. I have not found a plausible explanation for that phenomenon, but perhaps you will. Such, often random, oscillations in support of one or another party are quite common in any system.

    The perception that the Jews were running the state was overwhelming, whether you like it or not. Most banks were in Jewish hands as well as large sections of the retail and textile industry. Apparently, almost 80% of all lawyers were Jews. In fact, prior to the putsch in 1933, most Jews could be described as German nationalists. It is paradox that Jews in Czechoslovakia were also leaning towards German nationalism. Czech speaking Jews were more like rare exotic birds. The putsch in 1933 brought them to their senses and those who did not emigrate started to learn Czech.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
    , @Skeptikal
    , @Skeptikal
  14. Wyatt says:
    @karel

    I don’t know much about Nazi Germany, but I like to insist that the Nazis took socialism, removed the most jewish elements from it by introducing nationalism and actually making it an effective system for white people instead of following Marxism lock, stock and barrel and thus being puppets of jewish feudalism. It says a lot that the Germans not only recovered very quickly from its economic depression faster than everyone else and when they went to war, it took multiple nations to bring them down.

    It pisses off soc-coms when I say this.

  15. jamie b. says:
    @No Friend Of The Devil

    Question: Do you believe that the Moon landings were fake?

  16. @Wyatt

    Good points.

    The Dream theme dominates Theodor Herzl’s thinking and writing; it is at the core of his zionist vision.

    But the epigraph to Herzl’s 1903 novel Altneuland was, “If you wish it, it is no dream.”

    There were hard-headed Jewish-ish* businessmen and decision-influencers in the United States and elsewhere (especially Great Britain) who dealt very much in the real world and who used real-world tactics and very real (even if fiat) money to achieve the zionist “dream;” Louis Brandeis, Felix Frankfurter, Rabbi Stephen Wise, Henry Morgenthau, Jr., Samuel Untermeyer and a collection of other highly placed Jews used their positions and wealth in the other nations where they dwelt and whose institutions they suborned to leash those nations to real-world fulfillment of Herzl’s “dream.”

    ______

    *Jewish-ish because people like Brandeis, Frankfurter, Untermeyer were not observant/religious Jews but ‘political’ Jews as well as ardent zionists.

    • Replies: @geokat62
    , @Anonymouse
  17. geokat62 says:
    @SolontoCroesus

    There were hard-headed Jewish-ish* businessmen and decision-influencers in the United States and elsewhere…

    Given the pivotal role played by Chaim Weizmann, as documented by Douglas Reed in Controversy of Zion, he should receive top billing IMHO.

  18. @Wielgus

    “The factual dominance of the Jews running the state” – they didn’t. They had no significant footing in the armed forces or the civil service in Germany.

    A paper on the Yad Vashem site argues otherwise:

    https://www.yadvashem.org/odot_pdf/Microsoft%20Word%20-%207794.pdf

    The outstanding feature of [the Weimar] period was the polarization between the unprecedented integration of the Jews in every sphere of life, and the growth of political anti-Semitism among various organizations and political parties, especially in the immediate postwar years.
    Important achievements by Jews were recorded in the theater (Max Reinhardt), in music (Arnold Schönberg), in the visual arts (Max Liebermann), in philosophy (Herman Cohen) and in science (Albert Einstein). Among the Nobel prize winners in Germany up to 1938, 24 percent were Jews (nine Jews out of a total of thirty eight). It was in political and public life, however, that the Jewish role was most prominent. [emphasis added] Jews played an important role in the first cabinet formed after the 1918 revolution (Hugo Hasse and Otto Landesberg), the Weimar Constitution was drafted by a Jew (Hugo Pruess), and Jews were conspicuously present in the abortive attempts to create radical revolutionary regimes, especially in Bavaria. The revolutionary government in Munich was headed by a Jewish intellectual, Kurt Eisner, and after his assassination, two other Jewish leaders, Gustav Landauer and Eugen Levine, assumed positions of major influence in the “Raterepublik” (“Soviet” Republic”). Rosa Luxemburg, who was also assassinated, was a leader of the revolutionary Spartakus- bund, which was one of the predecessors of the German Communist party.
    In the following years as well, Jews held major political posts, primarily in the leadership of the democratic and socialist parties. The most prominent Jewish Political figure was Walther Rathenau, who served first as minister for economic affairs and then as foreign minister.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    , @Wielgus
  19. @Wielgus

    ‘…In reality, this was a state that in the 1920s thought about deporting Hitler back to Austria (he did not gain actual German citizenship until relatively late) but never did…’

    It’s interesting to think of history resting on such apparently inconsequential decisions.

    ‘Get rid of this fringe rabble-rouser? Meh…why bother?’

    Twenty years later, Germany in the Year Zero…

    • Agree: Wielgus
    • Replies: @Poco
  20. @Wyatt

    ‘“…The factual dominance of the Jews running the state” – they didn’t. They had no significant footing in the armed forces or the civil service in Germany. The Nazis called Weimar the Judenrepublik but had it actually been so, they would have encountered more resistance and less cooperation from state elements than they did…’

    A good, dispassionate book on Weimar and just what the Nazis were reacting against would be useful.

    We get this sort of vacuum. If, say, I came to power in America, 2033, I could explain pretty clearly the wellsprings of Colinism. But with the Nazis, it’s just sort of ‘the economy went south — and then there was this sweeping revision of everything, and people went wild with enthusiasm. Germans just be that way.’

    Uh huh. It’s not really a complete explanation. There was some sort of rot in Weimar — but we only get denials and fringe theories. Jews were involved — but to what extent? Etc.

    • Replies: @Wyatt
  21. Wielgus says:
    @karel
    https://anatomy-lesson.tumblr.com/post/154878725536/scenes-from-the-bvg-streik-berlin-transit-strike


    This strike took place a few days before polling day and Nazis and Communists were on the picket line. However, the Nazis had won votes in mutually contradictory ways – by presenting a “left-wing” face in some circumstances but also by playing up their nationalism and getting in fights with left-wing, especially KPD opponents. In the November election parties like the DNVP regained some votes they had lost to the NSDAP and it is likely that this was in part a negative response to the strike. Basically, the large Nazi vote was also a diverse and inherently unstable one, and perhaps von Papen saved them just in time by putting them in government before their vote had a chance to shrink further.
    Jews were less than 1% of the German population. Your statistic about them being 80% of German lawyers needs some back-up – since Jewish lawyers were fired en masse after the Nazi take-over, it would have needed a wholesale restructuring of the German legal profession if Jews had been 80% of the lawyers. The Third Reich would have had practically no lawyers. This did not happen. In fact quite a few leading Nazis had law degrees. Perceptions whether I like them or not? People may have thought the Jews far more ubiquitous than they were. People now think Covid has killed a quarter of the population, according to surveys – not reality but the result of being bombarded with it in the media for months. That doesn’t make it so.
    Czech Jews were often German-speaking (Franz Kafka for example, although he could speak Czech – he was never comfortable writing in Czech and generally did not) and had had a reputation for being pro-Hapsburg under the Empire. Their position in Czechoslovakia was somewhat awkward but probably not as much as that of the Germans in the border areas.

    • Replies: @karel
  22. @SolontoCroesus

    ‘…The outstanding feature of [the Weimar] period was the polarization between the unprecedented integration of the Jews in every sphere of life, and the growth of political anti-Semitism among various organizations and political parties…’

    You’d want (a) to look at how much of a change this was from Wilhelmine Germany, and (b) to what extent anti-semitism actually dominated the thinking of the various political factions.

    Relying on a Jewish site for this is treacherous ground — not because the Jews are necessarily being dishonest, but because they are naturally going to focus on what concerned them. Captain Von ____ might have also ranted about Poles — but Jews are naturally going to pay more attention to his rants about Jews.

    • Agree: Not Raul
    • Replies: @Wielgus
    , @SolontoCroesus
  23. Wielgus says:
    @SolontoCroesus

    I don’t see them present in the armed forces (where were the Jewish generals in the Reichswehr – was there even a single one? ) You mention Rathenau but skip over the awkward fact that he was murdered, and his right-wing nationalist murderers protected. Leviné, Luxemburg, Eisner and Landauer did not even survive into the second half of 1919, much less set the tone for the Weimar Republic. Hugo Haase, a more moderate socialist than them, was also assassinated. It was actually notorious that right-wing assassins were much more likely to get away with it in the Weimar Republic than left-wing ones and could count on under the table help from police, judiciary and the Reichswehr.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organisation_Consul

    But perhaps the most striking example of how the state actually functioned under Weimar was Hitler himself. He led a failed putsch in Munich in which cops were killed, went on trial and received a light sentence and served only a fraction of it. A genuine Judenrepublik would have given him very short shrift indeed.

  24. Wielgus says:
    @Colin Wright

    A book I once read about the pamphlets circulating in Vienna that the young Hitler probably read noted that while they were often very anti-Semitic, they also denounced Vienna’s then large Czech population. We do not hear so much about that, though.
    One caricature presented a giant Jew and a giant Czech as a sort of Tweedledum and Tweedledee double enemy of “German” Vienna.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  25. @Colin Wright

    Colin, AND Wielgus,

    I chose a Jewish site and Jewish narrative of Jews in Weimar Germany precisely because it reflected how Jews viewed Jewish presence in Germany in the Weimar period.

    I have commented several times on Unz that “within a fortnight” of Hitler’s ascent to chancellorship, Louis Brandeis directed to Rabbi Stephen Wise that “all German Jews should leave Germany . . . all 587,000 German Jews . . .”

    Brandeis’s directive is fraught with implications:

    a. A major bone of contention between the newly created American Jewish Congress (created in 1918; Brandeis & Wise were charter members) and the earlier-established American Jewish Committee was whether advocating for zionist Israel would impair the rights of Jews in the states where they already dwelt — such as Germany, where Jews had risen phenomenally since German unification in 1871.
    The situation was resolved in classic fashion: the Jewish delegation at Versailles demanded both: affirmation of the Balfour declaration granting Jewish “a homeland in Palestine” and protection of their rights as minorities* in other countries.

    b. Jews did, indeed, enjoy not only protection of their rights in Germany, they achieved something close to the run of the table. Germany had been a significant player in the early development of the zionist project in Palestine, and some zionists still sought German sponsorship for their colonization effort.

    c. It’s important to acknowledge that when Hitler came to power — specifically, in the early weeks of Feb. 1933, when Brandeis issued his directive, the NSDAP actually “quelled violence against Jews” (according to Breitman & Lichtman in FDR and the Jews). So Brandeis’s directive was not in reaction to NSDAP attacks on German Jews. Moreover, Brandeis knew well that Jews in Romania, Poland, and Russia were under far greater threat than Jews in Germany; in fact, Jews from those states found safety in Germany, whither they were guided by numerous Jewish aid agencies. Thus, as Hans Luther stated in 1935, NSDAP activities against Jews in Germany were not directed against the “old and loyal German Jews” but against those tens of thousands of migrant Jews and their “revolutionary” and non-Germanic values.

    So what was Brandeis thinking when he directed that “all German Jews leave Germany?”

    Additional rhetoric in his statement indicates that he intended the action as a punitive measure: “Let Germany share the fate of Spain.”

    My hypothesis is that Jews had intended to firmly establish themselves in Germany in much the way they had in Britain and have in the USA; that Brandeis understood that Hitler would frustrate that plan. Also, and in the event, Jews such as Weizmann (h/t Geokat62) had gained the firm support of the British; but also, that the balance of power had shifted not only from the Continent but also from Britain to the USA:** the British remained useful but no longer necessary and soon to be dispensable; and that migrating wealthy and highly-skilled and educated German Jews to Palestine as well as to USA would best position Jews to complete the colonization of Palestine and to gain the support of USA as its protector.

    Brandeis, Frankfurter, Baruch, Weizmann, Churchill and FDR themselves, as well as Ben Gurion in Tel Aviv were at all times in close communication and collaboration. I can’t say which branch of this unholy alliance decided that Germano Delenda est, but it is readily documented that Jews wrote, planned, and executed on key elements of the near-total destruction of Germany.

    Furthermore, inasmuch as these major figures were at almost all times aware — by code-breaking access to German communications, for example — of the extent and nature of “persecution of Jews” in the war fields, it must be assumed that the Jewish component in Allied leadership either intended or at very least was not unfavorable to the destruction of those Jews who did lose their lives in the course of a war that Jews played a major role is engendering. That those Jews were predominantly the self-same cohort as those that eugenicist Arthur Ruppin, who “produced Hebrew culture” in zionist Palestine, deemed of lesser value as “human material” toward the “new Jew” that would populate zionist Israel, suggests that those Jews were knowingly culled.

    _____
    * Ironic, ain’t it, that the precipitating event of WWII involved oppression of the German minority in Poland.

    ** Daniel Larison reviewed Stephen Wertheim’s Tomorrow the World: The Birth of US Global Supremacy on American Conservative HERE: https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-origins-of-u-s-global-dominance/
    Wertheim is a charter member of The Quincy Institute. His book is an important piece of historic revisionism; a few more inches and the gap between the ADL-protected dogma of holocaustism and What Really Happened will open wide enough to permit greater clarity accessible to a greater number. According to Larison, Wertheim argues that

    “Even before the U.S. was formally at war with the Axis, U.S. planners were drawing up proposals for what one analyst simply described as “world domination by the United States and the British Empire acting in close and continuous collaboration.” The blueprint for America’s postwar role was already being drafted before the U.S. entered the war.”

    That is to say Brandeis acted in a policy atmosphere whose goals for a US future aligned with his goals for a Jewish zionist future.

    • Agree: ThreeCranes
    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
  26. @Wielgus

    perhaps the most striking example of how the state actually functioned under Weimar was Hitler himself. He led a failed putsch in Munich in which cops were killed, went on trial and received a light sentence and served only a fraction of it. A genuine Judenrepublik would have given him very short shrift indeed.

    – – – Or maybe Hitler’s actions in the failed putsch suggested to Allied Central Casting that this odd-ball Austrian might have the right stuff for their purposes. Perhaps that’s why FDR’s old lunch buddy, Putzi Hansftaengl, gave Hitler shelter and comfort; financed the writing and publication of Hitler’s magnum opus; reported back to the FDR administration how their boy was coming along.

    Saddam Hussein was USA’s man until he wasn’t.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
  27. Wielgus says:

    I don’t think the Allies regarded saving the Jews of Europe as a key policy objective. Whereas the Germans considered their enemies to be the puppets of an international Jewish conspiracy, or at any rate presented this claim in their propaganda, as even a cursory examination of German and pro-German propaganda of WW2 will attest.
    “* Ironic, ain’t it, that the precipitating event of WWII involved oppression of the German minority in Poland.”
    Even more ironic that ethnic Poles living in the pre-WW2 Reich were treated worse than ethnic Germans in Poland. See the Potempa murder of 1932, in which Hitler made damn sure that five Nazis who beat a Pole in Silesia to death not only had the death sentence passed on them by a Weimar court quashed, but freed them from jail after coming to power. Of course this paled into significance next to how Poles would be treated under the Nazi occupation of Poland.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  28. Wielgus says:
    @SolontoCroesus

    Hitler was a pretty marginal figure in Germany until 1930. Had he been a Communist attempting a putsch he would probably not have made it to a courtroom. He would have been beaten to death in a police station cellar or army barracks. We don’t need to see Allied Central Casting in the fact that Hitler benefited from a right-wing bias in the Weimar judiciary and state apparatus. He was not the only one.

  29. Wyatt says:
    @Colin Wright

    Think that might be a miss tell, good buddy.

  30. @Wielgus

    ‘…Even more ironic that ethnic Poles living in the pre-WW2 Reich were treated worse than ethnic Germans in Poland…’

    Note that this would do little to make Germans in Poland feel well-treated.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
  31. anaccount says:

    I love reading Atzmon’s comment section for the complaints from libs that followed him here. On that note, welcome! I hope you guys know that we can take on globo-cap together anytime, whenever you are ready of course. Sad that you’d prefer to watch this planet die from a cancerous, capitalistic growth rather than work with with the (white) populist-right. We are a crude bunch but that is pretty harsh.

    Billionaires are concerned about white supremacy just like you, they just aren’t thankful for your help. You do it for free.

    • Replies: @karel
  32. karel says:
    @Wielgus

    Your last sentence –

    Their position in Czechoslovakia was somewhat awkward but probably not as much as that of the Germans in the border areas.

    makes no sense. How, where and when was their position awkward?
    Bernhard Weiss is just an example of a Jew being a lawyer and close to the wheels of power.
    https://www.accidentaltalmudist.org/heroes/2019/07/31/jewish-police-chief-in-pre-war-berlin/
    If you are so interested in the fate German lawyers, then order
    https://www.hsozkult.de/publicationreview/id/reb-6468
    In German wikipedia, section ”Gesetzes über die Zulassung zur Rechtsanwaltschaft“, you will find that
    Von den rund 19.500 zugelassenen Rechtsanwälten waren 4.394 jüdischer Abstammung (rund 22 %);[1] in den Großstädten wie Hamburg hatten 1933 rund 32,[2] in Berlin rund 60 % der Rechtsanwälte mindestens einen jüdischen Großelternteil.[3] This is probably a gross underrepresention as most Jews in the Weimar republic were not exactly forthcoming about their ethnicity. I may have misstook the 80% for the proportion of law students. I am not so certain now as I read about it in one publication about 20 years ago. Anyway the lawyers in Weimar rep. were not all replaced by Aryans in 1933, as in 1938 about ten percent of the lot were classified as Jews.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
  33. @Wielgus

    ‘A book I once read about the pamphlets circulating in Vienna that the young Hitler probably read noted that while they were often very anti-Semitic, they also denounced Vienna’s then large Czech population. We do not hear so much about that, though.
    One caricature presented a giant Jew and a giant Czech as a sort of Tweedledum and Tweedledee double enemy of “German” Vienna.’

    They posed very similar threats. Both were pouring in in unprecedented numbers. The Galician and Russian Jews — like the Czechs — were reluctant to assimilate. Both undercut the native Germans; the Czech laborers would work for less than German workers, while Jewish peddlers would undercut German merchants.

    It’d be mildly interesting to learn how the place of the Czechs in Vienna evolved between 1918 and 1938. The Jews were still very unpopular in 1938; how about the Czechs?

    • Replies: @Wielgus
    , @karel
  34. Wielgus says:
    @Colin Wright

    I would say they eventually did. Walking round Vienna and looking at the signs over businesses it is striking how many have Czech family names, but I didn’t hear Czech spoken that much, except by young people who had either moved to Austria recently or were tourists, from a land that is after all a next-door neighbour.
    Even in the Third Reich, at least one of the major Luftwaffe aces, an Austrian, was named Nowotny, clearly the common Czech name Novotny with the spelling Germanised.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  35. Wielgus says:
    @Colin Wright

    The Polish state had a problematic relationship with all its minorities, Germans included. Jews for example were the target of business boycotts and occasional violence, the Ukrainians and Belarusians in the east were seen as suspect and some may indeed have welcomed the arrival of Red Army troops in 1939 although saying so may have been problematic later. A detention centre at Bereza Kartuska, sometimes referred to as a Polish concentration camp, seems to have mainly held suspected Communist agents or sympathisers, often Jewish, but the inmates certainly included people accused of Ukrainian separatism. That the Poland of after 1945, with very different borders, was “reset” to be almost 100% ethnic Polish and incidentally also Catholic was not a coincidence.

    The Third Reich exaggerated the ill-treatment of local Germans in both Poland and Czechoslovakia as part of its aggressive drives. Franz Fühmann, a German from western Czechoslovakia and a keen Nazi in 1938, postwar wrote the story Die Verteidigung der Reichenburger Turnhalle (“The Defence Of The Gym In Reichenburg”). In the feverish atmosphere of 1938 Reich radio is whipping it up with stories of Czech beasts assaulting and murdering Germans. Fühmann gets together with others to defend a German gymnastics centre at Reichenburg. They arrive there and the place is calm, no marauding Czech beasts. There are a couple of Czech policemen speaking broken German in the town, and that is it. At first the Germans are dumbfounded but find themselves praising Reich radio for its cunning in making stuff up.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  36. Wielgus says:
    @karel

    I think Germans (“Sudeten Germans”) probably had more valid complaints in Czechoslovakia than Jews did, though it did not justify the events of 1938. That was the point of my last sentence.

    Jews were over-represented as lawyers for their share of the population, but 80% of German lawyers being Jewish is a wild exaggeration. It says that 60% of lawyers in Berlin had at least one Jewish grandparent, but even the Third Reich did not arrive at the conclusion that having a Jewish grandparent made you a Jew, and in any case Berlin is not Germany as a whole. There must have been many bar associations in Germany that had no Jews at all.

    They were not all replaced in 1933 but campaigns were started to deny Jewish lawyers (and other professionals) business and in the wake of Kristallnacht any remaining Jewish lawyers found at least professional life in Germany untenable.

    • Replies: @karel
  37. Gilead Atzmon, this is a little gem of an essay, poetic and pertinent. Thanks.

    • Replies: @Gilad Atzmon
  38. karel says:
    @anaccount

    What are you talking about? Are you also a ”lib”?

    • Replies: @anaccount
  39. @MarkU

    Of course both right and left have their ideologies, what I argue is that Left ideology is structured like a dream and Right ideology is structured like insomnia,,, In an ideal world, the dream and insomnia battle on equal ground, the problem starts when one side of the debate claims primacy …this is what we see in the West right now,,

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  40. @karel

    “Knee jerk” & no “basis in reality”. I see.

    “Once Hitler had removed the left-wing socialist opposition and destroyed the Weimar Republic, the conservative elite thought they would be able to replace Hitler, and appoint a leader of their choice.

    As Hitler’s votes dwindled in the November 1932 elections, the conservative elite knew that if they wanted to use Hitler and the Nazis to destroy the political left, they had to act quickly to get Hitler appointed as chancellor.

    Von Papen and Oskar von Hindenburg (President Hindenburg’s son) met secretly and backed Hitler to become chancellor. A group of important industrialists, including Hjalmar Schacht and Gustav Krupp, also wrote outlining their support of Hitler to President Hindenburg.

    The support of these figures was vital in Hindenburg’s decision to appoint Hitler as chancellor. Once elected, the conservative elite soon realised that they had miscalculated Hitler and his intentions.”

    https://www.theholocaustexplained.org/the-nazi-rise-to-power/the-nazi-rise-to-power/the-role-of-the-conservative-elite/

    German Elites, naturally would have preferred a more established party – like the Nationalists – any party they knew & felt comfortable with. They held any number of …hesitations about the NSDAP. But that the party was dangerously socialist ? I would suggest that that was a “lesser” fear….

    • Replies: @karel
  41. karel says:
    @Wielgus

    Perhaps you do not realize that quite a few of the Sudetendeutsche were Jews. As you see the world is not so simple and your various comparisons of who was worse off are quite pointless. What is worse, that these funny games of yours evoke in me the ugly image of the last German patriot Colin W.

    Why is it so important to you whether the proportion of Jewish lawyers in Berlin was 60 or 80%? Do you believe that there was already an available administrative apparatus a few months after the putsch to do the counting? Are you a fan of Halacha classification? In Frankfurt, the proportion of Jews in the Jewdiciary was probably close to 90% but do not pester me to provide the evidence. If you have better estimates, please let me know.

  42. karel says:
    @animalogic

    Perhaps you can tell me who ”the conservative elite” were. The fact is that Hitler was just fine for these ”elites” or whatever they were. Hence, they gave him and his party financial support.

  43. karel says:
    @Colin Wright

    Ah, Colin the greatest of German patriots has emerged again from the swamps of the deepest German forests. Why should have Czechs assimilated into an inferior culture is my question?

    I suppose that you have never worked with your hands as you fail to understand that ”the Czech laborers would work for less than German workers”. The explanation is simple the Czechs are lazy and the German laborer produces twice as much in one hour but gets only perhaps 10% more, simply because he is more stupid than his Czech competitor.

    • LOL: HeebHunter
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    , @HeebHunter
  44. @Wielgus

    ‘I would say they eventually did. Walking round Vienna and looking at the signs over businesses it is striking how many have Czech family names, but I didn’t hear Czech spoken that much, except by young people who had either moved to Austria recently or were tourists, from a land that is after all a next-door neighbour.
    Even in the Third Reich, at least one of the major Luftwaffe aces, an Austrian, was named Nowotny, clearly the common Czech name Novotny with the spelling Germanised.

    Yeah. Brigette Hamann makes much the same point in [i]Hitler’s Vienna.[/i] Czechs had long moved into the city and willingly Germanized. Within a generation or two, they’d be ‘German.’ Hitler’s childhood friend, August Kubizek (sp?) was half-Czech — but neither he nor Hitler thought of him that way.

    It’s only when the influx picked up that there was a problem. Too many Czechs who were still obviously Czech.

    More broadly, though, I think that this had always been the case with the German East. Slavic peasantry moved into the cities and became ‘German.’ It merely had to happen slowly enough so that no one would perceive a problem.

    For example, I have an ancestor who emigrated from Memel to California in 1864 or something. According to family lore, she always used to announce very emphatically, ‘Ich bin Preusse!’

    No doubt. At the same time, if it could be detected, I wouldn’t care to bet a dollop of Lithuanian couldn’t be found in my genes. Some peasant could easily have moved into town in the eighteenth century or something and got himself into the Wright family tree.

  45. @Wielgus

    ‘…The Third Reich exaggerated the ill-treatment of local Germans in both Poland and Czechoslovakia as part of its aggressive drives…’

    Yes, but…

    First off, as I pointed out, others being mistreated as well does little to address the grievances of Germans. From the German point of view, your points that the Poles mistreated Jews, Belorussians, Lithuanians, and Ukrainians would merely be one more argument for destroying the Polish state.

    Second, the Germans in the Sudetenland and the formerly Prussian-ruled Poland wouldn’t have seen themselves as interlopers, who should be grateful for toleration and an absence of vigorous oppression.

    They would have — and did — see the land as theirs, and Polish and Czech authority as being of questionable legitimacy. I can come to visit you, and if you ask me to remove my shoes, I’ll happily comply. If you come to visit me, and then demand that I take off my shoes in my own house, I may prove difficult.

    Unlike some here, I’m not bent on proving the Germans to have been always good and in the right; that dog won’t hunt. I’m more interested in making the point that they weren’t always clearly in the wrong.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
  46. @Gilad Atzmon

    ‘Of course both right and left have their ideologies, what I argue is that Left ideology is structured like a dream and Right ideology is structured like insomnia,,, In an ideal world, the dream and insomnia battle on equal ground, the problem starts when one side of the debate claims primacy …this is what we see in the West right now…’

    I would have once largely agreed with you. The Left tends to think in terms of how things should be — the Right in terms of how things are. Left to their own devices, the Left would turn the village into a commune, while the Right would continue to view its inhabitants as serfs of the manor, who should indeed receive a sound thrashing if they misbehave.

    Somewhere in the middle is clearly preferable.

    The difficulty is that now, the Left’s dream is no longer even desirable in theory. Encouraging children to change their gender is not good. There is no systemic racism, and oppressing whites and encouraging blacks to run amok on the grounds that there is cannot work out well. Come one come all emigration only ends when the global standard of living is the same as that of Bangladesh. There’s never — actually — been a society that’s been at one and the same time diverse, egalitarian, and successful. Doesn’t any of this bother them?

    They’ve gone bloody mad. The worst of it all is that even if we do beat them all into submission, I’m pessimistic as to what will be left. We’ll lurch from Allende to Pinochet. I’ve visited modern Chile; in a lot of respects, it’s not a very happy place.

    It’s going to be damned hard to put Humpty-Dumpty back together again. In fact, I have a sneaking suspicion it won’t happen.

    • Replies: @Hootsman
    , @Gilad Atzmon
  47. @karel

    ‘Ah, Colin the greatest of German patriots has emerged again from the swamps of the deepest German forests. Why should have Czechs assimilated into an inferior culture is my question?

    ‘I suppose that you have never worked with your hands as you fail to understand that ”the Czech laborers would work for less than German workers”. The explanation is simple the Czechs are lazy and the German laborer produces twice as much in one hour but gets only perhaps 10% more, simply because he is more stupid than his Czech competitor.’

    You’re an idiot.

    • Replies: @karel
    , @Zarathustra
  48. My first thought after reading your essay was of Meyrav Wurmser, as she was captured in the BBC Panorama, The War Party, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fBVvSvUawE
    Wurmser was so sure of herself and her colleagues, united as they were by “love, real love.” And they would test their ideas — sending US and other people’s children to wage war in Iraq. The Wurmsers and the other neocons in the BBC documentary live in middle class houses in middle class neighborhoods. Meyrav hangs wreaths of artificial sunflowers on her front door.

    Next, I wondered if the ideologies – categories Dream vs Insomnia are the same as Jerusalem and Athens, as revelation vs logos. I wondered if you, Gilad, had conversed with E Michael Jones.

    Finally, I was reminded of the short story, The Illusionless Man and the Visionary Maid.
    https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/allen-wheelis/the-illusionless-man-the-visionary-maid/
    The two polarities seem to have come to a modus vivendi:

    Henry would shrug, thinking there are no happy marriages and it would be no different with anyone else; but sometimes, far at the back of his unhappy mind, he would come upon the truth: he stayed with her because, with all her witless pursuit of illusions, she nevertheless stirred him—like the wren, trapped under a house, that had flown in his face: he had caught it in his hand, felt the terrified struggle, the concentration of heat, the tremolo of heartbeat too faint and fast to count. Lorabelle brought him no comfort; but, holding her, he felt life, and would not give it up. And sometimes in the midst of her railings Lorabelle would know that she stayed with Henry—not simply, as she said, because he wouldn’t give her a divorce—but because he was a rock and she leaned on him.
    {snip}
    in all that he did he could see himself striving toward a condition of beauty or truth or goodness or love that did not exist, but whereas earlier in his life he had always said “It’s an illusion” and turned away, now he said “There isn’t anything else” and stayed with it; and though it cannot be said that they lived happily, exactly, and certainly not ever after, they did live. They lived—for a while—with ups and downs, good days and bad, and when it came time to die Lorabelle said, “Now we’ll never be parted,” and Henry smiled and kissed her and said to himself, “There isn’t anything else,” and they died.

    It could be that the Dreamer and the Insomniac have more in common than it seems, and in the end they need each other to find the Golden Mean.

    As you say, Gilad, a problem is that the Dreamers have gained overwhelming dominance.

    The laws of nature demand that that condition cannot prevail forever; nature demands a balance. Can the Insomniac impose moderation on the Dreamer, or is his contribution only to be patient and endure until equilibrium prevails, because There isn’t anything else?

    • Replies: @karel
    , @Gilad Atzmon
  49. @Wielgus

    ‘But perhaps the most striking example of how the state actually functioned under Weimar was Hitler himself. He led a failed putsch in Munich in which cops were killed, went on trial and received a light sentence and served only a fraction of it. A genuine Judenrepublik would have given him very short shrift indeed…’

    That assumes all Jews would have been on the Left — unlikely, given the the rather prosperous, assimilated, ‘Germans of the Hebraic faith’ profile of the German Jewish community. Department store owners might not have been too enthusiastic about the coming Red Dawn.

    More generally, though, there’s a curious paucity of information on Weimar, and the Jewish place in it. Lindemann’s otherwise very illuminating and quite fair-minded Esau’s Tears sheds a great deal of light on antisemitism and the place of Jews in Europe prior to the Holocaust — but rather tantalizingly stops just short of Weimar. There’s some obviously anti-semitic material out there, but that’s almost as useless as the ‘us perfectly innocent Jews were just attacked by those antisemites because antisemites be antisemites’ school of history.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
  50. karel says:
    @Colin Wright

    Jawohl, Herr Colin. You are a sad case and probably too old to acquire any sense of humor. I would recommend to you, if I may, to join the Sudetendeutsche Landsmanschaft. It is easy, just fill the form bellow.
    https://www.sudeten.de/formulare/index.php?form_id=10002104
    They are desperate to acquire new members and in the Landsmanschaft you may find many individuals with whom to discourse as they would perfectly match your level of intellect. There are no strict conditions for entry. You don’t have to take your shoes off and even Africans or Jews can join if they feel ideologically close to the aims of the Landsmanschaft. Just cf.
    https://www.sudeten.de/seite/333885/ziele.html

  51. Cyrano says:

    Lemme try to explain the difference between capitalist “leftism” and socialist leftism. Socialism existed for what? Roughly 80 years – 1917 -1991 – the dates are based on the existence of socialism in the only country that ever really mattered – socialism wise. The one who started it all.

    In those almost 80 years of existence of socialism, the socialists discovered only one type of inequality. I mean, how low on imagination do you have to be, to discover only one inequality in almost 80 years? That’s why socialism failed.

    The capitalist left wing – referred to as “liberals” or “democrats” or whatever, have discovered so many types of inequalities, that it’s not even funny. Gender inequality, racial inequality, sexual inequality, age inequality – or discrimination based on all of the above. You see what I am saying.

    Capitalist “left wing” has the well-being of the population closer to their hearts than Socialist left wing ever managed. Some inexperienced, easy to fool (because they are fools) person who has never voted in their life, might think that all those inequalities that capitalist “left wing” “deals” with are just a tap dance avoiding the big one, and the only one that ever really mattered. To that I say NOT TRUE.

    The capitalist “left wing” is just simply too busy to address the favorite socialist inequality – wealth inequality. Eventually, in a million years they will come around to deal with it, but in the meantime they are too preoccupied discovering new inequalities every day. None of them will ever amount to anything, but at least they look busy, and they look like they really mean it.

    That’s what capitalist “liberalism” is all about. Totally phony, and lacking any substance. The only purpose is to extend the life of capitalism – while pretending that capitalism is progressing. Capitalism is progressing towards nowhere. Progress only comes by turning left. Right wing liberalism will never bring any progress, because it was never supposed to. It was only supposed to fool the fools and make them feel good about themselves and about how their countries are “liberal”.

  52. @No Friend Of The Devil

    Not three thousand! Only one thousand. Two thousand were policeman, firefighters and rescue workers.

  53. @Colin Wright

    It is you who is a total idiot. You not only never worked in production plant you never even did see inside of production plant. The production time is not influenced by worker.
    Worker only feeds the machine and than he takes out the finished part from the machine.
    That only takes a couple of second. There is no difference between Czech worker or German worker.
    It is the better machine what makes a difference.

    • Replies: @HdC
    , @Colin Wright
    , @Ugetit
  54. How did a wonderful and well written article with only a passing mention of Hitler turn the comment section into another German, NSDAP, WW2, Jews etc. conversation-debate ? Let that era pass into the annals of ancient history for now, soon enough (say in four years) we’ll all be talking enviously about Germany’s “good old days”.

    • Agree: Gilad Atzmon
    • Replies: @Vojkan
  55. ghali says:

    I find it very naive to use Zizek as the ultimate guru. Zizek is a proto-fascist and he often doesn’t know what he talks about. That is why he get very confused and angry incoherent.

    • Replies: @Vojkan
    , @Gilad Atzmon
  56. @jamie b.

    Yes, they were faked.

    See here (http://heiwaco.tripod.com/moontravel.htm) for a thorough debunking of any and all claims of manned space travel beyond low earth orbit.

  57. neutral says:
    @Wielgus

    “The factual dominance of the Jews running the state” – they didn’t. They had no significant footing in the armed forces or the civil service in Germany.

    This is no different to current ZOG regimes now. Just because they are not the rank and file in the military or the government paper pusher does not mean they are not in charge. What they were in charge of was the cultural, financial and academic institutions, when you run these things then you run everything. Luckily for Germany the military was not overrun by the cuckservative types like in the US military is now, there were enough decent types that overthrew the jew in their government.

    • Agree: Ugetit
  58. Beautifully written piece but Gilad treats Left dreams as if they emanate from the woke middle class when in reality globalist billionaires and their international institutions are the ones manipulating the brainwaves of the woke crowd, with the complicity of the deep state. What is being forced on Americans is nothing short of global communism brought to you by the transnational monopoly corporations and financiers who constitute a hostile elite. Their goal appears to be one world government headquartered in Jerusalem, while the USA wilts on the vine in racial sectarian paralysis. Their plans will surely cause a civil war, which furthers their agenda in removing white American people from a say in the direction of the world.

    • Agree: Insouciant
    • Replies: @Gilad Atzmon
  59. Dumbo says:

    In the progressive dream, vowing to ‘unite the nation’ is way more forceful that the reality of a sharp divide.

    It’s always a laugh (a riot!) that the same people who live by “divide and rule” constantly promise to “unite the nation”.

  60. Wielgus says:
    @Colin Wright

    The Weimar Chronicle – Prelude To Hitler by Alex de Jonge, published UK 1978, is quite good on the atmosphere of the Weimar Republic. The author interviewed an ex-Freikorps member, a student, involved in the early Weimar turmoil. Along with a friend he wandered by mistake into a “Red”-held town. They were detained briefly, their rifles confiscated (they were given receipts) and then released. The Freikorps man complained to Alex de Jonge about the rifles being taken, de Jonge noted that if he as a Red had accidentally walked into a Freikorps town he would have been past worrying about 50 years previously. (The Freikorps typically killed “Reds”.)
    Jews in the Weimar Republic ranged from relatively prosperous, long-established people, to recent immigrants from Poland and further east. The two groups were somewhat antagonistic. Walter Rathenau was an example of the first type, Herschel Grynszpan (the assassin of Ernst vom Rath, the act that provided the pretext for Kristallnacht) an example of the second. His parents were deported to the Polish border with others but Poland refused to let them in. Grynszpan was himself an undocumented alien in France when he shot vom Rath. Leftist Jews were a third category though accounts suggest they were more common among relatively recent immigrants to Germany than among the long-established.
    Department stores were associated under Weimar with Jews, and Nazis under Weimar often denounced the stores, a stance popular with small businesses who felt crushed by the competition from them.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  61. Wielgus says:
    @Colin Wright

    The 1918-39 Polish state tends to be canonised in Poland today but it was far from angelic (I am of partial Polish descent but not inclined to defend that Poland at all costs). Unfortunately it became a game of winner takes all – either destruction of the Polish state and creation of a privileged status for Germans, while Poles (and Czechs) were treated as inferior beings, or the wholesale removal of the Germans and the creation of a mono-ethnic state, as happened in Poland after 1945.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  62. Lochearn says:

    Gilad, do not confuse the genuine “Grapes of Wrath” left with the Jewish left. The real left was never utopian. It did not seek equality, but rather lesser inequality. The real left was never anti religion or even anti-capitalist – that’s the Jewish left. The real left was socially quite traditional. It just wanted a humane working week, enough money to live a decent if humble existence and not to die of overwork aged fifty or so. Marxism hijacked all that and it split the left fatally. Marxism wanted to steal the capitalists wealth and kill them and kill anyone who owned more than maybe three books – as in Bolshevik Russia.

    The real left was okay with the capitalist and the dudes with a load of books. But the Anglo tradition, unlike the Germanic tradition, was to treat the worker in a feudalistic manner ie. as a fucking peasant. Workers at Ford plants were known by the last four digits of their social security numbers as opposed to their names. Just like prison. The Germanic way was to include the worker and seek their input. That’s partly why Germany started to smash Britain industrially before WWI and why Britain went to war.

    Someone of the real left would surely be on the right nowadays, in there and ready to fight alongside Trump’s deplorables.

  63. No one knows what future awaits America… let’s just wait and see.

  64. karel says:
    @SolontoCroesus

    An interesting statement or rather a question of yours that

    It could be that the Dreamer and the Insomniac have more in common than it seems, and in the end, they need each other to find the Golden Mean.

    Yes to some extent as insomniacs in their periods of involuntary wakefulness, dream about being able to fall asleep but I am less certain that dreamers dream about the joys of insomnia.

  65. I very much enjoyed your article. Thanks.

    The solution to the problem seems quite obvious to me from this very insightful reading. The right is too busy dealing with the practical day in day out urgencies of life to bother with revolutionary activities. The left must be made more like the right.

    When these people are forced to confront reality instead of landing on a dreamy fluffy pillow they will change. If their businesses must compete in the market place rather than rely on boondoggles and special arrangements, left owned businesses will change. If the paper pushers and people who like to go to meetings all day suddenly have to demonstrate competence or actually be useful, they will change. If the ones out there in the streets raising hell are suddenly held accountable for their actions instead of being released without charges, things will change. If student loans weren’t shielded from market forces, guaranteed by government then college administrators would change, there would be less of them too. Maybe people who have no academic ability would leave college and university to actual scholars instead.

    There’s no fire without some source of fuel. The left’s fantasies require enormous amounts of fuel which further suppresses the right from engaging politically, they’re too busy. Stop fueling the left. Just stop. This is wrong. Not normal. People who work for a living are less likely to cause trouble. Professors doing actual research and teaching are always preferable to spoiled coddled activists. Work and accountability are the only deterrents sufficient to wake these “woke” people up. No wonder they are fighting to death to avoid it.

    TLDR; Just put them all to work and make them pay their own way. Stop lavishing money on dumb, ineffective, entitled people who refuse to produce anything of value. Problem solved.

    • Replies: @Gapeseed
  66. @SolontoCroesus

    You have stated the impermissible, that the elite Jews were complicit in the destruction–or rather sacrifice–of less desirable (in their own eyes) Jews. And that they have made hay out of this ever since, all the while keeping their own role out of sight and off the table.

    A pawn sacrifice.

  67. Alfred says:
    @jamie b.

    Question: Do you believe that the Moon landings were fake?

    [MORE]

    Have you ever had a look at the Lunar Lander at the National Air and Space Museum? Where did they store the fuel? In their backpacks?

    • Replies: @Zarathustra
  68. onebornfree says: • Website
    @No Friend Of The Devil

    “The time is now with more urgency than ever before to abandon the domestic and international terrorist netorks of the RNC and the DNC.To willingly and knowingly choose to associate with criminal psychopathic terrorists is a really idiotic move. It cannot be denied any longer that both the RNC and DNC are terrorist networks.”

    This “just” in : “Because they are all ultimately funded via both direct and indirect theft [taxes], and counterfeiting [central bank monopolies], all governments are essentially, at their very cores, 100% corrupt criminal scams which cannot be “reformed”or “improved”,simply because of their innate criminal nature.” onebornfree

    “Taking the State wherever found, striking into its history at any point, one sees no way to differentiate the activities of its founders, administrators and beneficiaries from those of a professional-criminal class.” Albert J. Nock

    “The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy.” –Carroll Quigley, U.S. President Bill Clinton’s mentor, “Tragedy and Hope,” pg. 1247, 1966 AD

    regards, onebornfree

  69. @karel

    Such nigger like statement from the whores and AV actresses producing captial of Europe. Fitting.

  70. Bird view!
    Republicans at least sometime were concerned about size of the pie.
    Democrats were without exception always concerned only about size of the slice of the pie. (for themselves.)
    Democrats are a scum who did destroy America.
    (Good for them.)
    Pie is now getting smaller and smaller.

  71. Ugetit says:
    @karel

    My guess is that during the economic collapse of Germany the citizens have lost patience with the left wing parties as the communist and socialists did little, or perhaps could do little, to alleviate their hardship.

    To the contrary, the Communists actively did all they could to cause chaos in Germany and from what I’ve been able to gather their violence and other forms of subversion were many times worse than what we in the US have experienced so far.

    Furthermore, the legend of the ”Dolchstoss”…

    Please explain why you chose to label it a legend.

    • Replies: @karel
  72. @animalogic

    The capitalists indeed much preferred them to the Communists and actually saw them as a bulwark protecting them from workers organizing against them through the Communists. That’s why they financed Hitler despite the fact his party was called the National Socialist German Worker party. The words socialism and workers were ruses to sucker workers away from those who were fighting their joints enemies – the capitalists.

    An interesting book my wife purchased at the museum on Nazism that is housed in the former hq of the Nazi party makes this point clear by noting that “one key to Hitler’s success was support from well-educated and wealthy bourgeois circles. Respected families like the Bechsteins and the Harfstaengls , and later the Bruchmans taught Hitler how to behave in upper class circles, arranged contacts and made money available.” Who would have thought Jews looked with such favor on Hitler? He was clearly okay as long as Jewish and German capitalists were united in controlling their real enemies the workers organized in a militant communist parties seeking to expropriate them by helping a force Germany that was effectively bent on derailing their efforts.

  73. Ugetit says:
    @Wyatt

    … I like to insist that the Nazis took socialism, removed the most jewish elements from it by introducing nationalism and actually making it an effective system for white people instead of following Marxism lock, stock and barrel and thus being puppets of jewish feudalism.

    Like you, I am no expert on German history, but from what I’ve been able to gather, I heartily agree with your very well stated assessment. Thanks.

  74. Ugetit says:
    @Wielgus

    “The factual dominance of the Jews running the state” – they didn’t.

    Despite your subsequent “reasoning,” you fail the credibility test. If you care to recover some of it, please provide credible documentation supporting your opinions.

  75. Lefties are perpetual goal post movers. It is all about totalitarian style empowerment and enrichment for them. Their lone view is what the world must do for them because they deserve it. Give them credit, they package their power grabbing whims in pretty paper and stylish bows to manipulate the feelings of female consumers .

    • Agree: noname27
    • Replies: @noname27
  76. Poco says:
    @Colin Wright

    I always thought the last Czar was too easy on his opponents as well. He could have had Lenin. I would have strangled Lenin with my own hands if I was Czar.

    • Replies: @Ugetit
  77. At my age the purpose of dreams seems to be to get me out of the bed to go urinate.

    • LOL: noname27
  78. @SolontoCroesus

    If secular jews put their energy and money in furthering the Zionist project, to reform the jewish psychology deformed by the their parasitic econonic roles in European countries for hundreds of years, by colonizing a near desert and making it bloom with normal people living in their own country earning an honest living as farmers and workers in the trades, why is this not a noble and estimable project. When I have retailed this uncontested history of the Zionist movement, I have been called a liar. Where in this account is the lie?

    Then there is the alternative narrative, that the jew is bent on ruling the world in aid of their grand project to make gentiles the slaves of the jews. A massive world conspiracy of which we know nothing but have our suspicions. Where is the evidence for that? Israel is said to be milking the US of billions of dollars, or some billions of dollars, but when examined the billions of dollars are meant to provide US arms manufacturers with overseas markets and have American citizens pay for it. All those billions are earmarked for buying, exclusively, US made armaments. The Israelis do get the armaments, the US manufacturers in fact get the billions of dollars.

  79. HdC says:
    @Zarathustra

    You are referring to mass production assembly plants such as those used for cars and consumer appliances.

    Try heavy engineering and manufacturing, where every employee’s contribution or lack thereof directly affects the bottom line. Here reliability, ability, character, stickwithitness, etc. etc. definitely rise to the fore. Even the attitude brought to the job affects the quality work. HdC

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    , @Zarathustra
  80. @Zarathustra

    ‘It is you who is a total idiot. You not only never worked in production plant you never…’

    Can you explain what your post has to do with anything I wrote?

    • Replies: @Zarathustra
  81. @karel

    I cannot think of a single plausible explanation for the rise in popularity of NSDA. As always and more probably, there was a multitude of reasons, not easily identified then and now. My guess is that during the economic collapse of Germany the citizens have lost patience with the left wing parties as the communist and socialists did little, or perhaps could do little, to alleviate their hardship.

    What you are missing here is that the German left was bitterly divided and that the democratic socialists had more in common with the conservatives because of their desire to maintain the republic.

    The communists supported violent revolution and turning Germany into a Soviet puppet state while the socialists wanted to maintain a democracy. The left was divided just as it was in Russia before the communists took over.

    So the NSDAP was anti-communist while offering similar economic benefits as the socialists.

    There was a legitimate fear that socialists would be too weak against the communists which is what happened in Russia.

    The Soviets wanted Germany more than any other European country. It was the home of Marx and the main industrial power.

    The Germans knew that once the Soviets took Germany it would be near impossible to remove them. So it wasn’t merely a vote over economic plans as many assume. There was a feeling that someone like Hitler might be needed to deal with the Soviet threat.

    • Replies: @karel
  82. @Wielgus

    ‘…The Freikorps man complained to Alex de Jonge about the rifles being taken, de Jonge noted that if he as a Red had accidentally walked into a Freikorps town he would have been past worrying about 50 years previously. (The Freikorps typically killed “Reds”.)…’

    It’s worth noting that you (and perhaps de Jonge) assume an equality here between the Communists and the Freikorps. Each is equally entitled to bear arms.

    I imagine many Germans of the day would have seen it differently. Indeed, this takes us to one of the reasons Nazism appealed; it promised to do away with class conflict — but not in the way the Communists proposed to do it.

    However, I meant to thank you for the source. I’ll see if I can obtain it.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
  83. @Wyatt

    I don’t know much about Nazi Germany, but I like to insist that the Nazis took socialism, removed the most jewish elements from it by introducing nationalism and actually making it an effective system for white people instead of following Marxism lock, stock and barrel and thus being puppets of jewish feudalism.

    The NSDAP was a clever trick play against Marxism and most US/Euro conservatives to this day still don’t understand this. It was not invented by Hitler as many assume.

    It removed the international servitude of Marxism while actually being more anti-Communist than other right wing parties.

    It also solved the problem of workers voting in anti-state leftists based on economic offerings made to them. We see this problem today where conservatives can’t really offer anything if they believe that government intervention is the problem. Conservatives then as today run on being “not left” which the left then grasps upon as not caring about helping workers.

  84. Ugetit says:
    @Zarathustra

    The production time is not influenced by worker.

    Wasn’t Stalin et al worried about industrial “diversion, wrecking, and sabotage” any of which could conceivably affect production time? If he was, then your claim may contain elements of inaccuracy. If he wasn’t, you still would have to prove your case.

    It would seem reasonable that not only time but other factors (such as quality) could be heavily influenced by workers, no?

  85. Ugetit says:
    @Poco

    I always thought the last Czar was too easy on his opponents as well

    True, and so was Hitler.

    FDR and Churchill sucked up to them. Churchill even admitted as much and knew what he was getting into. I’m convinced FDR knew as well, but I’m not aware that he had any qualms about it.

  86. @HdC

    You are referring to mass production assembly plants such as those used for cars and consumer appliances.

    Actually for auto assembly plants there have been notable differences between workers to where companies have moved based on quality of workers.

    Auto companies have setup in southern states because they have found non-union White workers to be a good value overall.

    Of course the reason for this move isn’t explicitly stated.

  87. Agent76 says:

    Nov 18, 2020 How to Spot a Propaganda Trial Balloon – #PropagandaWatch

    So it should be no surprise that propagandists float trial balloons in order to gauge public reaction to new proposals before going ahead with their plans.

  88. Pancho says:

    The real problem is that the Right does not see the problems and the Left see them, but always apply the wrong solutions. Why? Because the Left is the artificial creation of the most reactionary Right. Just follow the money and you’ll confirm it.

    • Replies: @noname27
  89. @Wielgus

    ‘The 1918-39 Polish state tends to be canonised in Poland today but it was far from angelic…’

    Indeed. Sometimes the flaws of the Polish state are advanced as a justification for Germany’s attack. It’s a good example of flawed logic. You may well be alcoholic and a wife-beater; it doesn’t make it okay for me to steal your car.

    ‘…. (I am of partial Polish descent but not inclined to defend that Poland at all costs). Unfortunately it became a game of winner takes all – either destruction of the Polish state and creation of a privileged status for Germans, while Poles (and Czechs) were treated as inferior beings, or the wholesale removal of the Germans and the creation of a mono-ethnic state, as happened in Poland after 1945.’

    You minimize matters. Perhaps expulsion of ethnic Germans from the areas around Lodz and Posen would have been justified. Then too, the location of East Prussia would have always proved a problem. However, it’s hard to see an argument for the ethnic cleansing of Silesia.

    …and of course ‘removal’ delicately understates the physical horror of what occurred. It’s not too far from stating that Germany ‘solved’ the Jewish problem.

  90. Hootsman says:
    @Colin Wright

    “Somewhere in the middle is clearly preferable.”

    [citation needed]

    History has shown that those who acquiesce to the demands of the mob are not met with gratitude, but simply more demands.

    • Agree: Ugetit
  91. ‘…History has shown that those who acquiesce to the demands of the mob are not met with gratitude, but simply more demands.’

    I agree.

  92. @karel

    The reality is that the NSDAP was a party of the “left”, unless you were a communist. They introduced higher employment standards and enforced them. They forced employers to meet with employees and listen to their concerns. They campaigned on an economic system that meets the needs of the people, not an economic system where the people meet the needs of the economic system. They took on the junkers to give farmers rights to the land they farmed. They nationalized some industries. Most importantly, they took on usury and the banking system in general. The “traditional” 19th century socialists opposed Marx because of his centralized control of everything, and likened it to the centralized control of a Rothschild bank.

    Compared to the UK and the US, they were “far left”. That doesn’t make it an ideal political philosophy any more the any other political philosophy is ideal. They all have good points and faults, even Marxism has the odd one – somewhere.

    • Agree: Ugetit
  93. Dumbo says:

    Why do so many commentary sections in this rag end up in Reductio ad Hitlerum?

    Seriously, forget Nazi Germany. Constant reminders about it by both the Left and the Right, the Jews and the (Neo-)Nazis, is disgusting and leads one only to a lack of actual solutions and focusing on the present and future, which might be the objective in any case.

    As for Freud, whatever he said about dreams lack any credibility, I mean his dream theory is complete bollocks. It’s easier to believe the Greek theories about dreams being messages from the Gods.

    • Replies: @noname27
    , @SolontoCroesus
  94. noname27 says: • Website
    @Pancho

    Interesting when one considers that The Left is controlled by Rothschild/Soros money.

    “Capitalism and Bolshevism are the two sides of the same Jewish coin.”

    – Adolf Hitler

  95. noname27 says: • Website
    @Old and Grumpy

    “It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of The Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers-out of unorthodoxy.”

    — George Orwell, (Eric Blair) Nineteen Eighty-Four

  96. noname27 says: • Website
    @Dumbo

    And if not a solution based on strong Nationalism what ‘actual solutions’ do you propose? I can’t wait.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  97. karel says:
    @Ugetit

    It is difficult to say who was creating more chaos as communists or social democrats fought openly in the streets with SA paramilitary gangs. You can admire pics of these events in
    https://www.alamy.de/stockfoto-strassenschlacht-zwischen-kommunisten-und-sa-1932-48400467.html
    or read a bit about it.
    https://www.dhm.de/lemo/kapitel/weimarer-republik/innenpolitik.html
    The SA gangsters also had a nice habit of shaking money collection cans while marching through the streets. Bystanders, who were not quick enough to throw something in, had a good chance of being beaten up. You may find it fine but it did not contribute much towards peace and order.

    Please explain why you chose to label it a legend.

    Because there has never been a consensus of what it was. Because of a mass starvation in the large cities during 1918 and the generality decided that an armistice was preferable to a communist revolution. cf.
    https://www.aerzteblatt.de/archiv/167694/Erster-Weltkrieg-1914-1918-Hunger-und-Mangel-in-der-Heimat

    • Replies: @Ugetit
  98. @Alfred

    It always puzzles me why those astronauts did not make a picture of earth for us to see how does the earth looks when it is viewed from the moon.

  99. Miro23 says:

    Left ideology, accordingly, is shaped like a ‘dream.’ Aiming for what ‘ought to be’ rather than ‘what is’ induces a level of utopian illusory detachment and depicts a phantasmal egalitarian world often removed from our abusive, oppressive and doomed reality.

    The older Karl Marx version:

    In communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticize after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic.

    Karl Marx – German Ideology 1845

    And the newer John Lennon version:

    Imagine there’s no heaven
    It’s easy if you try
    No hell below us
    Above us only sky
    Imagine all the people
    Living for today… Aha-ah…

    Imagine there’s no countries
    It isn’t hard to do
    Nothing to kill or die for
    And no religion, too
    Imagine all the people
    Living life in peace… You…

    You may say I’m a dreamer
    But I’m not the only one
    I hope someday you’ll join us
    And the world will be as one

    Imagine no possessions
    I wonder if you can
    No need for greed or hunger
    A brotherhood of man
    Imagine all the people
    You may say I’m a dreamer
    But I’m not the only one
    I hope someday you’ll join us
    And the world will live as one

    John Lennon – Imagine 1971

    The Left is often too blind to the political and social conditions in which it operates. It never detects the growing wave of resentment it brings upon itself because operating in a dream mode inflicts a severe form of detachment.

    So, the dreamworld has been going on for some time now.

  100. @Colin Wright

    Sorry!
    I can see now that you are both idiots.

  101. @HdC

    There are laborers, and there are trained workers like toolmaker, lathe operators maintenance technicians, etc.
    Like for example Toolmakers require three years of training.
    We were talking about laborers not trained whatsoever.

  102. @Anonymouse

    by colonizing a near desert and making it bloom* with normal people living in their own country** earning an honest living as farmers and workers in the trades, why is this not a noble and estimable project.

    * It wasn’t a “near desert.” Arthur Ruppin records in his 1907 letter to European zionists on the decrepit state of the various categories of Jews living in Palestine; he contrasted the wasteful practices of early Jewish “farmers and workers” with the more prudent practices of natives as well as of German settlers in the region.
    As Etan Bloom narrates in Arthur Ruppin and the Production of Hebrew Culture in Palestine, only a few years later, after Ruppin had acquired by subterfuge some of the most fertile and highly developed of Palestinian farmland, the Jezreel Valley, he went on to acquire and build TelAviv nearby to Jaffa, a highly successful Arab port city. The stated purpose for siting TelAviv right there was to supplant the Arab trade in oranges and in other revenue-producing commercial activities in Jaffa.

    ** It was not a “noble and estimable project” because it was, by design and intention from the very beginning the taking by fair means and foul of the lands, homes, and productivity of the people whose “own country” that region was.

    Zionist Jews plundered and stole, among other things, extensive libraries of the Palestinian Arabs. Benny Morris eventually came to write that zionist Jews carried out ethnic cleansing in numerous villages of the Palestinian Arabs. Morris excused it claiming, “Our backs were to the wall.” One assumes he was leaning on Jabotinsky’s Iron Wall.

    People take lands and other things they have not otherwise earned in wars, by treachery, and the like; it has happened innumerable times throughout history. Hebrew scripture enshrines the practice.

    The Ottomans took Constantinople from the Byzantines by one means and another: elements in the development of the Ottomans were decidedly militaristic and expansionistic. Jews lived in the Ottoman Empire for generations and understood, participated in, benefited from, and later mimicked some of the methods that Ottomans used.

    Own it, Jews; don’t piss on us and try to claim it’s the gentle rain from heaven. As in so many things, it’s the self-righteous, victim-claiming lying that many antisemites find so disgusting.

  103. @Miro23

    ‘…society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticize after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic.’

    This had to have been written by someone who never actually acquired and practiced a skill.

    I too can do almost anything — but as a rule, at about one fourth the speed and about half the quality of someone who specializes in the task. I remember trying to explain this to somebody who saw me working on my car and wanted to pay me to work on their car.

  104. @Miro23

    In communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticize after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic.

    Karl Marx – German Ideology 1845

    I’d never seen this excruciatingly infantile quote before. Who did Marx think would milk the cows in the morning so he could rear them in the evening? Who was going to cook the dinner that he planned to follow with a session of criticism? (In the latter case, probably his maid, whom he impregnated and then abandoned.)

    Yes, it is a dream.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  105. @Anonymouse

    ‘…by colonizing a near desert and making it bloom with normal people living in their own country earning an honest living as farmers and workers in the trades, why is this not a noble and estimable project. When I have retailed this uncontested history of the Zionist movement, I have been called a liar. Where in this account is the lie?’

    To start with, that what they colonized was ‘a near desert.’ It was actually a fairly heavily populated region, and colonizing it involved expelling the indigenous population.

    Others can debunk the rest of your vicious Zionist lies.

    • Agree: Not Raul
  106. @Wyatt

    ‘…I don’t know much about Nazi Germany, but I like to insist that the Nazis took socialism, removed the most jewish elements from it by introducing nationalism and actually making it an effective system for white people instead of following Marxism lock, stock and barrel and thus being puppets of jewish feudalism…’

    I used to take the same position, but I really think it’s fairer to say that Nazism was — among other things — a response of everyone but the urban working class to the threat posed by belligerent working-class revolutionary socialism.

    There were the Communists, of course, but the Social Democrats used to like to also ‘talk the talk’ even if they weren’t going to walk the walk.

    Well, that scared the shit out of everyone else. At the same time, people of good will could see that the class system wasn’t just, that working-class poverty in the presence of great wealth was intolerable, that everyone should have access to higher education, that social snobbery wasn’t pretty, etc.

    In other words, the workers had a point — but we’d rather not be stood up against a wall and shot, if it’s all the same to you.

    Nazism offered — and made much progress towards realizing — the dream of a classless society, or at any rate, one in which the condition of all classes would be made tolerable. That was the appeal. It’s all been hastily papered over since, but there was a good deal of approving interest in the Nazi experiment at the time, and it all seemed to be working. People were happy — another point that gets papered over.

    But it wasn’t socialism — not like the socialists defined it. That’s just not an accurate interpretation. More a response to socialism, that took a different approach to addressing the grievances in question.

  107. @Dumbo

    Seriously, forget Nazi Germany. Constant reminders about it by both the Left and the Right, the Jews and the (Neo-)Nazis, is disgusting

    Have you written to PBS & History Channel to make this same demand?

    I understand PBS aired a documentary on Hitler the day before the US election.
    Why do you suppose that was?

    Do you contend that such programming should be presented without a countering presentation — said another way, do you think it is appropriate or inappropriate to present an alternative perspective on the story?


    But I get your point: Gilad’s essay was about Dreams vs reality / insomnia, not Hitler & Nazis as such.

    A connection might be that the Left/Jews relentlessly cramming holocaustism down our throats via PBS etc is the Left’s attempt to say, See, my Dream state is REAL and you must join the world of my Dream and affirm it as reality!!

  108. Art says:

    One hundred percent for sure, the dream of the left is to have power. The left intellectual wants to be at the top of the human pecking order.

    The majority of the left (the soldiers) are pseudo-intellectuals who believe by virtue of their smarts, that they should rule. These pseudo-intellectuals are personal failures at creativity. They lack the organizational talent to create thoughts that build something of lasting value. Those who go on to create and construct, want the freedom to do so.

    Trump was hated because he was the antithesis of an intellectual – Trump actually was a builder of great structures. That is the baseline of the lefts visceral hate for him. He was something they could never be. When all the current left types are long dead and forgotten – Trump Tower will stand.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  109. Ugetit says:
    @karel

    Please explain why you chose to label it a legend.

    Because there has never been a consensus of what it was.

    Thanks for your respectful reply, but I asked why you made the choice. Whether or not there was or is agreement of what to call it doesn’t mean it was a legend. The Germans, as I understand it, hosted Jews who were fleeing both Russia and Poland, yet some of the (probably mostly unassimilated) Jews clearly decided to put the screws to long suffering Germany. Germany was stabbed in the back by them. It’s an easy to ascertain fact; there is no legend to it.

    As for trying to decide whether who were causing more chaos, I’d have to say that the Commies had been advocating and acting upon the idea of worldwide revolution in many serious ways for quite a long time and they therefore bear the brunt of the blame whether or not the SA were guilty of massive violence in response.

    Thanks for the links.

  110. Emslander says:

    Of course the Democrats cheated to create votes for Biden that weren’t there. They knew that a re-elected Trump would be a King that had been wounded, but had come back strong with clear memory of the slime who’d been aiming at him.

    “When you go for the King, you’d better kill him.”

    They think they’ve killed him, but maybe not.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  111. Our handlers may be getting seriously worried about how many of us are wandering off the reservation.

    ‘Welcome to FAHRENHEIT 411, a special newsletter on disinformation and conspiracy theories surrounding the 2020 presidential election. It is produced in partnership with the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, a London-based think tank that studies extremism, and written by Molly Boigon, an investigative reporter at The Forward…’

    https://forward.com/news/458263/groups- … bad-arson/

    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
  112. @noname27

    ‘And if not a solution based on strong Nationalism what ‘actual solutions’ do you propose? I can’t wait.’

    We are all children of our times, of course, and I can no more choose to not be patriotic than I can choose to have no interest in the opposite sex.

    However, even as I am subject to it, I can perceive that nationalism is not an eternal verity, nor has it been exactly an unalloyed good.

    Prior to about 1700-2000, depending on what group we’re talking about, nationalism as we understand it didn’t exist. During the Franco-Prussian War, French officers were distressed to discover that French peasants preferred Prussian troops to French ones. Prussians would merely demand food and fodder. French troops were likely to demand food, fodder, and recruits.

    So nationalism hasn’t always been a natural human condition for all…and it hasn’t necessarily been an improvement. It’s provoked innumerable wars, worsened the ones that did break out, fostered innumerable acts of brutal ethnic persecution and expulsion, and led to the wholesale destruction of about half the architectural heritage of man.

    It’s here, and we can’t will it away, but it’s another matter to argue it’s a good thing. The slaughter has been horrific.

    • Agree: Not Raul
    • Replies: @noname27
  113. @Emslander

    ‘“When you go for the King, you’d better kill him.”

    They think they’ve killed him, but maybe not.’

    Trump’s ineffectual — and inept. He won’t be the one we’ll have to worry about.

    In fact, if you just wanted not much to happen, he was a pretty good choice.

  114. Wielgus says:
    @Colin Wright

    De Jonge notes that the left, especially the KPD and its forerunner the Spartacists, were bogeymen but never actually formidable enough to deserve the title. There were people who saw the Freikorps as saviours. There were others who saw them as monsters. Given that the German army was to be drastically reduced, Freikorps were a stopgap but their legality was questionable in terms of the Versailles treaty, the degree of control the German government had over them was always questionable, and when the German government tried to put the Freikorps genie back in the bottle, a significant number of them attempted a putsch (the “Kapp putsch” of 1920). The usual depiction of the period is that Weimar was threatened by extremists of left and right. In this picture the Freikorps were a sizable part of the right, although they were called into being by the government.

    De Jonge seemed amused by the ex-Freikorps guy losing his rifle to the dreaded “Reds”, because he certainly lived to tell about it. De Jonge didn’t find any “Red” who lived to tell the tale after being captured by the Freikorps but a lot of evidence that they were simply killed out of hand. I think he also mentions Von Killinger, a Freikorps leader, writing a book about his experiences of 1919-23 in which he describes having a woman arrested in a formerly “Red” zone flogged. He seemed to take sadistic satisfaction in such things. He later became the Third Reich ambassador to Romania and committed suicide shortly before the Red Army arrived in Bucharest in 1944.

  115. @Colin Wright

    Looks like this is Jew vs Jew infighting — focus is on Pam Geller’s bad acts. Chuckie The Shomer Schumer takes a beating — a demonstration of that famous Jewish u-nit-ee. Luv it.

    This sentence:

    “Last week’s Geller posts also echo an effort by Pres. Trump and other Republicans to paint civil unrest as part of “Joe Biden’s America,” generally by exaggerating the violence connected to Black Lives Matter protests against police brutality.”

    uh oh
    Maybe BLM did not torch all of the insurance fraud targets that they were supposed to burn — hence, “Fahrenheit 411” — according to Ray Bradbury, it takes F. 451 to burn a book.

    Molly Boigon: 40 degrees shy of flaming idiocy.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  116. @James N. Kennett

    I’d never seen this excruciatingly infantile quote before. Who did Marx think would milk the cows in the morning so he could rear them in the evening? Who was going to cook the dinner that he planned to follow with a session of criticism?

    Who is going to shovel cow sh-t while Marx bloviates over dinner? Even Marxists today have a hard time with the division of labor. You can find them arguing about it on various websites.

    Marx never explains the basics of how he plans to reorganize labor so he can do as he pleases and yet people still think he was a genius. Marxists with PhDs can’t answer basic questions about who does what and what happens if everyone just wants to register as an artist.

    It’s really amusing to watch them admit that some jobs will require forcing people with guns or threat of imprisonment. Then they also have to use guns and threat of imprisonment to keep skilled labor from leaving. WHAT A UTOPIA.

    The truly sad thing is that we still are in this war with the left. They know Marx was wrong but so many stick with him anyways because they can’t think outside the box and no other philosopher offered such grandiose dreams.

  117. @Art

    The majority of the left (the soldiers) are pseudo-intellectuals who believe by virtue of their smarts, that they should rule. These pseudo-intellectuals are personal failures at creativity.

    I have been saying this for a while.

    They are beta level intellectuals that lack creativity.

    They think they are special for being smarter than the average person but deeply resent people that can think independently or creatively.

    They are basically administrative assistants that think they can fix the world by reading the right books. Stalin was originally a clerk and later killed people that he felt were intellectually threatening.

  118. Skeptikal says:

    “Those few Leftists who are awaken by any sort of reality check are effectively pushed out, left with no other option but flipping (political) sides. ”

    Very true.
    Or being forced to see that genuinely progressive and “conservative” positions tend to converge.

    But “identitarian” leftists cannot see this because they are so fixated on their narrow view of social justice and end up being exclusive and judgmental of millions of “real” people.

  119. @Curmudgeon

    And you forgot the most important thing. They introduced the profit shearing.
    It was important even from the point of view that when the profits were low unions did not make excessive demands. Unions could see the balance sheets. Also they introduced 3 weeks payed holidays. First country in the world.

  120. Skeptikal says:

    Very interesting interpretation and most of it makes sense.

    Up until here:
    “Biden doesn’t let reality interfere with the dream. As ‘president-elect’ he doesn’t waste time, he works with his transition team, he keeps the fantasy afloat. America is on the verge of a civil war but even that doesn’t bother the ‘president-elect’ and his transition team. In the progressive dream, vowing to ‘unite the nation’ is way more forceful that the reality of a sharp divide.”

    To me, Biden’s announcement that he was the new president and his “big brotherly” advice to Trump to, basically, get a grip and get lost, and he quick moves to form transition team, name cabinet members, and basically act like the *current* president were less akin to a “fantasy” and more reminiscent of the atmospherics of a colonel leading a junta who, with cameras rolling, steps out on the balcony of a government building, surrounded by four or five of his junta colleagues, to announce to the citizens that he has now taken over and heads the new regime.
    End of story.

    • Replies: @CCZ
  121. @SolontoCroesus

    ‘…Looks like this is Jew vs Jew infighting…

    Nu? Have you looked at who owns this site — and who posted the post that we’re commenting on?

    Jews aren’t the Orcs of Sauron. They’re a set of people, who unfortunately are a little too good at their job, and among whom the consensus settles on a series of rather unfortunate propositions: come one come all immigration, hostility to ordinary conservative social values, an obsession with sex, and…Israel.

    They aren’t bad…just a little too good at their job. So wrap your head around that, realize that it’s going to be more complicated than releasing your inner Viking, and settle in for the fight.

  122. Skeptikal says:
    @karel

    In the disastrous postwar years of the twenties in Germany the perception was very strong that while everyone was in desperate straits and basically losing everything, suffering unemployment, malnutrition, and on and on, Germany’s Jews seemed to be doing relatively well and to have the wherewithal to buy up assets that were going for a song, buy new clothes, decent food, etc. This perception comes out clearly in some oral histories.

    Jews also controlled the media, film making, book publishing, the arts, were a strong force in medicine and many other professional fields (although I believe they could not teach in the universities, could not practice the law, could not be judges; not sure of the civil service). Still the relative prosperity of Jews and their high profile in finance, including some very high profile enterprises such as the Allgemeine Elektrizitäts-Gesellschaft, financing the construction of modern industrial infrastructure (railways) etc. made them very noticeable to Germans, although the German Jews were a pretty small portion of the German population: less than 1%.

    • Replies: @karel
  123. @Wielgus

    ‘De Jonge notes that the left, especially the KPD and its forerunner the Spartacists, were bogeymen but never actually formidable enough to deserve the title…

    They did topple the German Empire and establish a socialist republic in Bavaria. It seems to me that people could be excused for taking them seriously.

    Let’s put it in present-day terms. The Muslim awful bad men revolt. They manage to cause the EU to collapse, and establish an Islamic Republic in France.

    Ready for a moderated response? Feel that captured ISIS fighters should be treated the same as pro-EU militia?

    • Replies: @Wielgus
  124. karel says:
    @Skeptikal

    Jews also controlled the media, film making, book publishing, the arts, were a strong force in medicine and many other professional fields (although I believe they could not teach in the universities, could not practice the law, could not be judges; not sure of the civil service).

    What period you are referring to? It does make sense to me in any case. Do you read by any chance any of the comments here?

    • Replies: @Skeptikal
  125. karel says:
    @Curmudgeon

    It is a matter of perception of what is left and what is right. The NSDAP propagandists have made lot of promises to make it popular, just as political parties normally do, but the NSDAP ideology has never questioned the structure of the existing capitalist system. In prewar Czechoslovakia was a nasty party called ”Sudetendeutsche Partei”, modelled according NSDAP. cf.
    https://www.welt.de/geschichte/article163760246/Sudetendeutsche-lebten-in-Demokratie-und-waehlten-Hitler.html
    Only a seriously confused individual would have ever thought of that party as being left wing.

    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
  126. AReply says:

    This article has to be a GPT-x test.
    It makes no sense. It’s the verbal equivalent of finding Ryan Gosling’s face added into a photo by AI:

    https://www.businessinsider.com/ryan-gosling-face-photo-editor-gigapixel-ai-2020-8

    Is that Ryan Gosling’s face? No more so, I suppose, than the Virgin Mary appearing in golden crust of a grilled cheese sandwich, but who cares?

    The “left” is what the article says it is because that’s what the article says it is. QED. Add uncontextualized pop-left reference to dreamy Zizek to grab attention with an emotionally arousing connection to fatherly negligence burning a child — The horror!

    Why is “the Left” letting our childrenz burnz?!

    Then something, something why hasn’t the left protected the poor white working man, blah, blah empty signifiers

    This isn’t even childish, it’s robotically haphazard and ridiculous.

  127. Skeptikal says:
    @karel

    “In fact, prior to the putsch in 1933, most Jews could be described as German nationalists. It is paradox that Jews in Czechoslovakia were also leaning towards German nationalism. Czech speaking Jews were more like rare exotic birds. The putsch in 1933 brought them to their senses and those who did not emigrate started to learn Czech. ”

    This is not at all paradoxical. The state of Czechoslovakia was a recent creation; before that the relevant political entity was the Austro-Hungarian empire, and Bohemia was definitely in the “German” portion of this empire. It was perfectly natural for upward-striving Jews in Bohemia to cluster in German-speaking Prag and ultimately to look toward Vienna as their cultural capital . In this Franz Kafka was typical. German-speaking Jews looked down on the ethnic Czechs. They also were quite terrified of Czech nationalism. This was a different group from the ethnic Germans, the Sudetenland Germans, of whom there were also about 2 million in Bohemia and Moravia: the lands that were hived away from the disintegrated Austro-Hungarian Empire and combined with (Catholic/Hungarian) Slovakia to become Czechoslovakia. So it is not at all odd that the German-speaking Jews of Czechoslovakia, like Hitler, identified more with the German nationalist project than with the Czech one.

    Many of the leading intellectual lights in fin-de-siecle Vienna and before (many of them Jews) came from Bohemia or Moravia, including Sigmund Freud.

    William M. Johnston’s classic, The Austrian Mind, contains a very interesting chapter on the political struggle between Germans and Czechs in Bohemia, pp. 265–74, as well as lots of discussion throughout on the role of Bohemian and Moravian Germans (including Jews) in 19th C Austrian German culture. It is really quite startling.

    • Replies: @karel
  128. Traditional Left Ideology sets out a vision of how the world ‘ought to be.’
    …if the Left focuses on ‘what could be,’ the Right focuses on ‘what is.’ If the Left operates where people ‘could be,’ the Right operates where people ‘are’ or at least, where they believe themselves to be. The Right does not aim to change human social reality but rather to celebrate, and to even maximize it.

    There’s some truth to this but not quite. There’s always been a Rousseau-ean aspect to the Left. As an Mexican elder says in THE WILD BUNCH, “We all dream of being a child again, even the worst of us…” But the Left also developed as a movement of reality check. The modern left originated with the intention to wake history out of its slumber. The masses were trapped in the dream of the Divine Right of Kings, God & Heaven, and virtue of meekness. But in fact, kings and noblemen were merely human like everyone else. They weren’t special despite all the pomp. And was there proof of God & Heaven? Should the clergy have power and influence when their institution is based on a myth? And why should the people be meek and humble when the vain elites live in opulence and feel contempt for the unwashed?
    Much about the French Revolution was meant as a reality check on the state of things. It told the people that the regal monarch is just a man, like you or me. So, why should he be blindly revered and obeyed? And why should his heirs take power? By what right should they rule over the people? The Left also spilled the beans on religion and clergy. The rise of reason and science called for demonstrable proof, and there was no evidence to Biblical claims. Furthermore, even though the clergy preached the ‘meekness’ message of Jesus, they were accused of being corrupt status-seekers who mostly catered to the rich and powerful.
    In ANY institution, it is usually the opportunistic, cunning, and shrewd than the virtuous, principled, and honest who make it to the top.

    So, the Left was trying to wake people up from the slumber of history dominated by kings, aristocracy, and the church. What did Napoleon mean when he said, “China is a sleeping giant. Let it sleep”? He meant it’s better for China to remain ‘rightist’ and static than go ‘leftist’ and dynamic. It was conservative China that was asleep in its own Middle Kingdom conceits. So sure of itself and its civilizational values, it refused to wake up to the reality that the West had surpassed it in every measure of power and wealth. Before Western Imperialist ventured into China, there were many obvious clues that China better wake up and change. But it kept on sleeping in its smug ‘rightist’ conservative dream of superiority and security. It was the introduction of Western Leftism that forced many young Chinese to wake up and smell the coffee(than the usual tea). It was this materialist leftism that urged them to go beyond Confucian conceits(of the useless literati) and accept the material dimensions of reality. It’s no wonder communism was appealing to so many young Chinese in the early 20th century.

    Also, Karl Marx had argued that people should wake up to the truth of history. He called religion the opiate of the masses. He argued that the main engine of history is not Great Men, Spiritual Ideas, or Philosophy but the struggle for the control of material reality. Throughout history, the elites found clever ways to exploit the masses and hog most of the wealth EVEN THOUGH it was the masses who did most of the heavy-lifting. He regarded capitalism as a both a liberating revolutionary force and an exploitative form of new oppression. Capitalism was liberating in that it was totally materialist, something it shared with communism. It accepted matter as the true basis of power. Titles such as king or duke meant nothing to capitalism. Neither did God or spirituality. Capitalism was about property, investment, factories, and technology. To facilitate investment and transfers of wealth, capitalism relied on ever more elaborate schemes of finance. Because capitalism focused on the material world and real results, it revolutionized technology and profoundly transformed the landscape, along with human relations based on production and distribution. However, because it was focused mainly on profit and due to the role of finance, capitalism had two problems, one moral and the other economic. Capitalists didn’t care how much the masses suffered as long as their own profits increased. Even though finance is supposed to serve the material economy, it could take on a life of its own and create a form of economics that defies material sense — today, Wall Street and globalist banks cook up with ever more surreal ways to increase create wealth.

    So, in that sense, Marxism was to wake the people up from the dream of kings & queens, myth & religion, and the ‘virtues’ promoted by the powerful to control the masses. It also warned that ‘liberalism’ and ‘individualism’ were more smoke-and-mirrors used by the propertied class to justify their exploitation and wealth. Their real power owed to control of materials via capital, not abstract ideals about ‘freedom’. For the exploited masses, ‘freedom’ was meaningless because they lacked the material means to ensure their own interests. So, true freedom for the masses could only come by gaining control of the material means of production. Why did so many Russians join the Revolution? The horrors of World War I and its social impact woke them up to the fact that Tsar Nicholas wasn’t some grand wise patriarch, the father of his people, but a half-wit, fool, and weakling. Nicholas, the biggest rightist force in Europe, had been asleep about reality and history. He thought the people would remain loyal to him no matter what because he was the loving father of his people; he loved them, and they loved him. What a rude awakening for him.

    So, there was a side to leftism that was about waking up to reality and seeing the light. The Left grew out of the Enlightenment. Let there be light and let us see what reality with a clear eye. Let us be critical of power than just obeying it. Let us ask questions than accept the old answers as sacrosanct.
    But the Left had its own problems arising from arrogance, ignorance, ur-spirituality, and limitations of man. Some on the Left were so sure of their truth(supposedly based on science and reason) that they became intolerant and even murderous to those who disagreed. Despite the conceit of true knowledge and reason, mankind can only know so much. An expert in one field knows nothing of other fields. And even experts often turn out to be wrong(or they cravenly cater to the Power). What was ‘certain’ in medicine a hundred yrs ago, or even fifty years ago, may be null and void today. And there is the ‘spiritual’ nature of man. Even those who claim to be totally rational and materialist(or secular) have a secret need to divide the world into holy and unholy. Consider the Holocaust, Globo-Homo, and the Magic Negro. Holocaust should be treated as a historical subject, but it’s become a religion where one must not question the numerology of the sacred six million. ‘Gay rights’ became Gay Rites, a cult of sodomy as the wonder of the ages. Homos used to push their cause on secular grounds of individual rights. Now, they insist that religious institutions fly the ‘gay’ banner. And if anyone says homo fecal-penetration is gross, he or she must be purged, shamed, and blacklisted. The ‘inqueersition’. And indeed anyone who is critical of the homo lifestyle has no chance of making it in higher levels of government or industry. Globo-Homo is the official faith of the Deep State and Big Capital. You better get on your knees and BELIEVE… or else you’re cast to the purgatory of demotion or unemployment. And consider the BLM nonsense. Most blacks are murdered by other blacks, and if anything, cops save a lot of black lives. But as blacks are now holy objects, ANY instance of a black thug killed by cops is blasphemy or ‘blaxphemy’. Michael Brown was a thug who got killed in Ferguson. He never said, “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot”, but that has become part of the Sacred Narrative among blacks and white progs. Why all such nonsense among people who claim to be rational, secular, and modern? Because human nature is ‘spiritual’, and that means even those who reject God and Church will find new icons, idols, and causes to worship. Notice how all these white progs kneel at the feet of MLK, Mandela, and Obama(and Oprah too).

    Of course, the choice of Jews, blacks, and homos as the holy trinity is largely the result of Jewish Supremacist control of media, academia, finance, and most whore politicians. Jews naturally promote themselves. Jews see homos as useful allies in turning Leftism from Mayday to Gayday. In the past, many Jews were of working class background or starving intellectuals. They were sincerely on the Left. Today, over 50% of Jews make over $100,000 a year. Jews are the richest people on Earth. Jews want to keep the brand of ‘leftism’ and ‘radicalism’ but in service of wealth and privilege. So, why would Jews favor traditional leftism when something like communism will be devastating to Jews? Indeed, even in the Soviet Union where many Jews had an auspicious start, they eventually lost out to non-Jews.
    Look how Bernie Sanders runs as a ‘socialist’ and then urges all his herd to vote for Hillary or Biden(who serve the Jews). Maybe Sanders was once a true socialist, but now, he’s a Jew first and socialist second. There are commie-types among Antifa, but they are useful to Jewish Capitalists because Commie Thought says, “Greatest Evil is Nazism and Racism.” So, as long as the Jewish Capitalist Media tells the ‘commies’ that there are ‘white supremacist’ and ‘neo-Nazis’ afoot, the dummy ‘commies’ are too busy attacking whites to ever get around to attacking capitalism. (Traditional communism argued that capitalism, not fascism, is the biggest enemy because Fascism and National Socialism are merely fake-revolutionary movements used by the capitalists to capture populist passions. In other words, fascism is merely iron boots capitalism. But most of today’s commies are the product of pop culture. Their ideology is based more on TV shows, rap, and punk/grunge music than true understanding of the history of the Left.)

    [MORE]

    If Leftist Ideology is based on ‘what ought to be’ than ‘what is’, could one argue that capitalism is leftist? Or that the West has been leftist even prior to the French Revolution, perhaps going back to the Renaissance? After all, capitalism has been about ‘what ought to be’. It’s been tireless in trying to come up with new and better ways of production, transportation, communication, and etc. Take the invention of flying machines. Most of humanity had given up on such dreams as impossible. Birds can fly, man cannot. But Western Man was not content with the reality that man is a terrestrial animal. He had to keep striving for ‘what ought to be’, and it was realized. So much that seemed impossible, ludicrous, or fantastical 100 yrs ago, let alone 200 yrs ago, have been realized. Back in the 1980s, only rich people had portable phones, which were big and heavy. Now, people have slick cell phones even in the slums of the Third World. When I was young, I didn’t expect something like the internet to arrive suddenly and change so much. The West advanced so much faster than the Rest because it got into the habit of pushing for ‘what ought to be’ than ‘what is’. People during World War I were amazed by new technologies, but they were all obsolete in a mere two and half decades in World War II. And who would have thought something like nuclear power was even possible? And yet it came to fruition because the West pushed for ‘what ought to be’. Steve Jobs came to greatness in the second chapter of Apple by imagining ‘what ought to be’. A declining company became the biggest in the world. Granted, ‘what ought to be’ is more doable in science/technology than in social ‘progress’ as objective than subjective standards apply, but ever-competitive capitalism is always fixated on ‘what ought to be’ than merely ‘what is’. So many companies operate on the basis that ‘what is’ now will be obsolete in the future when there will be products that come closer to how it ‘ought to be’.

    Leonardo Da Vinci made illustrations of flying machines. He failed to create one, but his mind was certainly in the mode of ‘what ought to be’, and this attitude did much to stimulate the West to push beyond the barriers of the ‘possible’. And in time, so much that seemed impossible became possible. Leftism seems to share this spirit but in the field of social science. And in many areas, there have been key reforms and successes because of leftist pressure and planning to create a better society. But then, this drive for more, the better, or the further emerged in the West prior to the rise of the Radical Left. Columbus had this spirit when he went on his voyage. Otto von Bismarck was a rightist-conservative but committed to creating a modern prosperous Germany with social services. And ‘right-wing’ autocrats of Asian nations after WWII were all invested in creating new orders; they embarked on tasks that seemed impossible and forbidding at the time.

    Granted, even as both the ‘right’ and ‘left’ in the modern world keep pushing for new possibilities and improvements, it’s generally true that the Right has a better sense of limits than the Left does. So, while rightists will adopt certain socialist policies, they don’t believe in panaceas. They are less puritanical even though puritanism is usually associated with the Right, not least because modernity rebelled against the moral teachings of the Church, not least on sexual matters. But when it comes to holier-than-thou fulmination, the left is far more puritanical. The Right is judgmental and repressive but not interested in uprooting all evils. It’s like Franco’s Spain tolerated the Left as long as it didn’t make trouble. In contrast, the Leftist orders seek to weed out all crime-think and seed the mind with correct ones. It’s why George Orwell became so alarmed about the Left. And Jonathan Haidt finds the leftist mind to be more arrogant and intolerant in its outlook. It’s not enough for the Left to control society; they must take possession of souls. Protestantism began as a proto-leftist puritanical challenge to the Catholic Church that seemed overly compromised with the reality of power and wealth.

    The left vs right dichotomy is especially confused in the West because of Christianity. As the official faith of the West, it became a symbol of establishment and conservative values. But Jesus was a rebel-heretic-maverick Jew who pissed off Jewish Conservatives. And His message is eternally radical(though not a radical call to arms). All of Jewish History was about the children of men and women who, in turn, became fathers of sons and daughters. So, despite all the spiritual content, it was grounded in the reality of biology and history. In contrast, the Christo-myth says Jesus is the miraculous Son of God. Though born of Mary, she was only a vessel. Also, He didn’t have sex or get married and have kids. He lived the life of the Perfect Man and died and defeated death. This fantastical story and message are more suited to leftist than rightist thinking. Also, whereas Rightism tends to be particularist — our tribe, our culture, our people — and hierarchical, the universal and egalitarian thrust of Christianity is closer in spirit to Leftism.
    But Christianity became the religion of the rich and powerful in the West. And the Enlightenment associated Christianity with kings, noblemen, corrupt clergy, superstition, reaction, and etc. But the meaning of Christianity never favored the rich and powerful. And there were many Christian progressives who believed the Faith must be on the side of the powerless than the powerful. Many Italians were both Marxist and Catholic. Still, one might say Christianity is conservative or rightist in its moral judgmentalism. It calls for social order in admonishing people to be sober, solemn, and pious. Leftism, in contrast, has a libertine streak. Many anarchists and early Marxists spoke of Free Love and other sexual experimentation. Some tried to fuse Marxism with Freudianism. And to that extent, Leftism was neo-paganist at odds with the moralism of Christianity. Ancient Greeks were certainly more libertine than the ancient Jews and Early Christians. But then, to the extent that the pagans were more cold-eyed about power and reality, they could be said to have been more ‘rightist’. The Romans saw the world in realist terms of winners and losers. If your side won, they were winners; if they lost, they were losers. In contrast, Christianity said the material winners of this life could be spiritual losers in the afterlife. Paganism’s no-nonsense view of power could be said to be rightist in relation to Christianity’s abstract view of power as it ‘ought to be’: The meek and powerless in this world could be(as they ought to be) the powerful in the next life(while the rich and mighty in this world are doomed to burn in Hell for all eternity). Today’s ‘leftist’ has the puritanical mindset of hard-line Christianity and the puerile sensibility of paganism at its most degenerate. It’s as if the characters in FELLINI SATYRICON got ‘moralistic’ in defense of debauchery: “I’m holier than thou because I take my kids to Drag Queen story hour.” It’s as if we are living in a dream because strange things happen in dreams, and the Current Year is very strange indeed.

    According to this perception, the dream is there to sustain the slumber against all odds.

    But it’s also because most people lack the power to dream, therefore they want to be part of the bigger dream. Perhaps, MLK’s (I Have A)Dream. Dream in the literal sense is what we all do when we sleep. Dream-as-metaphor is what we inhabit in the real world. There is no such thing as absolute living-in-reality as our understanding of reality is subjectively shaped by our senses. When we walk down the street, we are often just barely aware of the surrounding so as not to fall down or get hit by a car. Otherwise, we are hardly acknowledging or thinking about the reality before and around us. We don’t think, “I’m walking on concrete sidewalk, this is a parking lot with these cars, that is a tree, that is a person with a grocery bag, that is a cat, etc.” Instead, our minds process what holds most meaning for us. It could be about personal relationships, but it’s often about things that interest, stimulate, and provoke us. And these are often narratives, stories, images, idols, and issues. These function as something far more than mere knowledge. When someone watches the umpteenth show about hapless innocent noble blacks terrorized by the KKK, one doesn’t coolly think, “There was a time when certain white groups used violence against blacks in the South.” Rather, those images linger in the mind as dreamlike ghosts. They haunt and lurk the soul. Thus, they function as dreams than merely as knowledge. In this sense, we are all living in a dream, and mankind always has.

    Among primitive folks, a shaman or storyteller who tells the tale or narrative infects the listeners with heroes, villains, images, and visions that take on a life of their own in the hearts and souls of the listeners. Thus, the listeners come to partly live in the dream of the storyteller. Why do Jews now want to clamp down on Free Speech? They want to control the Dream Machine. They want all of us to be characters in their Dream Play. So, even though we all exist as individuals in the physical sense, our minds are often NPC-like in the Dream of another. Under Stalinism, so many Soviet citizens were NPC-like minions of Stalin’s Dream of Power and Justice. Under Maoism, so many Chinese youths were NPC-like minions of Mao’s grand dream. All those Germans under National Socialism fell under the spell of Hitler, a great orator who could pull people into his dream of Germany.

    It may well be that conservative types are less dreamy than those on the left. This element could keep them closer to reality, but it could also mean that conservatives become more dependent on the dreams of others who have the power to dream. Why can’t conservatives create their own Hollywood, their own dream-machine? Even as they complain about the Liberal/Leftist control of Hollywood and other dream-centers, they rely on the other for their dreams. The fact that so many German conservatives and rightist threw caution to the winds and surrendered to Hitler’s dream suggests that one’s inability to dream doesn’t necessarily lead to more reality or clarity but to reliance on the dream of others.
    This may explain why American Conservatism sucks so bad. Without the power of dreams, it has adopted all the dreams of the other side: ‘Diversity Is Our Strength’, ‘MLK was awesome’, ‘Gay Marriage is a conservative value’, ‘Muh Israel’, ‘Women in the Military’, and etc. The problem with reality is it’s difficult and inconvenient. The mind finds dreams more appealing than reality. This is why truth upsets so many people, especially if the Dream has elevated certain ideas or groups to holy status. So, honest talk about Jewish Power or black crime or homo degeneracy upsets people who’ve come under the spell of the Schlomo-Afro-Homo dream of Tri-Supremacist Holiness. Granted, what is acceptable depends on the nature of the Dominant Dream. At one time, even most Liberals believed that homosexuality was a mental sickness, even a disease. In either case, pro-homo or anti-homo, it wasn’t merely cold knowledge about homos but mythic vision of them as either darkly corrupting pathological villains(as they were portrayed in so many movies even up to the 1980s) or pure-as-snow angels of ‘rainbow’ wonderment.

    We are living in the Jewish Dream. Even those cast as villains and deplorables in this Dream are part of the dream because they explain themselves in accordance to the dream logic. For instance, most ‘conservatives’ will say “I’m not racist” or “I’m not homophobic”. They are morally defensive than morally autonomous. They accept the rule-book of the Dream that says ‘racism is evil’ and ‘homophobia is wicked’. They don’t ask why it’s called ‘racism’ when Ism simply means belief. If Ism means belief, race + ism should mean belief in the reality of race. Of course, race is real because evolution is real, and different groups evolved separately. But even if we accept ‘racism’ to mean ‘racial supremacism’, it should be obvious that Jews are supremacist because they demand that the West favor Jews uber alles and Israel over Palestinians(and Muslims and Arabs in general). For the sake of moral consistency, it is wrong for Jews to say that privileging whiteness is evil BUT favoring Jews is wonderful. Such illogic can be ‘logical’ only in a dream, a Jewish Dream, one in which Jews blame whites of ‘racism’ but practice ‘racism’ to the hilt for their own power and privilege. And yet, white conservatives who are demeaned as ‘racists’ by Jews go out of their way to prove they are NOT ‘racist’ by sucking up to Jews and praising Israel that is so blatantly ‘racist’ to Palestinians. It’s like Jews say Donald Trump is Hitler but Trump goes out of his way to prove he’s not ‘racist’ by totally supporting Zionist ‘racism’ against Palestinians and imperialism against Iran/Syria. So, even white conservatism operates within the hegemony of the Jewish Dream. It has no moral autonomy. It is essentially an NPC that plays according to Jewish Dream Logic that is illogical by any rules of moral consistency. How is it that Jews can denounce whites as Nazi but then go off to ally with quasi-nazi types in Ukraine? How is it that Jews can condemn supremacism but demand governments to shut down BDS, a movement that calls for equal justice for Palestinians?
    Or take ‘homophobia’. Any conservative who says “I’m not a homophobe” is an NPC in a Jewish Dream because, by his denial, he accepts the reality of the concept of ‘homophobia’. But Jews made up that bogus concept to imply that anyone who counters the globo-homo agenda or makes fun of homos is suffering from a psycho-pathology. In fact, ‘homophobia’ doesn’t exist. While some people hate homosexuality or have strong antipathy to homo behavior, it is not a phobia which specifically means extreme fear and panicked response to something harmless. ‘Homophobia’ exists as an article of faith in the Jewish Dream. In reality, homos do exist as some people are born homo, and this reality must be accepted, and social policy should be based on this fact. But it’s also true that homo-fecal-penetration has no biological or moral worth, and it makes no sense to celebrate sodomy with ‘rainbow’ colors. And now, we are told there’s ‘transphobia’ because enough people still say Bruce Jenner is a man and not a ‘woman’ or because they object to penis-and-balls-cutting as medical practice. What kind of sane medicine mutilates and removed perfectly healthy organs because some nut demands it? Also, if truth is a matter of subjectivity — “I’m a woman because I feel that I’m a woman even though I got penis and balls” — , what happens when such ‘logic’ is applied to race and other attributes? Is a dumb person a ‘genius’ because he says so? But maybe we are there already because so many mental midgets are now promoted as public intellectuals, especially if they’re black or tranny. All such craziness are allowed because we live in The Dream is Jewish. As Jews control the media, academia, deep state, and the megaphone, they get to spin The Dream. What they show on TV, teach in classes, print in papers, and allow on platforms come to determine the narrative, the myth, idols & icons, and the Current Year map of Good vs Evil. No wonder then that, even though Jews turned the Holy Land into Sodom and Gomorrah and dump on white Christians all the time, most Evangelicals are always shouting “Muh Israel”.

    The world is like The Dream because most people lack the power to dream. So, they rely on the dream of others. Much of the film MULHOLLAND DR. takes place in the dream of a woman, but her dream unfolds according to the dream logic of Hollywood fantasy. So, even her own dream is part of a bigger dream, the myth of stardom and cult of celebrity. In TWIN PEAKS THE RETURN, David Lynch’s character meets Monica Belluci in a dream who says, “We are like the dreamer who dreams and then lives inside the dream. But who’s the dreamer?”

    Who is the dreamer of The Dream we are all part of? Jewish Power is the Dreamer. All of us dream little dreams when we sleep but our waking life is part of The Dream of Jewish Power. In whose game are we effectively NPC’s without true autonomy of thought, freedom, and liberty? But then, is liberty an effective counter against The Dream? Libertarians tell us so, but what if most people are incapable of being free and independent? In that case, The Dream can be countered only by another Dream. It means history can never be about dream vs reality but dream vs dream. Reality is too harsh and dreary for most people. No wonder then that even fat ugly women still go to hair-dressers and cling to the fantasy that they are attractive. Indeed, things have gotten worse. It used to be narcissism used to be for the beautiful. Now, it’s almost like a human right for everyone, and so, there’s the body-positive movement where fatsos not only tell themselves they’re hot stuff but are promoted as such by the Jewish Dream Media. Well, if a man can be a ‘woman’, who says a fat ugly woman can’t be a beauty? This anti-essentialist subjectivism all points to how dream-ism has infected so much of society. Such lunacy is intrinsic to The Dream pushed by Jewish Power. REQUIEM TO A DREAM. You may be nothing and have nothing, but YOU ARE SPECIAL because you’re part of The Dream.

    ‘Reality’ and ‘logic’ in The Dream is as Jewish Power programs it. So, even though blacks are the main thugs and killers, we must chant BLM and cry for precious black lives being ‘genocided’ by white police. It’s utterly absurd as a claim in the real world, but the countless people who’ve been sucked into The Dream just go along. The Dream is so powerful and pervasive that all of us are, in one way or another, part of The Dream, if only because we must always remind ourselves and others that it isn’t real. Thus, no one is really fully awake. Either you go along with The Dream or you’re a lucid dreamer who knows you’re in The Dream but can’t really break out of it. As we are all social creatures, we can’t help but be part of the prevailing order. So, if much of society is still in The Dream, we are also partly in it because we are part of society. It’s like even anti-Hitlerians under National Socialism couldn’t fully escape The Dream. It became too much of the life and culture.

    The dream is sort of like a game, especially a con-game. Cons work because the con-man slips something with a distraction. Thus, the conned fail to see the reality of what is happening as he or she is fixated on what is shown. It’s why the woman falls for the con in HOUSE OF GAMES. That the woman is ‘too smart to be conned’ is actually part of the con devised against her.

    Dreams work in a similar way. We believe in the unbelievable in the dream — dead people alive in front of us and etc. — because the dream turns off the mechanism of verification and detection. The dream keeps streaming new ‘information’ before the mind that is too distracted to process anything for verification. While what happens in a dream isn’t logical, there is a logic behind the process of the dream that keeps the dreamer hoodwinked. And even when a person becomes a lucid dreamer, he is in the dream.

    What is true of a single mind is true of an entire society, especially when everyone is connected electronically. Electronic media are like collective neurons of society as a hive-mind. But who’s the dreamer or game-creater? Who is the ‘user’ and who are the ‘programs’?

    People’s minds are colonized by the electronic-neurons beamed by media, the Dream becomes their dream, and they become part of The Dream Empire or Dreampire as envisioned and programmed by Jews. So, even though Sigmund Freud failed as a scientist(as current psychology believes he was wrong about most things), his obsession with the power of dreams could have served as the blueprint of takeover of power. Marx was utopian but concentrated on the materialist reality. But all the talk of labor, production, and etc. got pretty dreary and boring to most people. Capitalism beat communism not only in the material sphere(of producing more) but in creating the Empire of Dreams, which Chris Hedges calls the Empire of Illusion. No wonder Jews were so eager to acquire Disney and then STAR WARS. Walt Disney and George Lucas had the power to create dreams.
    Dream as metaphor for power is explored in EXISTENZ by David Cronenberg where goyim move inside a maze created by a Jew. Even as they identify the Dream-Maker and kill him, they’re not sure if they’re in reality or still in the Dream. Even the Anti-Dream could be part of the Dream. And such is true in our world. Even those opposed to Jewish Supremacism are marked by the ‘logic’ of The Dream. If you oppose Jews, you must be ‘nazis’, ‘white supremacists’, ‘anti-semites’, or etc. Of course, there are neo-nazi types who can’t oppose Jewish Power without resorting to ‘Muh Fuhrer’, but this is because they lack the autonomous power to dream. Therefore, they must borrow the dream of Hitler to combat the Jewish Dream.

    How do a people replace one Dream with another? A New Dream in which most people become figures in another people’s Dream. They become NPC’s in another people’s game. US politicians, ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal’, are little more than NPC’s in the Jewish Dream. One way to replace one Dream with another is by invasion. US defeated Japan, erased the myth of the sacred Emperor, and installed the new Dream of Japan as a peace-loving democracy(that must take orders from the New Empire that invade and destroy other nations). Incidentally, blaming Japanese Militarism for Japan’s woes is disingenuous. After all, Japan embarked on its imperialist ventures BEFORE the military takeover and with the support & even encouragement by Western Imperialist powers. Furthermore, the leading imperialist powers in the world were all ‘democratic’: UK, France, and US. Also, most militarist governments were generally less imperialist, and more often than not, a nation turned to militarism as last recourse against foreign domination or total chaos. Franco and Pinochet were military leaders, but they didn’t invade anyone, and they came to power to defend the order from International Communism, a form of ideological imperialism. But as the US-dominant Narrative governs the world, Japanese are to believe that they were saved from bad old militarism with defeat and democracy. Such is the power of the Dream.

    The Dream can be replaced by outright invasion. Still, invaders without a strong Dream may fall under the Dream of the vanquished. Mongols invaded China but fell under the spell of the Middle Kingdom Dream. The Romans, for all their military glory, were weak in the power of Dreams. So, they fell under the Dream of the Greeks and worshiped a fusion of Roman and Greek gods. Their art imitated Greek imagination. And later, Romans and the Greeks fell under the Dream of Christianity even though Christians had no means to conquer them militarily. They became figures in the Dream of Jesus and Paul, Jews rejected by the Jews. Later, the Germanic barbarians invaded Rome, much like Mongols would invade China later, but as the barbarians were weak in the power of Dream, they too fell under the sway of Christo-Roman Template.

    The Power of Dreams come in two forms. One where the Dream takes on a power all its own independent of its originator and the Other where the Dream is used by a people to control others. For example, all of the West fell under the power of the Greek Dream. Especially the Renaissance, Enlightenment, and 19th century archaeology prized Greek culture as the shining ideal. Still, it was the Greek Dream without Greek power as the Greeks had long declined and fallen. And Greeks were okay with this: The Greek Way conquering the human imagination around the world WITHOUT Greeks having power over the world.
    In contrast, Jews felt differently. Via Christianity, there was the power of the Jewish Dream without Jewish Power. Christians read the Sacred Texts of Jews, and Jewish spirituality and historiography had great impact on the West. But even as Europeans fell under the sway of the Jewish Dream(as Jesus, Disciples, and Paul were Jews steeped in Jewish tradition), they were independent of Jewish Power and even hostile to Jewish People. And Jews took umbrage at this. Perhaps, the relation between Jews and Christians had been better IF Christianity didn’t insist that the Jews rejected the Messiah and murdered Him. But, there was bound to be hostility between Judaism and Christianity because Jews couldn’t help but feel that Jesus and Paul laid the groundwork of smuggling the Jewish God to other peoples, the dirty gentiles. It was a violation of the Covenant, and therefore, Jews could only feel hatred for Jesus and the heretical Jews. As Jews were anti-Christian, Christianity could only develop as an anti-Jewish religion.

    Anyway, if Greeks were resigned to the prestige of the Greek Dream being independent of Greek power(that was non-existent at any rate), Jews couldn’t tolerate Jewishness as an abstraction for other peoples without the input of the Jews themselves. Greek attitude was, “The Greek Way without the Greek Sway is okay”, but Jews felt that all who adopted the Jewish Way must come under Jewish Sway. As both Christianity and Islam have origins in Judaism, Jews must control the West and Near East. So, Muslim nations must be battered with Neocon militarism to teach them a lesson of who’s the real Chosen of God. Because Islam is a proud militant religion, Jews know it’s difficult to take over the Muslim Soul. But because Christianity is a religion of humility, guilt, and sin, Jews knew they could worm into the Christian Soul and re-code it for self-destruction. Alter the Christian Guilt Code toward feeling most ashamed of the Holocaust and Antisemitism(and ‘racism’ and ‘homophobia’). As most Christians are craven, shallow, or stupid, their Sin Complex could be manipulated in algorithm. Do it like the guys in INCEPTION by Christopher Nolan. Enter the White Christian Dreamscape, locate and unlock the soul-safe Houdini-style, and alter the main object of worship from God and Jesus to Jew, Negro, and Homo. Replace Virgin Mary with Anne Frank. Replace God with bellowing Negro. Replace angels with homo fairies. Thus, Christianity became cucked and worthless, a mere NPC program in a Jewish Dream of Dominion.

    Jewish Power seeks to Greek-ize the West. Just like the Greek Way became divorced from Greek Power(whereby even non-Greeks took Greek ideas and idols with no regard for actual Greeks), the Western Way must be divorced from Western Folks. We are told that Western Civilization is an Idea. It’s not a people and their land. It’s an idea or ideal that can be adopted by anyone. So, the power of the West should be an abstraction. Even if whites lose their lands and become minorities in their own nations due to mass immigration-invasion, there is no need to worry as Western Civilization will remain powerful as a Dream for all of humanity. White people having power isn’t what the West is about. All that matters is the Western Idea. As long as the Idea lives on as the Dream for others, the West is still #1. And what is this Western Idea: A Universal commitment to liberty, individuality, rule of law, and property rights(and sucking up Jews, blacks, and homos). So, even if white people were to vanish from the world, the West would be alive and well as long as people are into ‘muh liberty’ and property rights.

    But of course, Jews would never want this for themselves. If someone told Jews, “Hey, don’t worry if Arabs or Muslims take over Israel and if you Jews vanish off the face of the Earth because the Jewish Idea will always be with us in the form of the Bible and the achievements of Jews such as Einstein and Spielberg.” And even the Koran could be said to be partly Judaic since Muhammad was influenced by Jewish Texts. Now, would Jews be okay with a world of the Jewish Dream without Jewish Power? Of course not. Jews want to use The Dream as their hegemonic power over others. The Dream must never be independent of Jewish Power.
    Jews weren’t content with Gentiles adopting and worshiping the Jewish God. They wanted to gain control over anyone who adopted the universalized form of the Jewish God. Indeed, Jews even wanted to take God back from those people. What is Globo-Homo Queertianity but a bait-and-switch Jews are pulling on the Christians? By making Christians worship the inanity of Sodomic Globo-Homo, Jews effectively turn Christianity into a junk-religion devoid of God. Of course, Jewish Rabbis pretend to go along with globo-homo, but it’s just a ruse for the rubes. After all, the Talmud teaches the Jews to use all forms of deception to hoodwink and destroy the goyim. For Jews, a jealous people(like their God is jealous), Jewish Power must always command the Jewish Way. If Greek are flattered that non-Greeks took the Greek Way and came to greatness(and even surpassed the Greeks), Jews are not happy about non-Jews having taken the Jewish Way and come to greatness. Deep down inside, Jews hate Christianity and Islam even as they take pride in the fact that all those hapless shallow goyim fell under the power of the Jewish Dream. For Jews, the respect for the Jewish Way must be accompanied by the supremacy of Jewish Power. Jewish Way must not become independent of Jewish Power. Muslims must be hammered into submission by the Chosen People of Zion. Christians must be manipulated into changing their religion to suit the outlook and sensibilities of Jews. So, how dare the Russians not fly ‘gay’ flags in Orthodox Churches to appease the Jews… like the Catholics are finally on the verge of doing, what with the poop-pope Francis blessing ‘gay marriages’.

    White people have two paths: the Greek path or the Jewish path. Greek path says your civilization will live on as a great idea but minus the power of the people who created it. Jewish path says your civilization will live on as a great idea that is inseparable from the survive, security, and power of the people. Jews believe that even though non-Jews can learn and take from Jewishness, the Jewish Way really belongs to the Jews who are its real owners. But Jews tell white people that the Western Way cannot in any way be claimed by white Europeans. It is to be a dream independent of the dreamer… so that it will succumb to The Dream Empire of the Jews.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  129. CCZ says:
    @Skeptikal

    “…more reminiscent of the atmospherics of a colonel leading a junta….”

    This certainly adds to that atmosphere:

    U.S. Rep. Bill Pascrell, Jr. (D-NJ-09) today called for the widespread investigation and prosecution of members of the outgoing Trump administration.

    “Pascrell Demands Investigation, Prosecution of Trump Government Crimes”

    “Donald Trump and members of his administration have committed innumerable crimes against the United States,” said Rep. Pascrell. “He has endangered our national security. He ripped families apart. He poisoned the Census. He has personally profited from his office. He has attacked our elections and sought to throttle democracy. He has engaged in treachery, in treason. He has all but given up on governing and protecting our nation and if he had a shred of dignity he would resign today.”

    “Therefore, in 2021 the entire Trump administration must be fully investigated by the Department of Justice and any other relevant offices. Donald Trump along with his worst enablers must be tried for their crimes against our nation and Constitution.”

    https://pascrell.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=4527

  130. Skeptikal says:
    @karel

    There is a good account of the upsurge of Jewish cultural and political influence in Weimar Germany in Amos Elon, The Pity of It All, pp. 358-68.

    Add to that the prominence of Jews in larger and smaller businesses in fashion, graphic arts, theater, film, photography–many sectors, also Jews were in the forefront of the development of big modern department stores and were also prominent in all retail (smaller boutiques, fur business, clocks/watches and jewelry, art galleries, couture, other specialist businesses). Seems like the Nazis were against the expansion of this type of consumer culture, esp. department stores.
    Quite a lot of interesting info here (hits I got for “Berlin 1920 department stores”):
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_Tietz
    **http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/eng/217_Consumerism_Berlin%20Dept%20Stores_30.pdf
    https://www.yadvashem.org/articles/academic/the-attack-on-berlin-department-stores.html

    **”Leo Colze’s writing on department stores in Berlin captures the transformation of Germany at the turn of the century. Stylized as “uncrowned emperors” of Berlin, Colze sees stores such as Wertheim, Tietz, Jandorf, and Kaufhaus des Westens as the culmination of industrial development and transnational trade. Department stores and the rise of consumerism fundamentally altered the city landscape and the mode of interaction in urban areas. Colze enumerates the advantages and disadvantages of these stores, both for the individual and the city as whole.”

    Enormous transformations of German society were taking place, overlaid on the trauma of the defeat in WW1 and the collapse of the Reich. German Jews were very obviously shaping the new postwar Berlin. It is understandable that many Germans were resentful, esp. since hundreds of thousands of Germans were recent “refugees” from the countryside to the cities, esp. Berlin. Basically German peasants. Where they see, among other things, these fabulous emporiums where they probably cannot afford to buy anything . . . Owned by Jews . . .

    • Replies: @karel
  131. Skeptikal says:
    @animalogic

    Not to forget that the NSDAP stands for National Socialist German WORKERS Party.
    Hitler did have a comprehensive program for German citizens. Much of that program came to fruition through various subprograms for all social groups in German society.

    The Nazis did do a lot for workers and citizens. Not that different, it seems to me, from the CCP program in China to eliminate poverty. The Third Reich pulled hundreds of thousands out of abject poverty and ensured to all a basic supply of food, clothing, health care, basic information on hygiene, on how run a home and take care of infants, etc., cultural and recreational opportunities unheard of for workers elsewhere and certainly not in Germany. Maybe in the USSR. There was a voucher/point system, and everyone was subject to the same rules as far as what and how much they could purchase. Milk was provided for all children. Many women had leading positions in the bureaucracies that designed and administered these programs. This surely created a strong sense of solidarity. Recall that large portions of the German population were deracinated peasants and unemployed industrial workers, and the country had been sucker-punched by the postwar reparations, inflation, then came the depression.

    But these real advances for the citizenry came at the cost of the imposition of a totalitarian system via Gleichschaltung. Hovering in the background the conviction that building this healthy society meant eliminating Lebensunwuerdiges Leben.

    Good brief discussion of origins of Italian and German fascism here:
    https://aeon.co/ideas/fascism-was-a-right-wing-anti-capitalist-movement:

    “Hitler’s National Socialist German Workers’ Party (NSDAP) promised to serve the entire German people, but the German fascist vision of ‘the people’ did not include Jews and other ‘undesirables’. They promised to create a ‘people’s community’ (Volksgemeinschaft) that would overcome the country’s divisions. The fascists also pledged to fight the Depression and contrasted its activism on behalf of the people’s welfare with the meekness and austerity of the government and the socialists. By the 1932 elections, these appeals to protect the German people helped the Nazis become the largest political party, and the one with the broadest socioeconomic base.

    When, in January 1933, Hitler became chancellor, the Nazis quickly began work-creation and infrastructure programmes. They exhorted business to take on workers, and doled out credit. Germany’s economy rebounded and unemployment figures improved dramatically: German unemployment fell from almost 6 million in early 1933 to 2.4 million by the end of 1934; by 1938, Germany essentially enjoyed full employment. By the end of the 1930s, the government was controlling decisions about economic production, investment, wages and prices. Public spending was growing spectacularly.
    Nazi Germany remained capitalist. But it had also undertaken state intervention in the economy unprecedented in capitalist societies. The Nazis also supported an extensive welfare state (of course, for ‘ethnically pure’ Germans). It included ***free higher education, family and child support, pensions, health insurance and an array of publically supported entertainment and vacation options. *** All spheres of life, economy included, had to be subordinated to the ‘national interest’ (Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz), and the fascist commitment to foster social equality and mobility. Radical meritocratic reforms are not usually thought of as signature Nazi measures, but, as Hitler once noted, the Third Reich has ‘opened the way for every qualified individual – whatever his origins – to reach the top if he is qualified, dynamic, industrious and resolute’.

    Largely for these reasons, up till 1939, most Germans’ experience with the Nazi regime was probably positive. ”

    I tis not that easy to define what is “progressive” and what is “conservative” or right-wing.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  132. Anonymous[243] • Disclaimer says:

    This is the genuine unity of Freud and Marx. Not just an inversion of morality, pace Michael Polanyi; but a true inversion of Woke/Sleeping reality.

    In the University dream, the Left is a poor, fringe minority.
    In Reality, they create a (Postmodern) Ruling Class language of power.

    But Trump is also sleep-walking. In his dreams, he fulfilled his campaign promises.
    In reality, he continued the status quo.

    The Universities dream the Great Blue Dream.
    The Deplorables dream the Great Red Dream.

  133. @Wielgus

    De Jonge notes that the left, especially the KPD and its forerunner the Spartacists, were bogeymen but never actually formidable enough to deserve the title.

    Never a bogeymen?????? The KPD leader was in touch with Stalin and wanted to hand the country to him.

    This was AFTER it was clear that Stalin was a psycho and Marxism wasn’t improving the lives of Russians.

    But the traitorous KPD and other European Communists still wanted to hand their countries over to Stalin.

  134. @Priss Factor

    Also, Karl Marx had argued that people should wake up to the truth of history. He called religion the opiate of the masses.

    Yes he said that and then sold Western intellectuals a load of BS that was falsifiable from the beginning.

    So he depicts religion as a hoax and then dupes the so called enlightened class into thinking they needed to kill the bosses and establish a dictatorship for the sake of the workers. Practically none of his economic ideas worked and in fact the most successful Communist state (GDR) had a basic level of capitalism where the state provides capital and businesses are taxed at 100%.

    Millions are dead from his failed ideas so I don’t see how that is “waking up” from the traditional state. If the Russians remained under the Tsar they would be far more advanced today.

    Some on the Left were so sure of their truth(supposedly based on science and reason) that they became intolerant and even murderous to those who disagreed.

    They were murderous from the beginning. The French revolution was drenched in blood. They were killing nobles and were certain there was nothing special about them which is false. The left to this very day cannot process the reality that there is a natural hierarchy of men. The left is mostly an alliance of bitter children in adult bodies.

    If Leftist Ideology is based on ‘what ought to be’ than ‘what is’, could one argue that capitalism is leftist?

    No that is idealism and predates leftism.

    Leftist ideology is about “what ought to be” about regarding social structures and equality.

    The rest of your post is too long. The left doesn’t deserve pages upon pages of analysis when they can’t accept basic facts regarding human biology and economics. They are the Church of Equality and not reason based or a force for rationality. They have no choice in fact but to be anti-rational and shut down the open discussion of facts. They would shut down this website if they could and send off us to re-education camps. The left hates reality and only pretends to be interested in studying it when they lack power. This website doesn’t get 1% of interest traffic and it terrifies them. They would replace the internet with a People’s Truth and Equality Network if they had the power to do so.

    • Replies: @Gapeseed
  135. @Skeptikal

    Largely for these reasons, up till 1939, most Germans’ experience with the Nazi regime was probably positive.

    It was positive up until the invasion of Russia.

    The invasion of France could hardly be called a just war but the Germans didn’t care because they were not only victors but had stunned the world with the speed of their victory.

    What is interesting is that the French resistance is mostly a Hollywood creation.

    In fact the German troops had no shortage of French women willing to celebrate their victory.

    The French resistance really wasn’t a factor until the Allies were on their way from Normandy. There is a book about how it is a dirty national secret. The French just didn’t seem to care and went on with their daily lives.

  136. Vojkan says:
    @ghali

    Žižek is an epitome of bullshitting. If the article had been written by anyone else than Atzmon, I would have stopped reading right after the initial frame. I wouldn’t call Slavoj a proto-fascist. He is a typical product of the ex-Yugoslav system of socalist “self-management”. The former Yugoslavia produced profiles like his like Germany produces Volkswagens. The guy started his career by writing speeches for top Slovenian communists in the 1970s. Theoretically speaking, he is as marxist as one can be. Practically, he realises that marxist bullshit is a far better sell in a capitalist system than in a socialist one.
    For all intents and purposes, Žižek illustrates quite well Atzmon’s thesis of dream vs real world as there’s a world of which Slavoj dreams and there’s the world in which Žižek makes a (good) living.

    • Agree: Skeptikal
    • Replies: @Skeptikal
  137. @Australian lady

    Tx so much Australian Lady… 🙂

  138. Vojkan says:
    @Clay Alexander

    I wonder too and it actually discouraged me from a leaving a comment to the article which I found quite interesting in its own merit. However, I very much doubt I’ll ever talk “enviously about Germany’s ‘good old days’”.

  139. @Colin Wright

    “Somewhere in the middle is clearly preferable.”
    Some may suggest that this is what Socialist Nationalism is all about (the order of the words is intended as I refer to an ideology as opposed to a specific political party)…

  140. @SolontoCroesus

    To start with,,, here is my public exchange with E Michael Jones

    Of course Athens vs Jerusalem is associated with Logos anti Logos…or even thinking vs obedience…
    Tx so much for your insightful comment ….

  141. @ghali

    If you have an issue with proto fascists try not to be one,, in other words, learn to produce an argument,,,I am not an admirer of Zizek,,, but I do like his take here. Do you have something that resembles criticism to offer?

  142. @Chris in Cackalacky

    I agree,,, I tried to point at the inherent bond between left and money …

    • Replies: @Chris in Cackalacky
  143. karel says:
    @Skeptikal

    So it was. You forgot the Kempinski group whose owner Richard Unger must have been a German patriot or pretended to be by leasing the house called Vaterland on Potsdammer Platz. cf.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haus_Vaterland
    American anti-semites bombed the Vaterland three times and its ruins were finally removed in 1953
    Unger also owned numerous luxury hotels like Adlon or Bristol in Berlin and god knows what else.
    https://www.kempinski.com/en/hotels/about-us/history/

  144. karel says:
    @Skeptikal

    Wrong, it was a paradox.

    This is not at all paradoxical. The state of Czechoslovakia was a recent creation; before that the relevant political entity was the Austro-Hungarian empire, and Bohemia was definitely in the “German” portion of this empire.

    First, if Czechoslovakia was a recent creation, actually 28th October 1918, then Austria was an even more recent creation as it happened on 12th November 1918. As you see Czechs are usually somewhat faster.
    Second, you can also argue that Niederösterreich was a Czech portion of the empire.
    Third, you claim that

    In this Franz Kafka was typical. German-speaking Jews looked down on the ethnic Czechs. They also were quite terrified of Czech nationalism.

    This is an utter nonsense. Kafka spent years together with Milena Jesenská and although we know little about the intimacy of their relationship, she was clearly the dominant figure. Her social standing was also a notch higher than Kafka’s, as her father was a famous professor at the University, unlike the common shopkeeper Hermann Kafka. Kafka was also a timid man with many complexes, especially about his body. There are a few anecdotal accounts about Franz meeting a Czech boyfriend of one of his three younger sisters (cannot recall which one). That man was an athlete showing off his muscles and performing some exercises in Kafka’s presence. Apparently, this show off found Kafka unbearable.
    Forth, many German Jews and Goyim emigrated to Czechoslovakia in the thirties. The most notable examples are Thomas and Heinrich Mann both of whom became Czechoslovak citizens; Thomas in 1936 and Heinrich in 1935.
    Fifth, I had to laugh while reading that

    Many of the leading intellectual lights in fin-de-siecle Vienna and before (many of them Jews) came from Bohemia or Moravia, including Sigmund Freud.

    To call one of the greatest charlatans of 2oth century a ”leading intellectual light” is a good attempt at sarcasm, I presume. Freud was a true German Nazi, hating Czechs. Perhaps it was the Viennese ambient and his transcendental friendship with Hitler, which confused this deranged individual.

    I fail to understand why you write here at length about things you know very little about.

    • Replies: @Skeptikal
  145. @Gilad Atzmon

    Yes you did. I went back and read that but believe it deserves more primacy for a clearer picture.

  146. noname27 says: • Website
    @Colin Wright

    In 1700 there wasn’t the scourge of Communism. Strong Christian Nationalism is the ONLY bulwark against the demonic curse of Communism.

    “Democracy is indispensable to Socialism.” – V. I. Lenin

    “Socialism leads to Communism.” – Karl Marx

  147. Skeptikal says:
    @Vojkan

    Zizek is a bullsh—–r.

    Who thinks he understands all cultures, including American.

    I used to like him when I first encountered his writings in the LRB—and not *everything* he says is BS .

    . . But I did start noticing instances of BS and decided to ignore him.

    • Replies: @Vojkan
  148. CCR says:

    This was a fine article — deeper than most on Unz.

    But the comment section was very disappointing. Obviously most of the readers wanted to talk about Jews and Nazis and Germany of the ’20s and ’30s and thought this was the place to do it. (It isn’t.)

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  149. Skeptikal says:
    @karel

    You have a very proprietary attitude toward who may post here. It is laughably pompous.
    You are probably Czech and think you are the letzte Instanz when it comes to all thing Czech or Bohemian.

    I didn’t mention Niederoesterreich.

    I do not claim to be an expert but I have read widely and I do read German.

    I may well be guilty of oversimplifying and I named Kafka is an example of a German-speaking Jew because his name is well known to English speakers. it is true that his beloved was Czech: His friends saw that the relationship was destructive for the very neurotic Kafka and warned him against her. But these are just personal details and are not that relevant.

    Your view of Freud as a charlatan, too, is irrelevant. Like it or not he was extremely influential. Again, that was an example of a figure well known to English speakers.

    My advice to you—and other interested readers—is to educate yourself on the actual cultural history of Austro-Hungary by reading William M. Johnston, The Austrian Mind: An Intellectual and Social History, 1848 to 1938. It is widely acknowledged to be the best source in English for gaining a grasp of the social and political strains, stresses, and shifting alignments in the Austro-Hungarian Empire. For example, just one of the encomiums heaped on this work: “[Johnston’s] erudition is vast, his command o the literature immense . . .as a contribution to scholarship it stands alone in its field.”

    There was nothing paradoxical about many Jewish-German Czechs signing on to German nationalism. Like many Jews they had a strong strain of racism. The Jewish community in Bohemia and Moravia was not monolithic. But I am wasting my breath with you.

    So, Pan Karel, go eff yourself with your obnoxious self-importance. Do not presume to impose your private point system for posting at UR. Just looked at a couple of YOUR previous posts. They reinforce my assessment that not only do you consider yourself the reigning Czech expert at the UR with a right to insult anyone who ventures into your territory (marked with old piss for manners, like quite a few Czechs, many of whom are charming but only to those they know personally; otherwise terrible manners, in my experience in the country), but in your general attitude and tone you are a horse’s ass. An HA with a huge chip on your shoulder. BTW I think your own understanding of the relationship between Volksdeutscher, Staatsangehoeriger, and Reichsangehoeriger may be faulty.

    Done with you.

    • Replies: @karel
  150. @CCR

    But the comment section was very disappointing. Obviously most of the readers wanted to talk about Jews and Nazis and Germany of the ’20s and ’30s and thought this was the place to do it. (It isn’t.)

    It might not seem relevant but German thinkers in the 1920s were posed with the same problems we see today. Meaning these problems were never solved.

    We have the same problem of a traitorous left luring in voters with offers of utopian dreams and the right is unable to stop them.

    From the article:
    But if the Left focuses on ‘what could be,’ the Right focuses on ‘what is.

    This gets to the core of the problem.

    The US/Euro right is in denial that focusing on ‘what is’ leads to election losses.

    The US/Euro conservatives believe that if we just point out the flaws of the left an alliance of voters (Evangelicals, gun owners, business owners, etc) will sneak them across a finish line. That strategy barely worked in the US when Whites were a strong majority. We saw in California that this strategy fails once the left has enough non-Whites to align with urban White liberals in an alliance against rural Whites.

    But the real problem is that the right is also too obstinate in its belief that ‘what is’ is the best possible outcome or should at least be accepted. There have been too many cases where government intervention did in fact improve the outcome. The mainstream right is too disconnected from the problems that workers face. The same is true for the left but they at least offer a form of hope even if it is based in fantasy.

    The NSDAP solved this problem and routed both the destructive globalist left and the obstinate right. Hitler obviously took things too far but there is a lesson here in strategy.

  151. Gapeseed says:
    @A Competent Physicist

    Student loan debt has created a zombie class with nothing to lose, shambling forth in self-imposed shackles and a rage against society. A debt jubilee would create a lot of bitter people (like myself, who lived impoverished paying off two questionable graduate degrees in full), but it might be the only thing that changes their calculus and gives them a stake in the current system. That would not be making them pay their own way (and would constitute a de facto transfer of money to the Left), but the alternative is a simmering revolutionary class, and a large one (Millennials) to boot.

  152. Gapeseed says:
    @John Johnson

    American conservatives are Christian or are strongly influenced by Christ, who demanded that we love our enemies. At worst, that means live and let live, by and large. The Left replaces G-d with the state and other large organizations of power and stature, none of which have such strictures.

  153. karel says:
    @Skeptikal

    good news. I hope that you will not pester me in the future with your nonsense.

  154. @karel

    It is a matter of perception of what is left and what is right.

    Indeed. As I stated, compared to the standard UK and US political definitions, Hitler would have been far left. The US, for example, has abysmally low employment standards, because raising them would be akin to communism. Even the so-called leftist Tony Blair reduced employment standards in the UK and sold off assets Thatcher never would have dreamed touching.

    the NSDAP ideology has never questioned the structure of the existing capitalist system.

    Absolute nonsense. Finance capital and usury are at the heart of the existing capitalist system. The international banking system is at the heart of the existing capitalist system. They challenged both of these structures. First through his Labour Certificates then through trading commodity for commodity, by-passing the Bank of International Settlements. WWII was a war for finance capital. Marx and his followers were rejected by his contemporary critics, pointing out that his views were akin to those of a Rothschild bank. Marx only changed ownership, not the structure.
    The other part of the existing capitalist system that is “off limits” is that the existing capitalist system relies (and always has relied) on an endless supply of cheap labour, which means unnecessary high immigration. It is needed to reduce the expectations of the workers through unemployment.
    It is said the left/right paradigm arose in France with those seeking change moving to the left of the chamber, while those wanting things to stay the same moved to the right. It is not delusional to note much of the NSDAP platform and what they actually achieved – like full employment, better working conditions, and better housing for workers was to the “left” of existing capitalist orthodoxy, which as a race to the bottom, remains so today. How far “left”, is a different matter.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  155. @Curmudgeon

    Indeed. As I stated, compared to the standard UK and US political definitions, Hitler would have been far left.

    But that is only true for economics. The US/UK left is very hostile to any form of nationalism.

    The NSDAP doesn’t really fit well on the modern left/right axis.

    The main problem is that the modern left is more concerned with making White people a minority than actually helping workers. They are more bothered by racial inequality than economic suffering, even if the latter is extreme.

    Marxism failed and the left decided that White people and what is left of Western culture are the main problem. The economic left in the US is all but dead. They get shouted down by modern leftists that are more concerned with important things like gay marriage and making sure 6 year olds get hormones if they identify as trans.

    Finance capital and usury are at the heart of the existing capitalist system.

    The modern leftist doesn’t even know what the word usury means. Biden has actually spent his life defending credit card companies and voted against making it easier to declare bankruptcy. Payday loans with triple digit interest are legal in most states. Dem states rely heavily on gambling and lottery revenue.

    Finance capital and usury are at the heart of the existing capitalist system. The international banking system is at the heart of the existing capitalist system. They challenged both of these structures.

    That is correct and the international banking system would rather not talk about how it actually worked.

    • Replies: @karel
  156. @Curmudgeon

    ‘The reality is that the NSDAP was a party of the “left”, unless you were a communist. They introduced higher employment standards and enforced them. They forced employers to meet with employees and listen to their concerns. They campaigned on an economic system that meets the needs of the people, not an economic system where the people meet the needs of the economic system. They took on the junkers to give farmers rights to the land they farmed. They nationalized some industries. Most importantly, they took on usury and the banking system in general. The “traditional” 19th century socialists opposed Marx because of his centralized control of everything, and likened it to the centralized control of a Rothschild bank.’

    It’s been pointed out, and I think fairly, that the left/right paradigm fails when it comes to the Nazis.

    The usual Leftist schtick that the Nazis were tools/in cahoots with the capitalists doesn’t survive close inspection. It would be more accurate to say the Nazis used capitalism than capitalism used the Nazis.

    But conversely, the attempt to equate Nazism with socialism doesn’t really fly either. The Nazis’ base wasn’t in the urban working class, nor did they have the least intention of doing away with private property.

    So both sides are wrong. Nazism — ironically, considered how commonly all and sundry are labeled ‘Nazis’ — was sui generis. You can’t usefully slot it into the ‘Left-Right’ spectrum.

  157. Vojkan says:
    @Skeptikal

    According to Harry Frankfurt – if my interpretation is correct -, whether an argument is true or not is immaterial to the bullshitter, as long as it can be used as a mean of persuasion of an audience. Therefore, a good bullshitter will make indiscriminate use of facts and fabrications to achieve a purpose.
    Characters as Žižek were scouted from secondary school already in the former Yugoslavia. The system needed schooled bullshitters to make believe the masses that it worked. And it worked, I mean the bullshitting, not the system. There are plenty of people all over the newly “independent” countries Yugoslavia has spawned who are nostalgic of Tito’s era. You’ll never make them awaken to the fact that their reality today is the logical consequence of them indulging in dreams yesterday.
    Žižek being a clever guy, understands it and adapts his bullshit in accordance, to continue making a comfortable living. If that implies sprinkling his narrative with a few obvious truths, all the better because it makes him appear even more credible.
    To be clear, I have nothing against him personally, it is the overrepresentation of his character typology that irritates me.

  158. Wielgus says:
    @Colin Wright

    That isn’t putting it in present-day terms. The pro-EU militia would have to be in a large number of cases hard to control by the EU, prone to get ideas of their own and even march on Brussels to stage a coup, on the analogy of the Kapp putsch. Although initially called into being to defeat the “Red” menace, a lot of the Freikorps just saw the Weimar Republic as “democratic scum” or even the “Judenrepublik”. That a great many made a seamless transition to the Nazi movement a bit later on goes without saying. In short, the Freikorps were something of a Frankenstein’s monster.

  159. karel says:
    @but an humble craftsman

    Be less humble, you craftsman of nonsense!

  160. karel says:
    @John Johnson

    Ha ha and once more ha.

    Indeed. As I stated, compared to the standard UK and US political definitions, Hitler would have been far left.

    But that is only true for economics. The US/UK left is very hostile to any form of nationalism.

    Far left, yes indeed and very much so. But for how many months? They were so left that the great and only party nationalized all banks, armament industries, all other industies as well, furthermore the regime distributed land to landless peasants, cancelled all debts and did many other nice things.

  161. Gidorno says:

    I was a volunteer in Haiti after the earthquake in 2010. The number of Liberal “volunteers” was somewhere in the low single-digit percentage – and most of them were either trying to wrangle money for the Clinton Foundation or position themselves to take credit for something they didn’t have anything to do with – never really hands-on.

    Liberals “care” about people until they actually have to do something out of their ordinary day – then it’s someone *else’s* job.

  162. anaccount says:
    @karel

    Not really. I think these ideologies (left/right) are largely a _|EWish invention to keep the Goyim separated. The ‘left’, if that is what you want to call it, is totally owned and managed by the world’s financial elite. You can see it from top to bottom and there is nothing more synthetic in this world other than the j3wish claim to ‘Israel’.

    That is what I mean.

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
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Gilad Atzmon Comments via RSS
PastClassics
How America was neoconned into World War IV
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.