The Author of the Critique is worried that he will be considered anti-Semitic, but my main objection is quite an opposite one, namely, The Critique is too Jewish by its outlook.
Our comprehension of the world starts at juxtaposing observations. Four blind men describe an animal they encountered: it is like a column; no, a snake, no, a barrel, no, a tooth. Their impressions would be of little value unless there were a man of vision to integrate them and draw a picture of an elephant.
Various manifestations of Jewish spirit produced a cascade of differing impressions almost defying an integration attempt. Zionist Jews in Palestine created a many-tiered rigid caste society, where natives are excluded, imported guest workers have no rights, army and security apparatus controls everything and a call for equality disqualifies the caller from holding a public office. Globalist financiers of George Soros kind, followers of Karl Poppers Open Society offered and created other systems. There are impressions of activity by Jewish media moguls, Hollywood producers, museum curators, art dealers, human rights activists, New York bankers and Washington neo-conservative ideologists.
The observations are valid and important; now they should be collected and systematised until the ground is ripe for a man of vision who would draw a picture of the elephant. It is not an easy task, for it is an article of faith in our world, thou shalt not draw an elephant. This commandment is enforced by the fierce Jewish opposition to such endeavour.
This forbidden and mammoth task was undertaken by the Anonymous (and possibly collective) author of WHEN VICTIMS RULE: A Critique of Jewish Pre-eminence in America, (further called The Critique), two-thousand-pages-long collection of observations of various Jewish activities. This work in progress is posted on www.jewishtribalreview.com and probably will remain there for quite a while. Its sheer size is just one of the reasons why it is not likely to emerge as a printed book. While describing the challenge that moved him, the Author writes:
In “free societies,” anyone who wants may write, and publish, works that attack Christianity; assail the “historical revisionism” of Afro-centrism; deconstruct the myths of Hinduism; defame the Pope; disdain Republican, Democratic, communist, or any other ideology; emblazon the whole of Islam as a hotbed for irrational mania and terrorism; write entire volumes about the alleged worldwide Japanese economic “conspiracy”; and vilify the entirety of the nebulous entity known as the “white establishment” and anyone dictated by skin colour to be within it. But, curiously, in the vast expanse of deconstructive engines of all and everything, one cannot criticize the sacrosanct domain of Jewish history, politics, and identity, unless the critic is willing to be systematically marginalized in all walks of life, prepared to be tarnished and branded as a contemptible hate-filled “anti-Semite,” risk losing her or her job, and be categorically lumped into mainstream society’s moral and intellectual garbage dump reserved for the likes of the Nazis and Ku Klux Klan.
The biased discourse so aptly described by the Author causes much mental anguish to Americans of Jewish origin, separates them from their Gentile compatriots and even more regrettably contributes to the loss of life in Palestine. That is why a good new deconstruction of Jewish history, politics, identity, religion and tradition is certainly needed, especially as the critical works of 1920s and 1930s became outdated. The Author has followed the trail blazed by Professors Albert Lindemann of the University of California, Kevin MacDonald of California State University, Israel Shahak of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Elliot Horowitz and other researchers.
The Author collected immense amount of data, sometimes trivial, sometimes relevant facts and opinions. The bibliography is colossal, as if the book was produced by a Jewish Studies department of a well-endowed American University. It could be a companion volume to Encyclopaedia Judaica. Severely abridged, it would be readable and still impressive. In the full form, it will be used whenever there is a discussion on the Jewish influence in American politics or media. For instance, recent debate Neumann Blankfort would be easily substantiated by referring to this book.
However, this interesting book is regrettably short of insight. While noting and criticising Jewish pre-eminence, it does not offer an answer to the paramount questions: What does it mean? how it was achieved? Why it is achieved? Without an attempt to answer, the book remains but an important database.
The Author is worried that he will be considered anti-Semitic, but my main objection is quite an opposite one, namely, The Critique is too Jewish by its outlook, and not only because some pages appear as a Jewish vanity publication, listing prominent and successful Jews. It is true, there are lists of Jews in unorthodox business of robbery and murder, but even this thing is not unusual. Isaac Babel happily described Jewish gangsters of Odessa, while the stories of Jewish-American gangsters were published many times and are quite popular with Jewish readers.
Probably the word tribal is the key to its Jewish-ness and to the relative failure. The view of Jews as a tribe is a very Jewish view, promoted nowadays by Adin Steinzaltz, the chief Talmudic authority in Israel. He called the Jews: family. But this view does not furnish us with a good explanation of the Rise of the Jews and of its consequences. If the Jews are a tribe, sort of extended family, what is the secret of their magic attraction and strange successes? There are many families, from Sicilian Mafia to Hong Kong Triads, but can they measure up to the Jewish influence, nay, centrality in the Western world? By adhering to this Jewish clannish view the Author overlooked the ideology behind the Jews. For instance, he quotes:
Raphael Patai, a Jewish scholar, claims that, for all the knottiness surrounding the modern day issue, being Jewish can best be described as nothing more than “a state of mind”
And smugly adds:
This kind of “state,” of course, won’t afford you citizenship in today’s state of Israel, nor acceptance into any Jewish community anywhere.
True? Not really. This state of mind is shared by Conrad Black, a Gentile who became a Jewish media mogul without undergoing circumcision. He is an accepted and valued member of the Jewish community and a potential citizen of Israel. Technically, by virtue of his marriage to his Jewish wife, but much more so by his state of mind. Plenty of Gentile Americans share this state of mind. On the other hand, a factory worker or a peasant born of Jewish parents technically entitled to the place in the community and to the Israeli passport but lacks this state of mind and would be out of place in the Jewish community. In Israel there are many immigrants of Jewish origin who were thoroughly de-Jewified but decided to come to Israel. They do not fit into the Jewish society and form its outcast fringe.
While rejecting insightful remark of Patai, the Author accepts some misleading Jewish declarations for their face value. He writes:
Yet modern Jewry’s deep animosity towards Christianity stems from the accusation that institutional Christianity was seminal to anti-Semitism in the Middle Ages
It is the traditional Jewish point of view, deeply un-historical and anachronistic. In the same vein, the Author could say,
Yet modern Jewry’s deep animosity towards Palestinians stems from the accusation that Palestinians were seminal to anti-Semitism
In both cases, Jewry was on the offensive, not a defensive side. The Jews attacked Christians from the days of the Apostles, just as they attacked Palestinians by depriving them of their livelihood from the very beginning of Zionist immigration. The Author probably noticed his mistake and tried to correct it without harmonising with his preceding statement:
Judaism had, of course, antipathy for Christianity from the latter’s very inception.
So, the reader has a choice of two contradicting statements: the Jewish animosity is a reaction to Christian anti-Semitism, or it is a primary attitude of Jews. The Author goes on, getting deeper into the bog of anachronistic contradictions:
Christianity evolved out of Judaism; it was founded and propagated by Jews dissatisfied with the direction of the seminal faith as guided by its leaders. “Popular hatred of the Temple priests and the rich,” says Lenni Brenner, “became the basis of Christianity, and the New Testament must be seen as the last major production of the Jewish religious genre.”
Again, it is a traditional Jewish point of view, debunked by Professor Israel Joseph Yuval of the Hebrew University. Yuval proved that while Christianity evolved from the Biblical Judaism, the Rabbinic Judaism came to existence AFTER Christianity appeared as a reactionary response to it. Lenni Brenner can be forgiven for his weak grasp of ancient history, but the Author should know that Christianity rose and won the day when there were no Temple priests neither filthy rich anymore, after AD 70.
No study or deconstruction of Jewishness is meaningful, unless one understands that Jewry was born in order to fight Christ and Christianity. It found other uses: to make money and share influence. Likewise, an army can be used for many purposes, to harvest potatoes or extinguish fires, but it is created to fight wars. The Author collected much evidence of Jewish hostility to Christianity, but he failed to comprehend its key role in Jewish attitudes.
He failed for he adopted basically Jewish materialistic export vision of history, world and self. He quotes:
As even Mark Twain noted, “With most people, of a necessity, bread and meat take first rank, religion second. I am convinced that the persecution of the Jews is not due in any large degree to religious prejudice.”
It is an erroneous observation of a myopic Yankee. In the course of history, people gave up their bread and meat, wives and children, died and killed for the sake of their faith. While persecution of the Jews was not due to religious commandment, the relentless Jewish assault on Christendom cant be comprehended without this framework.
The Jews promote the Tribe vision, as it sounds quite harmless and stops potential escapees: why indeed should one escape ones own tribe that one belongs to by virtue of birth? Again, if it is just a tribe, it really makes no difference what sort of positions its members occupy. The Tribe vision allows the Jews to claim for their own the Apostles and Karl Marx, and many wonderful people of Jewish origin. This vision proclaims: once a Jew, always a Jew. However, reality is different: two thousand years ago there were millions of Jews, while by 8th century they disappeared almost completely. Spain succeeded to undo its Jews. If descendents of Jews were Jews, there would be hundreds of millions Jews nowadays.
The non-tribal character of Jews is well illustrated by the fate of the Jews of China. This community was successfully assimilated, and all efforts of Israeli and American Jews to bring them back to Jewish conscience failed, for it makes no sense to be a Jew outside of Christs ecumene.
Indeed, what is a Jew? Everyone has a small part of his personality that stops him from embracing (=being together with, or identical to) Christ. It is excessive care for ones property, anti-collectivism, godlessness and fight against God = Christ, dishonesty, elitism, some sorts of creativity, disregard for others. That is a small Jew inside us. The fiery catharsis of Christs incarnation, mission, passion and resurrection expelled this slag from the body of Church. Presence of slag is to remind us of the catharsis, and to help us to contemplate of God. Provided there is no God but God, rebels against God take the side of the Prince of the World, and he takes their side.
That is why great theologians and mystics from St John to Martin Luther, from Muhammad to Fr Serge Bulgakov contemplated on the Jews. For them, the Jews were a visible proof of Gods attention to Man, a living memory of Incarnation and a negative example of what can go wrong. A Jew who understood it and acted correspondingly ceased to be a Jew. A Gentile who accepted the Jewish mode of behaviour turns into a Jew. The pre-eminence of Jews in America is another form of re-stating words of Marx: America has been Jewified and accepted the Jewish values.
The Author failed to understand this spiritual meaning of Jews and Jewish influence. Not a tribe, but ideology, that is the essence of the problem. Pre-eminence of Jewish ideology and Jewish values in America is the true problem of America and the world. The Author quotes words of a Jewish commentator, Robert Kamenetz:
I began to suspect that Jewish identity, as it has evolved in the West today, could be a real barrier to encountering the depths of Judaism. In other words, being Jewish could keep you from being a Jew.
What on earth is one to make of this observation!
However, Marx proposed an answer: Judaism is sordid form of Christianity, while Christianity is sublime Judaism. Kamenetz (like many good and spiritual Jews) felt that immersion into the depths of Judaism (=Christianity) leads to rejection of Jewish identity. Such people should be supported and assisted to leave the Jewish fold. The leaders of the Jews are aware of the danger and that is why they fight the church and derail its efforts to save the Jews from Judaic tendency. In my opinion, the greatest Jewish achievement in the US was the Boston proclamation by Bishops of the Catholic Church that Jews do not need salvation, effectively reducing Christianity to the level of faith for goyim.
Judaic spirit is a real danger to the tripartite ecumene of West-Russia-Islamic world. But biological approach proposed by the Author does not help. One of modern ideologists of European Traditionalism, Horst Mahler, a great adversary of Jewish supremacy, stressed the spiritual element of the struggle:
Hitler failed for he attended to biological (racist, tribal) aspect of Jews, while it is the spiritual aspect that had to be fought. Only in April 1945 he recognised that the Jews represent certain Spirit that cant be defeated but by spirit. The belief that there is no God, that Man is self-sufficient (Humanism), that the World is realizable without recourse to the concept of the Absolute Spirit (God), is the triumph of Judaism over other peoples. On this basis alone these peoples are delivered to Globalism and ordained to destruction.
Without spiritual background, the tribe-based research of the Author offers no solution but copying of the Jewish strategy. It will certainly be utilised as a good database, after some editing will be done. The encyclopaedic grasp of the book makes some errors unavoidable.
For instance, the Author writes at length about relevance of Maimonides, a medieval Jewish scholar and sage, and then, on the next page, he refers to an old — and obviously still influential — Talmudic expert, Rambam. He does not realise Rambam and Maimonides is but one person, Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon.
The Author has no clear grasp of Russian name usage and constantly confuses family names and patronymics. For instance he refers to Moisei Solomonovich, head of the secret police in Petrograd, though his last name was Uritsky.
But the most important lacuna of the book is its lack of understanding what should be changed. We shall discuss it on other occasion.