The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Cathy Young: Ann Coulter Is Anti-Semitic But Sabrina Rubin Erdely Couldn't Possibly be Anti-Gentilic
🔊 Listen RSS
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

U. of Virginia frat house window smashed by readers of Sabrina Rubin Erdely’s Rolling Stone hoax “A Rape on Campus”

From the annals of the Sapir-Whorf effect

Libertarian writer Cathy Young, a sort of Ayn Rand Lite, is getting some mileage in the Daily Beast out of accusing Ann Coulter of anti-Semitism due to guilt by association:

Ann Coulter’s Anti-Semitism Runs Deeper Than You Know

The Trump cheerleader shares his habit of promoting ethnic nationalists and their ugly ideas.

Amusingly, Cathy preceded this with a blogpost last month about how horrible it is that anybody could suspect that Sabrina Rubin Erdely, author of Rolling Stone’s notorious “A Rape on Campus,” is a wee bit anti-Gentilic (not that Cathy could imagine such a word):

… Luke Ford’s blogpost, which speculates on whether or not I’m a “neocon,” contains a tidbit that led me to another interesting discovery. As an aside, Ford takes a jab at me for having written two Reason.com columns on the University of Virginia/Rolling Stone rape hoax “without mentioning Steve [Sailer] or Richard Bradley”: “Hard to say if she is just lazy or ignores the work of writers she doesn’t like.” Actually, both of those columns were reprints from RealClearPolitics.com; earlier, I had written two other RCP columns on the subject which did mention Bradley, a blogger and former magazine editor, and credit him for being first to raise questions about the credibility of the alleged fraternity gang rape victim, Jackie.

I’m not really sure why I should have credited Steve Sailer, who posted about the case on his Unz Review blog and then wrote about it for Taki Magazine but added nothing original. (In the magazine piece, Sailer claims that his November 29 blogpost drew attention to Bradley’s post, which had languished unnoticed since November 24. Reason‘s Robby Soave wrote about it on December 1. I don’t know if he was tipped off to Bradley’s post by Sailer or one of Sailer’s readers, but I can say that Robby and I were among several journalists privately discussing the problems with the Rolling Stone story by November 25.)

However! Ford’s mention of Sailer’s commentary on the UVA story reminded me of something I had forgotten: the Sailer acolytes in Bradley’s blog comments who tried to argue that Rolling Stone author Sabrina Rubin Erdely’s piece about rape culture at UVA, centered around Jackie’s story, had something to do with Erdely being Jewish. Apparently, she had some kind of Jewish agenda to destroy UVA because it’s too white, Christian, pretty and conservative, or something. (When another commenter pointed out that many of the journalists who helped debunk the hoax were also Jewish, the conspiracy nuts were undeterred: Of course the Jews will do that when their mischief is caught out!)

Okay, so these are just random commenters. But a December 3, 2014 post at VDARE by one of their prolific bloggers, Eugene Gant, highlighting Sailer’s Taki Magazine article, referred to Erdely as “militantly Jewish” (linking to an article about a Jewish day camp that briefly referenced Erdely as one of the parents) and “a hit thing for the Christophobic left” (because she had previously written a story, also of dubious veracity, about a boy’s sexual abuse by priests). The Occidental Observer ran a longer piece depicting the rape-hoax story as “ethnic warfare” born from Erdely’s “anti-White animus” (in the Alt-Right taxonomy, Jews are, of course, not “white”) and noting that some of her staunchest defenders were “Jewish female journalists.” Oh, and Luke Ford did a blogpost that referred to Erdely as an “proud Jew and anti-white fabulist” (with a headline calling her a “left-wing Jew with a history of Christian-bashing).

As for Sailer? Well, he didn’t exactly peddle this slimy nuttery himself, but he sure did pander to it. Check out this April 7, 2015 Sailer blogpost at VDARE titled “Sabrina Rubin Erdely’s Kristallnacht on Campus.” Its actual subject is the theme of broken glass in Erdely’s story (such as the glass table shattering during Jackie’s alleged rape) and actual broken glass at the fraternity named in the rape allegations, which was attacked by vandals throwing bottles and bricks through the windows in December 2014, shortly after the story’s publication.

If it weren’t for the obsession with Erdely’s Jewishness in certain quarters, I would have assumed that “Kristallnacht” was just a fancy metaphor. But was it actually a not-so-subtle reversal of an infamous attack on Jews in which a “militant Jew” becomes the perpetrator inflicting a Kristallnacht on gentiles? You decide.

Okay!

 
• Tags: Sapir-Whorf 
Hide 449 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. I wonder if Cathy Young can accept that “anti-white animus” exists. Anywhere. Every time she approaches the idea she seems to reflexively dismiss it. Think harder, Cathy. Look around.

    • Replies: @rod1963
    She's a political fanatic. Also she works for the CATO institute. IOW she works for a globalist/anti-white group with ties to the Kochs that are no friends of the U.S. and it's white population.

    Does it surprise anyone that she targets whites in any form at all?

    What we need to do is look at are the men behind the curtain who pull the strings. That means the various foundations, institutes, think tanks, etc. Many of them are down right hostile to the well being of whites and America.
    , @Nico

    I wonder if Cathy Young can accept that “anti-white animus” exists. Anywhere. Every time she approaches the idea she seems to reflexively dismiss it.
     
    I am pretty sure that in so doing she is reflexively safeguarding her career and livelihood.
    , @David F.
    In my experience most Jews simply can't grasp the concept of gentiles victimized by Jews. *A priori*, gentiles always have secure, unshakable power to oppress Jews; and Jews are always the struggling underdog and justified in taking any advantage against their opponents.

    Showing evidence doesn't make a difference. Erdley is Jewish; therefore by definition she is punching up.
    , @Alec Leamas
    What is telling is that in the linked piece she doesn't really delve into the claims against Erdely, she just engages in uproar and concludes antisemitism - where antisemitism as used now completely coincides with Sobran's definition that an antisemite is someone whom the jews hate, rather than someone who hates jews.

    Erdely could have focused her piece on an allegation having taken place at her alma mater, the University of Pennsylvania (25% Jewish student body far outperforming their proportion of high achievers) and where she would have the lay of the land, or allegations against black athletes - she chose, instead, to focus her attentions on the Southern, gentile and white fraternity culture at Virginia. Her piece is riddled with expressions of Jewish anxieties and inferiorities - she feels the need to mention all of the blondes at Virginia in the piece, for example.

    The standard Young seems to be holding out for accusations against Erdely clearly don't apply to accusations against Erdely's accusers. There seems to be this need to deny the existence of Jewish solidarity (as if Young's piece doesn't unwittingly stand as evidence of it) and group interests against all and copious evidence that these things exist. On the one hand she's willing to attribute the passions and beliefs of villagers in rural Poland 300 years ago to all white gentiles, while categorically excluding the possibility that a well-healed, well-connected and powerful group with numerous ethnic advocacy organizations are pursuing a common interest.
  2. Oy vey, shut it down!

  3. Another day, another foray into the blogosphere wars of who is more racist than who and whose commenters are the bigger meanies. All while trying to passively dismiss any argument you as the author overlooked. Keep up the good fight, Cathy.

    • Replies: @pyrrhus
    Life is too short to deal with stupid and dishonest people like Cathy Young.....there are a million others just the same....
  4. TGGP says:

    You should note that in her Ann Coulter article she references some of your writings.

    Carl: I imagine she’d accept the existence of it in, say, the Nation of Islam. They’re well outside the mainstream. The unusual alt-right position is that such animus exists within the mainstream, and is even found among many white people.

  5. • Replies: @tbraton
    I haven't read the piece, but I am guessing it must be a German shepherd. I would point out that the news item comes from "fox," and I wouldn't trust anything a fox says about a dog. I believe there is a lot of bad blood there. I wouldn't know what to make of the fact if I saw a dog making a Hitler salute. any more than I would know what to make of a dog walking two-legged on his front paws. Just marvel, I guess, at the imagination of some dogs.
  6. She shouldn’t be above criticism, but it’s worth remembering that Cathy is on our side when it comes to denouncing the more demented elements of modern feminism.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Apparently her (((neurotic))) obsession with sniffing out anti-semitism, real or imagined, trunps her moderate feminism.
  7. Just because some Jews are Christophobic doesn’t mean all are. We should be able to point out that some people have irrational fears of Christianity without implying that everyone else in that group shares the prejudice.

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Just because some Jews are Christophobic doesn’t mean all are. We should be able to point out that some people have irrational fears of Christianity without implying that everyone else in that group shares the prejudice.
     
    I don't think anyone is implying that ALL Jews hate Christians. The sentiment seems to me to be more about the double standard/hypocrisy now common in the media and mainstream popular culture - that the accusation of "anti-Semitism" is utilized frequently by Jews, true or not, but any critique of ant-gentilism by Jews is immediately denounced as anti-Semitism/racism/irrational and ignorant prejudice.
    , @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever...
    "Just because some Jews are Christophobic". I hope this is trolling/satire.
    , @ben tillman

    Just because some Jews are Christophobic doesn’t mean all are. We should be able to point out that some people have irrational fears of Christianity without implying that everyone else in that group shares the prejudice.
     
    But it's not about Jews as "individuals". It's about the organized Jewish community. It's irrelevant that not all Jews agree with the dogma and policies advocated by the organized community. The point is that the community has the resources and coordination to erect a false consciousness among gentiles and prevent the emergence of organized opposition.

    Jews tend to prevail in these conflicts, despite their smaller numbers, when they are able to act as a group while we are not.
    , @Penguinchip
    I think we're suggesting precisely that she is, but by no means that all are.
    , @dr kill
    Without Xtians there would no longer be any Jews - just sayin'.
  8. If it weren’t for the obsession with Erdely’s Jewishness in certain quarters, I would have assumed that “Kristallnacht” was just a fancy metaphor. But was it actually a not-so-subtle reversal of an infamous attack on Jews in which a “militant Jew” becomes the perpetrator inflicting a Kristallnacht on gentiles? You decide.

    Funny, sounds like Cathy hasn’t quite made her mind up on the matter herself.

    If I recall correctly, the “broken glass” metaphor was so overdone, so campy and so permeated the narrative that I don’t know how anyone can plausibly question Erdely’s intent. She really tried that hard.

    Not that I think it’s characteristic of Jews in general. If I were Jewish, it would have embarrassed me, so I tend to assume that rational-minded Jews who read the piece had that reaction.

    • Replies: @cwhatfuture
    I am Jewish. Unfortunately I read the piece only after I had read about the piece here. So when reading it, I only found it ridiculous, although I think its main point of reference was to the generalized media coverage of date raping and fraternities. That was in the news a lot then if I remember. As the "victim" was not Jewish, what the hell point could the author have been making exactly, if that was her intent?
  9. Priss Factor [AKA "Polly Perkins"] says:

    Didn’t Sabrina herself say that she skipped over colleges like Harvard and specifically wanted some ‘conservative’ college with blonde types?

    Also, her ‘reporting’ is best understood in the larger context of Jewish resentments and paranoia… such as Jews continuing to be traumatized because their grandparents couldn’t play golf at some wasp club. And Hollywood making Wall Streets to be waspish.
    Also, the fact that Jews are prominent in the media, and the media played along with Erderly. Also, what the media did with Zimmerman. And the media’s jump to conclusion about Duke Lacrosse. And Michael Brown. And the whole Black Lives Matter nonsense. And recall how NYT covered the story of over 20 blacks raping a 11 yr old Hispanic girl. Ridiculous.
    Also, how Rape Culture hysteria overlooks black rape but sniffs for every sign of white rape. The hate hoaxes that have become so prevalent largely due the climate of hysteria created from Obama down to elementary school teacher.
    And Emma Sulkowicz and Lena Dunham, both part Jewish. Sulky got a black homo and some others to railroad a German student. Dunham claimed she was raped by some Republican, but it turned out to be bogus.

    So, seen in the context of all those things, there was a Jewish bias in what Erderly did. And there is Jewish bias in Young’s article. She’s obviously sticking up for her own kind.
    And if Kristallnacht metaphor is too much, let’s not forget that no people use Holocaust metaphors and associations more crazily than Jews do.
    We are told Putin is New Hitler, Assad is New Hitler, Gaddafi was new hitler, Hussein was new Hitler. We are told Iran wants to wipe Israel off the map… and should be nuked(according to Adelson). We are told Trump is Hitler and Trump supporters are all Nazis. You’d think Wasp golf clubs were like nazi camps for not having allowed Jews ages ago.
    Jews compare Muslim invaders into Europe with Jewish refugees from the Holocaust.
    No people scream Nazi and see Hitlers everywhere like the Jews do. Funny. The West should smash Muslim nations cuz they’re like Nazis. But when the displaced Muslim ‘nazis’ invade Europe, they are like ‘Jewish refugees’ and white nations better welcome them with open arms or else they are, guess what, Nazis.

    One thing for sure, Cathy Young is anti-gentile. A real hater.

  10. @Carl
    I wonder if Cathy Young can accept that "anti-white animus" exists. Anywhere. Every time she approaches the idea she seems to reflexively dismiss it. Think harder, Cathy. Look around.

    She’s a political fanatic. Also she works for the CATO institute. IOW she works for a globalist/anti-white group with ties to the Kochs that are no friends of the U.S. and it’s white population.

    Does it surprise anyone that she targets whites in any form at all?

    What we need to do is look at are the men behind the curtain who pull the strings. That means the various foundations, institutes, think tanks, etc. Many of them are down right hostile to the well being of whites and America.

    • Replies: @Anonymous Nephew
    "she works for the CATO institute"

    PJ O'Rourke, also previously sponsored by CATO, who's just come out for Hillary Clinton, has appeared several times on BBC radio describing Trump's relationship with the Republican party as 'the drunk uncle at the family gathering".
  11. Sabrina Rubin Erdely’s Kristallnacht

    I thought the allusion was particularly apt given not just actual the thuggery of the attack on the fraternity, but especially because of the official support for the prevailing narrative and the ineffectual investigation of the actual vandalism. It definitely had the whiff (there goes the world that leftists love to use anytime some black/homosexual/transgender person is lynched mythically somewhere) of Nazi-condoned thuggery or even Maoist Cultural Revolution.

    As for anti-gentilism, anyone who has grown up with a large Jewish population as I have can serve as a witness to the prevailing sense of fear and contempt toward gentiles that many Jews seem to harbor (one that is much more freely discussed among Jews themselves). Even though I am not Jewish, I frequently heard disparaging remarks about non-Jews, especially white Catholics and Asians, from Jewish acquaintances and colleagues particularly while I was in academia. For some reason, people seem to feel very free about their thoughts around me, and would tell me their inner thoughts readily (this came in VERY HANDY when I used to work as an investigator).

    Growing up, I used to have a highly positive view of Jews, but that began to change once I grew up and began to see beyond the propaganda (“Light unto nations”) and Holocaust victimology.

    • Replies: @Lot

    As for anti-gentilism, anyone who has grown up with a large Jewish population as I have can serve as a witness to the prevailing sense of fear and contempt toward gentiles that many Jews seem to harbor (one that is much more freely discussed among Jews themselves).
     
    So your evidence is "everyone who knows Jews knows this to be true" and "things you heard from Jewish acquaintances"

    That's awfully persuasive!

    Maybe you are feeling a bit of envy and resentment at the single ethnic group most successful at skimming off the best women of your race? I mean, Amy Chua is quite a catch: best selling author, as politically incorrect as she feels like, daughter of one of the leading professors of electrical engineering in the nation, makes a ton of money, raises polite and intelligent children. And in her wikipedia pic, at age 50, she is still smoking hot.

    , @Jan
    Two summers working as a summer camp counsellor, surrounded by Jews, taught me all I need to know about their hive mentality.
    , @Gross Terry
    "Even though I am not Jewish, I frequently heard disparaging remarks about non-Jews, especially white Catholics and Asians, from Jewish acquaintances and colleagues particularly while I was in academia"

    a cursory survey of jewish marriage habits suggests you are full of shit.
    , @Nico
    My own experience at a 20% Jewish university would corroborate pretty much everything you say here.

    I will however say that I managed to get a few Jewish friends out of undergrad. All of them are atheist/agnostic and we regularly enjoyed Christmas music and Irish bacon together (we can't now because we live on opposite sides of an ocean, but we talk regularly). Two of them are sisters born in Montreal to an Anglo-Jewish father and a Jewish-American mother. Their father was raised Orthodox in north London (now a predominantly Paki area, much to his horror) and rejected religious practice in his young adulthood, becoming accustomed to the Brit "pub and grub" socializing.

    Needless to say these folks are "off-the-circuit" with respect to their ethnic group and don't find much in the way of useful connections from people "of the tribe." They're too irreverent to fit in with the religious crowd and their assimilationist affinity for Anglo/Christian culture as well as their disdain for Third World immigration and the LGBT agenda makes them pariahs with most of the "uppity" crowd.
    , @biz
    How can so many people here, presumably with a straight face, accuse a group which currently has a 70% intermarriage rate of acting as an enthocentric block?
    , @Thea
    I went to a school where whites were a minority with many of that small group being Jewish.

    Anecdotally, they seemed to treat anyone with whom they disagreed with contempt. Saving their most haughtiness for one another. But that it just my experience. I certainly had Jewish freinds who weren't freinds to each other.
    , @cwhatfuture

    For some reason, people seem to feel very free about their thoughts around me, and would tell me their inner thoughts readily (this came in VERY HANDY when I used to work as an investigator).
     
    It would seem you are telling us your inner fantasies quite readily. Although I don't find any of it VERY HANDY or even very handy.

    the prevailing sense of fear and contempt toward gentiles that many Jews seem to harbor
     
    I can assure you, there is no Jew that "fears" you. Although after reading one email from you, I suspect many Jews have contempt for you.
  12. @jtgw
    Just because some Jews are Christophobic doesn't mean all are. We should be able to point out that some people have irrational fears of Christianity without implying that everyone else in that group shares the prejudice.

    Just because some Jews are Christophobic doesn’t mean all are. We should be able to point out that some people have irrational fears of Christianity without implying that everyone else in that group shares the prejudice.

    I don’t think anyone is implying that ALL Jews hate Christians. The sentiment seems to me to be more about the double standard/hypocrisy now common in the media and mainstream popular culture – that the accusation of “anti-Semitism” is utilized frequently by Jews, true or not, but any critique of ant-gentilism by Jews is immediately denounced as anti-Semitism/racism/irrational and ignorant prejudice.

    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @juster
    As a Jewish person, it's taken me a long time to get around to this position but at this point I agree. Anti white, anti-Christian sentiments are arguably considerably worse at this point than anti-Semitism.
  13. That was a long way to go. Steve, all publicity is good

  14. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    “I’m not really sure why I should have credited Steve Sailer, who posted about the case on his Unz Review blog and then wrote about it for Taki Magazine but added nothing original.”

    I think folks here were most creative in surmising the psychology of Coakley, as with the ‘catfishing’ business.

    • Replies: @Mike Sylwester
    I think folks here were most creative in surmising the psychology of Coakley, as with the ‘catfishing’ business.

    Of course, this blog made many original contributions to the exposure of Jackie Coakley's hoax.

    To toot my own horn, I pointed out that, while a high-school student, Coakley was a teammate of a championship swimmer named Bailey Monahan in the YMCA Stingray Swimming Club in Stafford, Virginia. When Coakley enrolled at the University of Virginia, she used that high-school swimming-club experience to obtain a lifeguard job at the university's swimming pool. Working there, she supposedly met the imaginary lifeguard named Haven Monahan.

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/the-importance-of-three-words-catfishing-and-haven-monahan/#comment-1288927

    , @Percy Gryce
    I think I was one of the first to hypothesize her mental illness:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/rolling-stone-apologizes-for-gang-rape-store/#comment-792002
  15. #triggeredbytrump

    It usually annoys me but at the moment it’s actually very funny seeing media types trying to process people simply pointing out their blatant double standard.

    strict immigration control and nice wall for Israel = good

    strict immigration control and even nicer wall for America = second Hitler

  16. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Good Lord, you people are a bunch of creeps. (Oh, and by the way… the so-called “racial” component of being Jewish is an ethnicity, not a race. “Whiteness” is not an ethnicity. And Israel recognizes black Ethiopian Jews as Jewish.

    So, a white rich fraternity had to be inconvenienced for a bit. Boo fucking hoo

    • Replies: @el topo
    I'm sure you'd feel the same way if the windows in your house were smashed in by bricks. Boo fucking hoo.

    Creep.
    , @5371
    [“Whiteness” is not an ethnicity]

    Yes it is. It originated as an umbrella ethnicity, which very commonly become an ethnicity tout court, as in this case.
    , @tbraton
    Interesting that you found it necessary to create a new screen name and make your first post on unz.com to make such a profound point.
    , @anon
    So, a white rich fraternity had to be inconvenienced for a bit. Boo fucking hoo

    Well, nobody was even inconvenienced by Ann Coulter's comments, but that didn't stop Cathy Young (among others) from complaining about them.
    , @Jack D
    Your post is a troll and not worthy of a reply, but I'll take the bait.

    In situations like this, it's always worthwhile to reverse the fact pattern and see how you would react. If your answer changes depending on whose ox is being gored, then you are probably acting out of bias or animus and not general principles.

    So, imagine a black fraternity is accused of raping a woman. A well known right winger writes a story about it in a national magazine and provides lurid details about how the giant evil black men did the deed. (Forget that this would never happen in post-1964 America - perhaps it happened in 1952 but liberals remember this incident as if it happened yesterday). The outraged white students on campus march to the frat and break all their windows. The frat members, fearing lynching, have already escaped. Later it is revealed that it was all a hoax and that no one was raped.

    Would you be telling us to move on or would this not be one of the great liberal cause celebres of all time? Are we not still talking about the "Scottsboro Boys" 85 years after the fact?
    , @Luke Ford
    "The Jewish race" was the normal way of referring to the Jewish people before the 1930s when race fell out of favor as a way of categorizing people.

    http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/dna-links-prove-jews-are-a-race-says-genetics-expert-1.428664

    http://www.jewfaq.org/judaism.htm
    , @MQ
    the boundaries of 'white' in America are notoriously ever-changing, but what makes the most sense is to say that Ashkenazi Jews are a white European ethnicity (like Italians or whatever), while Sephardic Jews are a North African ethnic group (I suspect North Africans will melt into 'whites' in the US and for the second generation already have, in that little distinction is noted unless someone is ostentatiously Muslim).
    , @Jus' Sayin'...

    "...the so-called “racial” component of being Jewish is an ethnicity, not a race..."
     
    I'll focus on your "science" and ignore the poor writing, thinking and indifference to other human beings that your trolling reveals.

    You seem blissfully unaware of recent research involving the human genome. The quoted Frankfurt School meme was allowed a pass in the old days. Current research has found that there is a very distinctive set of haplotypes associated with Ashkenazi Jews. These clearly distinguish them from other Europeans and other human clades. The presence of such haplotypes is confirming evidence of some Ashkenaz ancestry. I cannot think of anything that would more clearly define a set of human beings as a racial group.
    , @Tracy

    Good Lord, you people are a bunch of creeps. (Oh, and by the way… the so-called “racial” component of being Jewish is an ethnicity, not a race. “Whiteness” is not an ethnicity. And Israel recognizes black Ethiopian Jews as Jewish.

    So, a white rich fraternity had to be inconvenienced for a bit. Boo fucking hoo
     
    Whites are treated as a group; it's ridiculous to expect us to not react as a group. "White guilt," "white privilege," cis white males," "the white race is the cancer of the world" -- give me a break.

    I take note of your last line there about a "rich white fraternity" who endured what you characterize as an "inconvenience." Nice.

    Further, Ethiopian Jews are treated like crap in Israel. See The tribulations of being an Ethiopian Jew, The plight of Ethiopian Jews in Israel, and Israel: No promised land for Ethiopian Jews. There are plenty more articles like that out there. Do a search.
    , @Ragno
    It's endemic to our civilization's ongoing collapse that it's now nearly impossible to determine if you are a non-white - say, for instance, a Jew - sugaring the other guy's gas tank for the home team; or just another newly-minted Race Traitor trundling off the higher education conveyor belt, eager to get in there and throw the game while repeatedly winking at the men on the other sideline.

    That it's now 50/50 either way tells you that the hour is late and the reckoning is near.
  17. Lot says:

    The evidence for Coulter’s supposed antisemitism is extremely thin.

    She never “touted” Radix, she retweeted a tweet that was anti-NRO that had a Radix hashtag, one of several.

    I mean, it was not even a link, it was a retweet of a hashtag mention!

    Radix site is certainly antisemitic, but honestly the various alt-right sites like Radix that post ambitious, boring, long-winded articles kind of blur together for me, and quite likely Ann as well.

    The second retweet had nothing to do whatsoever with Jews, but a joke about how Hillary’s anti-Trump ad makes Trump look really good. If I had twitter I’d retweet it myself, it was funny! Is she supposed to do a background check on everyone she retweets?

    Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile, and brings disrepute onto the site and its many fine authors. However, he’s one of dozens of authors, and they run maybe one thing a year from him on average. He’s not even in the top 50 or so authors there, and he is not listed on the main directory of authors.

    Balance this thin evidence against the fact that Ann (1) is a strong supporter of Israel (2) retweets Mickey Kaus about 20 times more often than any supposed anti-semite (3) supports Trump and his objectively pro-jewish policies, and calling her anti-semitic is simply slander.

    Finally, we have Ann affection for supposed anti-semite Steve. The evidence for this is a single quote, which is indeed pretty ugly and antisemitic:

    Or in the case of the wealthiest, most powerful group, they use their influence over the media to instill [insecurity] in their children and to depress, demoralize, and divide other groups` children.

    This and a sparse number of other flirtations with MacDonald-style antisemitism, if they were the main theme of Steve’s rather voluminous writing about Jews, could indeed justify the label. But they are not very typical at all. At most they show Steve is at times anti-semitism-curious. Is Ann supposed to boycott him now for that or else be guilty by association?

    • Replies: @5371
    [pretty ugly and antisemitic]

    You misspelled "too cogent for comfort".
    , @Jefferson
    Also Ann Coulter used to have a Jewish boyfriend, so she is not doing a good very job of being an anti-Semite.
    , @AndrewR
    Any criticism of Jews is anti-semitism?

    The mainstream is openly anti-white. That many Jews pretend to be white doesn't negate the fact that they are a specific subpopulation sharing genes and customs with each other that "other" whites do not share.
    , @Nico

    Kevin MacDonald... says nothing worthwhile
     
    I would have agreed with this sentiment back in the day when it was common and open street knowledge that Jews were a specific ethnic if not exactly racial group whose interests at various times have been in direct conflict with those of white Christians qua white Christians. Nowadays, when even immigration patriots are expected to kiss the collective arses of a demographic group which is hugely overrepresented in the openly anti-white and anti-Christian Western intelligentsia and which despite obvious admirable exceptions continues to vote massively for the anti-white, anti-Christian faction in North America at any rate, it is worth reminding people now and then of what should be flashing bright red in their faces.
    , @Luke Ford
    Kevin MacDonald is a giant. I do not know how anyone could read Kevin's book Culture of Critique and not come to the same conclusion. Rabbinical friends of mine have read it and been deeply moved. The entire series is compelling.

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

    Yidden desperately need something like this:

    http://www.lukeford.net/blog/?p=63983

    "Jews for Consistency" monitors the proclamations and actions of Jewish groups in the light of Jewish text and Jewish history.

    We point out when they seek the the opposite things for Jews that they seek for non-Jews. Too often organized Jewry pursues cohesion for Jews (in 2016 Israel's Sephardic Chief Rabbi, in line with the Torah tradition, said non-Jews were not permitted to live in the Jewish state) but multiculturalism for non-Jews (more non-white immigration into white countries, more rights for minorities such as blacks, latinos, gays, and the transgendered, more rights for atheists and less Christianity in the public square, etc). Rarely do these Jewish groups show the same concern for non-Jewish minorities in the Jewish state.

    If unity, strength and cohesion are good for Jews, then these qualities are equally good for gentiles. When you maximize rights and power for minorities, as Jewish activists often try to do in the West, it always comes at the cost of cohesion for the majority. How would you like your country being disunited and fragmented? How would you like the Jewish state to stop being the Jewish state and start being another multicultural hodgepodge of warring groups? Do you want Tibet to stop being Tibetan and Japan to stop being Japanese? So why do America, England, and Australia need to lose their historic identities as Anglo countries?

    We ask Jewish organizations -- such as the ADL (Anti-Defamation League), the SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center), and the SWC (Simon Wiesenthal Center) -- to follow the Golden Rule and to only do unto others as they would want done to Jews and to the Jewish state. If they want to wrap themselves in the mantle of Torah and tolerance, we check their claims because sometimes these groups are running a con.

    I am convert to Orthodox Judaism and a hasid of Kevin MacDonald. And now I must daven and study a page of Talmud.

    , @iSteveFan

    The evidence for Coulter’s supposed antisemitism is extremely thin.
     
    You should also note that Ann goes to great lengths to assign full blame for the 1965 Immigration Act to the Irishman Teddy Kennedy, and never mentions the actual author of the legislation. This seems to be a deliberate attempt to show she is not anti-semitic.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Radix site is certainly antisemitic"

    No, it is not "certainly antisemitic". The authors who are published there are not especially obsessed with Jews or even interested in them. Many of the commenters could rightfully be called anti-semitic, but that could be said of any number of websites.

    "Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile, and brings disrepute onto the site and its many fine authors."

    Nothing worthwhile? Nothing at all?

    In the eyes of some people, just noticing things is "anti-semitic".
    , @ben tillman

    Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile . . . .
     
    Yeah, aside from pioneering the exploration of the evolutionary strategies of both sides of the Jew/White Gentile conflict (A People That Shall Dwell Alone/What Makes Western Culture Unique), of the White Gentile group strategies developed to compete with Jews (Separation and Its Discontents), and of the the Jewish response to prevent the formation of White Gentile group strategies (The Culture of Critique) -- and being essentially correct in all of this -- what has he done?
    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Can somebody please define anti-semitism?

    I'm completely serious. From what I see (at least around here), it generally means pointing out things about Jews (or the Jewish community) that Jews would rather not have discussed. The actual merits of the comment are rarely discussed.

    AndrewR's assertion that "Any criticism of Jews is anti-semitism" seems to be correct - again, at least in these parts; however, I'm open to discussion. Why is AndrewR's definition not correct?

    Webster's definition of anti-semitism is uses the words "hostility" and "hatred" toward Jews. Does criticism constitute hatred and/or hostility? If so, how is any discussion of any political topic possible? Or is that the point?

    Basically, where the line between criticism and hatred? Also, if Group A is attacking my group, is it even wrong for me to be anti-Group A?
    , @Priss Factor
    "Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile, and brings disrepute onto the site and its many fine authors."

    I disagree. I think MacDonald has done some good work. His theory of history tends to be monomaniacal and he tends to blame Jews for too many things, but he is hardly alone in this kind of thinking. After all, many important Jewish thinkers have tended to put all the villainous eggs in one basket. Blame Wasps for everything!!
    And Jews have been the most important creators of the academic discourse where EVERYTHING is blamed on white males. And this sort of thing is mainstream. Just listen to that atrocious Matthew Weiner of Madmen fame. Or Sorkin's rotten Social Network.
    What MacDonald is turn the tables, and focus on Jews in relation to just about everything.

    So, I don't have problems with Vdare's association with MacDonald.
    But I do have problems with MacDonald's association with some far-right types.
    I mean Greg Johnson the Himmlerish fruitkin-neo-nazi is pure poison. (And he lacks taste. I hear he writes film criticism as Trevor Lynch. This dufus watches Battlestar Galactica. Imagine that. A full grown man, a fruit no less, watching that crap. Fruits are silly, but I thought they at least had some aesthetic sense.) MacDonald has associated with even worse, like Don Black, neo-nazi human garbage of Daily Stormer.

    The question is why?
    If we wanna be condemnatory, MacDonald lacks moral sense.
    If we wanna be generous, maybe he had to find allies where he could. Everyone prefers 'better company', but if there are only scuzzos who will listen to you, then whaddya gonna do?
    I think Alt Rightists starting out today are better off. They can find better quality people. But when Macdonald was starting out, the slightest critical view of Jewish power was anathema. It was pariah stuff. And most respectable people went nowhere near it.

    But this was also true of the Left. When they were radicals forming a movement, they sided with all kinds of nuts, thugs, gangsters, crooks, lunatics, and etc.

    This goes for BDS movement too. There was a time when most Libs stayed far away from anti-Zionism cuz it was associated with either vengeful far-right or fanatical far-left. But BDS has made anti-Zionism semi-fashionable, and once big name stars like Roger Waters made it sort-of-cool, we are seeing even respectable people support it.

    Now that Alt Right is making once-taboo subjects a part of the national debate, people like MacDonald should distance themselves from anyone with a whiff of that 14/88 skunk odor that really must go.
    , @Luke Ford
    Kevin MacDonald cracked our code. We're f***ed. We have to make a deal.
    , @Redking
    If someone's writings are going to be attributed to "antisemitism" then one might as well describe what "semitism" is. The antisemites are against something besides Jewish DNA and stereotypical hook noses, right?

    Whatever semitism is the antisemitic are opposed to it.
  18. Lot says:
    @Twinkie

    Sabrina Rubin Erdely’s Kristallnacht
     
    I thought the allusion was particularly apt given not just actual the thuggery of the attack on the fraternity, but especially because of the official support for the prevailing narrative and the ineffectual investigation of the actual vandalism. It definitely had the whiff (there goes the world that leftists love to use anytime some black/homosexual/transgender person is lynched mythically somewhere) of Nazi-condoned thuggery or even Maoist Cultural Revolution.

    As for anti-gentilism, anyone who has grown up with a large Jewish population as I have can serve as a witness to the prevailing sense of fear and contempt toward gentiles that many Jews seem to harbor (one that is much more freely discussed among Jews themselves). Even though I am not Jewish, I frequently heard disparaging remarks about non-Jews, especially white Catholics and Asians, from Jewish acquaintances and colleagues particularly while I was in academia. For some reason, people seem to feel very free about their thoughts around me, and would tell me their inner thoughts readily (this came in VERY HANDY when I used to work as an investigator).

    Growing up, I used to have a highly positive view of Jews, but that began to change once I grew up and began to see beyond the propaganda ("Light unto nations") and Holocaust victimology.

    As for anti-gentilism, anyone who has grown up with a large Jewish population as I have can serve as a witness to the prevailing sense of fear and contempt toward gentiles that many Jews seem to harbor (one that is much more freely discussed among Jews themselves).

    So your evidence is “everyone who knows Jews knows this to be true” and “things you heard from Jewish acquaintances”

    That’s awfully persuasive!

    Maybe you are feeling a bit of envy and resentment at the single ethnic group most successful at skimming off the best women of your race? I mean, Amy Chua is quite a catch: best selling author, as politically incorrect as she feels like, daughter of one of the leading professors of electrical engineering in the nation, makes a ton of money, raises polite and intelligent children. And in her wikipedia pic, at age 50, she is still smoking hot.

    • Replies: @anonymous

    Maybe you are feeling a bit of envy and resentment at the single ethnic group most successful at skimming off the best women of your race?
     
    You give us one big example and then generalize it to 'they're all doing it' yet criticize someone else for making a generalization based on his experiences.
    , @Anonymous

    Maybe you are feeling a bit of envy and resentment at the single ethnic group most successful at skimming off the best women of your race? I mean, Amy Chua is quite a catch: best selling author, as politically incorrect as she feels like, daughter of one of the leading professors of electrical engineering in the nation, makes a ton of money, raises polite and intelligent children. And in her wikipedia pic, at age 50, she is still smoking hot.
     
    From what I can gather, Twinkie landed himself a high-IQed Christian Nordic queen. Can't do any better than that. And she obviously wasn't looking for some neurotic, Christ-denying nebbish who would always view her as inferior to his mother, whom he a creepy relationship with that requires therapy. No, Mrs. Twinkie was looking for a Christian man with brains and, most importantly, character, because in this life you either accept Christ or you don't. It's a choice. As C.S. Lewis wrote in The Great Divorce: “There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, ‘Thy will be done,’ and those to whom God says, in the end, ‘Thy will be done’ ”.
    , @Tracy
    See the three minute mark: https://youtu.be/TDIrPXNXzJw
    , @SFG
    Dude, I often agree with you, but enough impugning the masculinity of other commenters or their ethnic groups. It's kind of pointless. It's like these guys on alt-right blogs who point out how fat feminists are--sure, but does that make them wrong?

    Honestly, neither Jews nor Asians are paragons of masculinity *on average* (never mind your brother who served in the Marines, we are talking means and medians here)--which is precisely why those groups are so successful. Success in an industrialized, capitalist society requires the feminine traits of deceit and false kindness, and you have to sit still in a classroom and study to get into a good college.

    Hell, even in war discipline, organization, and technology count more than muscles.

    What are the macho groups? Blacks and Hispanics. How are they doing?

    Alpha males, beta culture. Beta males, alpha culture. It's one of the paradoxes of life.

    , @Twinkie

    So your evidence is “everyone who knows Jews knows this to be true” and “things you heard from Jewish acquaintances”

    That’s awfully persuasive!
     
    What I presented was a tiny snippet from my life experience - take it however you will. It was not intended to be a scientific survey of American Jewish attitudes. I grew up thinking that the whole "Light unto nations" rhetoric was earnest. I had many Jewish friends as a young person. I also developed an enormous sympathy for the horrors their ancestors suffered in Europe.

    But much of that opinion has been changed by what I experienced and witnessed. And it's not just about me or my particular ethnic group. I just heard Jewish administrators at universities expressing both fear and contempt toward non-Jewish white goy (usually not about ethnic Italians or Irish, but almost always about "flyover country" whites) too many times in their "unguarded" moments.

    The fear was in the sense that they were a privileged minority in a sea of potentially aggrieved majority - the traditional Diaspora Jewish anxiety. The contempt was along the lines of "They are dumber than we are." It was really shocking for me the first couple of times I heard such sentiments. But I was a naïve young man.

    This does not mean that I think all or even most Jews feel that way toward non-Jewish whites. It's more that such sentiments do exist and that anytime someone critiques it, that person is met with accusations of racism, ignorance, prejudice, etc. - all the while Jews themselves frequently fall back on accusations of "anti-Semitism" against those with whom they disagree.

    Maybe you are feeling a bit of envy and resentment at the single ethnic group most successful at skimming off the best women of your race?
     
    You should know by now that I could not care less whom Asian-American women marry. I am a bit busy being married to a gorgeous Midwestern Shiksa, with whom I have a large brood. As an I assimilationist, I am all for Asians - male or female - marrying whites (though I would prefer they married good Christian whites).

    Amy Chua
     
    She's not my type. Too short, for starters. And not athletic enough. Sorry.
  19. @Anonymous
    Good Lord, you people are a bunch of creeps. (Oh, and by the way... the so-called "racial" component of being Jewish is an ethnicity, not a race. "Whiteness" is not an ethnicity. And Israel recognizes black Ethiopian Jews as Jewish.

    So, a white rich fraternity had to be inconvenienced for a bit. Boo fucking hoo

    I’m sure you’d feel the same way if the windows in your house were smashed in by bricks. Boo fucking hoo.

    Creep.

    • Replies: @ATX Hipster
    Don't forget the libel. Reputations never seem to fully bounce back after a rape accusation, no matter how thoroughly debunked.
  20. @Lot
    The evidence for Coulter's supposed antisemitism is extremely thin.

    She never "touted" Radix, she retweeted a tweet that was anti-NRO that had a Radix hashtag, one of several.

    I mean, it was not even a link, it was a retweet of a hashtag mention!

    Radix site is certainly antisemitic, but honestly the various alt-right sites like Radix that post ambitious, boring, long-winded articles kind of blur together for me, and quite likely Ann as well.

    The second retweet had nothing to do whatsoever with Jews, but a joke about how Hillary's anti-Trump ad makes Trump look really good. If I had twitter I'd retweet it myself, it was funny! Is she supposed to do a background check on everyone she retweets?

    Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile, and brings disrepute onto the site and its many fine authors. However, he's one of dozens of authors, and they run maybe one thing a year from him on average. He's not even in the top 50 or so authors there, and he is not listed on the main directory of authors.

    Balance this thin evidence against the fact that Ann (1) is a strong supporter of Israel (2) retweets Mickey Kaus about 20 times more often than any supposed anti-semite (3) supports Trump and his objectively pro-jewish policies, and calling her anti-semitic is simply slander.

    Finally, we have Ann affection for supposed anti-semite Steve. The evidence for this is a single quote, which is indeed pretty ugly and antisemitic:

    Or in the case of the wealthiest, most powerful group, they use their influence over the media to instill [insecurity] in their children and to depress, demoralize, and divide other groups` children.
     

    This and a sparse number of other flirtations with MacDonald-style antisemitism, if they were the main theme of Steve's rather voluminous writing about Jews, could indeed justify the label. But they are not very typical at all. At most they show Steve is at times anti-semitism-curious. Is Ann supposed to boycott him now for that or else be guilty by association?

    [pretty ugly and antisemitic]

    You misspelled “too cogent for comfort”.

  21. @Anonymous
    Good Lord, you people are a bunch of creeps. (Oh, and by the way... the so-called "racial" component of being Jewish is an ethnicity, not a race. "Whiteness" is not an ethnicity. And Israel recognizes black Ethiopian Jews as Jewish.

    So, a white rich fraternity had to be inconvenienced for a bit. Boo fucking hoo

    [“Whiteness” is not an ethnicity]

    Yes it is. It originated as an umbrella ethnicity, which very commonly become an ethnicity tout court, as in this case.

    • Replies: @SFG
    I'd argue 'white American' has become its own ethnicity. Back in Europe you have Italians, Irish, etc.
  22. @jtgw
    Just because some Jews are Christophobic doesn't mean all are. We should be able to point out that some people have irrational fears of Christianity without implying that everyone else in that group shares the prejudice.

    “Just because some Jews are Christophobic”. I hope this is trolling/satire.

  23. The young turks can’t work out if rape is bad if blacks are doing the raping

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    "Racism towards blacks by whites is worse than raping babies"

    -TYT
  24. Jews voluntarily living in Exile in other people’s lands, preaching multiculturalism there, while simultaneously championing Jewish hegemony in Israel, are fundamentally neurotic.

    Cathy, like the vast majority of Exilic Jews, is neurotic.

    It is so sad to see them twisted up in mental knots, torturing themselves, unwilling to live among their own people, yet always fearful living among gentiles.

    Zionism + aliyah are the only cure. No more excuses, Cathy.

    • Replies: @Jewish Conservative Race Realist
    I agree with you Bill.

    I used to think it would be possible to remain a patriot (of America) and a Jew at the same time. After all, there are American Catholics who are patriots of America and not Ireland or Italy or some other Catholic nation. For me personally, it's never been difficult to do this at all. Of course I love America more than Israel. America is where my forefathers have lived for almost two centuries. Israel is nothing to me.

    But Jewish activism in this country is burning every possible bridge with patriots, and I don't really see how this gets walked back anymore. Due to this invidious rhetoric from my co-ethnics, I'm sadly coming to the conclusion that the only viable options for Jewish diaspora in America are complete assimilation (reject entirely Jewish identity and blend into Stale Pale America) or emigration. Split loyalty and "dual" loyalty are bogus ideas. As I learned from Sailer on this very blog, politics is primarily about Whose Side Are You On. Loyalty comes in a strict hierarchy and at some point each person is called upon to declare, stand, and deliver.

    Any Jew who advocates open borders for their home country and ethnic preservation policies for Israel should be ostracized, silenced, or deported to Israel, in that order. The insanity has got to end.

    For me personally, Jewish identity is nothing at all compared to White American identity. But after spending so much time in alt-right circles, I can't deny that there's really something to the Jewish ethnocentrism case. (With many notable exceptions. Many great men of the Right are Jewish or Jewish ethnicity.)

    For me, I've given up on Jewish identity completely. It's easy for me since I'm not a believer. My wife is a believing Christian, and my kids are coming up Christian. They won't learn of my Jewish heritage until they are fully grown because I don't want to open the door to childhood self-reimagining as a poor oppressed Jew. Nobody has it better than the Jews in this country. They have all the advantages of high status and few of the disadvantages of being Pale and Stale. The only dignified disposition of Jewish Americans towards the USA is gratitude and service.
    , @tbraton
    "Cathy, like the vast majority of Exilic Jews, is neurotic."

    I was wondering when someone was going to bring up that fact. I don't know whether every poster here assumes that based on earlier threads dealing with Cathy Young, but I only discovered that recently. I was somewhat familiar with the name Cathy Young after reading some of her articles on RCP, but I wasn't impressed enough to explore her further. A check with Wikipedia reveals her ethnicity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathy_Young She was born Ekaterina Jung in Moscow and came to the U.S. when she was 7. I am somewhat surprised to find her defending Ms. Erdeley, who seems to have done a very good job completely discrediting her journalistic values with her article on the UVA "rape case" to go along with her earlier examples of shoddy journalism. Young manages to write a fairly lengthy blog dealing with the "Jewish" aspect of the attacks against Erdely but manages to avoid uttering one peep of criticism of Erdely's contemptible "journalism" which severely damaged the reputations of the frat guys, the fraternity and UVA.
    , @juster
    Believe it or not I'm Jewish and in full agreement with all of this until the 2nd to last sentence.

    I think there is hope to make some Jews non-neurotic and live happily in white societies without seeking to undermine them. Cathy needs to rethink her position.
  25. @Carl
    I wonder if Cathy Young can accept that "anti-white animus" exists. Anywhere. Every time she approaches the idea she seems to reflexively dismiss it. Think harder, Cathy. Look around.

    I wonder if Cathy Young can accept that “anti-white animus” exists. Anywhere. Every time she approaches the idea she seems to reflexively dismiss it.

    I am pretty sure that in so doing she is reflexively safeguarding her career and livelihood.

  26. Càthy Young is not hot.

  27. Ann Coulter is not an anti-Semite and she doesn’t pander to anti-Semites.

    Steve Sailer, on the other hand, really does pander to anti-Semites and, in fact, it seems to be a pretty central part of his business model because he, without fail, ramps it up in line with his quarterly fundraisers.

    I was reading some old Lawrence Auster stuff the other day. He exemplified the ability the criticize Jews for what the do wrong, both as individuals and as a group, without dabbling in unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism. Similarly he was able to criticize blacks and other protected minorities without dabbling in racist trash. He ceaselessly warned about the gutter Richard Spencer and others were leading the anti multicultural right into.

    Unfortunately, it was to no avail. Any remotely honest person knows the alt-right is up to its neck in filth at this point. Any sensible person knows that its all going to blow up in your face before too long. You made your pact with the devil, laughing about it is not going to make it go away.

    • Disagree: MEH 0910
    • Replies: @anon
    strict immigration control and a nice shiny wall is either good or bad - not good for one and bad for another

    your inability to process such a blatant double standard is the problem - not the inevitable, eventual reaction to it

    check your wiring
    , @AndrewR
    Oy vey. If you hate Sailer so much why do you read him? I tend to ignore the writers I dislike.
    , @Pat Hannagan
    You do know that Auster was a Jew, don't you?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYkLHecnyiE

    , @Hunsdon
    Hey, would you care to point to some of our host's "unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism"?

    No?

    I didn't think so.
    , @27 year old
    They say the "cuck" meme is dying out but we should definitely keep it around, it's the perfect description for guys like this
    , @gruff

    Unfortunately, it was to no avail. Any remotely honest person knows the alt-right is up to its neck in filth at this point. Any sensible person knows that its all going to blow up in your face before too long. You made your pact with the devil, laughing about it is not going to make it go away.
     
    I disagree. I think the real effect will be to broaden public discourse. You can't deny that the list of unsayable and unthinkable things has been growing for some time; the pendulum will now swing back.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "I was reading some old Lawrence Auster stuff the other day. He exemplified the ability the criticize Jews for what the do wrong, both as individuals and as a group, without dabbling in unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism. Similarly he was able to criticize blacks and other protected minorities without dabbling in racist trash. He ceaselessly warned about the gutter Richard Spencer and others were leading the anti multicultural right into."

    You are aware, are you not, that Auster was jewish? And while he often criticized Jews for their hostility to white, christian civilization, he was himself not immune to occasionally labeling others as anti-semites on the the thinnest of pretexts. And Richard Spencer is hardly Jew-obsessed; he doesn't talk about them very much. Spencer doesn't want to lead the right into a dead-end; he wants to lead the right into power. I don't know if all that fashy iconography is the right way to go about it, but that is what he is trying to do. He isn't interested in things that weaken the movement.

    "Any remotely honest person knows the alt-right is up to its neck in filth at this point."

    I have no reason to believe that you are a remotely honest person.
    , @Lot
    You called it just right on every point.

    And it is sad, because with Trump we are potentially on the cusp of actually doing something about America's ongoing demographic disaster. Rather than focus on the very hard work of reaching 50% + 1 in elections, a big part of the nationalist right in America would prefer to wallow in the filth you describe.

    When you look at Europe, you see what happens when the nationalist right rejects kooks and wins elections, sometimes able to join governments in return for major concessions on immigration, versus when it takes the "let's going over for the millionth time the perfidy of the Jews!" path.

    Tell you all what: I concede Congressmen Celler sucks. Can we move on?
    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Define "racist trash."
    , @unpc downunder
    As Tom Sunic has pointed out, the biggest problem with the alt right is narcissism and low-level sociopathy. Lawrence Auster himself was guilty of this in the way he constantly rubbed people up the wrong way, even when they were 80 percent in agreement with him.
  28. @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever...
    Kristallnacht? That's nothing. I'm teaching my dog to Roman salute.
    http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/05/10/man-arrested-on-hate-charges-after-posting-video-teaching-dog-hitler-salute.html

    I haven’t read the piece, but I am guessing it must be a German shepherd. I would point out that the news item comes from “fox,” and I wouldn’t trust anything a fox says about a dog. I believe there is a lot of bad blood there. I wouldn’t know what to make of the fact if I saw a dog making a Hitler salute. any more than I would know what to make of a dog walking two-legged on his front paws. Just marvel, I guess, at the imagination of some dogs.

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    Actually, the dog in question is a pug: I have a pug, she does that thing with her arm when she wants me to feed her. Also, the guy who posted the video was obviously goofing around, just as it is obvious that the Scottish Jewish guy who carried on about the video is self-promoting. I hope the whole thing just goes away.

    Other things:

    -- I honestly never really thought about Sabrina's ethnicity much, because of the Hungarian last name, but it did seem clear on reading her article that she has hostility towards WASP's. However, "Jewishness" itself has nothing to do with it; she's no more anti-WASP than Camille Paglia, who is Italian Catholic. What's going in Philadelphia, anyway?

    -- It's interesting that people can imbibe prejudices when they are kids ("our people are so great, hey, let's tell jokes about people who are not like us") and then act like it's something to be proud of and/or a central element of of their identity when they are middle aged ("I'll never forget the time that black guy called me honky"). I thought that as you got older you were supposed to acquire some wisdom, which includes becoming a little bit less self-centered.

    -- There are family prejudices among Jews just as there are among other people (e.g., Sabrina, Camille). In that sense, yes, I've known some Jews who have made snarky comments about non-Jews, especially Palestinians and Svartzers, and I've known some non-Jews who have made nasty comments about Jews. I don't think it's a problem unless it becomes a guiding light to someone's conduct and/or if such petty attitudes start determining how one live's one's life.

    -- Speaking of petty, claiming that anyone who criticizes Jews is doing so because they are racially jealous, particularly in the sexual domain, is really getting into the gutter.

    -- Cathy Young: There's some merit to what she says. There are a lot of people who associate things they don't like with Jews, and this is due to simplistic stereotypes. Carrying those stereotypes into a typological ideology (like McDonald) is I think a mistake, and a gratuitous one, not only because it encourages irrational feelings among non-Jews, but irrational feelings among Jews, as well.

    -- However, going around saying that someone is "flirting" with anti-semitism is tantamount to saying, "I really want to deliver a social death sentence to you, and call you an anti-semite, but I can't, because your own words aren't sufficient, so I will intimidate you by giving you this threat: if I can continue to find people who have any six degrees of separation from you who use bad words I will call you an anti-semite" which to ordinary people is going to be construed as bullying and a smear. If the shoe fits, wear it.
  29. @Anonymous
    Good Lord, you people are a bunch of creeps. (Oh, and by the way... the so-called "racial" component of being Jewish is an ethnicity, not a race. "Whiteness" is not an ethnicity. And Israel recognizes black Ethiopian Jews as Jewish.

    So, a white rich fraternity had to be inconvenienced for a bit. Boo fucking hoo

    Interesting that you found it necessary to create a new screen name and make your first post on unz.com to make such a profound point.

  30. @Gabriel M
    Ann Coulter is not an anti-Semite and she doesn't pander to anti-Semites.

    Steve Sailer, on the other hand, really does pander to anti-Semites and, in fact, it seems to be a pretty central part of his business model because he, without fail, ramps it up in line with his quarterly fundraisers.

    I was reading some old Lawrence Auster stuff the other day. He exemplified the ability the criticize Jews for what the do wrong, both as individuals and as a group, without dabbling in unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism. Similarly he was able to criticize blacks and other protected minorities without dabbling in racist trash. He ceaselessly warned about the gutter Richard Spencer and others were leading the anti multicultural right into.

    Unfortunately, it was to no avail. Any remotely honest person knows the alt-right is up to its neck in filth at this point. Any sensible person knows that its all going to blow up in your face before too long. You made your pact with the devil, laughing about it is not going to make it go away.

    strict immigration control and a nice shiny wall is either good or bad – not good for one and bad for another

    your inability to process such a blatant double standard is the problem – not the inevitable, eventual reaction to it

    check your wiring

  31. @jtgw
    She shouldn't be above criticism, but it's worth remembering that Cathy is on our side when it comes to denouncing the more demented elements of modern feminism.

    Apparently her (((neurotic))) obsession with sniffing out anti-semitism, real or imagined, trunps her moderate feminism.

  32. @Lot
    The evidence for Coulter's supposed antisemitism is extremely thin.

    She never "touted" Radix, she retweeted a tweet that was anti-NRO that had a Radix hashtag, one of several.

    I mean, it was not even a link, it was a retweet of a hashtag mention!

    Radix site is certainly antisemitic, but honestly the various alt-right sites like Radix that post ambitious, boring, long-winded articles kind of blur together for me, and quite likely Ann as well.

    The second retweet had nothing to do whatsoever with Jews, but a joke about how Hillary's anti-Trump ad makes Trump look really good. If I had twitter I'd retweet it myself, it was funny! Is she supposed to do a background check on everyone she retweets?

    Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile, and brings disrepute onto the site and its many fine authors. However, he's one of dozens of authors, and they run maybe one thing a year from him on average. He's not even in the top 50 or so authors there, and he is not listed on the main directory of authors.

    Balance this thin evidence against the fact that Ann (1) is a strong supporter of Israel (2) retweets Mickey Kaus about 20 times more often than any supposed anti-semite (3) supports Trump and his objectively pro-jewish policies, and calling her anti-semitic is simply slander.

    Finally, we have Ann affection for supposed anti-semite Steve. The evidence for this is a single quote, which is indeed pretty ugly and antisemitic:

    Or in the case of the wealthiest, most powerful group, they use their influence over the media to instill [insecurity] in their children and to depress, demoralize, and divide other groups` children.
     

    This and a sparse number of other flirtations with MacDonald-style antisemitism, if they were the main theme of Steve's rather voluminous writing about Jews, could indeed justify the label. But they are not very typical at all. At most they show Steve is at times anti-semitism-curious. Is Ann supposed to boycott him now for that or else be guilty by association?

    Also Ann Coulter used to have a Jewish boyfriend, so she is not doing a good very job of being an anti-Semite.

    • Replies: @Pat Hannagan
    Ever seen that scene where Cool Hand Luke takes the turtle to his boss? That's what you just did.
  33. @Lot
    The evidence for Coulter's supposed antisemitism is extremely thin.

    She never "touted" Radix, she retweeted a tweet that was anti-NRO that had a Radix hashtag, one of several.

    I mean, it was not even a link, it was a retweet of a hashtag mention!

    Radix site is certainly antisemitic, but honestly the various alt-right sites like Radix that post ambitious, boring, long-winded articles kind of blur together for me, and quite likely Ann as well.

    The second retweet had nothing to do whatsoever with Jews, but a joke about how Hillary's anti-Trump ad makes Trump look really good. If I had twitter I'd retweet it myself, it was funny! Is she supposed to do a background check on everyone she retweets?

    Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile, and brings disrepute onto the site and its many fine authors. However, he's one of dozens of authors, and they run maybe one thing a year from him on average. He's not even in the top 50 or so authors there, and he is not listed on the main directory of authors.

    Balance this thin evidence against the fact that Ann (1) is a strong supporter of Israel (2) retweets Mickey Kaus about 20 times more often than any supposed anti-semite (3) supports Trump and his objectively pro-jewish policies, and calling her anti-semitic is simply slander.

    Finally, we have Ann affection for supposed anti-semite Steve. The evidence for this is a single quote, which is indeed pretty ugly and antisemitic:

    Or in the case of the wealthiest, most powerful group, they use their influence over the media to instill [insecurity] in their children and to depress, demoralize, and divide other groups` children.
     

    This and a sparse number of other flirtations with MacDonald-style antisemitism, if they were the main theme of Steve's rather voluminous writing about Jews, could indeed justify the label. But they are not very typical at all. At most they show Steve is at times anti-semitism-curious. Is Ann supposed to boycott him now for that or else be guilty by association?

    Any criticism of Jews is anti-semitism?

    The mainstream is openly anti-white. That many Jews pretend to be white doesn’t negate the fact that they are a specific subpopulation sharing genes and customs with each other that “other” whites do not share.

    • Agree: Nico
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "The mainstream is openly anti-white."

    See, it's comments like this that make shake my burka. The only perpetual "anti-white" movement is the one concocted in your mind. The mainstream consists of whites, but according to you, they're not really white, they're anti-white, even though it has yet to be definitely established what constitutes white and what constitutes anti-white.

    "That many Jews pretend to be white doesn’t negate the fact that they are a specific subpopulation sharing genes and customs with each other that “other” whites do not share."

    How about focusing on humanity for once than your obsession of Jews.

    Why some people remotely consider Cathy Young, or Ann Coulter for that matter, to be credible is beyond me. They engage in rampant show(wo)manship.

    , @conatus
    "That many Jews pretend to be white"

    Yeah in this vid, Mike Wallace does not pretend, he says he is not white.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeixtYS-P3s
    , @MQ
    That many Jews pretend to be white doesn’t negate the fact that they are a specific subpopulation sharing genes and customs with each other that “other” whites do not share.

    lol -- exactly the same could be said of Sicilians, Ukrainians, etc. Jews are a white ethnic group, same as the others. Like all ethnic groups, we share a particular history and customs, in this case a religion (although it's not uncommon for religion to line up with ethnicity). I wouldn't deny that the history of anti-semitism has led some (though hardly all) Jews to feel a particular kind of alienation from Christian ethnic groups, and that sometimes gets reflected in an eagerness to follow along with popular culture/political trends that demonize other groups. But there are certainly plenty of non-Jews that follow those ideologies as well, from their own particular kinds of alienation.

    The line between anti-semitism and depictions of real ethnic/cultural differences comes when you posit Jews as some kind of collective conspiracy against the health of the wider society, rather than as people who are influenced by their own backgrounds as other people are.

  34. @Anonymous
    The young turks can't work out if rape is bad if blacks are doing the raping

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6n31gSkq0II

    “Racism towards blacks by whites is worse than raping babies”

    -TYT

  35. As a non-Jew living in Israel, I can definitely attest that anti-Gentilism is “a thing”, although it’s not especially sophisticated here. I haven’t experienced very much myself, but I have a somewhat special status here and I also live in a heavily Anglo (American/British/South African) area where everything is a bit gentler.

    You should know that, apart from the ultra-religious groups, anti-Gentilism is much more common among the Mizrahim here than among the Ashkenazi founders of the state. (The Ashkenazi founding elites have been pretty much swamped by relatively unsophisticated immigrants from the Middle East and the former Soviet Union — the smart ones got out earlier — over the past 68 years, although the Ashkenazi elites still keep the country going economically.)

    Jewish immigrants are routinely quizzed about their Jewishness (even when they are clearly orthodox), while anyone who speaks Hebrew with a native accent is given a pass, even if they (like Ariel Sharon), have questionable Jewish background. An exception might be really unassimilated post-1991 Soviets, many of whom are well-known not to be Jewish according to the Rabbinate. But the assimilation pressures here are very strong — I’m not really sure if very Slavic-looking people (you do see them around) who speak Hebrew fluently are under suspicion.

    • Replies: @Gabriel M
    As a non-Jew living in Israel, I can definitely attest that anti-Gentilism is “a thing”, although it’s not especially sophisticated here. I haven’t experienced very much myself blah blah blah

    Are you trying to parody a whiney minority or what?
  36. @Gabriel M
    Ann Coulter is not an anti-Semite and she doesn't pander to anti-Semites.

    Steve Sailer, on the other hand, really does pander to anti-Semites and, in fact, it seems to be a pretty central part of his business model because he, without fail, ramps it up in line with his quarterly fundraisers.

    I was reading some old Lawrence Auster stuff the other day. He exemplified the ability the criticize Jews for what the do wrong, both as individuals and as a group, without dabbling in unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism. Similarly he was able to criticize blacks and other protected minorities without dabbling in racist trash. He ceaselessly warned about the gutter Richard Spencer and others were leading the anti multicultural right into.

    Unfortunately, it was to no avail. Any remotely honest person knows the alt-right is up to its neck in filth at this point. Any sensible person knows that its all going to blow up in your face before too long. You made your pact with the devil, laughing about it is not going to make it go away.

    Oy vey. If you hate Sailer so much why do you read him? I tend to ignore the writers I dislike.

  37. @Gabriel M
    Ann Coulter is not an anti-Semite and she doesn't pander to anti-Semites.

    Steve Sailer, on the other hand, really does pander to anti-Semites and, in fact, it seems to be a pretty central part of his business model because he, without fail, ramps it up in line with his quarterly fundraisers.

    I was reading some old Lawrence Auster stuff the other day. He exemplified the ability the criticize Jews for what the do wrong, both as individuals and as a group, without dabbling in unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism. Similarly he was able to criticize blacks and other protected minorities without dabbling in racist trash. He ceaselessly warned about the gutter Richard Spencer and others were leading the anti multicultural right into.

    Unfortunately, it was to no avail. Any remotely honest person knows the alt-right is up to its neck in filth at this point. Any sensible person knows that its all going to blow up in your face before too long. You made your pact with the devil, laughing about it is not going to make it go away.

    You do know that Auster was a Jew, don’t you?

  38. @Gabriel M
    Ann Coulter is not an anti-Semite and she doesn't pander to anti-Semites.

    Steve Sailer, on the other hand, really does pander to anti-Semites and, in fact, it seems to be a pretty central part of his business model because he, without fail, ramps it up in line with his quarterly fundraisers.

    I was reading some old Lawrence Auster stuff the other day. He exemplified the ability the criticize Jews for what the do wrong, both as individuals and as a group, without dabbling in unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism. Similarly he was able to criticize blacks and other protected minorities without dabbling in racist trash. He ceaselessly warned about the gutter Richard Spencer and others were leading the anti multicultural right into.

    Unfortunately, it was to no avail. Any remotely honest person knows the alt-right is up to its neck in filth at this point. Any sensible person knows that its all going to blow up in your face before too long. You made your pact with the devil, laughing about it is not going to make it go away.

    Hey, would you care to point to some of our host’s “unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism”?

    No?

    I didn’t think so.

    • Agree: EriK, MEH 0910
    • Replies: @Gabriel M
    Learn to read.

    I said that Steve Sailer panders to anti-Semites. If you really want me to cite examples of "“unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism?" in his comment threads, then I suppose I shall. An honest (and sane) person would just concede the point though.
  39. I like the Kristallnacht reference because the Jackie-Youth threw stones through the fraternity’s windows, shattering the glass. The analogy was:

    * Nazis = Jackie-Youth

    * Jewish synagogues and stores = Fraternity

    ———

    I like also the pogrom reference. The analogy was:

    * Gentile boy found dead right before Easter = Jackie did not get a weekend date

    * Jewish village deserves to be attacked = Fraternity deserves to be attacked

    ———

    Cathy Young seems to think that these analogies incite hostility toward Jews. I thought she was smarter than that.

    Young grew up in Moscow, Russia. Her family was allowed to emigrate from there to the USA because the family is Jewish. Now she is spending her time and energy making bogus accusations of anti-Semitism against her fellow American citizens here. Her Jewish resentments are making her behave stupidly.

    • Replies: @SFG
    I have to say, she's done quite a bit criticizing feminism, so I hate to pile on her too much.
  40. @Lot
    The evidence for Coulter's supposed antisemitism is extremely thin.

    She never "touted" Radix, she retweeted a tweet that was anti-NRO that had a Radix hashtag, one of several.

    I mean, it was not even a link, it was a retweet of a hashtag mention!

    Radix site is certainly antisemitic, but honestly the various alt-right sites like Radix that post ambitious, boring, long-winded articles kind of blur together for me, and quite likely Ann as well.

    The second retweet had nothing to do whatsoever with Jews, but a joke about how Hillary's anti-Trump ad makes Trump look really good. If I had twitter I'd retweet it myself, it was funny! Is she supposed to do a background check on everyone she retweets?

    Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile, and brings disrepute onto the site and its many fine authors. However, he's one of dozens of authors, and they run maybe one thing a year from him on average. He's not even in the top 50 or so authors there, and he is not listed on the main directory of authors.

    Balance this thin evidence against the fact that Ann (1) is a strong supporter of Israel (2) retweets Mickey Kaus about 20 times more often than any supposed anti-semite (3) supports Trump and his objectively pro-jewish policies, and calling her anti-semitic is simply slander.

    Finally, we have Ann affection for supposed anti-semite Steve. The evidence for this is a single quote, which is indeed pretty ugly and antisemitic:

    Or in the case of the wealthiest, most powerful group, they use their influence over the media to instill [insecurity] in their children and to depress, demoralize, and divide other groups` children.
     

    This and a sparse number of other flirtations with MacDonald-style antisemitism, if they were the main theme of Steve's rather voluminous writing about Jews, could indeed justify the label. But they are not very typical at all. At most they show Steve is at times anti-semitism-curious. Is Ann supposed to boycott him now for that or else be guilty by association?

    Kevin MacDonald… says nothing worthwhile

    I would have agreed with this sentiment back in the day when it was common and open street knowledge that Jews were a specific ethnic if not exactly racial group whose interests at various times have been in direct conflict with those of white Christians qua white Christians. Nowadays, when even immigration patriots are expected to kiss the collective arses of a demographic group which is hugely overrepresented in the openly anti-white and anti-Christian Western intelligentsia and which despite obvious admirable exceptions continues to vote massively for the anti-white, anti-Christian faction in North America at any rate, it is worth reminding people now and then of what should be flashing bright red in their faces.

  41. @Twinkie

    Sabrina Rubin Erdely’s Kristallnacht
     
    I thought the allusion was particularly apt given not just actual the thuggery of the attack on the fraternity, but especially because of the official support for the prevailing narrative and the ineffectual investigation of the actual vandalism. It definitely had the whiff (there goes the world that leftists love to use anytime some black/homosexual/transgender person is lynched mythically somewhere) of Nazi-condoned thuggery or even Maoist Cultural Revolution.

    As for anti-gentilism, anyone who has grown up with a large Jewish population as I have can serve as a witness to the prevailing sense of fear and contempt toward gentiles that many Jews seem to harbor (one that is much more freely discussed among Jews themselves). Even though I am not Jewish, I frequently heard disparaging remarks about non-Jews, especially white Catholics and Asians, from Jewish acquaintances and colleagues particularly while I was in academia. For some reason, people seem to feel very free about their thoughts around me, and would tell me their inner thoughts readily (this came in VERY HANDY when I used to work as an investigator).

    Growing up, I used to have a highly positive view of Jews, but that began to change once I grew up and began to see beyond the propaganda ("Light unto nations") and Holocaust victimology.

    Two summers working as a summer camp counsellor, surrounded by Jews, taught me all I need to know about their hive mentality.

  42. More identity politicking and victimology. Great. Rubin Erdly may be a fabulist, but since I can construct a theory of anti-semitism this proves she’s a victim and hence we must all overlook her prevarications while we give her safe spaces and a hug room. This serves the purpose of inoculation against prosecuting those who perpetrate hate-crime hoaxes. And since the original (fake) hate-crime is always front page above the fold while the follow up reporting of the hoax discovery is always section “B” page 24 amid the ads from used car dealers, everything works out just fine. I must say I fail to see the point of taking this shot at Sailer. Those of us who read him aren’t going to be swayed against him while there will be some who are freshly introduced to his name as a player and incited to find and read his blog. A net win for Sailer and Unz.

  43. @Anonymous
    Good Lord, you people are a bunch of creeps. (Oh, and by the way... the so-called "racial" component of being Jewish is an ethnicity, not a race. "Whiteness" is not an ethnicity. And Israel recognizes black Ethiopian Jews as Jewish.

    So, a white rich fraternity had to be inconvenienced for a bit. Boo fucking hoo

    So, a white rich fraternity had to be inconvenienced for a bit. Boo fucking hoo

    Well, nobody was even inconvenienced by Ann Coulter’s comments, but that didn’t stop Cathy Young (among others) from complaining about them.

  44. @rod1963
    She's a political fanatic. Also she works for the CATO institute. IOW she works for a globalist/anti-white group with ties to the Kochs that are no friends of the U.S. and it's white population.

    Does it surprise anyone that she targets whites in any form at all?

    What we need to do is look at are the men behind the curtain who pull the strings. That means the various foundations, institutes, think tanks, etc. Many of them are down right hostile to the well being of whites and America.

    “she works for the CATO institute”

    PJ O’Rourke, also previously sponsored by CATO, who’s just come out for Hillary Clinton, has appeared several times on BBC radio describing Trump’s relationship with the Republican party as ‘the drunk uncle at the family gathering”.

    • Replies: @Pat Hannagan
    Never found the guy amusing.

    Put an Irishman on the spit and you can always get another Irishman to turn him.
    , @ATX Hipster
    What are the chances we'll see demands for Hillary to denounce O'Rourke because of "Foreigners Around the World"?

    http://imgur.com/gallery/H1X8R
    , @Milo Minderbinder
    Kind of reminds me of Buckley's son Chris coming out for Obama in 2008.

    I can understand various types of Conservatives not liking Trump or not voting for him.

    But how can they make the leap to supporting the corrupt, incompetent, man-hating, globalist Hillary.

    If you really can't stand Trump, vote Libertarian or Constitution Party, or leave the spot on the ballot for President blank, but Hillary, really?
    , @Andrew Ryan
    Kind of ironic since Trump is a teetolar and O'Rourke was famously a lush. O'Rourke is a libertarian who is completely ignorant of HBD who wrote a book ("Eat the Rich") where he attempted to fathom how Sweden could simultaneously be so socialist and so successful and could only square that circle by predicting the imminent collapse of the country due to its socialist policies. He referred to Sweden as an example of "good socialism" whereas Cuba was an example of "bad socialism".

    The idea that a country full of Swedes will be a nice place regardless of its politics (with the exception of going full retard i.e. North Korea) and a country full of Cubans will pretty much be a sh*thole regardless of its politics never showed up on his radar.

    Funny guy but full of sh*t.

    , @William Badwhite
    O'Rourke was funny for a bit back in the early 90's, but his act quickly wears thin. He did have a funny crack about Mexico though. "Welcome to Mexico...the Republic of Dirt...a country whose national sport consists of torturing farm animals"
  45. @Gabriel M
    Ann Coulter is not an anti-Semite and she doesn't pander to anti-Semites.

    Steve Sailer, on the other hand, really does pander to anti-Semites and, in fact, it seems to be a pretty central part of his business model because he, without fail, ramps it up in line with his quarterly fundraisers.

    I was reading some old Lawrence Auster stuff the other day. He exemplified the ability the criticize Jews for what the do wrong, both as individuals and as a group, without dabbling in unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism. Similarly he was able to criticize blacks and other protected minorities without dabbling in racist trash. He ceaselessly warned about the gutter Richard Spencer and others were leading the anti multicultural right into.

    Unfortunately, it was to no avail. Any remotely honest person knows the alt-right is up to its neck in filth at this point. Any sensible person knows that its all going to blow up in your face before too long. You made your pact with the devil, laughing about it is not going to make it go away.

    They say the “cuck” meme is dying out but we should definitely keep it around, it’s the perfect description for guys like this

  46. Cantor’s sons were in the very same frat that was accused. Perhaps it was a hatchet job, designed to come out right before the election, “Congressman’s two sons in Rape Frat,” but Cantor lost the GOP primary in June.
    Perhaps Erdely was not anti-Gentilic but anti-Cantor?

  47. @Twinkie

    Sabrina Rubin Erdely’s Kristallnacht
     
    I thought the allusion was particularly apt given not just actual the thuggery of the attack on the fraternity, but especially because of the official support for the prevailing narrative and the ineffectual investigation of the actual vandalism. It definitely had the whiff (there goes the world that leftists love to use anytime some black/homosexual/transgender person is lynched mythically somewhere) of Nazi-condoned thuggery or even Maoist Cultural Revolution.

    As for anti-gentilism, anyone who has grown up with a large Jewish population as I have can serve as a witness to the prevailing sense of fear and contempt toward gentiles that many Jews seem to harbor (one that is much more freely discussed among Jews themselves). Even though I am not Jewish, I frequently heard disparaging remarks about non-Jews, especially white Catholics and Asians, from Jewish acquaintances and colleagues particularly while I was in academia. For some reason, people seem to feel very free about their thoughts around me, and would tell me their inner thoughts readily (this came in VERY HANDY when I used to work as an investigator).

    Growing up, I used to have a highly positive view of Jews, but that began to change once I grew up and began to see beyond the propaganda ("Light unto nations") and Holocaust victimology.

    “Even though I am not Jewish, I frequently heard disparaging remarks about non-Jews, especially white Catholics and Asians, from Jewish acquaintances and colleagues particularly while I was in academia”

    a cursory survey of jewish marriage habits suggests you are full of shit.

    • Replies: @SFG
    They're not mutually exclusive. In fact, the widespread intermarriage might well be a cause of jealousy among people who decided to sacrifice to marry within the tribe.

    Which means the 'all Jews hate gentiles' meme is BS, but the attitudes Twinkie's describing I will certainly believe in.
    , @Twinkie

    a cursory survey of jewish marriage habits suggests you are full of shit.
     
    Not all intermarriages are the same. For examples, in white-Asian intermarriages, the children tend to identify as whites rather than as Asians. In fact, there was a recent study that showed that in generations two and three, those with partial Asian ancestry overwhelmingly identified themselves as whites. And among American-born Asians, a sizable minority of even FULL-blooded Asians identified as whites in generations two and up!

    On the other hand, in Jewish intermarriages, it is very common for the non-Jewish partner to assimilate into the Jewish spouse's culture. A classic example that captures both trends is Amy Chua. Her children are on record as stating that they identify themselves as Jewish and that they are "only Chinese" to the extent that they do "stuff like eat Chinese food." Even though Chua's husband is a non-practicing Jews, I believe it was *Amy Chua* who encouraged her daughters to undergo Jewish rituals.

    So, despite the handwringing about intermarriage among Jews, their intermarriages seem to assimilate others into their minority - expand the Tribe - if you will. Meanwhile Asian intermarriages seem to be far more assimilative into the majority population.
  48. @Anonymous Nephew
    "she works for the CATO institute"

    PJ O'Rourke, also previously sponsored by CATO, who's just come out for Hillary Clinton, has appeared several times on BBC radio describing Trump's relationship with the Republican party as 'the drunk uncle at the family gathering".

    Never found the guy amusing.

    Put an Irishman on the spit and you can always get another Irishman to turn him.

  49. @el topo
    I'm sure you'd feel the same way if the windows in your house were smashed in by bricks. Boo fucking hoo.

    Creep.

    Don’t forget the libel. Reputations never seem to fully bounce back after a rape accusation, no matter how thoroughly debunked.

    • Replies: @SFG
    Yeah, that's the thing. Feminists making it easier to make false accusations will mean more of them are made. It really is us or them.
  50. @Lot
    The evidence for Coulter's supposed antisemitism is extremely thin.

    She never "touted" Radix, she retweeted a tweet that was anti-NRO that had a Radix hashtag, one of several.

    I mean, it was not even a link, it was a retweet of a hashtag mention!

    Radix site is certainly antisemitic, but honestly the various alt-right sites like Radix that post ambitious, boring, long-winded articles kind of blur together for me, and quite likely Ann as well.

    The second retweet had nothing to do whatsoever with Jews, but a joke about how Hillary's anti-Trump ad makes Trump look really good. If I had twitter I'd retweet it myself, it was funny! Is she supposed to do a background check on everyone she retweets?

    Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile, and brings disrepute onto the site and its many fine authors. However, he's one of dozens of authors, and they run maybe one thing a year from him on average. He's not even in the top 50 or so authors there, and he is not listed on the main directory of authors.

    Balance this thin evidence against the fact that Ann (1) is a strong supporter of Israel (2) retweets Mickey Kaus about 20 times more often than any supposed anti-semite (3) supports Trump and his objectively pro-jewish policies, and calling her anti-semitic is simply slander.

    Finally, we have Ann affection for supposed anti-semite Steve. The evidence for this is a single quote, which is indeed pretty ugly and antisemitic:

    Or in the case of the wealthiest, most powerful group, they use their influence over the media to instill [insecurity] in their children and to depress, demoralize, and divide other groups` children.
     

    This and a sparse number of other flirtations with MacDonald-style antisemitism, if they were the main theme of Steve's rather voluminous writing about Jews, could indeed justify the label. But they are not very typical at all. At most they show Steve is at times anti-semitism-curious. Is Ann supposed to boycott him now for that or else be guilty by association?

    Kevin MacDonald is a giant. I do not know how anyone could read Kevin’s book Culture of Critique and not come to the same conclusion. Rabbinical friends of mine have read it and been deeply moved. The entire series is compelling.

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

    Yidden desperately need something like this:

    http://www.lukeford.net/blog/?p=63983

    “Jews for Consistency” monitors the proclamations and actions of Jewish groups in the light of Jewish text and Jewish history.

    We point out when they seek the the opposite things for Jews that they seek for non-Jews. Too often organized Jewry pursues cohesion for Jews (in 2016 Israel’s Sephardic Chief Rabbi, in line with the Torah tradition, said non-Jews were not permitted to live in the Jewish state) but multiculturalism for non-Jews (more non-white immigration into white countries, more rights for minorities such as blacks, latinos, gays, and the transgendered, more rights for atheists and less Christianity in the public square, etc). Rarely do these Jewish groups show the same concern for non-Jewish minorities in the Jewish state.

    If unity, strength and cohesion are good for Jews, then these qualities are equally good for gentiles. When you maximize rights and power for minorities, as Jewish activists often try to do in the West, it always comes at the cost of cohesion for the majority. How would you like your country being disunited and fragmented? How would you like the Jewish state to stop being the Jewish state and start being another multicultural hodgepodge of warring groups? Do you want Tibet to stop being Tibetan and Japan to stop being Japanese? So why do America, England, and Australia need to lose their historic identities as Anglo countries?

    We ask Jewish organizations — such as the ADL (Anti-Defamation League), the SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center), and the SWC (Simon Wiesenthal Center) — to follow the Golden Rule and to only do unto others as they would want done to Jews and to the Jewish state. If they want to wrap themselves in the mantle of Torah and tolerance, we check their claims because sometimes these groups are running a con.

    I am convert to Orthodox Judaism and a hasid of Kevin MacDonald. And now I must daven and study a page of Talmud.

    • Replies: @Lot
    You are a grade-A weirdo and shameless media hound and craver of attention.

    A fan of The International Jew as well? Why or why not?
    , @SFG
    Only thing I'd add is it's often not the same people--the last issue of Race Traitor ('Treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity') was about the persecution of the Palestinians, for instance, and hardcore Orthodox types usually don't spend lots of time going on about the wonders of immigration.

    They intersect in the neocons, who genuinely do preach 'diversity for America/homogeneity for Israel'. But a lot of liberal Jews will criticize the Palestinians, and a lot of the Orthodox don't spend their time agitating for more diversity.
  51. “Apparently, she had some kind of Jewish agenda to destroy UVA because it’s too white, Christian, pretty and conservative, or something. ”

    Apparently, Ann had some kind of anti-semitic agenda to destroy organized jewry because it’s too semitic, jewish, ugly, and liberal, or something.

  52. Why do so many Jews change their names to things like “Young”, “Sanders” and “Stewart” that are clearly not Jewish? It’s almost as though in spite of their “achievements” Jews are ashamed to be seen as Jewish.

    More to the point; regardless of how “libertarian” they might be pretending to be in the moment, have we not seen enough of the malice and destructiveness of Jewish feminism to know to completely ignore what a female Jewish writer has to say about anything? Any potential UVA rape hoax of the future can be avoided if everyone takes my sage advice.

    • Replies: @SFG
    Assimilation? 'Cathy Young' is pretty much a literal translation of 'Ekaterina Jung'.

    She's criticized a lot of the more extreme manifestations of feminism, which has always been my #1 peeve with the left. It's rare to find anyone attacking feminism, honestly.

    Coulter hit her anti-Semitism button and she reacted, but it's not as if that's all she's ever talked about.
  53. @Hunsdon
    Hey, would you care to point to some of our host's "unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism"?

    No?

    I didn't think so.

    Learn to read.

    I said that Steve Sailer panders to anti-Semites. If you really want me to cite examples of ““unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism?” in his comment threads, then I suppose I shall. An honest (and sane) person would just concede the point though.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    I said that Steve Sailer panders to anti-Semites. If you really want me to cite examples of ““unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism?” in his comment threads, then I suppose I shall. An honest (and sane) person would just concede the point though.
     
    By your logic, Ron Unz panders to anti-Semites. So does Ilana Mercer. Which strikes me as somewhat odd when neither of them appear to be "self-hating Jews." Perhaps the principle of open and unfettered dialog isn't a priority for you. As for Sailer, I'm fairly certain I've seen anti-white comments in his comment threads also - does this mean he panders to anti-white racists?

    Where exactly is the line drawn for anti-semitism? A whole lot of people think Ann Coulter and Rick Sanchez are anti-Semites. I've been accused of it myself more than once. And where is the line for "racism" drawn?

    Sailer has noticed that walls work quite well in controlling Israel's immigration problem. This inevitably invites notice that many Jews who support Israel's wall also reject the idea of a wall for America. Nothing invites attack like hypocrisy.
    , @5371
    So allowing people to express their opinion = pandering to them.
    Perfectly clear.
    , @William Badwhite
    "If you really want me to cite examples of ““unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism?” in his comment threads, then I suppose I shall"

    He asked you to do so the first time. Please make sure to draw a distinction between "unhinged anti-Semitism" and "demented anti-Zionism". Do they differ from garden variety anti-Semitism/Zionism?

    "An honest (and sane) person would just concede the point though."

    You made a baseless assertion. Following up a baseless assertion by demanding someone "concede the point" is silly. You haven't made a point, you've made an assertion.

    "Pander" is defined as "to do or provide what someone wants or demands even though it is not proper, good, or reasonable". Beyond approving comments, Steve doesn't do much of anything for his various commenters. Hitting an "approve" button is not pandering. He approves your silliness, he approves comments from Silky Duck or whatever name he's using this week. Are you arguing that he panders to you and the Duck guy as well? Rhetorical question, don't answer.

    According to the rules of logic a baseless assertion can be countered by another baseless assertion. I assert that you argue like a woman (demand your point be conceded when you've not made a point; attribute your failure to make an argument to someone else's shortcoming ("learn to read"); use overblown adjectives such as "demented").

    I assert that Hunsdon asking you to provide some basis for your assertion was rather charitable.
    , @Jus' Sayin'...
    You seem to equate pandering to anti-Semites with not censoring readers' comments using criteria which you deem acceptable.
    , @Jack D
    There is no doubt (in my mind at least) that anti-Semitic kooks are present in the Sailer comments, along with various other points of view. I can't imagine that they form a big part of his fundraising base - how much can be left over from the SSI check after you have paid the rent on the trailer and bought beer, cigarettes and jerky? The reason that they stand out so much here is that they have pretty much been purged from the rest of "polite" American society. While I understand the impetus to do so (for Jews this can be regarded literally as a matter of life and death because the last time these viewpoints were given free rein it turned out very very badly), there is also supposed to be an American tradition of free speech where all viewpoints, even unpopular ones were permissible. We don't need a First Amendment to protect popular points of view. The Left used to understand this quite well when theirs were the viewpoints in need of protection, but now that they shoe is on the other foot they have no problem resorting to McCarthyite tactics and doing their best to see that those with the "wrong" opinions lose their jobs and everything else.
  54. And in other news, our elites discover somebody who makes them glad they have countries and borders: http://www.factmag.com/2016/05/12/home-office-reportedly-investigating-azealia-banks-for-racism/

  55. @Anonymous Nephew
    "she works for the CATO institute"

    PJ O'Rourke, also previously sponsored by CATO, who's just come out for Hillary Clinton, has appeared several times on BBC radio describing Trump's relationship with the Republican party as 'the drunk uncle at the family gathering".

    What are the chances we’ll see demands for Hillary to denounce O’Rourke because of “Foreigners Around the World”?

    Foreigners Around The World by P.J. O’Rourke

    • Agree: Travis, PV van der Byl
  56. @Talpiot
    As a non-Jew living in Israel, I can definitely attest that anti-Gentilism is "a thing", although it's not especially sophisticated here. I haven't experienced very much myself, but I have a somewhat special status here and I also live in a heavily Anglo (American/British/South African) area where everything is a bit gentler.

    You should know that, apart from the ultra-religious groups, anti-Gentilism is much more common among the Mizrahim here than among the Ashkenazi founders of the state. (The Ashkenazi founding elites have been pretty much swamped by relatively unsophisticated immigrants from the Middle East and the former Soviet Union -- the smart ones got out earlier -- over the past 68 years, although the Ashkenazi elites still keep the country going economically.)

    Jewish immigrants are routinely quizzed about their Jewishness (even when they are clearly orthodox), while anyone who speaks Hebrew with a native accent is given a pass, even if they (like Ariel Sharon), have questionable Jewish background. An exception might be really unassimilated post-1991 Soviets, many of whom are well-known not to be Jewish according to the Rabbinate. But the assimilation pressures here are very strong -- I'm not really sure if very Slavic-looking people (you do see them around) who speak Hebrew fluently are under suspicion.

    As a non-Jew living in Israel, I can definitely attest that anti-Gentilism is “a thing”, although it’s not especially sophisticated here. I haven’t experienced very much myself blah blah blah

    Are you trying to parody a whiney minority or what?

    • Replies: @Talipiot
    You're trying to bait me for some reason.

    I think I have one of the most objective and informed perspectives on Israel of any person on the planet (I'm not a Palestinian!).

    I'm certainly not an aggrieved minority. I keep my head down most of the time and smile condescendingly at the most barbarous people when necessary. Since that's not part of the culture here, they don't get it.
  57. @Big Bill
    Jews voluntarily living in Exile in other people's lands, preaching multiculturalism there, while simultaneously championing Jewish hegemony in Israel, are fundamentally neurotic.

    Cathy, like the vast majority of Exilic Jews, is neurotic.

    It is so sad to see them twisted up in mental knots, torturing themselves, unwilling to live among their own people, yet always fearful living among gentiles.

    Zionism + aliyah are the only cure. No more excuses, Cathy.

    I agree with you Bill.

    I used to think it would be possible to remain a patriot (of America) and a Jew at the same time. After all, there are American Catholics who are patriots of America and not Ireland or Italy or some other Catholic nation. For me personally, it’s never been difficult to do this at all. Of course I love America more than Israel. America is where my forefathers have lived for almost two centuries. Israel is nothing to me.

    But Jewish activism in this country is burning every possible bridge with patriots, and I don’t really see how this gets walked back anymore. Due to this invidious rhetoric from my co-ethnics, I’m sadly coming to the conclusion that the only viable options for Jewish diaspora in America are complete assimilation (reject entirely Jewish identity and blend into Stale Pale America) or emigration. Split loyalty and “dual” loyalty are bogus ideas. As I learned from Sailer on this very blog, politics is primarily about Whose Side Are You On. Loyalty comes in a strict hierarchy and at some point each person is called upon to declare, stand, and deliver.

    Any Jew who advocates open borders for their home country and ethnic preservation policies for Israel should be ostracized, silenced, or deported to Israel, in that order. The insanity has got to end.

    For me personally, Jewish identity is nothing at all compared to White American identity. But after spending so much time in alt-right circles, I can’t deny that there’s really something to the Jewish ethnocentrism case. (With many notable exceptions. Many great men of the Right are Jewish or Jewish ethnicity.)

    For me, I’ve given up on Jewish identity completely. It’s easy for me since I’m not a believer. My wife is a believing Christian, and my kids are coming up Christian. They won’t learn of my Jewish heritage until they are fully grown because I don’t want to open the door to childhood self-reimagining as a poor oppressed Jew. Nobody has it better than the Jews in this country. They have all the advantages of high status and few of the disadvantages of being Pale and Stale. The only dignified disposition of Jewish Americans towards the USA is gratitude and service.

    • Agree: Stan d Mute
    • Replies: @Lot

    Any Jew who advocates open borders for their home country and ethnic preservation policies for Israel should be ostracized, silenced, or deported to Israel, in that order. The insanity has got to end.
     
    Open boarders for America is wrong, regardless of ethnicity and regardless position on Israel having open boarders.

    For me, I’ve given up on Jewish identity completely. It’s easy for me since I’m not a believer. My wife is a believing Christian, and my kids are coming up Christian. They won’t learn of my Jewish heritage until they are fully grown because I don’t want to open the door to childhood self-reimagining as a poor oppressed Jew.
     
    Like your kids, I am half-Jewish and raised Christian, and my awareness of my ancestry never made me imagine myself as "oppressed." Rather I have a mild sense of pride in the accomplishments of both my Ashkenazi and Anglo/Germanic ancestors, as well as white Americans generally. I don't see the point of hiding such things.
    , @Jack D

    They won’t learn of my Jewish heritage until they are fully grown
     
    If you want your kids to spit on your grave, the best way is to hide something really big from them that they learn of when they are adults (extra points if they find out from someone else, which they will) and which rocks their world. Maybe one of your kids wants to be the grand wizard of the KKK - imagine when he finds out that he is really 1/2 Jewish himself. He'll probably convert and become a rabbi just to spite you.

    On the other hand, if you tell kids the most unimaginable things when they are little ("The Lubavitcher Rebbe was your grandfather") it doesn't bother them one bit because the world that they are presented with seems "normal" to them no matter how strange it is to anyone else.

    I assume that you must not have any relationship with you parents, siblings or any other blood relatives? If you are going to keep this secret, it wouldn't do to attend Cousin Eddie's bar mitzvah.

    To be a self hating anything, including a self-hating Jew, is a sad thing. Get some therapy and learn to be comfortable in your own skin.
    , @unlearnedelder
    I mostly agree with your comment.
    But I don't really see Jews advocating for open borders here being the same ones advocating for netanyahu's fences and deportation of "infiltrators".

    Obviously being a member of the tribe I'm biased, but I generally see the homocidal behavior of some jews to western civilization as part of a suicidal tendency.
    I think people tend to forget that debates that go on within Israel and the Jewish community. There are plenty of Israelis want Israel to be more liberal and multicultural.
    The leader of the opposition in Israel called for Netanyahu to let in Syrian refugees. Soros isn't a backer of AIPAC, but backs the anti-Netanyahu, pro-Iran deal JStreet, along with a host of Israeli treason lobby (treasonous to Israel) groups through the New Israel Fund.

    While I admire your gratitude to the country and subsequent decision to becoming fully american, I think it's generally true that the Jews most committed to Judaism are *less* likely to advocate for liberal policies for the US. The less committed ones advocate these policies because they've left judaism for secularism/multiculturalism instead of the majority culture like you have.
    I can't think of a single Jewish Neocon intellectual that is Orthodox or even Conservative ( I wouldn't count ben shapiro as an intellectual, but fine I can't think of two...)
    And it's also somewhat interesting that Jews least loyal to Israel are the antizionist hassidic groups like satmar (though I can see how they pose problems for society).

    , @SFG
    I don't know if I'd go lying to your kids--as Jack D said, they might join the alt-right and find an unpleasant surprise if someone goes digging. Besides, you don't want to create neuroses (especially if you don't want them acting too Jewish ;) ). Just tell them, hey, you're Christian, teach them about European and American history, and let them decide the rest. Ultimately they'll do what they want anyway.

    I have been thinking about what you said a lot, though. It seems like you either go Reform/Conservative, and swallow all this left-wing SJW crap, or Orthodox, and have to go live in one of 3 areas of the country that are really expensive and follow a bunch of rules useful for desert nomads 2000 years ago. The neocons actually had a nice 'secular right-wing' option, but then they went and started a war with Iraq for the benefit of Israel.

    I'd say, to any pro-white Jew reading this, you have 2 options. If you live near NYC, you can find a right-wing Jew who agrees with you and agree to disagree on immigration. If you don't, just find a suitable denomination and convert, or you can be the weird right-wing guy in your temple. If you really want to get involved in activism, find a group like AmRen that tolerates your ancestry. Hey, it's better than being conservative and black.
    , @AndrewR
    I would be honest with them but also be honest about Jewish power. Basically talk to them about their Jewish heritage in the same way that Goodthinking White Liberal parents are expected to talk to their children about whiteness. As for the holocaust narrative, say that human history is full of atrocities but that the holocaust is today used cynically as a weapon to push a Jewish Supremacist agenda. Leaving aside the questions over the veracity of the official narrative, nothing the Germans could have ever done justifies the way they're currently treated, let alone the way that Jews treat other people of European descent.
  58. @Anonymous Nephew
    "she works for the CATO institute"

    PJ O'Rourke, also previously sponsored by CATO, who's just come out for Hillary Clinton, has appeared several times on BBC radio describing Trump's relationship with the Republican party as 'the drunk uncle at the family gathering".

    Kind of reminds me of Buckley’s son Chris coming out for Obama in 2008.

    I can understand various types of Conservatives not liking Trump or not voting for him.

    But how can they make the leap to supporting the corrupt, incompetent, man-hating, globalist Hillary.

    If you really can’t stand Trump, vote Libertarian or Constitution Party, or leave the spot on the ballot for President blank, but Hillary, really?

    • Replies: @Kevin O'Keeffe

    Kind of reminds me of Buckley’s son Chris coming out for Obama in 2008.
     
    John McCain was (and is) a dangerous, mentally unhinged war monger. While Obama turned out to be a lousy President, he was sort of an unknown commodity at that time, and I couldn't blame anyone for voting for him in 2008, and just kinda hoping for the best (personally, I voted for Ralph Nader that year).

    Supporting Obama in 2008, and supporting Clinton in 2016, simply aren't comparable situations. Hillary is all too well known, and anyone who supports Hillary is next-of-kin to a traitor (or is a fool), and should be written out of any sort of political future among decent people.

    , @John Mansfield
    The next president will be Trump or Clinton; no plausible third option exists. For some of us, more of the same but even worse with Clinton is preferable to a whole new level of public depravity with Trump. Others like depravity and would be Trump if they could, so this stance is beyond their understanding.
  59. @Big Bill
    Jews voluntarily living in Exile in other people's lands, preaching multiculturalism there, while simultaneously championing Jewish hegemony in Israel, are fundamentally neurotic.

    Cathy, like the vast majority of Exilic Jews, is neurotic.

    It is so sad to see them twisted up in mental knots, torturing themselves, unwilling to live among their own people, yet always fearful living among gentiles.

    Zionism + aliyah are the only cure. No more excuses, Cathy.

    “Cathy, like the vast majority of Exilic Jews, is neurotic.”

    I was wondering when someone was going to bring up that fact. I don’t know whether every poster here assumes that based on earlier threads dealing with Cathy Young, but I only discovered that recently. I was somewhat familiar with the name Cathy Young after reading some of her articles on RCP, but I wasn’t impressed enough to explore her further. A check with Wikipedia reveals her ethnicity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathy_Young She was born Ekaterina Jung in Moscow and came to the U.S. when she was 7. I am somewhat surprised to find her defending Ms. Erdeley, who seems to have done a very good job completely discrediting her journalistic values with her article on the UVA “rape case” to go along with her earlier examples of shoddy journalism. Young manages to write a fairly lengthy blog dealing with the “Jewish” aspect of the attacks against Erdely but manages to avoid uttering one peep of criticism of Erdely’s contemptible “journalism” which severely damaged the reputations of the frat guys, the fraternity and UVA.

  60. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Lot

    As for anti-gentilism, anyone who has grown up with a large Jewish population as I have can serve as a witness to the prevailing sense of fear and contempt toward gentiles that many Jews seem to harbor (one that is much more freely discussed among Jews themselves).
     
    So your evidence is "everyone who knows Jews knows this to be true" and "things you heard from Jewish acquaintances"

    That's awfully persuasive!

    Maybe you are feeling a bit of envy and resentment at the single ethnic group most successful at skimming off the best women of your race? I mean, Amy Chua is quite a catch: best selling author, as politically incorrect as she feels like, daughter of one of the leading professors of electrical engineering in the nation, makes a ton of money, raises polite and intelligent children. And in her wikipedia pic, at age 50, she is still smoking hot.

    Maybe you are feeling a bit of envy and resentment at the single ethnic group most successful at skimming off the best women of your race?

    You give us one big example and then generalize it to ‘they’re all doing it’ yet criticize someone else for making a generalization based on his experiences.

  61. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Young wrote: ‘in the Alt-Right taxonomy, Jews are, of course, not “white.”’

    I recalled reading at LEAST one article by a Jew making that EXACT point, so I googled “Jews aren’t white,” here are the first and fifth links I found:

    http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/ashkenazi-jews-are-not-white-response-to-haaretz-article/

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/09/22/jews-in-america-struggled-for-generations-to-become-white-now-we-must-give-up-that-privilege-to-fight-racism/

    This is a classic ploy of political correctness police: When the exact same thing that is said in the “respectable press” is said in “not respectable press” it is racism, antisemitism, etc.

    • Replies: @Glaivester
    ‘in the Alt-Right taxonomy, Jews are, of course, not “white.”’

    When I want to talk about Jewish animosity toward non-Jewish whites, I specifically refer to them as "white Gentiles" so as not to get into the discussion of whether or not Jews are white (I would say that ethnic Jews are white - obviously non-white converts (e.g. Sammy Davis Jr.) are not white).

    That's one way the term "antijaphetic" is useful - it refers to a particular prejudice in a way that the issue of Jewish whiteness is irrelevant.

    (It also means that "antijaphetism" usually would only refer to prejudice by Jewish people (or possibly Arabs, who are semitic but also white), as it is unlikely that most non-whites would distinguish white Jews from white Gentiles, so "antiwhite" is a perfectly good term.

  62. Ekaterina Jung is her real name. She is emblematic of the nexus between libertarians and liberals. The former exists as a mild critique of the latter, only because the latter has no fear of them. Progressivism is a culture war in America, so they are willing to punt on economic issues, knowing it is a rhetorical surrender at worst. There will never be a libertarian paradise.

    It’s the fact that the libertarian is willing to surrender on all cultural issues that makes them tolerable to Lefty. Throw in the libertarian habit of stabbing anyone to their right in the back and they make for very useful idiots.

    I did a post on Mx. Jung a while back: http://tinyurl.com/hsn85sm

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    Jung? She must be of German-Jewish origin.

    In the end, she doesn't feel German.
    In the end, she doesn't feel Russian.
    In the end, she doesn't feel American.
    In the end, she doesn't feel white.

    She says she's libertarian, but her rage at Coulter suggests she feels mostly as Jewish.

    There are two ways of identity.

    1. To declare what you are loudly and proudly.

    2. To angrily react to offense remark directed at a certain group.

    Some Jews say "I'm Jewish and I'm proud." Like Michael Medved.

    Some Jews say, "I'm beyond tribal identity and only believe in universal ideals."

    Some Jews are indeed sincerely like that. But some Jews say such stuff but still identify most powerfully as Jewish. And they betray themselves like Cathy Young.
    If Young is beyond tribal identity, what does it matter what Coulter said about Jewish power? Young was never much bothered by Coulter's 'offensive' remarks about other groups over the yrs.
    But Young is most offended by Ann Coulter's stuff about Jews(even though it's very mild compared to what Coulter has said about OTHER groups).
    And I wonder if Young ever denounced Adelson for his 'nuke Iran' remark.

    There is identity by declaration.
    There is identity by reaction.

    By Young's violent reaction to Coulter's alleged anti-Jewish remarks, it is clear that Young mostly as Jewish than as libertarian ideologue.

    Ayn Rand gave herself away too:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uHSv1asFvU

    She rationalizes her rabid & virulent tribalism with talk of 'industry', 'intelligence', and 'reason'. "Jews should kick Arab butt because... it's all about free enterprise."

    I wonder... suppose Iran becomes the most secular, democratic, and advanced nation in the Middle East while Israel turns into an autocratic semi-theocracy. I wonder how many Jewish Libertarians will support Iran against Israel.

    This goes for so many Jewish 'libertarians'. They claim to be beyond tribalism; they say they are first and foremost LIBERTARIANS. But most of them will be offended MORE by negative remarks about Jews than about libertarians.

    If you say, 'liberatarianism sucks', they will argue with you. If you say, 'Jews suck', they will denounce you. Hmm.
  63. Anti-White is the right term. Much more than anti-Christian in my opinion.

    They still hate Sweden even though it is barely religious. Why? Because it is White (or was).

    But they really don’t have any animus toward South America despite it being overwhelmingly Christian – because it is Brown.

    They don’t like Christianity as much as it is something for Whites to rally around. But that’s where it ends.

  64. @Anonymous Nephew
    "she works for the CATO institute"

    PJ O'Rourke, also previously sponsored by CATO, who's just come out for Hillary Clinton, has appeared several times on BBC radio describing Trump's relationship with the Republican party as 'the drunk uncle at the family gathering".

    Kind of ironic since Trump is a teetolar and O’Rourke was famously a lush. O’Rourke is a libertarian who is completely ignorant of HBD who wrote a book (“Eat the Rich”) where he attempted to fathom how Sweden could simultaneously be so socialist and so successful and could only square that circle by predicting the imminent collapse of the country due to its socialist policies. He referred to Sweden as an example of “good socialism” whereas Cuba was an example of “bad socialism”.

    The idea that a country full of Swedes will be a nice place regardless of its politics (with the exception of going full retard i.e. North Korea) and a country full of Cubans will pretty much be a sh*thole regardless of its politics never showed up on his radar.

    Funny guy but full of sh*t.

    • Replies: @PV van der Byl
    O'Rourke failed to understand the difference between a socialist country in which the state owns the means of production and an extensive social democratic welfare state with high taxes and transfer payments but where enterprises were still shareholder-owned and where markets determined prices.

    Sweden has been an example of the latter from about 1960 to the the 1990s when policy took a somewhat different direction. East Germany, 1945-1989, was a genuinely socialist state and a horrible place to live despite being populated by essentially the same people who lived in West Germany.

    Sweden functioned well enough for a long time even though its formerly very high standard of living declined relatively during the 60s, 70s, and 80s.
  65. Cathy Young, Ekaterina Jung, born in Russia, Anglicised name, speaks out endlessly, high paying job, denounces Whites, promotes Jews.

    Ekaterina Jung, that’s her name, hates antisemitism, that’s her game, nothing to see here, move along.

  66. @Anonymous
    Good Lord, you people are a bunch of creeps. (Oh, and by the way... the so-called "racial" component of being Jewish is an ethnicity, not a race. "Whiteness" is not an ethnicity. And Israel recognizes black Ethiopian Jews as Jewish.

    So, a white rich fraternity had to be inconvenienced for a bit. Boo fucking hoo

    Your post is a troll and not worthy of a reply, but I’ll take the bait.

    In situations like this, it’s always worthwhile to reverse the fact pattern and see how you would react. If your answer changes depending on whose ox is being gored, then you are probably acting out of bias or animus and not general principles.

    So, imagine a black fraternity is accused of raping a woman. A well known right winger writes a story about it in a national magazine and provides lurid details about how the giant evil black men did the deed. (Forget that this would never happen in post-1964 America – perhaps it happened in 1952 but liberals remember this incident as if it happened yesterday). The outraged white students on campus march to the frat and break all their windows. The frat members, fearing lynching, have already escaped. Later it is revealed that it was all a hoax and that no one was raped.

    Would you be telling us to move on or would this not be one of the great liberal cause celebres of all time? Are we not still talking about the “Scottsboro Boys” 85 years after the fact?

  67. @Anonymous
    Good Lord, you people are a bunch of creeps. (Oh, and by the way... the so-called "racial" component of being Jewish is an ethnicity, not a race. "Whiteness" is not an ethnicity. And Israel recognizes black Ethiopian Jews as Jewish.

    So, a white rich fraternity had to be inconvenienced for a bit. Boo fucking hoo

    “The Jewish race” was the normal way of referring to the Jewish people before the 1930s when race fell out of favor as a way of categorizing people.

    http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/dna-links-prove-jews-are-a-race-says-genetics-expert-1.428664

    http://www.jewfaq.org/judaism.htm

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Yes, but it was also not uncommon to refer to the "English race," "German race," "Italian race," etc. as well as the broader "White race" in that era. With regard to the population genetic evidence, discussing Jews as a race ignores that there are subgroups among Jews that have different genetic histories. Considering some of the larger Jewish subgroups, the recent work of Shai Carmi and collaborators has shown that Ashkenazi Jews are predominantly a mixture of Middle Eastern and Southern European genetic components with a small amount of East European admixture. Yemeni Jews appear to be descended from local converts.
  68. Yeah, I used to enjoy the way Jewish writers would refute and argue with each other, dismissing others as maniacs not worth talking to. So for Jon Chait for example, Jonah Goldberg is, unfortunately, wrong but salvagable. While say Ramesh Ponnuru is a rabid wolverine that needs to be put down. Funny stuff.

  69. I really dislike this kind of attempt at smear thru guilt by association – your cousin’s friend’s brother’s wife once posted an anti-Semitic comment on a blog, therefore you are an anti-Semite too.

    That being said, I don’t think that people like Erdely act out of specific anti-gentile bias. Erdely doesn’t hate Christians in the same way that say Rev. Wright hates white people. Some of her best friends are gentiles. If she is not married to one already, then one of her children (if she has any) probably will be someday. What she hates are badwhites. All goodwhites, whether Jewish or Gentile, hate badwhites. Really religious Jews (whose religion is Judaism, not liberalism) don’t really care about badwhites one way or the other. The difference is this – if I go before Rev. Wright and renounce my whiteness, it won’t help – the taint is in the blood (Rachel Dolezal is the exception that proves the rule). But if I appear before Erdely and her bunch and announce that I have become a goodwhite, they will accept me as long as I adhere to the rules of goodwhitism.

    • Agree: Desiderius
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    The hatred towards badgoyim by goodgoyim is not like the hatred Jews have towards badgoyim. They are similar but, in the goodgoyim's case, it's evolutionarily maladaptive while in the Jews' case it's evolutionarily adaptive.
  70. The Nazi accusations against the Jews included much sexual hysteria.

    * The pimps were Jews who made Gentile women work as prostitutes.

    * Jews raped Gentile women.

    * Children born from sexual intercourse between Jewish men and Gentile women suffered from congenitally defiled blood.

    Sabrina Rubin Erdely has tried to make a journalist career by inciting sexual hysteria against men. Her major targets have been a Roman Catholic priest and a university fraternity. Her accusatory articles are reckless. She essentially incited a pogrom against an innocent fraternity.

    As a Jew, she ought to be more mindful about the consequences of inciting sexual hysteria against entire demographic groups of our society.

    • Replies: @Luke Ford
    Why would anyone think there are a lot of Jews in the sex industry?

    http://www.jewishquarterly.org/issuearchive/articled325.html?articleid=38
  71. @tbraton
    I haven't read the piece, but I am guessing it must be a German shepherd. I would point out that the news item comes from "fox," and I wouldn't trust anything a fox says about a dog. I believe there is a lot of bad blood there. I wouldn't know what to make of the fact if I saw a dog making a Hitler salute. any more than I would know what to make of a dog walking two-legged on his front paws. Just marvel, I guess, at the imagination of some dogs.

    Actually, the dog in question is a pug: I have a pug, she does that thing with her arm when she wants me to feed her. Also, the guy who posted the video was obviously goofing around, just as it is obvious that the Scottish Jewish guy who carried on about the video is self-promoting. I hope the whole thing just goes away.

    Other things:

    — I honestly never really thought about Sabrina’s ethnicity much, because of the Hungarian last name, but it did seem clear on reading her article that she has hostility towards WASP’s. However, “Jewishness” itself has nothing to do with it; she’s no more anti-WASP than Camille Paglia, who is Italian Catholic. What’s going in Philadelphia, anyway?

    — It’s interesting that people can imbibe prejudices when they are kids (“our people are so great, hey, let’s tell jokes about people who are not like us”) and then act like it’s something to be proud of and/or a central element of of their identity when they are middle aged (“I’ll never forget the time that black guy called me honky”). I thought that as you got older you were supposed to acquire some wisdom, which includes becoming a little bit less self-centered.

    — There are family prejudices among Jews just as there are among other people (e.g., Sabrina, Camille). In that sense, yes, I’ve known some Jews who have made snarky comments about non-Jews, especially Palestinians and Svartzers, and I’ve known some non-Jews who have made nasty comments about Jews. I don’t think it’s a problem unless it becomes a guiding light to someone’s conduct and/or if such petty attitudes start determining how one live’s one’s life.

    — Speaking of petty, claiming that anyone who criticizes Jews is doing so because they are racially jealous, particularly in the sexual domain, is really getting into the gutter.

    — Cathy Young: There’s some merit to what she says. There are a lot of people who associate things they don’t like with Jews, and this is due to simplistic stereotypes. Carrying those stereotypes into a typological ideology (like McDonald) is I think a mistake, and a gratuitous one, not only because it encourages irrational feelings among non-Jews, but irrational feelings among Jews, as well.

    — However, going around saying that someone is “flirting” with anti-semitism is tantamount to saying, “I really want to deliver a social death sentence to you, and call you an anti-semite, but I can’t, because your own words aren’t sufficient, so I will intimidate you by giving you this threat: if I can continue to find people who have any six degrees of separation from you who use bad words I will call you an anti-semite” which to ordinary people is going to be construed as bullying and a smear. If the shoe fits, wear it.

    • Agree: iffen
    • Replies: @Marcus
    She seems to retain the old Jewish hatred of the Church as well https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabrina_Erdely#Rolling_Stone_article:_.22The_Catholic_Church.27s_Secret_Sex-Crime_Files.22
    , @tbraton
    I was not following unz.com or Steve Sailer when the UVA "rape" case broke, but Rod Dreher over at TAC ran several blogs on the subject starting around Dec. 5. It was there that I first learned of the RS story. Since I didn't read the original story in RS, the first discrepancy which got my attention was from a second-hand news account, which cited "Jackie's" claim that the incident occurred during the early fall during "pledge week" at UVA only to inform the readers that pledge week at UVA does not occur until the spring, six months later. For the accuser to make such a blatant error of nearly half a year for the time of the alleged incident sent warning lights going off in my mind. Later I learned of the other major discrepancies, including the shattered glass table on which the alleged rapes had occurred. There was an excellent commenter on Dreher's blog posting as "Ryan Booth," who followed the case closely and kept us fully informed of new developments. It was Ryan Booth who emphasized the height of absurdity that occurred at UVA during the crisis: the female President of UVA suspending all SORORIETIES because of an alleged rape at a UVA fraternity. Who would have guessed that coeds at UVA posed such a sexual threat to male students? I imagine that applications by males to attend UVA must have increased dramatically as a result.

    My contribution to one of Dreher's threads on the UVA case consisted of pointing out the curious history of Sabrina Rubin Erdely as an undergraduate at the U. of Pennsylvania:

    "tbraton says:

    December 11, 2014 at 1:15 pm

    I pointed this out in an earlier RD blog, and I don’t know how many readers picked up on it. But someone whose name I can’t remember off-hand (but would name if I could to give him credit) had posted a link to another site that was discussing the RS/UVA matter. I checked it out and discovered that Sabrina Rubin Erdely was a fellow student with the infamous Stephen Glass at the U of Pennsylvania and they both worked on the student paper together. (From Wikipedia: “He attended the University of Pennsylvania, where he was an executive editor of the student newspaper, The Daily Pennsylvanian, and was a classmate of Sabrina Erdely.” Also from Wikipedia: “While working at 34th Street she was disciplined by Glass, then serving as editor, for submitting a “made-up travel story” for publication. [4)”) Even more ironic was the disclosure that student editor Glass reprimanded student writer Rubin (her maiden name) for fabricating an article that had appeared in a student publication. I have not verified that fact and can only repeat what I read on the other site. I would welcome confirmation and reposting of the link by the poster whose name I can’t recall. (It would save me a lot of time searching for my post.)" http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/did-jackie-make-the-whole-thing-up-rolling-stone-uva/comment-page-2/#comment-7056682
  72. Ha! Little does Ekaterina Jung know that Steve Sailer has a theory contextualising all Jew-Goy disagreements into a box called: “The confusing disarray of human complexity which has been misconstrued as stereotypical behaviour when in fact all can be explained through genetic disposition: The evolutionary basis for misunderstandings which can be resolved through blogging aka me and JayMan resolve the world’s wars via understanding haplogroups and their interplay.”

    (I must admit it’s fantastically enjoyable to see you take the heat for being an anti-semite. I can’t wait till Andrew Bolt gets thrown under the same bus.)

  73. @Lot
    The evidence for Coulter's supposed antisemitism is extremely thin.

    She never "touted" Radix, she retweeted a tweet that was anti-NRO that had a Radix hashtag, one of several.

    I mean, it was not even a link, it was a retweet of a hashtag mention!

    Radix site is certainly antisemitic, but honestly the various alt-right sites like Radix that post ambitious, boring, long-winded articles kind of blur together for me, and quite likely Ann as well.

    The second retweet had nothing to do whatsoever with Jews, but a joke about how Hillary's anti-Trump ad makes Trump look really good. If I had twitter I'd retweet it myself, it was funny! Is she supposed to do a background check on everyone she retweets?

    Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile, and brings disrepute onto the site and its many fine authors. However, he's one of dozens of authors, and they run maybe one thing a year from him on average. He's not even in the top 50 or so authors there, and he is not listed on the main directory of authors.

    Balance this thin evidence against the fact that Ann (1) is a strong supporter of Israel (2) retweets Mickey Kaus about 20 times more often than any supposed anti-semite (3) supports Trump and his objectively pro-jewish policies, and calling her anti-semitic is simply slander.

    Finally, we have Ann affection for supposed anti-semite Steve. The evidence for this is a single quote, which is indeed pretty ugly and antisemitic:

    Or in the case of the wealthiest, most powerful group, they use their influence over the media to instill [insecurity] in their children and to depress, demoralize, and divide other groups` children.
     

    This and a sparse number of other flirtations with MacDonald-style antisemitism, if they were the main theme of Steve's rather voluminous writing about Jews, could indeed justify the label. But they are not very typical at all. At most they show Steve is at times anti-semitism-curious. Is Ann supposed to boycott him now for that or else be guilty by association?

    The evidence for Coulter’s supposed antisemitism is extremely thin.

    You should also note that Ann goes to great lengths to assign full blame for the 1965 Immigration Act to the Irishman Teddy Kennedy, and never mentions the actual author of the legislation. This seems to be a deliberate attempt to show she is not anti-semitic.

    • Replies: @Pat Hannagan
    The Irish will always be the fall guy for Anglo weaklings.

    Don't forget they won the wars! But never accuse them of anti-semitism, no sir, theyse be shaking that turtle, boss, they be shoutin' out loud! how much theyze luvs the Moses, yes siree Bob, hates them Irish Catholics loves them Jews, yes Sir!

    , @Pat Hannagan
    Dear Mr. Sailer,

    How come it’s okay to shitbag the Irish on your blog due to Kennedy when you know the Jews wrote the Act that wrote off your own nation yet you refuse to write about it?

    Furthermore, why do you censor abusive comments about Jews yet allow offensive comments about the Irish?

    Yours enquiringly, sincerely, and grovelling,

    Pat Hannagan

    , @AndrewR
    Celler was a lowly US Rep. Hart and Kennedy were Senators and Kennedy was arguably already the most well-known person in Congress.

    It's also notable that Celler's single goy grandparent was Catholic.

    Few would accuse me of philosemetism but I do not think Coulter's omission was terribly egregious.

    , @Maj. Kong
    Phil Hart was Irish.
    , @Clyde

    You should also note that Ann goes to great lengths to assign full blame for the 1965 Immigration Act to the Irishman Teddy Kennedy.....
     
    Weren't the Irish given lousy quotas (low numbers) by what we had prior to 1965? And that RFK and JFK wanted to change this? Get Ireland higher numbers? That this was part of the reason for Teddy Kennedy being the Senate floor manager for the 1965 Immigration Act.

    How come Australia got rid of it white Australia policy at the same time in 1966?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Australia_policy
    In 1966, the Holt Liberal Government introduced the Migration Act 1966, a watershed moment in immigration reform, it effectively dismantled the White Australia Policy and increased access to non-European migrants, including refugees fleeing the Vietnam War
  74. @Jefferson
    Also Ann Coulter used to have a Jewish boyfriend, so she is not doing a good very job of being an anti-Semite.

    Ever seen that scene where Cool Hand Luke takes the turtle to his boss? That’s what you just did.

  75. @Lot
    The evidence for Coulter's supposed antisemitism is extremely thin.

    She never "touted" Radix, she retweeted a tweet that was anti-NRO that had a Radix hashtag, one of several.

    I mean, it was not even a link, it was a retweet of a hashtag mention!

    Radix site is certainly antisemitic, but honestly the various alt-right sites like Radix that post ambitious, boring, long-winded articles kind of blur together for me, and quite likely Ann as well.

    The second retweet had nothing to do whatsoever with Jews, but a joke about how Hillary's anti-Trump ad makes Trump look really good. If I had twitter I'd retweet it myself, it was funny! Is she supposed to do a background check on everyone she retweets?

    Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile, and brings disrepute onto the site and its many fine authors. However, he's one of dozens of authors, and they run maybe one thing a year from him on average. He's not even in the top 50 or so authors there, and he is not listed on the main directory of authors.

    Balance this thin evidence against the fact that Ann (1) is a strong supporter of Israel (2) retweets Mickey Kaus about 20 times more often than any supposed anti-semite (3) supports Trump and his objectively pro-jewish policies, and calling her anti-semitic is simply slander.

    Finally, we have Ann affection for supposed anti-semite Steve. The evidence for this is a single quote, which is indeed pretty ugly and antisemitic:

    Or in the case of the wealthiest, most powerful group, they use their influence over the media to instill [insecurity] in their children and to depress, demoralize, and divide other groups` children.
     

    This and a sparse number of other flirtations with MacDonald-style antisemitism, if they were the main theme of Steve's rather voluminous writing about Jews, could indeed justify the label. But they are not very typical at all. At most they show Steve is at times anti-semitism-curious. Is Ann supposed to boycott him now for that or else be guilty by association?

    “Radix site is certainly antisemitic”

    No, it is not “certainly antisemitic”. The authors who are published there are not especially obsessed with Jews or even interested in them. Many of the commenters could rightfully be called anti-semitic, but that could be said of any number of websites.

    “Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile, and brings disrepute onto the site and its many fine authors.”

    Nothing worthwhile? Nothing at all?

    In the eyes of some people, just noticing things is “anti-semitic”.

    • Replies: @Lot

    “Radix site is certainly antisemitic”

    No, it is not “certainly antisemitic”
     
    That's my memory of it looking at the article titles and trying to read some of the poorly-written, long, overly ambitious articles on it. I agree that it isn't a focus of the site, though going to the homepage now one is greeted by a big picture of Kevin MacDonald and link to a speech.

    Now if you want to define MacDonald as "not antisemitic" I am not going to stop you, but I will not be using your non-standard English myself.
    , @Stan d Mute

    “Radix site is certainly antisemitic”

    No, it is not “certainly antisemitic”. The authors who are published there are not especially obsessed with Jews or even interested in them.
     
    It seems like a huge subset of the population is unable to discern beyond this all/nothing mentality. Thus all whites are guilty for the 1-2% of American whites who owned slaves during the period when that was legal. Or, on the other side, all Jews are guilty for the very loud and visible proportion who agitated for communism or open borders or abolition of freedom of association/speech. And then there are those who apparently cannot (or willfully do not) process the idea that one can be anti-Zionist without being anti-Jew. Or who refuse to understand how one could be anti-Jewish (as an ideology) without being anti-Jew (the people).

    So questioning any aspect of the official holocaust narrative = "Nazi who wants to genocide all Jews." Or questioning the American patriotism/loyalty of a Jew who swears eternal allegiance to Israel = "anti-Semite who wants to put Jews into gas chambers." And of course criticizing negro culture = "racist who wants to put blacks in chains and or lynch them just for the color of their skin." Wanting to deport everyone who entered America unlawfully and deport all immigrants found guilty of crime or on the public dole = "anti-Hispanic racist." Public health concerns about male homosexual behaviors = "homophobes." And etc. Yet, again, they have no trouble labeling all whites as "inherently institutionally racist" or possessing an unearned "white privilege." They'll see endless nuances and gradations among their LGBTQ... pals, but anyone who notices negro crime rates or Zionist media manipulation is a hardcore klansman or Nazi.

    My question, since I see this on both the left and the right (more so on the left I think) is whether it's universal human shorthand (i.e. Stereotyping) or a more insidious effort to dehumanize the "enemy"?
  76. I had written two other RCP columns on the subject which did mention Bradley, a blogger and former magazine editor, and credit him for being first to raise questions about the credibility of the alleged fraternity gang rape victim, Jackie.

    Questions about the credibility of the storyteller (Jackie) arose later. What Steve and Bradley did, I believe, was raise questions about the credibility of the story, which was flatly unbelievable on its face.

    • Agree: Forbes
    • Replies: @Spmoore8
    I think Steve's role in publicizing Richard Bradley's early skepticism was very important, and furthermore, Steve's analysis of literary and historical roots to the hoax, as well as the causal catfishing roots was miles ahead of everyone else.

    I'm disappointed in Cathy Young.
  77. Moscow-born Jew Ekaterina Jung doesn’t recognize any Jewish religious animus toward other religions? Ah, OK.

    • Replies: @Matra
    Ekaterina Jung is Julia Ioffe one generation on.

    Anonymous Nephew: PJ O’Rourke, also previously sponsored by CATO, who’s just come out for Hillary Clinton, has appeared several times on BBC radio describing Trump’s relationship with the Republican party as ‘the drunk uncle at the family gathering”.

    O'Rourke doesn't realise that he has been that uncle for quite some time now.

  78. @iSteveFan

    The evidence for Coulter’s supposed antisemitism is extremely thin.
     
    You should also note that Ann goes to great lengths to assign full blame for the 1965 Immigration Act to the Irishman Teddy Kennedy, and never mentions the actual author of the legislation. This seems to be a deliberate attempt to show she is not anti-semitic.

    The Irish will always be the fall guy for Anglo weaklings.

    Don’t forget they won the wars! But never accuse them of anti-semitism, no sir, theyse be shaking that turtle, boss, they be shoutin’ out loud! how much theyze luvs the Moses, yes siree Bob, hates them Irish Catholics loves them Jews, yes Sir!

    • Replies: @Matra
    The Irish will always be the fall guy for Anglo weaklings.

    And yet it was leading Irish-American politicians and journalists who were overrepresented in the push for more immigration - they along with the Ancient Order of Hibernians had been doing so for generations - not those "Anglo weaklings" who were always the demographic agitating and voting against every increase in immigration (including the descendants of Puritans who seem to be the favourite Alt Right/Neoreaction scapegoats).

    OT Pat, but on some site I think you said you were 200 years removed from Ireland. Are you ever going to become an Australian?

  79. @SPMoore8
    Actually, the dog in question is a pug: I have a pug, she does that thing with her arm when she wants me to feed her. Also, the guy who posted the video was obviously goofing around, just as it is obvious that the Scottish Jewish guy who carried on about the video is self-promoting. I hope the whole thing just goes away.

    Other things:

    -- I honestly never really thought about Sabrina's ethnicity much, because of the Hungarian last name, but it did seem clear on reading her article that she has hostility towards WASP's. However, "Jewishness" itself has nothing to do with it; she's no more anti-WASP than Camille Paglia, who is Italian Catholic. What's going in Philadelphia, anyway?

    -- It's interesting that people can imbibe prejudices when they are kids ("our people are so great, hey, let's tell jokes about people who are not like us") and then act like it's something to be proud of and/or a central element of of their identity when they are middle aged ("I'll never forget the time that black guy called me honky"). I thought that as you got older you were supposed to acquire some wisdom, which includes becoming a little bit less self-centered.

    -- There are family prejudices among Jews just as there are among other people (e.g., Sabrina, Camille). In that sense, yes, I've known some Jews who have made snarky comments about non-Jews, especially Palestinians and Svartzers, and I've known some non-Jews who have made nasty comments about Jews. I don't think it's a problem unless it becomes a guiding light to someone's conduct and/or if such petty attitudes start determining how one live's one's life.

    -- Speaking of petty, claiming that anyone who criticizes Jews is doing so because they are racially jealous, particularly in the sexual domain, is really getting into the gutter.

    -- Cathy Young: There's some merit to what she says. There are a lot of people who associate things they don't like with Jews, and this is due to simplistic stereotypes. Carrying those stereotypes into a typological ideology (like McDonald) is I think a mistake, and a gratuitous one, not only because it encourages irrational feelings among non-Jews, but irrational feelings among Jews, as well.

    -- However, going around saying that someone is "flirting" with anti-semitism is tantamount to saying, "I really want to deliver a social death sentence to you, and call you an anti-semite, but I can't, because your own words aren't sufficient, so I will intimidate you by giving you this threat: if I can continue to find people who have any six degrees of separation from you who use bad words I will call you an anti-semite" which to ordinary people is going to be construed as bullying and a smear. If the shoe fits, wear it.
  80. Much of alleged Jewish anti-whiteness/anti-gentilism is just the usual attempt to keep up with the post-WASP Joneses in their contempt for badwhites.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    I'd say it's more like an arms race in which Jews and goodgoyim vie for peak anti-badgoy status. But from an evolutionary POV, Jews are destined to be the winners of this battle.
    , @ben tillman

    Much of alleged Jewish anti-whiteness/anti-gentilism is just the usual attempt to keep up with the post-WASP Joneses in their contempt for badwhites.
     
    That is theoretically preposterous, and contrary to the empirical data. The theoretical problems are obvious (people generally don't develop self-destructive ideologies that benefit others except as a result of influence from those being benefited), and blogger n/a has addressed the empirical side of things in several posts at his blog:

    http://racehist.blogspot.com/
    , @Maj. Kong
    Earl Raab would disagree with that.

    http://www.lukeford.net/blog/?p=66445
    , @Jenner Ickham Errican
    A bit tautological. They don’t need to keep up with themselves. They are the “post-WASP Joneses,” and the current and potential badwhites, really, are all whites (aka gentiles). That’s why your community needs a No Place For Hate sign, graciously provided by the ADL.
    , @Frau Katze
    Could you elaborate on "badwhites" and "goodwhites"? I'm not quite sure what it means but it sounds promising.
    , @Jack D
    And the whole goodwhite/badwhite concept is really a sort of distorted Calvinism and has its roots in Christian (Protestant), not Jewish, doctrine. The whole modern Jewish "Tikkun Olam" (repair the world) thing has very little to do with traditional Jewish doctrine where "repairing the world" did not mean instituting free lunches for underprivileged black children but rather meant preparing for the coming of the Messiah. But it does have a lot to do with traditional WASP do-goodism.

    As a gedankenexperiment, imagine a large white country that thru some terrible tragedy has lost most of its Jewish population. Then see if the same liberal currents (for example a lady president who wants to let in millions of refugees into her country) exist in that country as in the US. If they do, this is proof that the goodwhite phenomenon would exist with or without the Jews.

    Just because you see Jews riding the bandwagon and playing the tune (even improvising riffs) doesn't mean that they wrote the song that they are playing.

  81. @Gabriel M
    Ann Coulter is not an anti-Semite and she doesn't pander to anti-Semites.

    Steve Sailer, on the other hand, really does pander to anti-Semites and, in fact, it seems to be a pretty central part of his business model because he, without fail, ramps it up in line with his quarterly fundraisers.

    I was reading some old Lawrence Auster stuff the other day. He exemplified the ability the criticize Jews for what the do wrong, both as individuals and as a group, without dabbling in unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism. Similarly he was able to criticize blacks and other protected minorities without dabbling in racist trash. He ceaselessly warned about the gutter Richard Spencer and others were leading the anti multicultural right into.

    Unfortunately, it was to no avail. Any remotely honest person knows the alt-right is up to its neck in filth at this point. Any sensible person knows that its all going to blow up in your face before too long. You made your pact with the devil, laughing about it is not going to make it go away.

    Unfortunately, it was to no avail. Any remotely honest person knows the alt-right is up to its neck in filth at this point. Any sensible person knows that its all going to blow up in your face before too long. You made your pact with the devil, laughing about it is not going to make it go away.

    I disagree. I think the real effect will be to broaden public discourse. You can’t deny that the list of unsayable and unthinkable things has been growing for some time; the pendulum will now swing back.

  82. @Anon
    "I’m not really sure why I should have credited Steve Sailer, who posted about the case on his Unz Review blog and then wrote about it for Taki Magazine but added nothing original."

    I think folks here were most creative in surmising the psychology of Coakley, as with the 'catfishing' business.

    I think folks here were most creative in surmising the psychology of Coakley, as with the ‘catfishing’ business.

    Of course, this blog made many original contributions to the exposure of Jackie Coakley’s hoax.

    To toot my own horn, I pointed out that, while a high-school student, Coakley was a teammate of a championship swimmer named Bailey Monahan in the YMCA Stingray Swimming Club in Stafford, Virginia. When Coakley enrolled at the University of Virginia, she used that high-school swimming-club experience to obtain a lifeguard job at the university’s swimming pool. Working there, she supposedly met the imaginary lifeguard named Haven Monahan.

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/the-importance-of-three-words-catfishing-and-haven-monahan/#comment-1288927

  83. @Gabriel M
    Ann Coulter is not an anti-Semite and she doesn't pander to anti-Semites.

    Steve Sailer, on the other hand, really does pander to anti-Semites and, in fact, it seems to be a pretty central part of his business model because he, without fail, ramps it up in line with his quarterly fundraisers.

    I was reading some old Lawrence Auster stuff the other day. He exemplified the ability the criticize Jews for what the do wrong, both as individuals and as a group, without dabbling in unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism. Similarly he was able to criticize blacks and other protected minorities without dabbling in racist trash. He ceaselessly warned about the gutter Richard Spencer and others were leading the anti multicultural right into.

    Unfortunately, it was to no avail. Any remotely honest person knows the alt-right is up to its neck in filth at this point. Any sensible person knows that its all going to blow up in your face before too long. You made your pact with the devil, laughing about it is not going to make it go away.

    “I was reading some old Lawrence Auster stuff the other day. He exemplified the ability the criticize Jews for what the do wrong, both as individuals and as a group, without dabbling in unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism. Similarly he was able to criticize blacks and other protected minorities without dabbling in racist trash. He ceaselessly warned about the gutter Richard Spencer and others were leading the anti multicultural right into.”

    You are aware, are you not, that Auster was jewish? And while he often criticized Jews for their hostility to white, christian civilization, he was himself not immune to occasionally labeling others as anti-semites on the the thinnest of pretexts. And Richard Spencer is hardly Jew-obsessed; he doesn’t talk about them very much. Spencer doesn’t want to lead the right into a dead-end; he wants to lead the right into power. I don’t know if all that fashy iconography is the right way to go about it, but that is what he is trying to do. He isn’t interested in things that weaken the movement.

    “Any remotely honest person knows the alt-right is up to its neck in filth at this point.”

    I have no reason to believe that you are a remotely honest person.

  84. @iSteveFan

    The evidence for Coulter’s supposed antisemitism is extremely thin.
     
    You should also note that Ann goes to great lengths to assign full blame for the 1965 Immigration Act to the Irishman Teddy Kennedy, and never mentions the actual author of the legislation. This seems to be a deliberate attempt to show she is not anti-semitic.

    Dear Mr. Sailer,

    How come it’s okay to shitbag the Irish on your blog due to Kennedy when you know the Jews wrote the Act that wrote off your own nation yet you refuse to write about it?

    Furthermore, why do you censor abusive comments about Jews yet allow offensive comments about the Irish?

    Yours enquiringly, sincerely, and grovelling,

    Pat Hannagan

    • Replies: @riches
    "censor abusive comments about Jews yet allow offensive comments about the Irish"

    Good luck with your inquiries, sincerity and groveling. You can throw in donating too, believe it or not. I've tried 'em all.

    I think slur names of most European nationalities are allowed—even encouraged—in the comments. (The one that applies to my heritage makes frequent appearances.)

    Just stay away from the common one for Jews. Or African-Americans.
  85. Cathy Young is in the awkward position of staking her career on pretending to fight SJWs while simultaneously staking her career on being one.

    This could work only at a publication called “Reason”.

  86. how horrible it is

    Don’t really see that in what you quoted here. She calls some people’s Jewish conspiracy nonsense “slimy nuttery”, which it arguably is. Your attack very much sounds like hurt vanity, because she doesn’t recognize your “importance”. Or are there any factual mistakes in what you quoted?

  87. @jtgw
    Just because some Jews are Christophobic doesn't mean all are. We should be able to point out that some people have irrational fears of Christianity without implying that everyone else in that group shares the prejudice.

    Just because some Jews are Christophobic doesn’t mean all are. We should be able to point out that some people have irrational fears of Christianity without implying that everyone else in that group shares the prejudice.

    But it’s not about Jews as “individuals”. It’s about the organized Jewish community. It’s irrelevant that not all Jews agree with the dogma and policies advocated by the organized community. The point is that the community has the resources and coordination to erect a false consciousness among gentiles and prevent the emergence of organized opposition.

    Jews tend to prevail in these conflicts, despite their smaller numbers, when they are able to act as a group while we are not.

    • Replies: @iffen
    erect a false consciousness among gentiles and prevent the emergence of organized opposition.

    Jews tend to prevail in these conflicts, despite their smaller numbers, when they are able to act as a group while we are not.



    while we are not.


    It might be because they are stuck with fewer imbeciles such as yourself.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    But it’s not about Jews as “individuals”. It’s about the organized Jewish community.
     
    The Jews on our side aren't organized.
  88. @Jack D
    I really dislike this kind of attempt at smear thru guilt by association - your cousin's friend's brother's wife once posted an anti-Semitic comment on a blog, therefore you are an anti-Semite too.

    That being said, I don't think that people like Erdely act out of specific anti-gentile bias. Erdely doesn't hate Christians in the same way that say Rev. Wright hates white people. Some of her best friends are gentiles. If she is not married to one already, then one of her children (if she has any) probably will be someday. What she hates are badwhites. All goodwhites, whether Jewish or Gentile, hate badwhites. Really religious Jews (whose religion is Judaism, not liberalism) don't really care about badwhites one way or the other. The difference is this - if I go before Rev. Wright and renounce my whiteness, it won't help - the taint is in the blood (Rachel Dolezal is the exception that proves the rule). But if I appear before Erdely and her bunch and announce that I have become a goodwhite, they will accept me as long as I adhere to the rules of goodwhitism.

    The hatred towards badgoyim by goodgoyim is not like the hatred Jews have towards badgoyim. They are similar but, in the goodgoyim’s case, it’s evolutionarily maladaptive while in the Jews’ case it’s evolutionarily adaptive.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    You are assuming (against all evidence) that all gentiles form a single breeding pool so that for some gentiles to undermine their fellow gentiles is maladaptive. This is just wrong - Belmont women avoid public relationships with Fishtown trailer trash at all costs. You might have a fling with the contractor but it has to be on the down low or it lowers your status. The people Belmont men want to undermine in the evolutionary race are precisely those who otherwise would have a chance with their women. By making badwhites into social untouchables, this reduces the competition for babes among goodwhites.

    By the way, if you read the history of leftist movements in America, one of the big motivating factors for guys was they were a great place to pick up chicks. Not only chicks, but chicks who would put out, back when respectable women were expected to be chaste.

    Alt-right types have this idea that the white team is, or should be, united in the same way that black, Jews, etc. are. This was never the case in American history simply because almost everyone was white. Once (and the day is fast approaching) whites are a minority then they might form this kind of bloc identity to protect themselves against the majority, but as long as they are the majority just being "white" is not an identity.

    , @Thea
    It is only the Jewish perogative that divides the world into Gentile & Jew. The Japanese for example, see Japanese & non Japanese.
  89. @Desiderius
    Much of alleged Jewish anti-whiteness/anti-gentilism is just the usual attempt to keep up with the post-WASP Joneses in their contempt for badwhites.

    I’d say it’s more like an arms race in which Jews and goodgoyim vie for peak anti-badgoy status. But from an evolutionary POV, Jews are destined to be the winners of this battle.

  90. Nico says:
    @Twinkie

    Sabrina Rubin Erdely’s Kristallnacht
     
    I thought the allusion was particularly apt given not just actual the thuggery of the attack on the fraternity, but especially because of the official support for the prevailing narrative and the ineffectual investigation of the actual vandalism. It definitely had the whiff (there goes the world that leftists love to use anytime some black/homosexual/transgender person is lynched mythically somewhere) of Nazi-condoned thuggery or even Maoist Cultural Revolution.

    As for anti-gentilism, anyone who has grown up with a large Jewish population as I have can serve as a witness to the prevailing sense of fear and contempt toward gentiles that many Jews seem to harbor (one that is much more freely discussed among Jews themselves). Even though I am not Jewish, I frequently heard disparaging remarks about non-Jews, especially white Catholics and Asians, from Jewish acquaintances and colleagues particularly while I was in academia. For some reason, people seem to feel very free about their thoughts around me, and would tell me their inner thoughts readily (this came in VERY HANDY when I used to work as an investigator).

    Growing up, I used to have a highly positive view of Jews, but that began to change once I grew up and began to see beyond the propaganda ("Light unto nations") and Holocaust victimology.

    My own experience at a 20% Jewish university would corroborate pretty much everything you say here.

    I will however say that I managed to get a few Jewish friends out of undergrad. All of them are atheist/agnostic and we regularly enjoyed Christmas music and Irish bacon together (we can’t now because we live on opposite sides of an ocean, but we talk regularly). Two of them are sisters born in Montreal to an Anglo-Jewish father and a Jewish-American mother. Their father was raised Orthodox in north London (now a predominantly Paki area, much to his horror) and rejected religious practice in his young adulthood, becoming accustomed to the Brit “pub and grub” socializing.

    Needless to say these folks are “off-the-circuit” with respect to their ethnic group and don’t find much in the way of useful connections from people “of the tribe.” They’re too irreverent to fit in with the religious crowd and their assimilationist affinity for Anglo/Christian culture as well as their disdain for Third World immigration and the LGBT agenda makes them pariahs with most of the “uppity” crowd.

  91. @iSteveFan

    The evidence for Coulter’s supposed antisemitism is extremely thin.
     
    You should also note that Ann goes to great lengths to assign full blame for the 1965 Immigration Act to the Irishman Teddy Kennedy, and never mentions the actual author of the legislation. This seems to be a deliberate attempt to show she is not anti-semitic.

    Celler was a lowly US Rep. Hart and Kennedy were Senators and Kennedy was arguably already the most well-known person in Congress.

    It’s also notable that Celler’s single goy grandparent was Catholic.

    Few would accuse me of philosemetism but I do not think Coulter’s omission was terribly egregious.

    • Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky
    "Celler was a lowly US Rep."

    Nice try minimizing Celler's role, but no sale. The act (which bore his name, along with Hart's) was proposed and steered to passage by Celler.
    , @iSteveFan

    Celler was a lowly US Rep. Hart and Kennedy were Senators and Kennedy was arguably already the most well-known person in Congress.
     
    First, no Senator can introduce legislation into the House. It takes a Representative to do that. Second,Celler was the author. In fact Celler's problem was that he was not a Senator and therefore needed someone to introduce HIS bill into the Senate. This is where Hart came in.

    There is no dispute Teddy spoke on its behalf. But Celler was the immigration expert having spent forty years of his career focusing on this issue. He became an immigrationist after the 1924 Act passed and finally got his victory in 1965.

    Think of a modern analogy involving Marco Rubio and Chuck Schumer. Marco headlined the 'Gang of 8' bill in the Senate. But does anyone doubt Chuck Schumer was the brains behind it? As Steve pointed out at the time, Schumer was the guy with the perfect SAT and Marco was the guy who went to the now defunct Tarkio College. Chuck was smart enough to use Marco as the face of the bill. And I suppose had it passed, Ann would be calling it 'Marco's immigration act', even though we all know Chuck wrote it.
    , @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    In 1965, Ted Kennedy was nowhere near the most well known person in Congress. His older brother Robert Kennedy had just been elected as US Senator from NY in 1964. There were also Senators Barry Goldwater (who had just run for president in '64); Strom Thurmond of SC; Albert Gore, Sr of TN; etc.

    Ted Kennedy had been in the US Senate for all of three yrs and had just been elected to his first full term, so no, he was nowhere near the elite names in all of Congress in 1965.
  92. Off-topic but not by a lot: NYT has an article on London’s new Muslim mayor, Sadiq Khan. There’s enough there to give you some idea of the kind of mayor he intends to be.

    I think it’s a good time for iSteve-ites to put down some markers predicting what to expect during his tenure. If you’re worried about Londonistan and take “Submission” seriously, you’re certainly not gonna expect an uneventful tenure, right?

    As for me, I expect he’ll be a far less radical and identity-politics oriented mayor than the white Christian De Blasio. He sounds very much like a classical liberal, more interested in cheaper housing and public transit than gendered bathrooms and safe spaces. I don’t expect him to accuse the London cops of oppressing Muslims or to allow Sharia civil courts.

    What’s your prediction?

    • Replies: @anon

    What’s your prediction?
     
    tsunami of corruption as London slips into the 3rd world - not all or even mostly him - it'll be seen as a cue to go back to the old country ways

    he's not a radical although he'll have to turn a blind eye to people who are to keep his voters onside but that is only a shade different from the appeasement policy that has been in place for 30 years anyway.
    , @Anonymous
    That's what I would have guessed about Barack Obama in 2008.
    , @Frau Katze
    Sharia civil courts already exist in the UK. They've been there for years.
    , @Bhroham
    As a Londoner, his religion does not seem to be especially politically relevant to him, so I don't expect it to be very relevant to his tenure, except from a generalised 'diversity' standpoint. British 'political muslims' seem to dislike him for ignoring or going against their treasured causes (e.g. Palestine). See for example: http://5pillarsuk.com/2016/05/04/london-will-shortly-get-a-muslim-mayor-but-i-cant-find-a-muslim-who-cares/
    , @Golan Globus
    He'll be better behaved than Livingstone.
  93. In your standard corporate non-white ethnic grievance, the basic remedy is to increase minority hiring at the organization and to appoint a gatekeeper such as ombudsman or diversity Commissar to rat out future incidents. But it would be unthinkable for an organization such as the RS to add “white” writers to police minorities so they keep a rigid defense and never admit even the slightest guilt. In fact how can there be anti-white hatred when whites don’t even exist?

  94. Is this another case of personal envy informing an ostensibly political attack? Coulter is a more accomplished author than is Young, and is also prettier than her, is more popular than her, and appears on TV more frequently than Young.

    • Replies: @AmericanaCON
    Cathy Young is not a “big name” author, columnist or talking head. Coulter has made millions of dollars on her books while Young has not written a published book since 1999. There is simply not a market for people like Young anymore. There are too many left-libertarians for her to be marketable. She sells her articles for around 100 dollars. Young had her “prime” ten years ago when criticism of radical feminism was considered to be “courageous” in the center-right mainstream. As always, Conservative Inc. lost and racial feminism won. Her piece has very little substance. Set aside all guilt by association her key argument goes;

    1. Israel was founded by as an ethno-state and United States was not.
    2. Israel is surrounded by hostile states (and hostile people) and United States is not
    3. If Israel allowed Palestinian refugees to return or allowed massive immigration it would change the demographics and Israel.
    4. Finland grants automatic citizenship to ethnic Finns in the Diasporas and limit immigration

    Hence, ethno-nationalism is tolerable when practices by Israel but not United States. Coulter is anti-Semitic because she does not criticize Finland for their ethno-nationalism.

    Young’s arguments are not solid;

    1. United States was actually funded by as an ethno-state. The Naturalization Act of 1790 only allowed free white persons of good character to become citizens. In fact United States was more or less an ethno-state until 1965.

    2. It may be true that Israel is surrounded by hostile states (and hostile people) but the same argument could be used by Americans who would argue that Latin-America is “hostile states”

    3. In 1950 United States was close to 90 percent non-Hispanic white and 70 percent protestant. In 2010 about 63 percent of the US population is non-Hispanic white. Consequently, the American society has transformed from a fairly homogeneous society to a multiracial society. Although not contributed fully to immigration the Protestant population has dropped to 38 percent (2015). Israel was in 1950s more homogeneous than Israel is today.

    4. Young claim that Finland grant citizenship based on ethnicity is actually not true. Her own link to Wikipedia does not even claim that. However, Germany do or rather did do so to Germans in Eastern Germany in very recent times. However, this does not contribute to the case that Coulter is Anti-Semitic. Coulter does not criticize Finland, Germany or Israel. She only claims that she wants the same for United States. The only one in this beef who actually present a double standard (based on faulty facts) is Cathy Young.

    Anyway….

    The reason why Cathy Young feels uncomfortable is that she does not like ethno-nationalism in other countries than Israel and she fears that United States is turning that way with the election of Trump – who implicitly appeals to it. If Young had been smarter she would take the position of Philip Weiss at Mondoweiss or journalist Max Blumenthal who rejects all ethno-nationalism. However, that wouldn’t go well with her employers and I guess ADL wouldn’t be happy about it. From her view her piece was unnecessary and did not successfully push her agenda because it was so bluntly hypocritical. Young does has a point that the Alternative-Right is growing and that civic-nationalism and populism may spill over until explicit ethno-nationalism. I have no doubt it will – but instead of accusing people for Anti-Semitism she ought to take a coherent position. Either she accepts being a minority (together with African-Americans, Indians and others) in a white US ethno-state (which is also fully possible in Israel) or she goes full Philip Weiss. It is up to her.

    Personally, im not an ethno-nationalist..

  95. http://thefederalist.com/2016/04/14/you-cant-whitewash-the-alt-rights-bigotry/
    By Cathy Young
    April 14, 2016

    Are there political taboos surrounding race-related genetic cognitive and behavioral differences? Of course (and for very understandable reasons, given historical experience). The controversy around Wade’s 2014 book, “A Troublesome Inheritance,” demonstrates how sensitive the subject is. It is very likely this sensitivity has deterred legitimate inquiry. Some people who have waded into this minefield have also been, in my view, unfairly tarred as racists—such as Charles Murray, with whom I disagree on a number of things but whom I am honored to know.

    This Cathy Young quote leads me to believe that Cathy Young suspects that HBD is right on the facts.

  96. @ben tillman

    I had written two other RCP columns on the subject which did mention Bradley, a blogger and former magazine editor, and credit him for being first to raise questions about the credibility of the alleged fraternity gang rape victim, Jackie.
     
    Questions about the credibility of the storyteller (Jackie) arose later. What Steve and Bradley did, I believe, was raise questions about the credibility of the story, which was flatly unbelievable on its face.

    I think Steve’s role in publicizing Richard Bradley’s early skepticism was very important, and furthermore, Steve’s analysis of literary and historical roots to the hoax, as well as the causal catfishing roots was miles ahead of everyone else.

    I’m disappointed in Cathy Young.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    I am adding Cathy Young to my list of People I Once Respected. P J O'Rourke joined yesterday.
  97. @ben tillman

    Just because some Jews are Christophobic doesn’t mean all are. We should be able to point out that some people have irrational fears of Christianity without implying that everyone else in that group shares the prejudice.
     
    But it's not about Jews as "individuals". It's about the organized Jewish community. It's irrelevant that not all Jews agree with the dogma and policies advocated by the organized community. The point is that the community has the resources and coordination to erect a false consciousness among gentiles and prevent the emergence of organized opposition.

    Jews tend to prevail in these conflicts, despite their smaller numbers, when they are able to act as a group while we are not.

    erect a false consciousness among gentiles and prevent the emergence of organized opposition.

    Jews tend to prevail in these conflicts, despite their smaller numbers, when they are able to act as a group while we are not.

    while we are not.

    It might be because they are stuck with fewer imbeciles such as yourself.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    It might be because they are stuck with fewer imbeciles such as yourself.

     

    It's depressing that despite a curated comment section and despite my well-stocked "Commenters to Ignore" list, I still can't make it through a thread without seeing this kind of ad hominem remark. Even here, amid one of the smartest cadres of commentariat in the blogosphere, we find those who fail to grasp that ad hominem attacks say much about the commenter while saying nothing about his target. And so my "Ignore" list continues to expand..
  98. @Desiderius
    Much of alleged Jewish anti-whiteness/anti-gentilism is just the usual attempt to keep up with the post-WASP Joneses in their contempt for badwhites.

    Much of alleged Jewish anti-whiteness/anti-gentilism is just the usual attempt to keep up with the post-WASP Joneses in their contempt for badwhites.

    That is theoretically preposterous, and contrary to the empirical data. The theoretical problems are obvious (people generally don’t develop self-destructive ideologies that benefit others except as a result of influence from those being benefited), and blogger n/a has addressed the empirical side of things in several posts at his blog:

    http://racehist.blogspot.com/

    • Replies: @Desiderius

    people generally don’t develop self-destructive ideologies that benefit others except as a result of influence from those being benefited
     
    The contempt of goodwhites for badwhites is not self-destructive. They don't recognize badwhites as members of their tribe.
    , @Corvinus
    All you did was provide a link without any explanation as how these "theoretical problems are obvious". Good grief.
  99. Cathy Young used to date John Fund, so you’ve got that whole WSJ/Open Borders/Bomb the Middle East connection.

  100. she’s no more anti-WASP than Camille Paglia, who is Italian Catholic.

    You are right about Ellis Islander Camille Paglia being anti-WASP (and anti-blonde) but I can’t imagine her ever going so far as to falsely and publicly accuse a particular WASP she’s had no personal relationship with of a major crime. I think that requires a hatred so deep that you’ve dehumanised, perhaps unconsciously, the group your target belongs to. I say ‘unconsciously” because I don’t think Jews (and other Euroasian ethnic groups) are lying when they do this kind of thing. They are just so deeply in-group focussed they can’t see the bigger picture.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas
    I never took Paglia as anti-WASP so much as embracing her (perhaps idealized) earthy and passionate Southern Italian roots. Necessarily this requires some opposition to WASP cultural control and the stoic WASP style but I don't think there was much desire to obliterate it so much as to make cultural space for her own sort. Perhaps I've just read the wrong books/columns and seen the wrong talks by her. Other than on TV in her youth, I can't imagine that Syracuse at the time was a bastion of WASP privilege. Likely the blondes of whom she was jealous, desirous or both were Polish, German, or Irish Catholics of modest, working class means.

    For a few nights about two weeks ago I suffered from some insomnia. In the wee hours I watched two films in particular on cable that I had never before seen out of sheer boredom among others - 1987's Dirty Dancing, and 1988's Beaches. Now, I'm not much younger than Erdely and I'm Catholic from blue collar neighborhoods in Philadelphia and sent to parochial schools but my mother was a striving working sort who sent me and my brother to a Jewish day camp (though not explicitly so) in a Jewish belt of suburban Montgomery County as kids to get rid of us for the day after my parents got divorced. We were two of a very, very few gentiles there and I can tell you that those two movies were seen, discussed and part of the cultural ether for those kids (not just the girls! Aside: what sort of thirteen year old boy is a Bette Midler fan?). It's just an educated guess, but if I recall Erdely is from that same part of Montgomery County, probably very culturally similar to those kids (hell, she may have gone to that camp herself) and I'd bet given her age she saw both of those movies over and over.

    I suppose the point in mentioning the films is that they're sort of a window into the mind of a person like Erdely - the simultaneous chauvinism and feelings of inferiority, their view of the Jew/goy divide, etc. In Beaches, the main goy is a WASP who learns to live a little after befriending a loud and brash Jewish child entertainer (there is even a pseudo Country Club scene where the little Jewish girl is asked to leave a restaurant). In Dirty Dancing, the goys are prole white trash who work at the Catskills resort by day and drink and dance in ways that amount to open acts of coitus at night, while the Jews are wealthy and educated if reserved, one learning to dance and her sexual passions awaken with the Buck goy while a Jewish doctor first unwittingly pays for a botched backalley abortion (pre-Roe), and then sweeps in to heroically save the life of the pretty blonde white trash slut and keep everything quiet.
  101. Gentile is the right word to use for a Westerner, both secular & Christian, who is traditional heritage as opposed to Semitic (Jewish or Muslim).

    Cathy has lost all my respect when she tries to deny Steve’s role in the Rolling Stone story (private discussion is not public).

    • Replies: @SFG
    The evidence is kind of circumstantial, though I do think Steve called it to Richard's attention as well.
  102. @iSteveFan

    The evidence for Coulter’s supposed antisemitism is extremely thin.
     
    You should also note that Ann goes to great lengths to assign full blame for the 1965 Immigration Act to the Irishman Teddy Kennedy, and never mentions the actual author of the legislation. This seems to be a deliberate attempt to show she is not anti-semitic.

    Phil Hart was Irish.

    • Replies: @iSteveFan
    Phil didn't write the bill.
  103. @Brutusale
    Moscow-born Jew Ekaterina Jung doesn't recognize any Jewish religious animus toward other religions? Ah, OK.

    Ekaterina Jung is Julia Ioffe one generation on.

    Anonymous Nephew: PJ O’Rourke, also previously sponsored by CATO, who’s just come out for Hillary Clinton, has appeared several times on BBC radio describing Trump’s relationship with the Republican party as ‘the drunk uncle at the family gathering”.

    O’Rourke doesn’t realise that he has been that uncle for quite some time now.

  104. @Desiderius
    Much of alleged Jewish anti-whiteness/anti-gentilism is just the usual attempt to keep up with the post-WASP Joneses in their contempt for badwhites.

    Earl Raab would disagree with that.

    http://www.lukeford.net/blog/?p=66445

  105. Not entirely off-topic…

    Students are occupying the dean’s office at (Catholic) Seattle University.

    In a lengthy petition posted online, the students describe the college’s curriculum as “Eurocentric and Classical in nature, damaging, stifling, and failing to align with content taught elsewhere in the University.” They are asking for a new curriculum, for the college to recruit and hire professors from diverse backgrounds, and for every faculty member undergo training from an anti-racist network in Seattle.

    They are also asking the dean to resign and said they were prepared to occupy the office until she does so.

    http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/education/students-occupy-seattle-university-deans-office/

    • Replies: @Anon
    Someone needs to found a college that teaches only African culture so we can send all the whiners there. Christ, every time some black kid realizes she has to read Hamlet, she goes screeching to the admins about their racist curriculum because Hamlet is hard reading, it makes her feel dumb, and she doesn't want to be forced to use her brain. She's the sort of student who was given a 150 point 'addition' onto her SAT scores so the school could admit her, and now she finds the work is beyond her.

    All these whiners knew perfectly well when they applied to the college what the college taught, and when the black students picked the courses, they knew they'd be studying dead white males. You don't take Western Literature without being well aware that you're going to encounter Shakespeare. If you don't want to read Plato or Aristotle, then quite picking courses like Philosophy or History of Western Civilization. You can avoid them perfectly well if you want to. Take Biology, Engineering, Economics, or Math. There are plenty of courses out there that are almost purely data-driven.

    Many of the complaints about the Eurocentric and Classical curriculum come when black kids who have gone through dumbed-down public schools encounter top-tier white male learning for the first time, and they're shocked by how difficult it is.

    I'm not surprised this flared up right before finals. I'll bet these students are either danger of flunking out, or they're getting grades so poor they're going to lose their scholarships and will have to drop out of college.

  106. @AndrewR
    Any criticism of Jews is anti-semitism?

    The mainstream is openly anti-white. That many Jews pretend to be white doesn't negate the fact that they are a specific subpopulation sharing genes and customs with each other that "other" whites do not share.

    “The mainstream is openly anti-white.”

    See, it’s comments like this that make shake my burka. The only perpetual “anti-white” movement is the one concocted in your mind. The mainstream consists of whites, but according to you, they’re not really white, they’re anti-white, even though it has yet to be definitely established what constitutes white and what constitutes anti-white.

    “That many Jews pretend to be white doesn’t negate the fact that they are a specific subpopulation sharing genes and customs with each other that “other” whites do not share.”

    How about focusing on humanity for once than your obsession of Jews.

    Why some people remotely consider Cathy Young, or Ann Coulter for that matter, to be credible is beyond me. They engage in rampant show(wo)manship.

    • Replies: @anon

    The only perpetual “anti-white” movement is the one concocted in your mind.
     
    The entire media are clearly and explicitly anti-white.

    There are lots of examples but the simplest is the way Asians disappear when they break the anti-white narrative and reappear when they don't.
    , @AndrewR
    I'm not obsessed with Jews. I just recognize that they tend to act in ways hostile to whites even while claiming to be white.
  107. Man, Orwell get’s righter and righter every day. Controlling language is what the left does to stifle thought.

  108. @AndrewR
    Any criticism of Jews is anti-semitism?

    The mainstream is openly anti-white. That many Jews pretend to be white doesn't negate the fact that they are a specific subpopulation sharing genes and customs with each other that "other" whites do not share.

    “That many Jews pretend to be white”

    Yeah in this vid, Mike Wallace does not pretend, he says he is not white.

  109. In all seriousness, in what sense are Jews in the US today more beleaguered than WASPs?

    Are they more “marginalized” because they lack power? Because they have no influence? Because they are not accepted at the top echelons of any institution of significance? Because they lack economic prosperity? Because somebody, somewhere, is celebrating Christmas publicly?

    So why is it, exactly, that anti-Semitism is considered an unspeakable evil, but open mocking and criticism of WASPs and what they stand for is completely acceptable? If WASPs are The Man, why aren’t Jews The Man?

    When does the shelf-life of the relevance of historic and genuinely damaging acts of anti-Semitism in the US finally run out? How much more centrality and power must Jews achieve before they become the establishment, and may be treated as such?

    Or does it never end?

  110. @Maj. Kong
    Phil Hart was Irish.

    Phil didn’t write the bill.

    • Replies: @PV van der Byl
    Do you believe that writing the bill required unusual skills, something only a few people could have done?

    It must have been a very long time ago that any Senator or Congressman drafted legislation personally. They approve of bills, of course, but staffers do the writing.

    The 1965 Act passed 202-60 in the House and and 76-18 in the Senate.

    What do you suppose mattered more, the ability to write bills or having had the political muscle to pass them?

    And how would you have ranked Ted Kennedy, Phil Hart, and Emmanuel Cellar in terms of muscle?
  111. @Pat Hannagan
    The Irish will always be the fall guy for Anglo weaklings.

    Don't forget they won the wars! But never accuse them of anti-semitism, no sir, theyse be shaking that turtle, boss, they be shoutin' out loud! how much theyze luvs the Moses, yes siree Bob, hates them Irish Catholics loves them Jews, yes Sir!

    The Irish will always be the fall guy for Anglo weaklings.

    And yet it was leading Irish-American politicians and journalists who were overrepresented in the push for more immigration – they along with the Ancient Order of Hibernians had been doing so for generations – not those “Anglo weaklings” who were always the demographic agitating and voting against every increase in immigration (including the descendants of Puritans who seem to be the favourite Alt Right/Neoreaction scapegoats).

    OT Pat, but on some site I think you said you were 200 years removed from Ireland. Are you ever going to become an Australian?

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    OT Pat, but on some site I think you said you were 200 years removed from Ireland. Are you ever going to become an Australian?
     
    If Australia is like Canada, the Irish can't become valid citizens. They have to cross their fingers, or mumble, when they swear the oath to Her Majesty.

    This is an often-discussed problem among Irish immigrants to Canada.

    , @Luke Ford
    I'm a descendant of this Irish-Australian rebel:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Dwyer
  112. @Twinkie

    Sabrina Rubin Erdely’s Kristallnacht
     
    I thought the allusion was particularly apt given not just actual the thuggery of the attack on the fraternity, but especially because of the official support for the prevailing narrative and the ineffectual investigation of the actual vandalism. It definitely had the whiff (there goes the world that leftists love to use anytime some black/homosexual/transgender person is lynched mythically somewhere) of Nazi-condoned thuggery or even Maoist Cultural Revolution.

    As for anti-gentilism, anyone who has grown up with a large Jewish population as I have can serve as a witness to the prevailing sense of fear and contempt toward gentiles that many Jews seem to harbor (one that is much more freely discussed among Jews themselves). Even though I am not Jewish, I frequently heard disparaging remarks about non-Jews, especially white Catholics and Asians, from Jewish acquaintances and colleagues particularly while I was in academia. For some reason, people seem to feel very free about their thoughts around me, and would tell me their inner thoughts readily (this came in VERY HANDY when I used to work as an investigator).

    Growing up, I used to have a highly positive view of Jews, but that began to change once I grew up and began to see beyond the propaganda ("Light unto nations") and Holocaust victimology.

    How can so many people here, presumably with a straight face, accuse a group which currently has a 70% intermarriage rate of acting as an enthocentric block?

    • Replies: @SFG
    Because groups are heterogeneous. 70% of Jews are out marrying Whites and Asians. The other 30% work in opinion journalism and churn out articles like this.

    (Joke--there is overlap.)

    I exaggerate, of course, but I suspect a lot of this is actually a response to intermarriage--they think the tribe will be gone in 50 years, leaving only larger noses among the upper middle class in the Northeast, so they go looking for threats.
    , @Twinkie

    How can so many people here, presumably with a straight face, accuse a group which currently has a 70% intermarriage rate of acting as an enthocentric block?
     
    Please see my response to another commenter regarding this: https://www.unz.com/isteve/cathy-young-ann-coulter-is-anti-semitic-but-sabrina-rubin-erdely-couldnt-possibly-be-anti-gentilic/#comment-1417773
    , @Mr. Anon
    "How can so many people here, presumably with a straight face, accuse a group which currently has a 70% intermarriage rate of acting as an enthocentric block?"

    The Kennedy family had a 100% intermarriage-rate and yet managed to act as a Kennedy block. The same could be said of the Rockefeller family, the Trump family, and many other wealthy clans.
    , @Honorary Thief
    Because people marry people they are attracted to as individuals, even if they are wary of the tribe they come from?

    Are you suggesting that no black dude who is married to a white chick could possibly have a chip on his shoulder toward whites?
    , @ben tillman

    How can so many people here, presumably with a straight face, accuse a group which currently has a 70% intermarriage rate of acting as an enthocentric block?
     
    The group does not have a 70% intermarriage rate. You know, there are Jews in Israel, too. And the 70% rate is a gross exaggeration for the US. And even if it weren't, it wouldn't prove your point, would it?
  113. but I can say that Robby and I were among several journalists privately discussing the problems with the Rolling Stone story by November 25.

    Here’s the world’s smallest prize for discussing phony racist journalism privately with other racist, phony journalists.

    (When another commenter pointed out that many of the journalists who helped debunk the hoax were also Jewish, the conspiracy nuts were undeterred: Of course the Jews will do that when their mischief is caught out!)

    The fact that the racist/ANTI-SEMITE!!! whites are outnumbered and outgunned by the “anti-racist”/anti-ANTI-SEMITE!!! whites never seems to slow (((the culture of critique))) down. It certainly never seems to absolve any of the racist/ANTI-SEMITE!!! whites for anything. So why should the supposed un-racism of some other Jews absolve Erdely?

    This is how sloppy people’s arguing skills become when they never take on any challenges.

    The Occidental Observer ran a longer piece depicting the rape-hoax story as “ethnic warfare” born from Erdely’s “anti-White animus” (in the Alt-Right taxonomy, Jews are, of course, not “white”)

    One can make the same argument either way; Erdely can, like Uncle Tom, be racist against her own kind, or, she can be racist against non-Jewish whites.

    This is what your arguments look like when you’re not very good at arguing.

    slimy nuttery

    Quite the wordsmith, isn’t she.

  114. @Lot
    The evidence for Coulter's supposed antisemitism is extremely thin.

    She never "touted" Radix, she retweeted a tweet that was anti-NRO that had a Radix hashtag, one of several.

    I mean, it was not even a link, it was a retweet of a hashtag mention!

    Radix site is certainly antisemitic, but honestly the various alt-right sites like Radix that post ambitious, boring, long-winded articles kind of blur together for me, and quite likely Ann as well.

    The second retweet had nothing to do whatsoever with Jews, but a joke about how Hillary's anti-Trump ad makes Trump look really good. If I had twitter I'd retweet it myself, it was funny! Is she supposed to do a background check on everyone she retweets?

    Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile, and brings disrepute onto the site and its many fine authors. However, he's one of dozens of authors, and they run maybe one thing a year from him on average. He's not even in the top 50 or so authors there, and he is not listed on the main directory of authors.

    Balance this thin evidence against the fact that Ann (1) is a strong supporter of Israel (2) retweets Mickey Kaus about 20 times more often than any supposed anti-semite (3) supports Trump and his objectively pro-jewish policies, and calling her anti-semitic is simply slander.

    Finally, we have Ann affection for supposed anti-semite Steve. The evidence for this is a single quote, which is indeed pretty ugly and antisemitic:

    Or in the case of the wealthiest, most powerful group, they use their influence over the media to instill [insecurity] in their children and to depress, demoralize, and divide other groups` children.
     

    This and a sparse number of other flirtations with MacDonald-style antisemitism, if they were the main theme of Steve's rather voluminous writing about Jews, could indeed justify the label. But they are not very typical at all. At most they show Steve is at times anti-semitism-curious. Is Ann supposed to boycott him now for that or else be guilty by association?

    Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile . . . .

    Yeah, aside from pioneering the exploration of the evolutionary strategies of both sides of the Jew/White Gentile conflict (A People That Shall Dwell Alone/What Makes Western Culture Unique), of the White Gentile group strategies developed to compete with Jews (Separation and Its Discontents), and of the the Jewish response to prevent the formation of White Gentile group strategies (The Culture of Critique) — and being essentially correct in all of this — what has he done?

    • Replies: @Smitty
    Time will tell. If this sociology prof (posing as a sciencey "evo psych" prof) never gets his due as the pioneer explainer of something supposedly important it won't be for lack of hype on his groupies' part. Since the non-U.S./Euro flank of the academy isn't controlled by pro-Jew forces shouldn't ol' Kev devote his energies there? Or does he like it fine where he is
  115. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Vinay
    Off-topic but not by a lot: NYT has an article on London's new Muslim mayor, Sadiq Khan. There's enough there to give you some idea of the kind of mayor he intends to be.

    I think it's a good time for iSteve-ites to put down some markers predicting what to expect during his tenure. If you're worried about Londonistan and take "Submission" seriously, you're certainly not gonna expect an uneventful tenure, right?

    As for me, I expect he'll be a far less radical and identity-politics oriented mayor than the white Christian De Blasio. He sounds very much like a classical liberal, more interested in cheaper housing and public transit than gendered bathrooms and safe spaces. I don't expect him to accuse the London cops of oppressing Muslims or to allow Sharia civil courts.

    What's your prediction?

    What’s your prediction?

    tsunami of corruption as London slips into the 3rd world – not all or even mostly him – it’ll be seen as a cue to go back to the old country ways

    he’s not a radical although he’ll have to turn a blind eye to people who are to keep his voters onside but that is only a shade different from the appeasement policy that has been in place for 30 years anyway.

  116. @Mike Sylwester
    The Nazi accusations against the Jews included much sexual hysteria.

    * The pimps were Jews who made Gentile women work as prostitutes.

    * Jews raped Gentile women.

    * Children born from sexual intercourse between Jewish men and Gentile women suffered from congenitally defiled blood.

    Sabrina Rubin Erdely has tried to make a journalist career by inciting sexual hysteria against men. Her major targets have been a Roman Catholic priest and a university fraternity. Her accusatory articles are reckless. She essentially incited a pogrom against an innocent fraternity.

    As a Jew, she ought to be more mindful about the consequences of inciting sexual hysteria against entire demographic groups of our society.

    Why would anyone think there are a lot of Jews in the sex industry?

    http://www.jewishquarterly.org/issuearchive/articled325.html?articleid=38

  117. Let me be clear: I can criticize Jewry and Jews in general (and as such) without being the “ANTI-SEMITE!!!” the anti-ANTI-SEMITES!!! want me to be; I accept Jewish allies like Gottfried, Unz, Stein, etc., as allies. I don’t care if that makes the world too complicated for Young to describe accurately. And I refuse the canard that it’s the Jews’ Jewishness that is ultimately the problem; nope – if Jews stopped doing the things I criticize them for, I’d stop criticizing them. Simple as that.

  118. @Carl
    I wonder if Cathy Young can accept that "anti-white animus" exists. Anywhere. Every time she approaches the idea she seems to reflexively dismiss it. Think harder, Cathy. Look around.

    In my experience most Jews simply can’t grasp the concept of gentiles victimized by Jews. *A priori*, gentiles always have secure, unshakable power to oppress Jews; and Jews are always the struggling underdog and justified in taking any advantage against their opponents.

    Showing evidence doesn’t make a difference. Erdley is Jewish; therefore by definition she is punching up.

    • Replies: @SFG
    I don't know, there are all those 'Jewish Voice for Peace' guys going on about the Palestinians.
  119. @Corvinus
    "The mainstream is openly anti-white."

    See, it's comments like this that make shake my burka. The only perpetual "anti-white" movement is the one concocted in your mind. The mainstream consists of whites, but according to you, they're not really white, they're anti-white, even though it has yet to be definitely established what constitutes white and what constitutes anti-white.

    "That many Jews pretend to be white doesn’t negate the fact that they are a specific subpopulation sharing genes and customs with each other that “other” whites do not share."

    How about focusing on humanity for once than your obsession of Jews.

    Why some people remotely consider Cathy Young, or Ann Coulter for that matter, to be credible is beyond me. They engage in rampant show(wo)manship.

    The only perpetual “anti-white” movement is the one concocted in your mind.

    The entire media are clearly and explicitly anti-white.

    There are lots of examples but the simplest is the way Asians disappear when they break the anti-white narrative and reappear when they don’t.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "The entire media are clearly and explicitly anti-white. There are lots of examples but the simplest is the way Asians disappear when they break the anti-white narrative and reappear when they don’t."

    [Shakes head] So you can't find the words to define "anti-white", then offer some nondescript, vague "example". I get it, the boys at the bridge club made it clear to maintain the narrative regardless of how foolish it looks.
  120. Somewhat OT, it looks like the Apostle Steve’s “Mission to the Jews” is starting to bear fruit;

    https://pjmedia.com/spengler/2016/05/11/alien-vs-predator/?singlepage=true

    • Replies: @SFG
    It's like these low-probability/high-payoff investments the millionaires do--it probably won't work, but if it does, all our problems are over. Buckley corrupted the neocons and got them on America's side for about 40 years--and, hey, anticommunism was OK again. 'Turn' enough Jews to the white side and the media will gain a Strange New Respect for populism.

    I'm not saying he'll succeed, but he might as well try.
  121. There are enough Jews who hate Christians to make a big difference in Christians’ lives.

  122. @ben tillman

    Just because some Jews are Christophobic doesn’t mean all are. We should be able to point out that some people have irrational fears of Christianity without implying that everyone else in that group shares the prejudice.
     
    But it's not about Jews as "individuals". It's about the organized Jewish community. It's irrelevant that not all Jews agree with the dogma and policies advocated by the organized community. The point is that the community has the resources and coordination to erect a false consciousness among gentiles and prevent the emergence of organized opposition.

    Jews tend to prevail in these conflicts, despite their smaller numbers, when they are able to act as a group while we are not.

    But it’s not about Jews as “individuals”. It’s about the organized Jewish community.

    The Jews on our side aren’t organized.

    • Replies: @neutral

    The Jews on our side aren’t organized.
     
    You can count them on one hand, so basically there are none on our side.
  123. @Lot
    The evidence for Coulter's supposed antisemitism is extremely thin.

    She never "touted" Radix, she retweeted a tweet that was anti-NRO that had a Radix hashtag, one of several.

    I mean, it was not even a link, it was a retweet of a hashtag mention!

    Radix site is certainly antisemitic, but honestly the various alt-right sites like Radix that post ambitious, boring, long-winded articles kind of blur together for me, and quite likely Ann as well.

    The second retweet had nothing to do whatsoever with Jews, but a joke about how Hillary's anti-Trump ad makes Trump look really good. If I had twitter I'd retweet it myself, it was funny! Is she supposed to do a background check on everyone she retweets?

    Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile, and brings disrepute onto the site and its many fine authors. However, he's one of dozens of authors, and they run maybe one thing a year from him on average. He's not even in the top 50 or so authors there, and he is not listed on the main directory of authors.

    Balance this thin evidence against the fact that Ann (1) is a strong supporter of Israel (2) retweets Mickey Kaus about 20 times more often than any supposed anti-semite (3) supports Trump and his objectively pro-jewish policies, and calling her anti-semitic is simply slander.

    Finally, we have Ann affection for supposed anti-semite Steve. The evidence for this is a single quote, which is indeed pretty ugly and antisemitic:

    Or in the case of the wealthiest, most powerful group, they use their influence over the media to instill [insecurity] in their children and to depress, demoralize, and divide other groups` children.
     

    This and a sparse number of other flirtations with MacDonald-style antisemitism, if they were the main theme of Steve's rather voluminous writing about Jews, could indeed justify the label. But they are not very typical at all. At most they show Steve is at times anti-semitism-curious. Is Ann supposed to boycott him now for that or else be guilty by association?

    Can somebody please define anti-semitism?

    I’m completely serious. From what I see (at least around here), it generally means pointing out things about Jews (or the Jewish community) that Jews would rather not have discussed. The actual merits of the comment are rarely discussed.

    AndrewR’s assertion that “Any criticism of Jews is anti-semitism” seems to be correct – again, at least in these parts; however, I’m open to discussion. Why is AndrewR’s definition not correct?

    Webster’s definition of anti-semitism is uses the words “hostility” and “hatred” toward Jews. Does criticism constitute hatred and/or hostility? If so, how is any discussion of any political topic possible? Or is that the point?

    Basically, where the line between criticism and hatred? Also, if Group A is attacking my group, is it even wrong for me to be anti-Group A?

  124. Steve, I recently found that there is a useful term in anthropology and cognitive linguistics for the Sapir-Whorf phenomenon, namely hypocognition. This term, and its opposite, hypercognition, was coined by Robert Levy to account for the differences between the way in which Tahitians construed their emotional experience and the way an outsider might do so.

    http://www.jasonthroop.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Levy.pdf

    Turning to Levy’s highly influential distinction between “hypercognition” and “hypocognition,” we find that he demonstrates that for his informants there seem to be a number of emotions such as “anger” (riri) that are hypercognized in Tahitian society. “That is, relative to some other feeling states (for example, interpersonal longing and loneliness, which… may be interpreted as some vague ‘being out of sorts’), there is considerable doctrine about anger, its effects, and what to do about it”

    In contrast to hypercognized emotion, which “is related to a considerable amount of theorizing,” there are a number of other affective states that are not so clearly delineated or culturally elaborated. These Levy terms “hypocognized emotions”. Significantly, Levy’s formulation of hyper- and hypocognition is greatly informed by Ernst Schachtel’s discussion of the relationship between focal attention and memory. According to Schachtel, there is an important connection between shared schemata, an individual’s focal attention, and the process of selectively parsing the vast field of sensory experience that confronts individuals from the moment of their birth. Central to Schachtel’s perspective is the idea that schemata—a term he borrows from Bartlett(1932)—selectively highlight some forms of experience, while “starving” others. Accordingly, it is often the case that non-schematic experience is difficult to incorporate and preserve in memory.

    The respective hypo- and hypercognitized elements of our political culture are a constant theme of your blog, but even here, the discussion of non-schematic experience is impeded by lack of vocabulary.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Thanks. Sounds useful.

    For example, nerdishness / autism spectrum / Asperger's thinking was hypocognized in the 20th Century and is becoming hypercognized in the 21st Century.

  125. @Corvinus
    "The mainstream is openly anti-white."

    See, it's comments like this that make shake my burka. The only perpetual "anti-white" movement is the one concocted in your mind. The mainstream consists of whites, but according to you, they're not really white, they're anti-white, even though it has yet to be definitely established what constitutes white and what constitutes anti-white.

    "That many Jews pretend to be white doesn’t negate the fact that they are a specific subpopulation sharing genes and customs with each other that “other” whites do not share."

    How about focusing on humanity for once than your obsession of Jews.

    Why some people remotely consider Cathy Young, or Ann Coulter for that matter, to be credible is beyond me. They engage in rampant show(wo)manship.

    I’m not obsessed with Jews. I just recognize that they tend to act in ways hostile to whites even while claiming to be white.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "I’m not obsessed with Jews. I just recognize that they tend to act in ways hostile to whites even while claiming to be white."

    Lamenting over and over about Jews as an entire group that they focus their energies against "whites" or "white interests"--without even a clear definition of what those terms engender--is indeed an obsession. It's ok to own up to it.
  126. @Matra
    The Irish will always be the fall guy for Anglo weaklings.

    And yet it was leading Irish-American politicians and journalists who were overrepresented in the push for more immigration - they along with the Ancient Order of Hibernians had been doing so for generations - not those "Anglo weaklings" who were always the demographic agitating and voting against every increase in immigration (including the descendants of Puritans who seem to be the favourite Alt Right/Neoreaction scapegoats).

    OT Pat, but on some site I think you said you were 200 years removed from Ireland. Are you ever going to become an Australian?

    OT Pat, but on some site I think you said you were 200 years removed from Ireland. Are you ever going to become an Australian?

    If Australia is like Canada, the Irish can’t become valid citizens. They have to cross their fingers, or mumble, when they swear the oath to Her Majesty.

    This is an often-discussed problem among Irish immigrants to Canada.

    • Replies: @Matra
    If you're born there it's not an issue.
    , @celt darnell
    Well, if you can't stand swearing an oath of allegiance to Her Majesty in Australia or Canada (or, New Zealand), may I suggest you immigrate instead to a republic?

    There's a rather big one in North America where, I am reliably informed, they speak English....
  127. @Matra
    The Irish will always be the fall guy for Anglo weaklings.

    And yet it was leading Irish-American politicians and journalists who were overrepresented in the push for more immigration - they along with the Ancient Order of Hibernians had been doing so for generations - not those "Anglo weaklings" who were always the demographic agitating and voting against every increase in immigration (including the descendants of Puritans who seem to be the favourite Alt Right/Neoreaction scapegoats).

    OT Pat, but on some site I think you said you were 200 years removed from Ireland. Are you ever going to become an Australian?

    I’m a descendant of this Irish-Australian rebel:

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

  128. @Vinay
    Off-topic but not by a lot: NYT has an article on London's new Muslim mayor, Sadiq Khan. There's enough there to give you some idea of the kind of mayor he intends to be.

    I think it's a good time for iSteve-ites to put down some markers predicting what to expect during his tenure. If you're worried about Londonistan and take "Submission" seriously, you're certainly not gonna expect an uneventful tenure, right?

    As for me, I expect he'll be a far less radical and identity-politics oriented mayor than the white Christian De Blasio. He sounds very much like a classical liberal, more interested in cheaper housing and public transit than gendered bathrooms and safe spaces. I don't expect him to accuse the London cops of oppressing Muslims or to allow Sharia civil courts.

    What's your prediction?

    That’s what I would have guessed about Barack Obama in 2008.

  129. @Milo Minderbinder
    Kind of reminds me of Buckley's son Chris coming out for Obama in 2008.

    I can understand various types of Conservatives not liking Trump or not voting for him.

    But how can they make the leap to supporting the corrupt, incompetent, man-hating, globalist Hillary.

    If you really can't stand Trump, vote Libertarian or Constitution Party, or leave the spot on the ballot for President blank, but Hillary, really?

    Kind of reminds me of Buckley’s son Chris coming out for Obama in 2008.

    John McCain was (and is) a dangerous, mentally unhinged war monger. While Obama turned out to be a lousy President, he was sort of an unknown commodity at that time, and I couldn’t blame anyone for voting for him in 2008, and just kinda hoping for the best (personally, I voted for Ralph Nader that year).

    Supporting Obama in 2008, and supporting Clinton in 2016, simply aren’t comparable situations. Hillary is all too well known, and anyone who supports Hillary is next-of-kin to a traitor (or is a fool), and should be written out of any sort of political future among decent people.

  130. @iSteveFan

    The evidence for Coulter’s supposed antisemitism is extremely thin.
     
    You should also note that Ann goes to great lengths to assign full blame for the 1965 Immigration Act to the Irishman Teddy Kennedy, and never mentions the actual author of the legislation. This seems to be a deliberate attempt to show she is not anti-semitic.

    You should also note that Ann goes to great lengths to assign full blame for the 1965 Immigration Act to the Irishman Teddy Kennedy…..

    Weren’t the Irish given lousy quotas (low numbers) by what we had prior to 1965? And that RFK and JFK wanted to change this? Get Ireland higher numbers? That this was part of the reason for Teddy Kennedy being the Senate floor manager for the 1965 Immigration Act.

    How come Australia got rid of it white Australia policy at the same time in 1966?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Australia_policy
    In 1966, the Holt Liberal Government introduced the Migration Act 1966, a watershed moment in immigration reform, it effectively dismantled the White Australia Policy and increased access to non-European migrants, including refugees fleeing the Vietnam War

  131. Good Lord, you people are a bunch of creeps. (Oh, and by the way… the so-called “racial” component of being Jewish is an ethnicity, not a race. “Whiteness” is not an ethnicity. And Israel recognizes black Ethiopian Jews as Jewish.

    I know high-handedness has become a way of life for you lot, but you don’t get to declare the boundaries of ethnicity, or whiteness, or race.

    And Israel discriminates against black Jews. How many are there in Israel? Do you even care?

    So, a white rich fraternity had to be inconvenienced for a bit. Boo fucking hoo

    Wow, just wow. Open racism in [the current year]!

    a cursory survey of jewish marriage habits suggests you are full of shit.

    Nah. 1. Jewish marriage habits are a lot more insular than than those of other white ethnic groups. French, Czech, Italian, Irish, etc…these groups do not even track so-called “intermarriage,” and the rates are much higher than for Jews. So Jewish marriage habits actually reveal particularism. 2. These much less particularist habits don’t stop (white) people from having animus against Irish, Italian, Czech, French, etc., ethnic groups, or constitute a valid defense for same.

    Are you trying to parody a whiney minority or what?

    Only whites may not complain. This is not racist. I was never here.

    Due to this invidious rhetoric from my co-ethnics, I’m sadly coming to the conclusion that the only viable options for Jewish diaspora in America are complete assimilation (reject entirely Jewish identity and blend into Stale Pale America) or emigration.

    Thanks for that post. But, I disagree with this bit. Patriotic (not (((Patriotic)))) Jews are uniquely positioned to speak to their people (and the public). You must follow your own conscience, of course, but for my part, I welcome Jewish critics of diaspora Jewry, and make no assimilatory demands.

    But they really don’t have any animus toward South America despite it being overwhelmingly Christian – because it is Brown.

    Real estate is the big x factor here; the more desirable a place is in terms of Jews wanting to live there (wealth + potential for Jews to “pass”), the more important it is that the whites in that place are whipped into submission. Thus, USA and Western Europe.

    That being said, I don’t think that people like Erdely act out of specific anti-gentile bias. Erdely doesn’t hate Christians in the same way that say Rev. Wright hates white people. Some of her best friends are gentiles.

    True. People like Erdely are more like rich white plantation owners. As long as the darkies smile and make nice and comply, the white plantation owner is quite fond. Start reading or getting uppity, though, and it’s a different story.

    Nothing worthwhile? Nothing at all?

    In the eyes of some people, just noticing things is “anti-semitic”.

    And thus inherently “not worthwhile.”

    Much of alleged Jewish anti-whiteness/anti-gentilism is just the usual attempt to keep up with the post-WASP Joneses in their contempt for badwhites.

    That’s like saying much of the black domination of the NBA is just an attempt to keep up with the white domination of the NBA in the fifties (or whenever it was); okay, my analogy would be more accurate if the NBA had never been white, sue me.

    The hatred towards badgoyim by goodgoyim is not like the hatred Jews have towards badgoyim. They are similar but, in the goodgoyim’s case, it’s evolutionarily maladaptive while in the Jews’ case it’s evolutionarily adaptive.

    This is the key difference, yes.

    Are there political taboos surrounding race-related genetic cognitive and behavioral differences? Of course (and for very understandable reasons, given historical experience).

    This BS is so entrenched in the culture that all it takes is an allusion to “make the case.” ‘Cept it’s BS. The Soviets killed tens of millions of people in the name of those taboos, but somehow the taboos still prevail. Because TPTB like them.

  132. @Gabriel M
    As a non-Jew living in Israel, I can definitely attest that anti-Gentilism is “a thing”, although it’s not especially sophisticated here. I haven’t experienced very much myself blah blah blah

    Are you trying to parody a whiney minority or what?

    You’re trying to bait me for some reason.

    I think I have one of the most objective and informed perspectives on Israel of any person on the planet (I’m not a Palestinian!).

    I’m certainly not an aggrieved minority. I keep my head down most of the time and smile condescendingly at the most barbarous people when necessary. Since that’s not part of the culture here, they don’t get it.

  133. It’s funny, but, the Jews’ frequent refrain of “look how often we’re intermarrying” actually reveals their particularism. Whites don’t notice so-called “intermarriage” at all. It’s their norm. They don’t even think to bring it up, and they don’t track its frequency (and if they do it’s usually on Jews’ behalf!). That this is not so for Jews reveals that they’re concerned about it in a way that whites are not.

    • Replies: @SFG
    Actually, that's not true--whites definitely notice when a white person marries someone who isn't white, and there are statistics on marriages between races. Even with Asians people joke about aspects of it like the differential gender intermarriage rates.

    Other white subgroups like Italian, Irish, etc. may not.
  134. @AndrewR
    The hatred towards badgoyim by goodgoyim is not like the hatred Jews have towards badgoyim. They are similar but, in the goodgoyim's case, it's evolutionarily maladaptive while in the Jews' case it's evolutionarily adaptive.

    You are assuming (against all evidence) that all gentiles form a single breeding pool so that for some gentiles to undermine their fellow gentiles is maladaptive. This is just wrong – Belmont women avoid public relationships with Fishtown trailer trash at all costs. You might have a fling with the contractor but it has to be on the down low or it lowers your status. The people Belmont men want to undermine in the evolutionary race are precisely those who otherwise would have a chance with their women. By making badwhites into social untouchables, this reduces the competition for babes among goodwhites.

    By the way, if you read the history of leftist movements in America, one of the big motivating factors for guys was they were a great place to pick up chicks. Not only chicks, but chicks who would put out, back when respectable women were expected to be chaste.

    Alt-right types have this idea that the white team is, or should be, united in the same way that black, Jews, etc. are. This was never the case in American history simply because almost everyone was white. Once (and the day is fast approaching) whites are a minority then they might form this kind of bloc identity to protect themselves against the majority, but as long as they are the majority just being “white” is not an identity.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas
    Well, whether it is adaptive or maladaptive for goodwhites depends upon whether they see themselves as the rulers of Brazil North when it finally arrives (i.e., as in Central and South American regimes) or rather as tax cattle who won't be allowed to have nice things and who will from time to time suffer partial purges and consistent harassment and abuse (as in the Chinese merchant classes in South East Asia). It's a risky bet - the upside of freezing themselves and their progeny in a ruling class impervious to competitive forces from the badwhites via meritocratic institutions, while the downside is simply potentially disastrous for themselves and their progeny.

    If one believes that the latter is a more likely outcome, and that present trends make it inevitable without a course correction in the present, it is maladaptive to status signal. If the former outcome, it is a ruthless form of competition elimination.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    By the way, if you read the history of leftist movements in America, one of the big motivating factors for guys was they were a great place to pick up chicks. Not only chicks, but chicks who would put out, back when respectable women were expected to be chaste.
     
    As they say in another Anglophone democracy, "Sleep Labour, marry Tory."

    Once (and the day is fast approaching) whites are a minority then they might form this kind of bloc identity to protect themselves against the majority, but as long as they are the majority just being “white” is not an identity.

     

    Exactly. The originally moderately diverse whites of the South (lowlanders, Scots-Irish and Germans in the hills, Cajuns and Creoles, assimilated Tex-Mex, Episcopalians, Methodists, Baptists, Catholics, and so on) eventually saw themselves as just "white". Same with South Africa-- Dutch, French and Portuguese melded into "Afrikaners", who later joined with the British they originally opposed.

    Racial diversity concentrates the mind.

    Actually, Southern white unity developed not to deal with blacks, but to counter other, outsider whites.

    , @AndrewR
    Your comment is insightful, and by no means do I mean to understate the genetic diversity within the "white" population, but I maintain my claim that focusing the brunt of your hatred on your closest kin is maladaptive, especially when there's no logical reason to do so.

    As a northerner of significant non-Anglo descent, I can't say I feel a great deal of kinship with southern whites. I'm a nonreligious Catholic and am not a redneck by any means. I view them as alien and the feeling is mutual. But I view them as much alien than most blacks, many Mexicans and even many Jews. If I had to pick groups for removal from the US, conservative southern whites would be rather far down the list. This is in stark contrast to probably most of the Belmont goodgoyim who you dubiously claim are not really cucks.

  135. @Reg Cæsar

    But it’s not about Jews as “individuals”. It’s about the organized Jewish community.
     
    The Jews on our side aren't organized.

    The Jews on our side aren’t organized.

    You can count them on one hand, so basically there are none on our side.

  136. Organized Jewry was working on demolishing the 1924 immigration act right up until they succeeded in 1965 (when they switched to mopping up, hunting down and bayoneting the stragglers). Hart, Celler, and Kennedy were not.

  137. @Desiderius
    Much of alleged Jewish anti-whiteness/anti-gentilism is just the usual attempt to keep up with the post-WASP Joneses in their contempt for badwhites.

    A bit tautological. They don’t need to keep up with themselves. They are the “post-WASP Joneses,” and the current and potential badwhites, really, are all whites (aka gentiles). That’s why your community needs a No Place For Hate sign, graciously provided by the ADL.

  138. Apparently, she had some kind of Jewish agenda to destroy UVA because it’s too white, Christian, pretty and conservative, or something. (When another commenter pointed out that many of the journalists who helped debunk the hoax were also Jewish, the conspiracy nuts were undeterred: Of course the Jews will do that when their mischief is caught out!)

    Yes Cathy, it is possible for Sabrina Rubin Erderly to have an ethnic agenda without it being a conspiracy involving all or even any other Jews. So many anti-anti-Semitic commentators take for granted that any criticism must involve accusations of a conspiracy that they end up assessing the criticism based not on its actual content but on the plausibility of it being a conspiracy. The question then is is this due to an innocent preconception or is it pure mendacity?

    • Replies: @5371
    So a considerable proportion of Jews have an "ethnic agenda", but none of them ever dreams of having communication concerning the subject with other Jews. Remarkable!
  139. @ben tillman

    Much of alleged Jewish anti-whiteness/anti-gentilism is just the usual attempt to keep up with the post-WASP Joneses in their contempt for badwhites.
     
    That is theoretically preposterous, and contrary to the empirical data. The theoretical problems are obvious (people generally don't develop self-destructive ideologies that benefit others except as a result of influence from those being benefited), and blogger n/a has addressed the empirical side of things in several posts at his blog:

    http://racehist.blogspot.com/

    people generally don’t develop self-destructive ideologies that benefit others except as a result of influence from those being benefited

    The contempt of goodwhites for badwhites is not self-destructive. They don’t recognize badwhites as members of their tribe.

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    The contempt of goodwhites for badwhites is not self-destructive. They don’t recognize badwhites as members of their tribe.
     
    You're being very unclear. What are the "post-WASP Joneses"? And why would they generate and propagate a belief system that is -- yes -- undeniably self-destructive (other than as a result of inluence from its beneficiaries)? (Whether they consider it self-destructive is irrelevant.) And why would you favor that explanation over the much more parsimonious explanation that the system was generated by the people who benefit from it and whose existence predated the "post-WASP Joneses"?
  140. @Carl
    I wonder if Cathy Young can accept that "anti-white animus" exists. Anywhere. Every time she approaches the idea she seems to reflexively dismiss it. Think harder, Cathy. Look around.

    What is telling is that in the linked piece she doesn’t really delve into the claims against Erdely, she just engages in uproar and concludes antisemitism – where antisemitism as used now completely coincides with Sobran’s definition that an antisemite is someone whom the jews hate, rather than someone who hates jews.

    Erdely could have focused her piece on an allegation having taken place at her alma mater, the University of Pennsylvania (25% Jewish student body far outperforming their proportion of high achievers) and where she would have the lay of the land, or allegations against black athletes – she chose, instead, to focus her attentions on the Southern, gentile and white fraternity culture at Virginia. Her piece is riddled with expressions of Jewish anxieties and inferiorities – she feels the need to mention all of the blondes at Virginia in the piece, for example.

    The standard Young seems to be holding out for accusations against Erdely clearly don’t apply to accusations against Erdely’s accusers. There seems to be this need to deny the existence of Jewish solidarity (as if Young’s piece doesn’t unwittingly stand as evidence of it) and group interests against all and copious evidence that these things exist. On the one hand she’s willing to attribute the passions and beliefs of villagers in rural Poland 300 years ago to all white gentiles, while categorically excluding the possibility that a well-healed, well-connected and powerful group with numerous ethnic advocacy organizations are pursuing a common interest.

  141. MQ says:
    @Anonymous
    Good Lord, you people are a bunch of creeps. (Oh, and by the way... the so-called "racial" component of being Jewish is an ethnicity, not a race. "Whiteness" is not an ethnicity. And Israel recognizes black Ethiopian Jews as Jewish.

    So, a white rich fraternity had to be inconvenienced for a bit. Boo fucking hoo

    the boundaries of ‘white’ in America are notoriously ever-changing, but what makes the most sense is to say that Ashkenazi Jews are a white European ethnicity (like Italians or whatever), while Sephardic Jews are a North African ethnic group (I suspect North Africans will melt into ‘whites’ in the US and for the second generation already have, in that little distinction is noted unless someone is ostentatiously Muslim).

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Sephardic Jews are not and were never restricted to North Africa. After the Iberian expulsions, some Sephardic Jews went to Italy and the Ottoman Empire as well as to North Africa. Indigenous Middle Eastern Jewish populations, in modern parlance sometimes referred to as Mizrahim instead of Sephardim, existed outside of North Africa as well, for example in Iran and Iraq.
  142. I.W. says:

    The term “anti-semitic” along with its variants has just about run its course as a weapon, after inflicting considerable unjust damage:

    http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/05/11/zionist-israel-hides-its-crimes-behind-its-smears-of-truth-tellers/

    Those who’ve made most use of the term perhaps believe they’re above natural justice though it seems to have followed them too for a very long time.

  143. MQ says:
    @AndrewR
    Any criticism of Jews is anti-semitism?

    The mainstream is openly anti-white. That many Jews pretend to be white doesn't negate the fact that they are a specific subpopulation sharing genes and customs with each other that "other" whites do not share.

    That many Jews pretend to be white doesn’t negate the fact that they are a specific subpopulation sharing genes and customs with each other that “other” whites do not share.

    lol — exactly the same could be said of Sicilians, Ukrainians, etc. Jews are a white ethnic group, same as the others. Like all ethnic groups, we share a particular history and customs, in this case a religion (although it’s not uncommon for religion to line up with ethnicity). I wouldn’t deny that the history of anti-semitism has led some (though hardly all) Jews to feel a particular kind of alienation from Christian ethnic groups, and that sometimes gets reflected in an eagerness to follow along with popular culture/political trends that demonize other groups. But there are certainly plenty of non-Jews that follow those ideologies as well, from their own particular kinds of alienation.

    The line between anti-semitism and depictions of real ethnic/cultural differences comes when you posit Jews as some kind of collective conspiracy against the health of the wider society, rather than as people who are influenced by their own backgrounds as other people are.

  144. @ben tillman

    Much of alleged Jewish anti-whiteness/anti-gentilism is just the usual attempt to keep up with the post-WASP Joneses in their contempt for badwhites.
     
    That is theoretically preposterous, and contrary to the empirical data. The theoretical problems are obvious (people generally don't develop self-destructive ideologies that benefit others except as a result of influence from those being benefited), and blogger n/a has addressed the empirical side of things in several posts at his blog:

    http://racehist.blogspot.com/

    All you did was provide a link without any explanation as how these “theoretical problems are obvious”. Good grief.

  145. @Luke Ford
    Kevin MacDonald is a giant. I do not know how anyone could read Kevin's book Culture of Critique and not come to the same conclusion. Rabbinical friends of mine have read it and been deeply moved. The entire series is compelling.

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

    Yidden desperately need something like this:

    http://www.lukeford.net/blog/?p=63983

    "Jews for Consistency" monitors the proclamations and actions of Jewish groups in the light of Jewish text and Jewish history.

    We point out when they seek the the opposite things for Jews that they seek for non-Jews. Too often organized Jewry pursues cohesion for Jews (in 2016 Israel's Sephardic Chief Rabbi, in line with the Torah tradition, said non-Jews were not permitted to live in the Jewish state) but multiculturalism for non-Jews (more non-white immigration into white countries, more rights for minorities such as blacks, latinos, gays, and the transgendered, more rights for atheists and less Christianity in the public square, etc). Rarely do these Jewish groups show the same concern for non-Jewish minorities in the Jewish state.

    If unity, strength and cohesion are good for Jews, then these qualities are equally good for gentiles. When you maximize rights and power for minorities, as Jewish activists often try to do in the West, it always comes at the cost of cohesion for the majority. How would you like your country being disunited and fragmented? How would you like the Jewish state to stop being the Jewish state and start being another multicultural hodgepodge of warring groups? Do you want Tibet to stop being Tibetan and Japan to stop being Japanese? So why do America, England, and Australia need to lose their historic identities as Anglo countries?

    We ask Jewish organizations -- such as the ADL (Anti-Defamation League), the SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center), and the SWC (Simon Wiesenthal Center) -- to follow the Golden Rule and to only do unto others as they would want done to Jews and to the Jewish state. If they want to wrap themselves in the mantle of Torah and tolerance, we check their claims because sometimes these groups are running a con.

    I am convert to Orthodox Judaism and a hasid of Kevin MacDonald. And now I must daven and study a page of Talmud.

    You are a grade-A weirdo and shameless media hound and craver of attention.

    A fan of The International Jew as well? Why or why not?

    • Replies: @5371
    Well, you seem to have perfectly mastered the argumentum ad hominem, anyway.
    , @whorefinder
    Grade-A weirdo, yes.

    Craver of attention, yes.

    But he's absolutely right.
    , @Luke Ford
    I have not read The International Jew and so I have no opinion on it.

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

    I have read Culture of Critique. Have you?

    There are only two honorable forms of argumentation -- disputing facts or logic. Name-calling is not honorable argument.

    I remain a big fan of your posts.
  146. Steve is not an anti-Semite, but he and many of his commenters make a huge mistake in assigning Assimilated Jewish anti-White behavior into Jewish ethno centrism. Because Steve and his commenters are fish not seeing the water, or wish to make excuses or apologies for the larger White culture being explicitly anti-White as a result of post-Christian religious belief.

    The tragedy of modern, Western, assimilated Jews like Cathy Young is that they traded their heritage and Jewishness for … a mess of pottage. Lennonism. Of the two, John was more dangerous than Vladimir because his post-Christian Utopia fit more with the comfortable virtue and status signaling that Young embodies than the hard struggle of throwing bombs into crowds that Vladimir required.

    How Jewish is Mark Zuckerberg? He’s the Jewish !Jeb!, who wants desperately to be Chinese like his wife. And that is not very Jewish, but is very WASP adventurers. Its Dances With Wolves, Avatar, James Michener’s “Hawaii,” and Pocahontas and Capt. Smith. Marry the foreign native princess and lead the natives as a Big Man (which lower/ordinary White man could NEVER be at home) against his fellow Whites/Europeans/Nationals.

    Fundamentally Kevin McDonald is horrible, because he’s WRONG. He is prescribing leeches for a patient beset by anemia. The problem of anti-Whitism in the West is not Jerry Seinfeld and Patton Oswalt conspiring with Howard Stern to turn America into Africa-meets-Pakistan, because that would be so good for Seinfeld, Oswalt, and Stern. The problem is John Lennonism Utopian virtue signaling at **ZERO COST** for status-seekers who are mostly **NOT JEWS**.

    Cathy Young stands out because she’s confirmation bias. But nothing she says would be out of place among Bill Gates mouth. Or Warren Buffet’s. Or Elizabeth Warren’s. Or Hillary Clinton’s.

    Jews are uniquely vulnerable to the post-Calvinist Witch Finding Puritanism without Jesus that characterizes our **EXTREME RELIGIOUS AGE**. Instead of being a Chosen People by God — who caused them to be born Jewish, they … choose their salvation willingly by being anti-White (which is also anti-Jewish — Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan, ISIS, Iran, and Erdogan all consider Jews to be both White and the enemy to be exterminated in some form or another).

    This has no cost, because as part of a highly insulated, bubble dwelling elite they don’t have their daughters raped and forced into prostitution like White working class people in Britain. Instead they live in a Seinfeld episode that never ends, where obscure and ever changing rules bring status. Jerry Seinfeld in the series was well, himself. A famous stand up comedian. But even his character was challenged by the constant and ever changing rules of PC that gave or took away status and standing.

    Anti-Whitism is not a Jewish conspiracy to undermine Gentiles and Christmas. It is instead a function of the constant, ever increasing, status chasing among a bubble dwelling elite that incurs no personal cost for anti-Whitism by their insulation and finds no status by accomplishment.

    And that last is key. Accomplishment means nothing, not fame, not money, not military prowess, nothing. Chris Kyle was the most accomplished sniper, and demonstrated bravery, and yet the SWPL crowd found him tedious and lower class — because he did not adhere to their rules of religion and status chasing within Lennonism religion.

    THAT is the rot in the West. Not Jews, who in the West traded their identity held onto for thousands of years for … saying “not that there is anything wrong with that.”

    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Except that American Jews support - and often fight for - a Jewish state, a state that goes against all of their (and gentile whites') silly we-are-the-world talk and philosophy that American Jews promote for white countries.

    Gentile whites don't support a white homeland across the sea that uses bad-ass fences and armed guards to protect their race. Jews do.

    Your argument is laughable in the face of that hypocrisy.

    Jews are different from SWPL gentiles.
    , @HA
    >The problem of anti-Whitism in the West is not Jerry Seinfeld and Patton Oswalt conspiring with Howard Stern to turn America into Africa-meets-Pakistan...

    For what it's worth, Patton Oswalt is not Jewish.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    Lennonism. Of the two, John was more dangerous than Vladimir because his post-Christian Utopia fit more with the comfortable virtue and status signaling...
     
    I wouldn't put much of the blame on Beatle John himself.

    "Not a Second Time", "Misery", "I'm a Loser", "Bad to Me", and the like were wonderfully crafted pop jingles which lifted the spirit despite the downer titles. "A Day in the Life", "Come Together", and "Imagine" were self-indulgent stoner crap.

    It's not John's fault that the former are dismissed and the latter get all the unmerited analysis. All he wanted to do was to enjoy a good pop song, his or someone else's. He said as much.
  147. @Gabriel M
    Learn to read.

    I said that Steve Sailer panders to anti-Semites. If you really want me to cite examples of "“unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism?" in his comment threads, then I suppose I shall. An honest (and sane) person would just concede the point though.

    I said that Steve Sailer panders to anti-Semites. If you really want me to cite examples of ““unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism?” in his comment threads, then I suppose I shall. An honest (and sane) person would just concede the point though.

    By your logic, Ron Unz panders to anti-Semites. So does Ilana Mercer. Which strikes me as somewhat odd when neither of them appear to be “self-hating Jews.” Perhaps the principle of open and unfettered dialog isn’t a priority for you. As for Sailer, I’m fairly certain I’ve seen anti-white comments in his comment threads also – does this mean he panders to anti-white racists?

    Where exactly is the line drawn for anti-semitism? A whole lot of people think Ann Coulter and Rick Sanchez are anti-Semites. I’ve been accused of it myself more than once. And where is the line for “racism” drawn?

    Sailer has noticed that walls work quite well in controlling Israel’s immigration problem. This inevitably invites notice that many Jews who support Israel’s wall also reject the idea of a wall for America. Nothing invites attack like hypocrisy.

  148. @Reg Cæsar

    OT Pat, but on some site I think you said you were 200 years removed from Ireland. Are you ever going to become an Australian?
     
    If Australia is like Canada, the Irish can't become valid citizens. They have to cross their fingers, or mumble, when they swear the oath to Her Majesty.

    This is an often-discussed problem among Irish immigrants to Canada.

    If you’re born there it’s not an issue.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    If you’re born there it’s not an issue.
     
    Jus soli?

    If you are born anywhere, you are issue. But "issue" implies jus sanguinis. It's all very confusing.
  149. Geez, how many pro-Israeli statements has Ann Coulter made in her life? Too many to count.

    Cathy Young reminds me of the rabid fundamentalists, or born-agains or whatever who accuse the tens of millions of rank and file Christians of not being the “real thing.” If you aren’t at their level of rabidness, you’re pretty much the same thing as a devil worshiper. That’s the religious kind of “logic” that goes along with too many of the anti-semitism watchdogs.

  150. @Desiderius

    people generally don’t develop self-destructive ideologies that benefit others except as a result of influence from those being benefited
     
    The contempt of goodwhites for badwhites is not self-destructive. They don't recognize badwhites as members of their tribe.

    The contempt of goodwhites for badwhites is not self-destructive. They don’t recognize badwhites as members of their tribe.

    You’re being very unclear. What are the “post-WASP Joneses”? And why would they generate and propagate a belief system that is — yes — undeniably self-destructive (other than as a result of inluence from its beneficiaries)? (Whether they consider it self-destructive is irrelevant.) And why would you favor that explanation over the much more parsimonious explanation that the system was generated by the people who benefit from it and whose existence predated the “post-WASP Joneses”?

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    Thanks for asking.

    What are the “post-WASP Joneses”?
     
    SWPLs and "conservative" corporate types.

    And why would they generate and propagate a belief system that is — yes — undeniably self-destructive (other than as a result of inluence from its beneficiaries)? (Whether they consider it self-destructive is irrelevant.)
     
    I could ask why your fellow American citizens who happen to be Jewish don't count in your own accounting of "self." My guess would be that you perceive your interests to diverge from theirs'. Same phenomenon.

    And why would you favor that explanation over the much more parsimonious explanation that the system was generated by the people who benefit from it and whose existence predated the “post-WASP Joneses”?
     
    Because I live among the post-WASP Joneses and have seen it happening my whole life.

    Jews benefit from a solidarity and sense of community that many white goy abandoned long ago. There are Jews among those who promoted/promote that abandonment, but they're far from alone.
  151. @Spmoore8
    I think Steve's role in publicizing Richard Bradley's early skepticism was very important, and furthermore, Steve's analysis of literary and historical roots to the hoax, as well as the causal catfishing roots was miles ahead of everyone else.

    I'm disappointed in Cathy Young.

    I am adding Cathy Young to my list of People I Once Respected. P J O’Rourke joined yesterday.

  152. Thea says:
    @Twinkie

    Sabrina Rubin Erdely’s Kristallnacht
     
    I thought the allusion was particularly apt given not just actual the thuggery of the attack on the fraternity, but especially because of the official support for the prevailing narrative and the ineffectual investigation of the actual vandalism. It definitely had the whiff (there goes the world that leftists love to use anytime some black/homosexual/transgender person is lynched mythically somewhere) of Nazi-condoned thuggery or even Maoist Cultural Revolution.

    As for anti-gentilism, anyone who has grown up with a large Jewish population as I have can serve as a witness to the prevailing sense of fear and contempt toward gentiles that many Jews seem to harbor (one that is much more freely discussed among Jews themselves). Even though I am not Jewish, I frequently heard disparaging remarks about non-Jews, especially white Catholics and Asians, from Jewish acquaintances and colleagues particularly while I was in academia. For some reason, people seem to feel very free about their thoughts around me, and would tell me their inner thoughts readily (this came in VERY HANDY when I used to work as an investigator).

    Growing up, I used to have a highly positive view of Jews, but that began to change once I grew up and began to see beyond the propaganda ("Light unto nations") and Holocaust victimology.

    I went to a school where whites were a minority with many of that small group being Jewish.

    Anecdotally, they seemed to treat anyone with whom they disagreed with contempt. Saving their most haughtiness for one another. But that it just my experience. I certainly had Jewish freinds who weren’t freinds to each other.

  153. @jtgw
    Just because some Jews are Christophobic doesn't mean all are. We should be able to point out that some people have irrational fears of Christianity without implying that everyone else in that group shares the prejudice.

    I think we’re suggesting precisely that she is, but by no means that all are.

  154. I now view posts like the above as iSteve’s version of “fan service.” There is good stuff routinely posted here in the spirit of unique, candid and topical food for thought. And then there’s vain feuding with random verbiage artists Steve logically must consider to be his peer group, evidently pleasing a key slice of loyal readers wetting themselves in excitement to hiss in unison at the hook-schnozzed Bum Of The Week. There’s a similar vibe here to cheering from the curb in the outlaw street racing scene, except that crowd isn’t as heavily East Asian… N.B. Steve’s one of the few second-tier politibloggers — famous but not TV famous as of yet — known for contemplating local crime stories and Patch.com-level village anecdotes: “curious” or egotistical? Well who says he can’t be both. Looking forward to how your neighbor isn’t tending to his lawn care and a report that the Zoroastrian family across the street refused to put out Halloween candy this year

    • Replies: @SFG
    Yeah, I was always trying to figure out if the Jew stuff goes up when he's asking for money or when he's not asking for money. Other commenters seem to have figured out it's the first. I find it hard to believe a guy would be that anti-semitic and choose to live in LA and review movies.

    Having aged past my prime myself, I've come to conclude a man may have to do many undesirable things to make a living. Of course the Jewish fraction of the commentariat could start sending larger checks... ;)

  155. Anti-gentilic? Why not just goyophobic?

  156. @Gabriel M
    Learn to read.

    I said that Steve Sailer panders to anti-Semites. If you really want me to cite examples of "“unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism?" in his comment threads, then I suppose I shall. An honest (and sane) person would just concede the point though.

    So allowing people to express their opinion = pandering to them.
    Perfectly clear.

  157. @Matra
    she’s no more anti-WASP than Camille Paglia, who is Italian Catholic.

    You are right about Ellis Islander Camille Paglia being anti-WASP (and anti-blonde) but I can't imagine her ever going so far as to falsely and publicly accuse a particular WASP she's had no personal relationship with of a major crime. I think that requires a hatred so deep that you've dehumanised, perhaps unconsciously, the group your target belongs to. I say 'unconsciously" because I don't think Jews (and other Euroasian ethnic groups) are lying when they do this kind of thing. They are just so deeply in-group focussed they can't see the bigger picture.

    I never took Paglia as anti-WASP so much as embracing her (perhaps idealized) earthy and passionate Southern Italian roots. Necessarily this requires some opposition to WASP cultural control and the stoic WASP style but I don’t think there was much desire to obliterate it so much as to make cultural space for her own sort. Perhaps I’ve just read the wrong books/columns and seen the wrong talks by her. Other than on TV in her youth, I can’t imagine that Syracuse at the time was a bastion of WASP privilege. Likely the blondes of whom she was jealous, desirous or both were Polish, German, or Irish Catholics of modest, working class means.

    For a few nights about two weeks ago I suffered from some insomnia. In the wee hours I watched two films in particular on cable that I had never before seen out of sheer boredom among others – 1987’s Dirty Dancing, and 1988’s Beaches. Now, I’m not much younger than Erdely and I’m Catholic from blue collar neighborhoods in Philadelphia and sent to parochial schools but my mother was a striving working sort who sent me and my brother to a Jewish day camp (though not explicitly so) in a Jewish belt of suburban Montgomery County as kids to get rid of us for the day after my parents got divorced. We were two of a very, very few gentiles there and I can tell you that those two movies were seen, discussed and part of the cultural ether for those kids (not just the girls! Aside: what sort of thirteen year old boy is a Bette Midler fan?). It’s just an educated guess, but if I recall Erdely is from that same part of Montgomery County, probably very culturally similar to those kids (hell, she may have gone to that camp herself) and I’d bet given her age she saw both of those movies over and over.

    I suppose the point in mentioning the films is that they’re sort of a window into the mind of a person like Erdely – the simultaneous chauvinism and feelings of inferiority, their view of the Jew/goy divide, etc. In Beaches, the main goy is a WASP who learns to live a little after befriending a loud and brash Jewish child entertainer (there is even a pseudo Country Club scene where the little Jewish girl is asked to leave a restaurant). In Dirty Dancing, the goys are prole white trash who work at the Catskills resort by day and drink and dance in ways that amount to open acts of coitus at night, while the Jews are wealthy and educated if reserved, one learning to dance and her sexual passions awaken with the Buck goy while a Jewish doctor first unwittingly pays for a botched backalley abortion (pre-Roe), and then sweeps in to heroically save the life of the pretty blonde white trash slut and keep everything quiet.

    • Replies: @Forbes
    Syracuse, in Paglia's time was Irish on the west side, Italian and German on the north side, Jewish on the east side, and black on the south side. WASPs weren't a thing. The pols were mainly Irish and Italian. Long time corrupt mayor was Greek.
    , @anon
    lust/hate
  158. @Matra
    Apparently, she had some kind of Jewish agenda to destroy UVA because it’s too white, Christian, pretty and conservative, or something. (When another commenter pointed out that many of the journalists who helped debunk the hoax were also Jewish, the conspiracy nuts were undeterred: Of course the Jews will do that when their mischief is caught out!)

    Yes Cathy, it is possible for Sabrina Rubin Erderly to have an ethnic agenda without it being a conspiracy involving all or even any other Jews. So many anti-anti-Semitic commentators take for granted that any criticism must involve accusations of a conspiracy that they end up assessing the criticism based not on its actual content but on the plausibility of it being a conspiracy. The question then is is this due to an innocent preconception or is it pure mendacity?

    So a considerable proportion of Jews have an “ethnic agenda”, but none of them ever dreams of having communication concerning the subject with other Jews. Remarkable!

  159. @Lot
    You are a grade-A weirdo and shameless media hound and craver of attention.

    A fan of The International Jew as well? Why or why not?

    Well, you seem to have perfectly mastered the argumentum ad hominem, anyway.

  160. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Lot

    As for anti-gentilism, anyone who has grown up with a large Jewish population as I have can serve as a witness to the prevailing sense of fear and contempt toward gentiles that many Jews seem to harbor (one that is much more freely discussed among Jews themselves).
     
    So your evidence is "everyone who knows Jews knows this to be true" and "things you heard from Jewish acquaintances"

    That's awfully persuasive!

    Maybe you are feeling a bit of envy and resentment at the single ethnic group most successful at skimming off the best women of your race? I mean, Amy Chua is quite a catch: best selling author, as politically incorrect as she feels like, daughter of one of the leading professors of electrical engineering in the nation, makes a ton of money, raises polite and intelligent children. And in her wikipedia pic, at age 50, she is still smoking hot.

    Maybe you are feeling a bit of envy and resentment at the single ethnic group most successful at skimming off the best women of your race? I mean, Amy Chua is quite a catch: best selling author, as politically incorrect as she feels like, daughter of one of the leading professors of electrical engineering in the nation, makes a ton of money, raises polite and intelligent children. And in her wikipedia pic, at age 50, she is still smoking hot.

    From what I can gather, Twinkie landed himself a high-IQed Christian Nordic queen. Can’t do any better than that. And she obviously wasn’t looking for some neurotic, Christ-denying nebbish who would always view her as inferior to his mother, whom he a creepy relationship with that requires therapy. No, Mrs. Twinkie was looking for a Christian man with brains and, most importantly, character, because in this life you either accept Christ or you don’t. It’s a choice. As C.S. Lewis wrote in The Great Divorce: “There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, ‘Thy will be done,’ and those to whom God says, in the end, ‘Thy will be done’ ”.

  161. Thank you, Steve, for writing about anti-gentilism. Very few people realize it exists, and much of that lack of attention may indeed be due to the Sapir-Whorf effect.

    When you don’t have a word or name for something, it is harder to think about and easy to miss. Anti-gentilism, or some similar term, should be used and used until it securely enters the lexicon.

    My only doubt is whether or not this term is enough. The real problem is anti-white-gentilism or anti-gentilism directed at whites. Or at white men. You see how tricky this is?

    We need a name for this. We know what it is: the subversion of us!

    It might be best for us to adopt a victim’s stance. That seems to work for those who are subverting us. The more decimated we become, the easier this will be, but if we don’t turn things around now, we might never be able to.

  162. @Matra
    If you're born there it's not an issue.

    If you’re born there it’s not an issue.

    Jus soli?

    If you are born anywhere, you are issue. But “issue” implies jus sanguinis. It’s all very confusing.

  163. @Anonymous Nephew
    "she works for the CATO institute"

    PJ O'Rourke, also previously sponsored by CATO, who's just come out for Hillary Clinton, has appeared several times on BBC radio describing Trump's relationship with the Republican party as 'the drunk uncle at the family gathering".

    O’Rourke was funny for a bit back in the early 90’s, but his act quickly wears thin. He did have a funny crack about Mexico though. “Welcome to Mexico…the Republic of Dirt…a country whose national sport consists of torturing farm animals”

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    O'Rourke was very funny for a very long time.
  164. @Anonymous
    Good Lord, you people are a bunch of creeps. (Oh, and by the way... the so-called "racial" component of being Jewish is an ethnicity, not a race. "Whiteness" is not an ethnicity. And Israel recognizes black Ethiopian Jews as Jewish.

    So, a white rich fraternity had to be inconvenienced for a bit. Boo fucking hoo

    “…the so-called “racial” component of being Jewish is an ethnicity, not a race…”

    I’ll focus on your “science” and ignore the poor writing, thinking and indifference to other human beings that your trolling reveals.

    You seem blissfully unaware of recent research involving the human genome. The quoted Frankfurt School meme was allowed a pass in the old days. Current research has found that there is a very distinctive set of haplotypes associated with Ashkenazi Jews. These clearly distinguish them from other Europeans and other human clades. The presence of such haplotypes is confirming evidence of some Ashkenaz ancestry. I cannot think of anything that would more clearly define a set of human beings as a racial group.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    You're using antiquated genetic terminology. The strongest evidence for distinct Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry comes from autosomal DNA studies that assay thousands of loci throughout the genome rather than uniparental marker haplotypes. However, it is also now clear that Ashkenazi Jews are the result of admixture (predominantly Middle Eastern and Southern European with a minor East European component). The admixture and subsequent inbreeding tend to cause Ashkenazi Jewish samples to form their own genetic cluster in the standard statistical analyses of the genetic data. The same effect is seen to some extent when other admixed groups like Uighurs are analyzed genetically. But even regions within the UK are genetically differentiable by autosomal DNA analysis.
  165. @Desiderius
    Much of alleged Jewish anti-whiteness/anti-gentilism is just the usual attempt to keep up with the post-WASP Joneses in their contempt for badwhites.

    Could you elaborate on “badwhites” and “goodwhites”? I’m not quite sure what it means but it sounds promising.

    • Replies: @SFG
    I think it started with our esteemed host and may have been a reference to the Saberhagen 'berserker' series where 'goodlife' serve the evil humanity-destroying machines, but 'goodwhites' are SWPL whites who hate their whiteness, whereas 'badwhites' are rednecks or similar 'evil whites' who are proud of their roots. I think.
  166. Priss Factor [AKA "Polly Perkins"] says:
    @The Z Blog
    Ekaterina Jung is her real name. She is emblematic of the nexus between libertarians and liberals. The former exists as a mild critique of the latter, only because the latter has no fear of them. Progressivism is a culture war in America, so they are willing to punt on economic issues, knowing it is a rhetorical surrender at worst. There will never be a libertarian paradise.

    It's the fact that the libertarian is willing to surrender on all cultural issues that makes them tolerable to Lefty. Throw in the libertarian habit of stabbing anyone to their right in the back and they make for very useful idiots.

    I did a post on Mx. Jung a while back: http://tinyurl.com/hsn85sm

    Jung? She must be of German-Jewish origin.

    In the end, she doesn’t feel German.
    In the end, she doesn’t feel Russian.
    In the end, she doesn’t feel American.
    In the end, she doesn’t feel white.

    She says she’s libertarian, but her rage at Coulter suggests she feels mostly as Jewish.

    There are two ways of identity.

    1. To declare what you are loudly and proudly.

    2. To angrily react to offense remark directed at a certain group.

    Some Jews say “I’m Jewish and I’m proud.” Like Michael Medved.

    Some Jews say, “I’m beyond tribal identity and only believe in universal ideals.”

    Some Jews are indeed sincerely like that. But some Jews say such stuff but still identify most powerfully as Jewish. And they betray themselves like Cathy Young.
    If Young is beyond tribal identity, what does it matter what Coulter said about Jewish power? Young was never much bothered by Coulter’s ‘offensive’ remarks about other groups over the yrs.
    But Young is most offended by Ann Coulter’s stuff about Jews(even though it’s very mild compared to what Coulter has said about OTHER groups).
    And I wonder if Young ever denounced Adelson for his ‘nuke Iran’ remark.

    There is identity by declaration.
    There is identity by reaction.

    By Young’s violent reaction to Coulter’s alleged anti-Jewish remarks, it is clear that Young mostly as Jewish than as libertarian ideologue.

    Ayn Rand gave herself away too:

    She rationalizes her rabid & virulent tribalism with talk of ‘industry’, ‘intelligence’, and ‘reason’. “Jews should kick Arab butt because… it’s all about free enterprise.”

    I wonder… suppose Iran becomes the most secular, democratic, and advanced nation in the Middle East while Israel turns into an autocratic semi-theocracy. I wonder how many Jewish Libertarians will support Iran against Israel.

    This goes for so many Jewish ‘libertarians’. They claim to be beyond tribalism; they say they are first and foremost LIBERTARIANS. But most of them will be offended MORE by negative remarks about Jews than about libertarians.

    If you say, ‘liberatarianism sucks’, they will argue with you. If you say, ‘Jews suck’, they will denounce you. Hmm.

  167. @ben tillman

    Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile . . . .
     
    Yeah, aside from pioneering the exploration of the evolutionary strategies of both sides of the Jew/White Gentile conflict (A People That Shall Dwell Alone/What Makes Western Culture Unique), of the White Gentile group strategies developed to compete with Jews (Separation and Its Discontents), and of the the Jewish response to prevent the formation of White Gentile group strategies (The Culture of Critique) -- and being essentially correct in all of this -- what has he done?

    Time will tell. If this sociology prof (posing as a sciencey “evo psych” prof) never gets his due as the pioneer explainer of something supposedly important it won’t be for lack of hype on his groupies’ part. Since the non-U.S./Euro flank of the academy isn’t controlled by pro-Jew forces shouldn’t ol’ Kev devote his energies there? Or does he like it fine where he is

    • Replies: @celt darnell
    Well, given that MacDonald has tenure, he'd be a fool to give it up as his publications have rendered him unemployable elsewhere.

    And he isn't unemployable because he's wrong, but because he offends certain well-heeled lobbies.

    MacDonald's "groupies" by the way, are completely and utterly outnumbered by his opponents who have a damned sight more influence.
  168. Priss Factor [AKA "Polly Perkins"] says:

    Jackie was kristall-facht.

  169. @Pat Hannagan
    Dear Mr. Sailer,

    How come it’s okay to shitbag the Irish on your blog due to Kennedy when you know the Jews wrote the Act that wrote off your own nation yet you refuse to write about it?

    Furthermore, why do you censor abusive comments about Jews yet allow offensive comments about the Irish?

    Yours enquiringly, sincerely, and grovelling,

    Pat Hannagan

    “censor abusive comments about Jews yet allow offensive comments about the Irish”

    Good luck with your inquiries, sincerity and groveling. You can throw in donating too, believe it or not. I’ve tried ’em all.

    I think slur names of most European nationalities are allowed—even encouraged—in the comments. (The one that applies to my heritage makes frequent appearances.)

    Just stay away from the common one for Jews. Or African-Americans.

    • Replies: @SFG
    From what I understand, if you leave slurs about Jews or blacks in, you get a lot of illiterate Nazi ('alt-right' is too generous) commenters.

    Given the general tone of the comments, all Steve is doing is making you clean up your language, which usually results in more cogent arguments. Most people here can complete sentences. The tone of the comments is generally not philosemitic, and while Jews have a large and vocal minority here, almost nobody defends blacks.

  170. @Vinay
    Off-topic but not by a lot: NYT has an article on London's new Muslim mayor, Sadiq Khan. There's enough there to give you some idea of the kind of mayor he intends to be.

    I think it's a good time for iSteve-ites to put down some markers predicting what to expect during his tenure. If you're worried about Londonistan and take "Submission" seriously, you're certainly not gonna expect an uneventful tenure, right?

    As for me, I expect he'll be a far less radical and identity-politics oriented mayor than the white Christian De Blasio. He sounds very much like a classical liberal, more interested in cheaper housing and public transit than gendered bathrooms and safe spaces. I don't expect him to accuse the London cops of oppressing Muslims or to allow Sharia civil courts.

    What's your prediction?

    Sharia civil courts already exist in the UK. They’ve been there for years.

  171. @Lot
    You are a grade-A weirdo and shameless media hound and craver of attention.

    A fan of The International Jew as well? Why or why not?

    Grade-A weirdo, yes.

    Craver of attention, yes.

    But he’s absolutely right.

  172. @Jack D
    You are assuming (against all evidence) that all gentiles form a single breeding pool so that for some gentiles to undermine their fellow gentiles is maladaptive. This is just wrong - Belmont women avoid public relationships with Fishtown trailer trash at all costs. You might have a fling with the contractor but it has to be on the down low or it lowers your status. The people Belmont men want to undermine in the evolutionary race are precisely those who otherwise would have a chance with their women. By making badwhites into social untouchables, this reduces the competition for babes among goodwhites.

    By the way, if you read the history of leftist movements in America, one of the big motivating factors for guys was they were a great place to pick up chicks. Not only chicks, but chicks who would put out, back when respectable women were expected to be chaste.

    Alt-right types have this idea that the white team is, or should be, united in the same way that black, Jews, etc. are. This was never the case in American history simply because almost everyone was white. Once (and the day is fast approaching) whites are a minority then they might form this kind of bloc identity to protect themselves against the majority, but as long as they are the majority just being "white" is not an identity.

    Well, whether it is adaptive or maladaptive for goodwhites depends upon whether they see themselves as the rulers of Brazil North when it finally arrives (i.e., as in Central and South American regimes) or rather as tax cattle who won’t be allowed to have nice things and who will from time to time suffer partial purges and consistent harassment and abuse (as in the Chinese merchant classes in South East Asia). It’s a risky bet – the upside of freezing themselves and their progeny in a ruling class impervious to competitive forces from the badwhites via meritocratic institutions, while the downside is simply potentially disastrous for themselves and their progeny.

    If one believes that the latter is a more likely outcome, and that present trends make it inevitable without a course correction in the present, it is maladaptive to status signal. If the former outcome, it is a ruthless form of competition elimination.

    • Replies: @SFG
    Agree 100%. They think the former--they'll assimilate everyone into a multicultural utopia, and being superior they and their progeny will rise to the top. (Blue-collar guy in Alabama? Too bad.)

    I'm betting on the latter.
    , @Jack D
    As a data point, EVERYONE thinks that they are an above average driver. I'm guessing goodwhites see themselves and their descendants as the natural meritocratic rulers of the future Brasil do Norte. They may even be right.
  173. @Jack D
    You are assuming (against all evidence) that all gentiles form a single breeding pool so that for some gentiles to undermine their fellow gentiles is maladaptive. This is just wrong - Belmont women avoid public relationships with Fishtown trailer trash at all costs. You might have a fling with the contractor but it has to be on the down low or it lowers your status. The people Belmont men want to undermine in the evolutionary race are precisely those who otherwise would have a chance with their women. By making badwhites into social untouchables, this reduces the competition for babes among goodwhites.

    By the way, if you read the history of leftist movements in America, one of the big motivating factors for guys was they were a great place to pick up chicks. Not only chicks, but chicks who would put out, back when respectable women were expected to be chaste.

    Alt-right types have this idea that the white team is, or should be, united in the same way that black, Jews, etc. are. This was never the case in American history simply because almost everyone was white. Once (and the day is fast approaching) whites are a minority then they might form this kind of bloc identity to protect themselves against the majority, but as long as they are the majority just being "white" is not an identity.

    By the way, if you read the history of leftist movements in America, one of the big motivating factors for guys was they were a great place to pick up chicks. Not only chicks, but chicks who would put out, back when respectable women were expected to be chaste.

    As they say in another Anglophone democracy, “Sleep Labour, marry Tory.”

    Once (and the day is fast approaching) whites are a minority then they might form this kind of bloc identity to protect themselves against the majority, but as long as they are the majority just being “white” is not an identity.

    Exactly. The originally moderately diverse whites of the South (lowlanders, Scots-Irish and Germans in the hills, Cajuns and Creoles, assimilated Tex-Mex, Episcopalians, Methodists, Baptists, Catholics, and so on) eventually saw themselves as just “white”. Same with South Africa– Dutch, French and Portuguese melded into “Afrikaners”, who later joined with the British they originally opposed.

    Racial diversity concentrates the mind.

    Actually, Southern white unity developed not to deal with blacks, but to counter other, outsider whites.

  174. @AndrewR
    The hatred towards badgoyim by goodgoyim is not like the hatred Jews have towards badgoyim. They are similar but, in the goodgoyim's case, it's evolutionarily maladaptive while in the Jews' case it's evolutionarily adaptive.

    It is only the Jewish perogative that divides the world into Gentile & Jew. The Japanese for example, see Japanese & non Japanese.

  175. Lot says:
    @Jewish Conservative Race Realist
    I agree with you Bill.

    I used to think it would be possible to remain a patriot (of America) and a Jew at the same time. After all, there are American Catholics who are patriots of America and not Ireland or Italy or some other Catholic nation. For me personally, it's never been difficult to do this at all. Of course I love America more than Israel. America is where my forefathers have lived for almost two centuries. Israel is nothing to me.

    But Jewish activism in this country is burning every possible bridge with patriots, and I don't really see how this gets walked back anymore. Due to this invidious rhetoric from my co-ethnics, I'm sadly coming to the conclusion that the only viable options for Jewish diaspora in America are complete assimilation (reject entirely Jewish identity and blend into Stale Pale America) or emigration. Split loyalty and "dual" loyalty are bogus ideas. As I learned from Sailer on this very blog, politics is primarily about Whose Side Are You On. Loyalty comes in a strict hierarchy and at some point each person is called upon to declare, stand, and deliver.

    Any Jew who advocates open borders for their home country and ethnic preservation policies for Israel should be ostracized, silenced, or deported to Israel, in that order. The insanity has got to end.

    For me personally, Jewish identity is nothing at all compared to White American identity. But after spending so much time in alt-right circles, I can't deny that there's really something to the Jewish ethnocentrism case. (With many notable exceptions. Many great men of the Right are Jewish or Jewish ethnicity.)

    For me, I've given up on Jewish identity completely. It's easy for me since I'm not a believer. My wife is a believing Christian, and my kids are coming up Christian. They won't learn of my Jewish heritage until they are fully grown because I don't want to open the door to childhood self-reimagining as a poor oppressed Jew. Nobody has it better than the Jews in this country. They have all the advantages of high status and few of the disadvantages of being Pale and Stale. The only dignified disposition of Jewish Americans towards the USA is gratitude and service.

    Any Jew who advocates open borders for their home country and ethnic preservation policies for Israel should be ostracized, silenced, or deported to Israel, in that order. The insanity has got to end.

    Open boarders for America is wrong, regardless of ethnicity and regardless position on Israel having open boarders.

    For me, I’ve given up on Jewish identity completely. It’s easy for me since I’m not a believer. My wife is a believing Christian, and my kids are coming up Christian. They won’t learn of my Jewish heritage until they are fully grown because I don’t want to open the door to childhood self-reimagining as a poor oppressed Jew.

    Like your kids, I am half-Jewish and raised Christian, and my awareness of my ancestry never made me imagine myself as “oppressed.” Rather I have a mild sense of pride in the accomplishments of both my Ashkenazi and Anglo/Germanic ancestors, as well as white Americans generally. I don’t see the point of hiding such things.

  176. Priss Factor [AKA "Polly Perkins"] says:
    @Lot
    The evidence for Coulter's supposed antisemitism is extremely thin.

    She never "touted" Radix, she retweeted a tweet that was anti-NRO that had a Radix hashtag, one of several.

    I mean, it was not even a link, it was a retweet of a hashtag mention!

    Radix site is certainly antisemitic, but honestly the various alt-right sites like Radix that post ambitious, boring, long-winded articles kind of blur together for me, and quite likely Ann as well.

    The second retweet had nothing to do whatsoever with Jews, but a joke about how Hillary's anti-Trump ad makes Trump look really good. If I had twitter I'd retweet it myself, it was funny! Is she supposed to do a background check on everyone she retweets?

    Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile, and brings disrepute onto the site and its many fine authors. However, he's one of dozens of authors, and they run maybe one thing a year from him on average. He's not even in the top 50 or so authors there, and he is not listed on the main directory of authors.

    Balance this thin evidence against the fact that Ann (1) is a strong supporter of Israel (2) retweets Mickey Kaus about 20 times more often than any supposed anti-semite (3) supports Trump and his objectively pro-jewish policies, and calling her anti-semitic is simply slander.

    Finally, we have Ann affection for supposed anti-semite Steve. The evidence for this is a single quote, which is indeed pretty ugly and antisemitic:

    Or in the case of the wealthiest, most powerful group, they use their influence over the media to instill [insecurity] in their children and to depress, demoralize, and divide other groups` children.
     

    This and a sparse number of other flirtations with MacDonald-style antisemitism, if they were the main theme of Steve's rather voluminous writing about Jews, could indeed justify the label. But they are not very typical at all. At most they show Steve is at times anti-semitism-curious. Is Ann supposed to boycott him now for that or else be guilty by association?

    “Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile, and brings disrepute onto the site and its many fine authors.”

    I disagree. I think MacDonald has done some good work. His theory of history tends to be monomaniacal and he tends to blame Jews for too many things, but he is hardly alone in this kind of thinking. After all, many important Jewish thinkers have tended to put all the villainous eggs in one basket. Blame Wasps for everything!!
    And Jews have been the most important creators of the academic discourse where EVERYTHING is blamed on white males. And this sort of thing is mainstream. Just listen to that atrocious Matthew Weiner of Madmen fame. Or Sorkin’s rotten Social Network.
    What MacDonald is turn the tables, and focus on Jews in relation to just about everything.

    So, I don’t have problems with Vdare’s association with MacDonald.
    But I do have problems with MacDonald’s association with some far-right types.
    I mean Greg Johnson the Himmlerish fruitkin-neo-nazi is pure poison. (And he lacks taste. I hear he writes film criticism as Trevor Lynch. This dufus watches Battlestar Galactica. Imagine that. A full grown man, a fruit no less, watching that crap. Fruits are silly, but I thought they at least had some aesthetic sense.) MacDonald has associated with even worse, like Don Black, neo-nazi human garbage of Daily Stormer.

    The question is why?
    If we wanna be condemnatory, MacDonald lacks moral sense.
    If we wanna be generous, maybe he had to find allies where he could. Everyone prefers ‘better company’, but if there are only scuzzos who will listen to you, then whaddya gonna do?
    I think Alt Rightists starting out today are better off. They can find better quality people. But when Macdonald was starting out, the slightest critical view of Jewish power was anathema. It was pariah stuff. And most respectable people went nowhere near it.

    But this was also true of the Left. When they were radicals forming a movement, they sided with all kinds of nuts, thugs, gangsters, crooks, lunatics, and etc.

    This goes for BDS movement too. There was a time when most Libs stayed far away from anti-Zionism cuz it was associated with either vengeful far-right or fanatical far-left. But BDS has made anti-Zionism semi-fashionable, and once big name stars like Roger Waters made it sort-of-cool, we are seeing even respectable people support it.

    Now that Alt Right is making once-taboo subjects a part of the national debate, people like MacDonald should distance themselves from anyone with a whiff of that 14/88 skunk odor that really must go.

  177. The U.S. was in fact founded as a white country. The Naturalization Act of 1790, which set forth our first policies on citizenship, denied naturalization to non-whites.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1790

    It’s “who. we. are.” as a people.

  178. Lot says:
    @Gabriel M
    Ann Coulter is not an anti-Semite and she doesn't pander to anti-Semites.

    Steve Sailer, on the other hand, really does pander to anti-Semites and, in fact, it seems to be a pretty central part of his business model because he, without fail, ramps it up in line with his quarterly fundraisers.

    I was reading some old Lawrence Auster stuff the other day. He exemplified the ability the criticize Jews for what the do wrong, both as individuals and as a group, without dabbling in unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism. Similarly he was able to criticize blacks and other protected minorities without dabbling in racist trash. He ceaselessly warned about the gutter Richard Spencer and others were leading the anti multicultural right into.

    Unfortunately, it was to no avail. Any remotely honest person knows the alt-right is up to its neck in filth at this point. Any sensible person knows that its all going to blow up in your face before too long. You made your pact with the devil, laughing about it is not going to make it go away.

    You called it just right on every point.

    And it is sad, because with Trump we are potentially on the cusp of actually doing something about America’s ongoing demographic disaster. Rather than focus on the very hard work of reaching 50% + 1 in elections, a big part of the nationalist right in America would prefer to wallow in the filth you describe.

    When you look at Europe, you see what happens when the nationalist right rejects kooks and wins elections, sometimes able to join governments in return for major concessions on immigration, versus when it takes the “let’s going over for the millionth time the perfidy of the Jews!” path.

    Tell you all what: I concede Congressmen Celler sucks. Can we move on?

    • Replies: @Jack D

    Tell you all what: I concede Congressmen Celler sucks. Can we move on?
     
    The irony here is that Steve is always complaining about how for the left , 1965 was just yesterday and not two generations ago. Apparently, for some on the right, Congressman Celler has just stepped off the House floor even though he has been out of office since 1973.

    Celler by the way had an incredible life - he was first elected to Congress during the election of 1922 and made his first important speech on the House floor during consideration of Immigration Act. The Immigration Act of 1924.
    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    No, we can't.

    Like many around here, I am tired of Jews using the word "anti-Semitic" in the same way that the Left uses "racist," i.e. as a way to bully and to stop arguments without dealing with the merits of those arguments.

    Address the argument, show us how Sailer has dabbled in "unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism."

    For that matter, please explain to us where you draw the line between criticism of Jewish organizations and Jewish elites and anti-Semitism? Because, frankly, around here, I rarely see the distinction. Criticism of Jewish organizations and elites is immediately labelled as anti-Semitism and thus the Worst Thing Ever because, as we all know, even the slightest anti-Semitism will quickly lead to gas chambers.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Tell you all what: I concede Congressmen Celler sucks. Can we move on?"

    No. A problem must be identified before it can be solved. And the roots of our immigration problems have not been identified by most of the public. Most Americans don't even know of the 1965 immigration act, let alone who was behind it.
    , @iffen
    when the nationalist right rejects kooks and wins elections

    Hope springs eternal.

    Jews on the brain disease is one of the reasons all is lost.
    , @gruff

    When you look at Europe, you see what happens when the nationalist right rejects kooks and wins elections, sometimes able to join governments in return for major concessions on immigration
     
    You mean Denmark?
  179. @Gabriel M
    Learn to read.

    I said that Steve Sailer panders to anti-Semites. If you really want me to cite examples of "“unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism?" in his comment threads, then I suppose I shall. An honest (and sane) person would just concede the point though.

    “If you really want me to cite examples of ““unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism?” in his comment threads, then I suppose I shall”

    He asked you to do so the first time. Please make sure to draw a distinction between “unhinged anti-Semitism” and “demented anti-Zionism”. Do they differ from garden variety anti-Semitism/Zionism?

    “An honest (and sane) person would just concede the point though.”

    You made a baseless assertion. Following up a baseless assertion by demanding someone “concede the point” is silly. You haven’t made a point, you’ve made an assertion.

    “Pander” is defined as “to do or provide what someone wants or demands even though it is not proper, good, or reasonable”. Beyond approving comments, Steve doesn’t do much of anything for his various commenters. Hitting an “approve” button is not pandering. He approves your silliness, he approves comments from Silky Duck or whatever name he’s using this week. Are you arguing that he panders to you and the Duck guy as well? Rhetorical question, don’t answer.

    According to the rules of logic a baseless assertion can be countered by another baseless assertion. I assert that you argue like a woman (demand your point be conceded when you’ve not made a point; attribute your failure to make an argument to someone else’s shortcoming (“learn to read”); use overblown adjectives such as “demented”).

    I assert that Hunsdon asking you to provide some basis for your assertion was rather charitable.

  180. @Gabriel M
    Learn to read.

    I said that Steve Sailer panders to anti-Semites. If you really want me to cite examples of "“unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism?" in his comment threads, then I suppose I shall. An honest (and sane) person would just concede the point though.

    You seem to equate pandering to anti-Semites with not censoring readers’ comments using criteria which you deem acceptable.

  181. @Jewish Conservative Race Realist
    I agree with you Bill.

    I used to think it would be possible to remain a patriot (of America) and a Jew at the same time. After all, there are American Catholics who are patriots of America and not Ireland or Italy or some other Catholic nation. For me personally, it's never been difficult to do this at all. Of course I love America more than Israel. America is where my forefathers have lived for almost two centuries. Israel is nothing to me.

    But Jewish activism in this country is burning every possible bridge with patriots, and I don't really see how this gets walked back anymore. Due to this invidious rhetoric from my co-ethnics, I'm sadly coming to the conclusion that the only viable options for Jewish diaspora in America are complete assimilation (reject entirely Jewish identity and blend into Stale Pale America) or emigration. Split loyalty and "dual" loyalty are bogus ideas. As I learned from Sailer on this very blog, politics is primarily about Whose Side Are You On. Loyalty comes in a strict hierarchy and at some point each person is called upon to declare, stand, and deliver.

    Any Jew who advocates open borders for their home country and ethnic preservation policies for Israel should be ostracized, silenced, or deported to Israel, in that order. The insanity has got to end.

    For me personally, Jewish identity is nothing at all compared to White American identity. But after spending so much time in alt-right circles, I can't deny that there's really something to the Jewish ethnocentrism case. (With many notable exceptions. Many great men of the Right are Jewish or Jewish ethnicity.)

    For me, I've given up on Jewish identity completely. It's easy for me since I'm not a believer. My wife is a believing Christian, and my kids are coming up Christian. They won't learn of my Jewish heritage until they are fully grown because I don't want to open the door to childhood self-reimagining as a poor oppressed Jew. Nobody has it better than the Jews in this country. They have all the advantages of high status and few of the disadvantages of being Pale and Stale. The only dignified disposition of Jewish Americans towards the USA is gratitude and service.

    They won’t learn of my Jewish heritage until they are fully grown

    If you want your kids to spit on your grave, the best way is to hide something really big from them that they learn of when they are adults (extra points if they find out from someone else, which they will) and which rocks their world. Maybe one of your kids wants to be the grand wizard of the KKK – imagine when he finds out that he is really 1/2 Jewish himself. He’ll probably convert and become a rabbi just to spite you.

    On the other hand, if you tell kids the most unimaginable things when they are little (“The Lubavitcher Rebbe was your grandfather”) it doesn’t bother them one bit because the world that they are presented with seems “normal” to them no matter how strange it is to anyone else.

    I assume that you must not have any relationship with you parents, siblings or any other blood relatives? If you are going to keep this secret, it wouldn’t do to attend Cousin Eddie’s bar mitzvah.

    To be a self hating anything, including a self-hating Jew, is a sad thing. Get some therapy and learn to be comfortable in your own skin.

    • Replies: @unlearnedelder

    Maybe one of your kids wants to be the grand wizard of the KKK – imagine when he finds out that he is really 1/2 Jewish himself. He’ll probably convert and become a rabbi just to spite you.
     
    I think this phenomena is not uncommon.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Csan%C3%A1d_Szegedi
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Burros
    , @anonymous

    Maybe one of your kids wants to be the grand wizard of the KKK – imagine when he finds out that he is really 1/2 Jewish himself.
     
    Frank Collin, onetime leader of a Nazi-faction party in Chicago and who is famous for declaring his intention to march on Skokie back in the late 70's, had a father whose family name was Cohen, changed to Collin. He was aware of it but denied it. Strange stuff happens.
  182. Your comparison of Young to Ayn Rand is super-lazy and weak… The former is a milquetoast even by the loosey-goosey standards of Reason mag. Rand, short version, counterintuitively extolled greedy business tycoons as Lightworkers and scrapped in the Hollywood rat race. Young just writes pabulum like “USSR was bad, mmmkay? P.C. is bad, mmmkay” and could be an editor for Newsweek if that was still around. Is Perot retroactively Trump Lite? Is Putin Peter the Great Lite?

  183. Lot says:
    @Mr. Anon
    "Radix site is certainly antisemitic"

    No, it is not "certainly antisemitic". The authors who are published there are not especially obsessed with Jews or even interested in them. Many of the commenters could rightfully be called anti-semitic, but that could be said of any number of websites.

    "Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile, and brings disrepute onto the site and its many fine authors."

    Nothing worthwhile? Nothing at all?

    In the eyes of some people, just noticing things is "anti-semitic".

    “Radix site is certainly antisemitic”

    No, it is not “certainly antisemitic”

    That’s my memory of it looking at the article titles and trying to read some of the poorly-written, long, overly ambitious articles on it. I agree that it isn’t a focus of the site, though going to the homepage now one is greeted by a big picture of Kevin MacDonald and link to a speech.

    Now if you want to define MacDonald as “not antisemitic” I am not going to stop you, but I will not be using your non-standard English myself.

    • Replies: @Luke Ford
    "Anti-Semitic" is not a useful euphemism. Just say "anti-Jewish." I understand it is less dramatic and mystical and conveys less righteousness to the person hurling the slur, but it is more exact.

    Hurling slurs like "anti-Semitic" is not honorable argument. Calling Kevin MacDonald such a slur does not reflect well on you. It would be fair to say that much of his work is negative about the impact of Jews on white cohesion in the West.

    Many gentiles are anti-Jewish and just as many Jews proportionately are anti-gentile. All groups are competing for scarce resources so they will have conflicts of interest and rational reasons to have some negative views of the other. The stronger your in-group identity, the more likely you will have negative views of out-groups. A Jew who does not have some negative feelings about Christianity is not representative of his people and a Christian or Muslim who does not have some negative views of Jews is not representative of his people and religion. Every major Jewish organization in the United States pushes for immigration amnesty. It would be weird if white gentile Americans did not have some negative feelings about that.

    There are no permanent allies or enemies. In some times and places, Jews will be the enemy of other groups and at other times and places, they will ally.

    http://www.lukeford.net/blog/?p=58725

    Here is the immigration policy of the Orthodox Agudath Israel:

    “Finally, in the area of immigration, Agudath Israel urges that American borders continue to be open to Jewish and other refugees who seek to come to the United States after escaping from oppressive political environments. The United States is a nation of immigrants and has long been distinguished by its generosity toward refugees from all across the globe. It is essential that such generosity continue to be maintained in today’s era of international volatility. Agudath Israel accordingly opposes any efforts to impose caps or quotas on refugees seeking safe haven in the United States. Agudath Israel further supports the provision of welfare benefits to needy non-citizen immigrants.”

    http://www.jlaw.com/LawPolicy/OU5.html

    It would be weird if many gentile Americans did not have some negative views of organized Jewry because of such platforms (in addition to positive views in light of ways Jews have done good things in their eyes).

    I am unaware of a large number of Jews in the diaspora lining up on the side of the majority against minorities. For more than 200 years, Jews in the West have invariably sided with the coalition of the fringe against the core. It would be unnatural and unhealthy for the white Christian core not to have some negative feelings about that.

    Maj. Kong perhaps put it best: "Anti-Semitism is as natural to Western civilization as anti-Christianity is to Jewish civilization, Islamic civilization and Japanese civilization."

    In other words what is called "anti-Semitism" simply refers to a conflict of group interests. The term never occurs in Torah and does not figure much in rabbinic commentary.

    , @Luke Ford
    Kevin MacDonald is less anti-Semitic and less critical of Jews than the God of the Hebrew Bible. Is the Torah anti-Semitic?
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Now if you want to define MacDonald as “not antisemitic” I am not going to stop you, but I will not be using your non-standard English myself."

    As Joseph Sobran noted, the operating definition of "anti-semitism" employed by many people nowadays is not "someone who dislikes Jews" but rather "someone whom Jews dislike".

    Is any criticism of tendencies that may be found among Jews, and is in some way characteristic of them, to be considered anti-semitism? Is simply noticing trends concerning Jews to be considered anti-semitism?

    In any event, the frequent use of the term anti-semitism, much like the frequenct use of the word racism, seems to be wearing it out. It is a magic incantation which is losing its power.

  184. @Lot
    You are a grade-A weirdo and shameless media hound and craver of attention.

    A fan of The International Jew as well? Why or why not?

    I have not read The International Jew and so I have no opinion on it.

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

    I have read Culture of Critique. Have you?

    There are only two honorable forms of argumentation — disputing facts or logic. Name-calling is not honorable argument.

    I remain a big fan of your posts.

    • Replies: @Lot

    I have not read The International Jew and so I have no opinion on it.

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

     

    It is basically MacDonald's antisemitism, plus a better style, minus the crappy pop-evo gloss.

    I have read Culture of Critique. Have you?

    There are only two honorable forms of argumentation — disputing facts or logic. Name-calling is not honorable argument.
     
    Generally, that's right, but I do not believe you write in good faith seeking the truth, but rather out of attention-whoring. Look, a Jew who endorses Kevin MacDonald! As such, you lose the privilege of being taken seriously.

    I remain a big fan of your posts.
     
    The feeling is not mutual. In the unlikely event I've got you wrong, however, I will take you on directly. MacDonald is a sociology professor at a third-rate college out of his depth discussing evolution of human intellectual traits. His thesis that Jews have "group evolved" the tendency to "undermine the culture" of their neighbors is just old style anti-semitism with a shoddy academic veneer. It relies, as well, on "group selection," a concept you can read about here:

    https://www.edge.org/conversation/the-false-allure-of-group-selection
  185. @Desiderius
    Much of alleged Jewish anti-whiteness/anti-gentilism is just the usual attempt to keep up with the post-WASP Joneses in their contempt for badwhites.

    And the whole goodwhite/badwhite concept is really a sort of distorted Calvinism and has its roots in Christian (Protestant), not Jewish, doctrine. The whole modern Jewish “Tikkun Olam” (repair the world) thing has very little to do with traditional Jewish doctrine where “repairing the world” did not mean instituting free lunches for underprivileged black children but rather meant preparing for the coming of the Messiah. But it does have a lot to do with traditional WASP do-goodism.

    As a gedankenexperiment, imagine a large white country that thru some terrible tragedy has lost most of its Jewish population. Then see if the same liberal currents (for example a lady president who wants to let in millions of refugees into her country) exist in that country as in the US. If they do, this is proof that the goodwhite phenomenon would exist with or without the Jews.

    Just because you see Jews riding the bandwagon and playing the tune (even improvising riffs) doesn’t mean that they wrote the song that they are playing.

    • Agree: Spmoore8
    • Replies: @5371
    Couldn't be anything to do with that "large white country" not having regained its sovereignty to this day and all its politicians and journalists having to dance to the tune of the Mossad and CIA.
    There must be some other explanation.
    , @Marcus
    "Traditional WASP do-goodism" like all but banning immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe? Jews and other immigrants were feared during that time partly because they brought anarchist, socialist, communist, etc. ideologies that were not popular in the US. Moldbug has no idea what he's talking about when he tries to put the blame on the Yankees (and I'm no fan of theirs) http://racehist.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-boston-upper-class-circa-1950.html
    , @Tracy

    And the whole goodwhite/badwhite concept is really a sort of distorted Calvinism and has its roots in Christian (Protestant), not Jewish, doctrine.
     
    Protestantism is Judaized Christianity. Even Martin Luther started off extremely philosemitic, and check out what Cromwell was pushing religiously as he was slaughtering Catholics and re-admitting Jews into England at the same time. Things got really obvious after Darby and Scofield, with their Dispensationalist nonsense.
    , @ben tillman

    And the whole goodwhite/badwhite concept is really a sort of distorted Calvinism and has its roots in Christian (Protestant), not Jewish, doctrine. The whole modern Jewish “Tikkun Olam” (repair the world) thing has very little to do with traditional Jewish doctrine where “repairing the world” did not mean instituting free lunches for underprivileged black children but rather meant preparing for the coming of the Messiah.
     
    This is all just manufactured out of thin air.

    Calvinism never involved any sort of "Tikkun Olam" in the "free lunches for underprivileged black children" sense. Nothing even close. Instead, to the practitioners of the Christian version of Tikkun Olam (the Puritans), it was more like what you described as the traditional Jewish doctrine -- which should not be surprising since they apparently picked it up from their Jewish next-door neighbors in the Netherlands. Notably, other Calvinists like the Huguenots or those in Scotland, never picked up "Tikkun Olam" at all.

    As a gedankenexperiment, imagine a large white country that thru some terrible tragedy has lost most of its Jewish population. Then see if the same liberal currents (for example a lady president who wants to let in millions of refugees into her country) exist in that country as in the US. If they do, this is proof that the goodwhite phenomenon would exist with or without the Jews.
     
    No, it would prove nothing of the sort. Things can be done from a distance.
  186. @Lot

    “Radix site is certainly antisemitic”

    No, it is not “certainly antisemitic”
     
    That's my memory of it looking at the article titles and trying to read some of the poorly-written, long, overly ambitious articles on it. I agree that it isn't a focus of the site, though going to the homepage now one is greeted by a big picture of Kevin MacDonald and link to a speech.

    Now if you want to define MacDonald as "not antisemitic" I am not going to stop you, but I will not be using your non-standard English myself.

    “Anti-Semitic” is not a useful euphemism. Just say “anti-Jewish.” I understand it is less dramatic and mystical and conveys less righteousness to the person hurling the slur, but it is more exact.

    Hurling slurs like “anti-Semitic” is not honorable argument. Calling Kevin MacDonald such a slur does not reflect well on you. It would be fair to say that much of his work is negative about the impact of Jews on white cohesion in the West.

    Many gentiles are anti-Jewish and just as many Jews proportionately are anti-gentile. All groups are competing for scarce resources so they will have conflicts of interest and rational reasons to have some negative views of the other. The stronger your in-group identity, the more likely you will have negative views of out-groups. A Jew who does not have some negative feelings about Christianity is not representative of his people and a Christian or Muslim who does not have some negative views of Jews is not representative of his people and religion. Every major Jewish organization in the United States pushes for immigration amnesty. It would be weird if white gentile Americans did not have some negative feelings about that.

    There are no permanent allies or enemies. In some times and places, Jews will be the enemy of other groups and at other times and places, they will ally.

    http://www.lukeford.net/blog/?p=58725

    Here is the immigration policy of the Orthodox Agudath Israel:

    “Finally, in the area of immigration, Agudath Israel urges that American borders continue to be open to Jewish and other refugees who seek to come to the United States after escaping from oppressive political environments. The United States is a nation of immigrants and has long been distinguished by its generosity toward refugees from all across the globe. It is essential that such generosity continue to be maintained in today’s era of international volatility. Agudath Israel accordingly opposes any efforts to impose caps or quotas on refugees seeking safe haven in the United States. Agudath Israel further supports the provision of welfare benefits to needy non-citizen immigrants.”

    http://www.jlaw.com/LawPolicy/OU5.html

    It would be weird if many gentile Americans did not have some negative views of organized Jewry because of such platforms (in addition to positive views in light of ways Jews have done good things in their eyes).

    I am unaware of a large number of Jews in the diaspora lining up on the side of the majority against minorities. For more than 200 years, Jews in the West have invariably sided with the coalition of the fringe against the core. It would be unnatural and unhealthy for the white Christian core not to have some negative feelings about that.

    Maj. Kong perhaps put it best: “Anti-Semitism is as natural to Western civilization as anti-Christianity is to Jewish civilization, Islamic civilization and Japanese civilization.”

    In other words what is called “anti-Semitism” simply refers to a conflict of group interests. The term never occurs in Torah and does not figure much in rabbinic commentary.

  187. @Jewish Conservative Race Realist
    I agree with you Bill.

    I used to think it would be possible to remain a patriot (of America) and a Jew at the same time. After all, there are American Catholics who are patriots of America and not Ireland or Italy or some other Catholic nation. For me personally, it's never been difficult to do this at all. Of course I love America more than Israel. America is where my forefathers have lived for almost two centuries. Israel is nothing to me.

    But Jewish activism in this country is burning every possible bridge with patriots, and I don't really see how this gets walked back anymore. Due to this invidious rhetoric from my co-ethnics, I'm sadly coming to the conclusion that the only viable options for Jewish diaspora in America are complete assimilation (reject entirely Jewish identity and blend into Stale Pale America) or emigration. Split loyalty and "dual" loyalty are bogus ideas. As I learned from Sailer on this very blog, politics is primarily about Whose Side Are You On. Loyalty comes in a strict hierarchy and at some point each person is called upon to declare, stand, and deliver.

    Any Jew who advocates open borders for their home country and ethnic preservation policies for Israel should be ostracized, silenced, or deported to Israel, in that order. The insanity has got to end.

    For me personally, Jewish identity is nothing at all compared to White American identity. But after spending so much time in alt-right circles, I can't deny that there's really something to the Jewish ethnocentrism case. (With many notable exceptions. Many great men of the Right are Jewish or Jewish ethnicity.)

    For me, I've given up on Jewish identity completely. It's easy for me since I'm not a believer. My wife is a believing Christian, and my kids are coming up Christian. They won't learn of my Jewish heritage until they are fully grown because I don't want to open the door to childhood self-reimagining as a poor oppressed Jew. Nobody has it better than the Jews in this country. They have all the advantages of high status and few of the disadvantages of being Pale and Stale. The only dignified disposition of Jewish Americans towards the USA is gratitude and service.

    I mostly agree with your comment.
    But I don’t really see Jews advocating for open borders here being the same ones advocating for netanyahu’s fences and deportation of “infiltrators”.

    Obviously being a member of the tribe I’m biased, but I generally see the homocidal behavior of some jews to western civilization as part of a suicidal tendency.
    I think people tend to forget that debates that go on within Israel and the Jewish community. There are plenty of Israelis want Israel to be more liberal and multicultural.
    The leader of the opposition in Israel called for Netanyahu to let in Syrian refugees. Soros isn’t a backer of AIPAC, but backs the anti-Netanyahu, pro-Iran deal JStreet, along with a host of Israeli treason lobby (treasonous to Israel) groups through the New Israel Fund.

    While I admire your gratitude to the country and subsequent decision to becoming fully american, I think it’s generally true that the Jews most committed to Judaism are *less* likely to advocate for liberal policies for the US. The less committed ones advocate these policies because they’ve left judaism for secularism/multiculturalism instead of the majority culture like you have.
    I can’t think of a single Jewish Neocon intellectual that is Orthodox or even Conservative ( I wouldn’t count ben shapiro as an intellectual, but fine I can’t think of two…)
    And it’s also somewhat interesting that Jews least loyal to Israel are the antizionist hassidic groups like satmar (though I can see how they pose problems for society).

  188. @Milo Minderbinder
    Kind of reminds me of Buckley's son Chris coming out for Obama in 2008.

    I can understand various types of Conservatives not liking Trump or not voting for him.

    But how can they make the leap to supporting the corrupt, incompetent, man-hating, globalist Hillary.

    If you really can't stand Trump, vote Libertarian or Constitution Party, or leave the spot on the ballot for President blank, but Hillary, really?

    The next president will be Trump or Clinton; no plausible third option exists. For some of us, more of the same but even worse with Clinton is preferable to a whole new level of public depravity with Trump. Others like depravity and would be Trump if they could, so this stance is beyond their understanding.

  189. @Gabriel M
    Learn to read.

    I said that Steve Sailer panders to anti-Semites. If you really want me to cite examples of "“unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism?" in his comment threads, then I suppose I shall. An honest (and sane) person would just concede the point though.

    There is no doubt (in my mind at least) that anti-Semitic kooks are present in the Sailer comments, along with various other points of view. I can’t imagine that they form a big part of his fundraising base – how much can be left over from the SSI check after you have paid the rent on the trailer and bought beer, cigarettes and jerky? The reason that they stand out so much here is that they have pretty much been purged from the rest of “polite” American society. While I understand the impetus to do so (for Jews this can be regarded literally as a matter of life and death because the last time these viewpoints were given free rein it turned out very very badly), there is also supposed to be an American tradition of free speech where all viewpoints, even unpopular ones were permissible. We don’t need a First Amendment to protect popular points of view. The Left used to understand this quite well when theirs were the viewpoints in need of protection, but now that they shoe is on the other foot they have no problem resorting to McCarthyite tactics and doing their best to see that those with the “wrong” opinions lose their jobs and everything else.

    • Replies: @tbraton
    " The Left used to understand this quite well when theirs were the viewpoints in need of protection, but now that they shoe is on the other foot they have no problem resorting to McCarthyite tactics and doing their best to see that those with the “wrong” opinions lose their jobs and everything else."

    Back in 313 A.D., the new Emperor Constantine issued a decree(the "Edict of Milan") prohibiting discrimination against Christianity, after many of years of agitation from Christians complaining about their ill treatment compared to other religions. He himself converted to Christianity. That earned Constantine the sobriquet of "the Great" and his later elevation to sainthood. Less than 70 years later in 380, Theodosius issued a decree making Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire and prohibiting government support for other religions. In 393, Theodosius banned the Olympic Games as a "pagan ritual," after more than a thousand years of celebration. After 380, the Christians, who had been pleading for "tolerance" for hundreds of years, began persecuting the practitioners of pagan religions.
    , @Johnny Smoggins
    "There is no doubt (in my mind at least) that anti-Semitic kooks are present in the Sailer comments, along with various other points of view. I can’t imagine that they form a big part of his fundraising base – how much can be left over from the SSI check after you have paid the rent on the trailer and bought beer, cigarettes and jerky? The reason that they stand out so much here is that they have pretty much been purged from the rest of “polite” American society."

    Of course, and everyone else throughout history who eventually came to despise Jews from ancient Egypt to Rome to modern Muslims were just rednecks in a trailer park in Kentucky watching The Price is Right while waiting for the meth dealer to show up right?

    Answer something honestly; do you really believe that someone like you've described would be reading and commenting at a site like this? Or is it more likely that more and more educated "normal" people (the sort that visit and comment here) might be starting to develop the same thing that everyone else who's lived amongst Jews has over the past five thousand years; anti - Semitism?
    , @iffen
    how much can be left over from the SSI check after you have paid the rent on the trailer and bought beer, cigarettes and jerky

    I like your comments, but you are going to have to lay off my peeps or we will have words.

    Do you even realize how difficult it is to find good jerky?
  190. I thought the whole point of the Alt-Right was to provide some equal opportunity bigotry to offset that so broadly published by the perverts, Hutu’s, socialists and Israel firsters.

  191. Sabrina Rubin Erderly. I wonder if she is related by marriage to Thomas Erderly, AKA, Tommy Ramone?

  192. @Jack D

    They won’t learn of my Jewish heritage until they are fully grown
     
    If you want your kids to spit on your grave, the best way is to hide something really big from them that they learn of when they are adults (extra points if they find out from someone else, which they will) and which rocks their world. Maybe one of your kids wants to be the grand wizard of the KKK - imagine when he finds out that he is really 1/2 Jewish himself. He'll probably convert and become a rabbi just to spite you.

    On the other hand, if you tell kids the most unimaginable things when they are little ("The Lubavitcher Rebbe was your grandfather") it doesn't bother them one bit because the world that they are presented with seems "normal" to them no matter how strange it is to anyone else.

    I assume that you must not have any relationship with you parents, siblings or any other blood relatives? If you are going to keep this secret, it wouldn't do to attend Cousin Eddie's bar mitzvah.

    To be a self hating anything, including a self-hating Jew, is a sad thing. Get some therapy and learn to be comfortable in your own skin.

    Maybe one of your kids wants to be the grand wizard of the KKK – imagine when he finds out that he is really 1/2 Jewish himself. He’ll probably convert and become a rabbi just to spite you.

    I think this phenomena is not uncommon.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Csan%C3%A1d_Szegedi
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Burros

  193. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Grumpy
    Not entirely off-topic...

    Students are occupying the dean's office at (Catholic) Seattle University.

    In a lengthy petition posted online, the students describe the college’s curriculum as “Eurocentric and Classical in nature, damaging, stifling, and failing to align with content taught elsewhere in the University.” They are asking for a new curriculum, for the college to recruit and hire professors from diverse backgrounds, and for every faculty member undergo training from an anti-racist network in Seattle.

    They are also asking the dean to resign and said they were prepared to occupy the office until she does so.
     
    http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/education/students-occupy-seattle-university-deans-office/

    Someone needs to found a college that teaches only African culture so we can send all the whiners there. Christ, every time some black kid realizes she has to read Hamlet, she goes screeching to the admins about their racist curriculum because Hamlet is hard reading, it makes her feel dumb, and she doesn’t want to be forced to use her brain. She’s the sort of student who was given a 150 point ‘addition’ onto her SAT scores so the school could admit her, and now she finds the work is beyond her.

    All these whiners knew perfectly well when they applied to the college what the college taught, and when the black students picked the courses, they knew they’d be studying dead white males. You don’t take Western Literature without being well aware that you’re going to encounter Shakespeare. If you don’t want to read Plato or Aristotle, then quite picking courses like Philosophy or History of Western Civilization. You can avoid them perfectly well if you want to. Take Biology, Engineering, Economics, or Math. There are plenty of courses out there that are almost purely data-driven.

    Many of the complaints about the Eurocentric and Classical curriculum come when black kids who have gone through dumbed-down public schools encounter top-tier white male learning for the first time, and they’re shocked by how difficult it is.

    I’m not surprised this flared up right before finals. I’ll bet these students are either danger of flunking out, or they’re getting grades so poor they’re going to lose their scholarships and will have to drop out of college.

  194. They say the “cuck” meme is dying out but we should definitely keep it around, it’s the perfect description for guys like this

    Jews supporting the status quo aren’t cucks, they’re ethocentric.

  195. @AndrewR
    Celler was a lowly US Rep. Hart and Kennedy were Senators and Kennedy was arguably already the most well-known person in Congress.

    It's also notable that Celler's single goy grandparent was Catholic.

    Few would accuse me of philosemetism but I do not think Coulter's omission was terribly egregious.

    “Celler was a lowly US Rep.”

    Nice try minimizing Celler’s role, but no sale. The act (which bore his name, along with Hart’s) was proposed and steered to passage by Celler.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    True but who remembers Celler today other than neurotic nativists on the internet? Ted Kennedy, in contrast, is still a household name and AFAIK never publicly (if at all) repudiated that act.
  196. I find most of the filth to be in the minds of the anti-ANTI-SEMITES!!! Strange scatological bent to the Tribe.

  197. ‘Anti-Gentilism’ is a term whose time has long-since come. With Trump’s popularity confirming that our 50-60 year experiment in soft-Marxism has soured with a huge balance of the American goy public, the West’s social reign of terror is proven soft and flabby, weak and stagnant. Its once fearsome enforcers don’t seem to notice yet – but Curt Schilling sure does. We got a sea-change goin’ here.

    So, it also may be time for an easily recognizable, Sapir-Whorf red-letter on “crime of noticing” felony realities. The only thing I can come up with is clumsy conjunction of obscene and observation – obscenervation.

    Someone- please do better. Let’s set them on the run.

    (And thanks for all you did to put that UVa atrocity to rest.)

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    I think the portmanteau word "obscenervation" would be best applied to people who become bored with looking at porn.

    We already have "thoughtcrime" to cover the mortal offense of observing the fact that human groups tend to act, and think, and rehash the same arguments in in concert.

    BTW, this is not about "conspiracies": this is about the fact that groups will tend to have similar goals, interests, and values, and thus are predictable in their actions, either affective or "rational." For example, there is a tendency to make vast generalizations about black people on this blog, and about how predictable their actions, opinions, and so on will be. But no one would attribute this to a conspiracy among black people.

    I've made it clear that vast generalizations about Jews are a waste of time and at minimum will aggrieve Jewish posters here: that's why I call it unhelpful. But then, if we start labeling such things "anti-semitic", next we will start calling things "racist", then "homophobic", then "misogynist", then "transphobic" and by that time this blog will be indistinguishable from "The Atlantic".

    Let's get back to the case. Is there some "thing" that connotes a hostility to "rich whites" or "WASPs" or "gentiles" or "goyim"? If there is such a thing. is there a particular strain of it that comes from Jews towards whites? I think the answer to both questions is affirmative, the problem is that just because some Jewish person (credibly, Sabrina) is hostile to preppy well to do whites. that doesn't mean it applies to all or even a lot of Jews. But what I have read in this thread is Jews and non-Jews largely playing the dozens, reaching for ever more extreme group insults. Is this productive, or is it merely entertainment?

    Is Cathy Young another person who fits the stereotype, that is, of a certain type of Jewish person who basically resents beautiful and privileged honkies? There are people like that. And to answer the question, I don't know. I don't think very highly of her anymore, however.
  198. @Lot

    “Radix site is certainly antisemitic”

    No, it is not “certainly antisemitic”
     
    That's my memory of it looking at the article titles and trying to read some of the poorly-written, long, overly ambitious articles on it. I agree that it isn't a focus of the site, though going to the homepage now one is greeted by a big picture of Kevin MacDonald and link to a speech.

    Now if you want to define MacDonald as "not antisemitic" I am not going to stop you, but I will not be using your non-standard English myself.

    Kevin MacDonald is less anti-Semitic and less critical of Jews than the God of the Hebrew Bible. Is the Torah anti-Semitic?

    • Agree: San Fernando Curt
    • Replies: @Lot
    On Seinfeld, Bryan Cranston converted to Judiasm for the jokes. You converted so you could be an eccentric weirdo self hating Jew like Norman Finkelstein, as well as to drop more Yiddish into your writing than natives speakers in New York would have circa 1920.

    You are so wonderfully unique Luke Ford!

    Please try to avoid knocking up any of my co-ethnics though.

  199. @Lot
    You called it just right on every point.

    And it is sad, because with Trump we are potentially on the cusp of actually doing something about America's ongoing demographic disaster. Rather than focus on the very hard work of reaching 50% + 1 in elections, a big part of the nationalist right in America would prefer to wallow in the filth you describe.

    When you look at Europe, you see what happens when the nationalist right rejects kooks and wins elections, sometimes able to join governments in return for major concessions on immigration, versus when it takes the "let's going over for the millionth time the perfidy of the Jews!" path.

    Tell you all what: I concede Congressmen Celler sucks. Can we move on?

    Tell you all what: I concede Congressmen Celler sucks. Can we move on?

    The irony here is that Steve is always complaining about how for the left , 1965 was just yesterday and not two generations ago. Apparently, for some on the right, Congressman Celler has just stepped off the House floor even though he has been out of office since 1973.

    Celler by the way had an incredible life – he was first elected to Congress during the election of 1922 and made his first important speech on the House floor during consideration of Immigration Act. The Immigration Act of 1924.

    • Replies: @tbraton
    In his "Making of the President" book for the 1980 Presidential election, "America in Search of Itself," which I consider the best of the 5 book series (1960, 1964, 1968, 1972 and 1980 elections), Theodore H. White, summa cum laude graduate of Harvard College, a noted liberal, and a great friend of the Kennedys, described the 1965 Immigration Act as "the worst of the Great Society legislation" that would dramatically change America--and not for the better. Even he acknowledged that was a bold conclusion for a very liberal child of Russian Jewish immigrants to make.
    , @Bill Jones
    "1965 was just yesterday and not two generations ago"


    Among certain sectors of our vibrant diversity, a generation is now 15 years not 25.
    , @fredyetagain aka superhonky
    "Apparently, for some on the right, Congressman Celler has just stepped off the House floor even though he has been out of office since 1973."

    That's for the very obvious reason that the damage he did to white Americans continues to this very day.
    , @Forbes
    If you spend any time perusing PBS, it is either the 1960s or the 1860s in America. So 1965 is, like, yesterday.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Celler by the way had an incredible life – he was first elected to Congress during the election of 1922 and made his first important speech on the House floor during consideration of Immigration Act. The Immigration Act of 1924."

    Yes, he had an incredible career, undermining the nation that permitted his ancestors to immigrate into it.
    , @Stealth

    "Celler by the way had an incredible life – he was first elected to Congress during the election of 1922 and made his first important speech on the House floor during consideration of Immigration Act. The Immigration Act of 1924."
     
    Who cares how incredible his life was? He played a key role in transforming the United States into an overpopulated, multicultural hell dominated by plutocrats and oligarchs. People try to excuse this by saying he and other proponents of higher immigration at the time were really only trying make sure Jews and other Europeans (such as the aforementioned Irish) could more easily immigrate to the US, but I suspect spite played a major role. When you open the gates to the entire world beyond Europe, what do you expect to happen? He was a great, incredible, villain (much worse than Ted Kennedy), and I hope history will one day remember him as such.
  200. AmericanaCON [AKA "Jolie Pepperdine"] says:
    @Mr. Anon
    Is this another case of personal envy informing an ostensibly political attack? Coulter is a more accomplished author than is Young, and is also prettier than her, is more popular than her, and appears on TV more frequently than Young.

    Cathy Young is not a “big name” author, columnist or talking head. Coulter has made millions of dollars on her books while Young has not written a published book since 1999. There is simply not a market for people like Young anymore. There are too many left-libertarians for her to be marketable. She sells her articles for around 100 dollars. Young had her “prime” ten years ago when criticism of radical feminism was considered to be “courageous” in the center-right mainstream. As always, Conservative Inc. lost and racial feminism won. Her piece has very little substance. Set aside all guilt by association her key argument goes;

    1. Israel was founded by as an ethno-state and United States was not.
    2. Israel is surrounded by hostile states (and hostile people) and United States is not
    3. If Israel allowed Palestinian refugees to return or allowed massive immigration it would change the demographics and Israel.
    4. Finland grants automatic citizenship to ethnic Finns in the Diasporas and limit immigration

    Hence, ethno-nationalism is tolerable when practices by Israel but not United States. Coulter is anti-Semitic because she does not criticize Finland for their ethno-nationalism.

    Young’s arguments are not solid;

    1. United States was actually funded by as an ethno-state. The Naturalization Act of 1790 only allowed free white persons of good character to become citizens. In fact United States was more or less an ethno-state until 1965.

    2. It may be true that Israel is surrounded by hostile states (and hostile people) but the same argument could be used by Americans who would argue that Latin-America is “hostile states”

    3. In 1950 United States was close to 90 percent non-Hispanic white and 70 percent protestant. In 2010 about 63 percent of the US population is non-Hispanic white. Consequently, the American society has transformed from a fairly homogeneous society to a multiracial society. Although not contributed fully to immigration the Protestant population has dropped to 38 percent (2015). Israel was in 1950s more homogeneous than Israel is today.

    4. Young claim that Finland grant citizenship based on ethnicity is actually not true. Her own link to Wikipedia does not even claim that. However, Germany do or rather did do so to Germans in Eastern Germany in very recent times. However, this does not contribute to the case that Coulter is Anti-Semitic. Coulter does not criticize Finland, Germany or Israel. She only claims that she wants the same for United States. The only one in this beef who actually present a double standard (based on faulty facts) is Cathy Young.

    Anyway….

    The reason why Cathy Young feels uncomfortable is that she does not like ethno-nationalism in other countries than Israel and she fears that United States is turning that way with the election of Trump – who implicitly appeals to it. If Young had been smarter she would take the position of Philip Weiss at Mondoweiss or journalist Max Blumenthal who rejects all ethno-nationalism. However, that wouldn’t go well with her employers and I guess ADL wouldn’t be happy about it. From her view her piece was unnecessary and did not successfully push her agenda because it was so bluntly hypocritical. Young does has a point that the Alternative-Right is growing and that civic-nationalism and populism may spill over until explicit ethno-nationalism. I have no doubt it will – but instead of accusing people for Anti-Semitism she ought to take a coherent position. Either she accepts being a minority (together with African-Americans, Indians and others) in a white US ethno-state (which is also fully possible in Israel) or she goes full Philip Weiss. It is up to her.

    Personally, im not an ethno-nationalist..

  201. @SPMoore8
    Actually, the dog in question is a pug: I have a pug, she does that thing with her arm when she wants me to feed her. Also, the guy who posted the video was obviously goofing around, just as it is obvious that the Scottish Jewish guy who carried on about the video is self-promoting. I hope the whole thing just goes away.

    Other things:

    -- I honestly never really thought about Sabrina's ethnicity much, because of the Hungarian last name, but it did seem clear on reading her article that she has hostility towards WASP's. However, "Jewishness" itself has nothing to do with it; she's no more anti-WASP than Camille Paglia, who is Italian Catholic. What's going in Philadelphia, anyway?

    -- It's interesting that people can imbibe prejudices when they are kids ("our people are so great, hey, let's tell jokes about people who are not like us") and then act like it's something to be proud of and/or a central element of of their identity when they are middle aged ("I'll never forget the time that black guy called me honky"). I thought that as you got older you were supposed to acquire some wisdom, which includes becoming a little bit less self-centered.

    -- There are family prejudices among Jews just as there are among other people (e.g., Sabrina, Camille). In that sense, yes, I've known some Jews who have made snarky comments about non-Jews, especially Palestinians and Svartzers, and I've known some non-Jews who have made nasty comments about Jews. I don't think it's a problem unless it becomes a guiding light to someone's conduct and/or if such petty attitudes start determining how one live's one's life.

    -- Speaking of petty, claiming that anyone who criticizes Jews is doing so because they are racially jealous, particularly in the sexual domain, is really getting into the gutter.

    -- Cathy Young: There's some merit to what she says. There are a lot of people who associate things they don't like with Jews, and this is due to simplistic stereotypes. Carrying those stereotypes into a typological ideology (like McDonald) is I think a mistake, and a gratuitous one, not only because it encourages irrational feelings among non-Jews, but irrational feelings among Jews, as well.

    -- However, going around saying that someone is "flirting" with anti-semitism is tantamount to saying, "I really want to deliver a social death sentence to you, and call you an anti-semite, but I can't, because your own words aren't sufficient, so I will intimidate you by giving you this threat: if I can continue to find people who have any six degrees of separation from you who use bad words I will call you an anti-semite" which to ordinary people is going to be construed as bullying and a smear. If the shoe fits, wear it.

    I was not following unz.com or Steve Sailer when the UVA “rape” case broke, but Rod Dreher over at TAC ran several blogs on the subject starting around Dec. 5. It was there that I first learned of the RS story. Since I didn’t read the original story in RS, the first discrepancy which got my attention was from a second-hand news account, which cited “Jackie’s” claim that the incident occurred during the early fall during “pledge week” at UVA only to inform the readers that pledge week at UVA does not occur until the spring, six months later. For the accuser to make such a blatant error of nearly half a year for the time of the alleged incident sent warning lights going off in my mind. Later I learned of the other major discrepancies, including the shattered glass table on which the alleged rapes had occurred. There was an excellent commenter on Dreher’s blog posting as “Ryan Booth,” who followed the case closely and kept us fully informed of new developments. It was Ryan Booth who emphasized the height of absurdity that occurred at UVA during the crisis: the female President of UVA suspending all SORORIETIES because of an alleged rape at a UVA fraternity. Who would have guessed that coeds at UVA posed such a sexual threat to male students? I imagine that applications by males to attend UVA must have increased dramatically as a result.

    My contribution to one of Dreher’s threads on the UVA case consisted of pointing out the curious history of Sabrina Rubin Erdely as an undergraduate at the U. of Pennsylvania:

    “tbraton says:

    December 11, 2014 at 1:15 pm

    I pointed this out in an earlier RD blog, and I don’t know how many readers picked up on it. But someone whose name I can’t remember off-hand (but would name if I could to give him credit) had posted a link to another site that was discussing the RS/UVA matter. I checked it out and discovered that Sabrina Rubin Erdely was a fellow student with the infamous Stephen Glass at the U of Pennsylvania and they both worked on the student paper together. (From Wikipedia: “He attended the University of Pennsylvania, where he was an executive editor of the student newspaper, The Daily Pennsylvanian, and was a classmate of Sabrina Erdely.” Also from Wikipedia: “While working at 34th Street she was disciplined by Glass, then serving as editor, for submitting a “made-up travel story” for publication. [4)”) Even more ironic was the disclosure that student editor Glass reprimanded student writer Rubin (her maiden name) for fabricating an article that had appeared in a student publication. I have not verified that fact and can only repeat what I read on the other site. I would welcome confirmation and reposting of the link by the poster whose name I can’t recall. (It would save me a lot of time searching for my post.)” http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/did-jackie-make-the-whole-thing-up-rolling-stone-uva/comment-page-2/#comment-7056682

    • Agree: SPMoore8
  202. @Lot
    You called it just right on every point.

    And it is sad, because with Trump we are potentially on the cusp of actually doing something about America's ongoing demographic disaster. Rather than focus on the very hard work of reaching 50% + 1 in elections, a big part of the nationalist right in America would prefer to wallow in the filth you describe.

    When you look at Europe, you see what happens when the nationalist right rejects kooks and wins elections, sometimes able to join governments in return for major concessions on immigration, versus when it takes the "let's going over for the millionth time the perfidy of the Jews!" path.

    Tell you all what: I concede Congressmen Celler sucks. Can we move on?

    No, we can’t.

    Like many around here, I am tired of Jews using the word “anti-Semitic” in the same way that the Left uses “racist,” i.e. as a way to bully and to stop arguments without dealing with the merits of those arguments.

    Address the argument, show us how Sailer has dabbled in “unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism.”

    For that matter, please explain to us where you draw the line between criticism of Jewish organizations and Jewish elites and anti-Semitism? Because, frankly, around here, I rarely see the distinction. Criticism of Jewish organizations and elites is immediately labelled as anti-Semitism and thus the Worst Thing Ever because, as we all know, even the slightest anti-Semitism will quickly lead to gas chambers.

  203. @Jack D

    Tell you all what: I concede Congressmen Celler sucks. Can we move on?
     
    The irony here is that Steve is always complaining about how for the left , 1965 was just yesterday and not two generations ago. Apparently, for some on the right, Congressman Celler has just stepped off the House floor even though he has been out of office since 1973.

    Celler by the way had an incredible life - he was first elected to Congress during the election of 1922 and made his first important speech on the House floor during consideration of Immigration Act. The Immigration Act of 1924.

    In his “Making of the President” book for the 1980 Presidential election, “America in Search of Itself,” which I consider the best of the 5 book series (1960, 1964, 1968, 1972 and 1980 elections), Theodore H. White, summa cum laude graduate of Harvard College, a noted liberal, and a great friend of the Kennedys, described the 1965 Immigration Act as “the worst of the Great Society legislation” that would dramatically change America–and not for the better. Even he acknowledged that was a bold conclusion for a very liberal child of Russian Jewish immigrants to make.

  204. @Jack D
    And the whole goodwhite/badwhite concept is really a sort of distorted Calvinism and has its roots in Christian (Protestant), not Jewish, doctrine. The whole modern Jewish "Tikkun Olam" (repair the world) thing has very little to do with traditional Jewish doctrine where "repairing the world" did not mean instituting free lunches for underprivileged black children but rather meant preparing for the coming of the Messiah. But it does have a lot to do with traditional WASP do-goodism.

    As a gedankenexperiment, imagine a large white country that thru some terrible tragedy has lost most of its Jewish population. Then see if the same liberal currents (for example a lady president who wants to let in millions of refugees into her country) exist in that country as in the US. If they do, this is proof that the goodwhite phenomenon would exist with or without the Jews.

    Just because you see Jews riding the bandwagon and playing the tune (even improvising riffs) doesn't mean that they wrote the song that they are playing.

    Couldn’t be anything to do with that “large white country” not having regained its sovereignty to this day and all its politicians and journalists having to dance to the tune of the Mossad and CIA.
    There must be some other explanation.

  205. @Jack D

    Tell you all what: I concede Congressmen Celler sucks. Can we move on?
     
    The irony here is that Steve is always complaining about how for the left , 1965 was just yesterday and not two generations ago. Apparently, for some on the right, Congressman Celler has just stepped off the House floor even though he has been out of office since 1973.

    Celler by the way had an incredible life - he was first elected to Congress during the election of 1922 and made his first important speech on the House floor during consideration of Immigration Act. The Immigration Act of 1924.

    “1965 was just yesterday and not two generations ago”

    Among certain sectors of our vibrant diversity, a generation is now 15 years not 25.

  206. @Gabriel M
    Ann Coulter is not an anti-Semite and she doesn't pander to anti-Semites.

    Steve Sailer, on the other hand, really does pander to anti-Semites and, in fact, it seems to be a pretty central part of his business model because he, without fail, ramps it up in line with his quarterly fundraisers.

    I was reading some old Lawrence Auster stuff the other day. He exemplified the ability the criticize Jews for what the do wrong, both as individuals and as a group, without dabbling in unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism. Similarly he was able to criticize blacks and other protected minorities without dabbling in racist trash. He ceaselessly warned about the gutter Richard Spencer and others were leading the anti multicultural right into.

    Unfortunately, it was to no avail. Any remotely honest person knows the alt-right is up to its neck in filth at this point. Any sensible person knows that its all going to blow up in your face before too long. You made your pact with the devil, laughing about it is not going to make it go away.

    Define “racist trash.”

  207. ‘Anti-Gentilism’ is a term whose time has long-since come. With Trump’s popularity confirming that our 50-60 year experiment in soft-Marxism has soured with a huge balance of the American public, the West’s social reign of terror is proven soft and flabby, weak and stagnant. Its once fearsome enforcers don’t seem to notice yet – but Curt Schilling sure does. We got a sea-change goin’ here.

    So, it also may be time for an easily recognizable, Sapir-Whorf red-letter on “crime of noticing” felony realities. The only thing I can come up with is clumsy conjunction of obscene and observation – obscenervation.

    Someone- please do better. Let’s set them on the run.

    (And thanks for all you did to put that UVa atrocity to rest.)

  208. @Jack D

    Tell you all what: I concede Congressmen Celler sucks. Can we move on?
     
    The irony here is that Steve is always complaining about how for the left , 1965 was just yesterday and not two generations ago. Apparently, for some on the right, Congressman Celler has just stepped off the House floor even though he has been out of office since 1973.

    Celler by the way had an incredible life - he was first elected to Congress during the election of 1922 and made his first important speech on the House floor during consideration of Immigration Act. The Immigration Act of 1924.

    “Apparently, for some on the right, Congressman Celler has just stepped off the House floor even though he has been out of office since 1973.”

    That’s for the very obvious reason that the damage he did to white Americans continues to this very day.

  209. @Jack D
    There is no doubt (in my mind at least) that anti-Semitic kooks are present in the Sailer comments, along with various other points of view. I can't imagine that they form a big part of his fundraising base - how much can be left over from the SSI check after you have paid the rent on the trailer and bought beer, cigarettes and jerky? The reason that they stand out so much here is that they have pretty much been purged from the rest of "polite" American society. While I understand the impetus to do so (for Jews this can be regarded literally as a matter of life and death because the last time these viewpoints were given free rein it turned out very very badly), there is also supposed to be an American tradition of free speech where all viewpoints, even unpopular ones were permissible. We don't need a First Amendment to protect popular points of view. The Left used to understand this quite well when theirs were the viewpoints in need of protection, but now that they shoe is on the other foot they have no problem resorting to McCarthyite tactics and doing their best to see that those with the "wrong" opinions lose their jobs and everything else.

    ” The Left used to understand this quite well when theirs were the viewpoints in need of protection, but now that they shoe is on the other foot they have no problem resorting to McCarthyite tactics and doing their best to see that those with the “wrong” opinions lose their jobs and everything else.”

    Back in 313 A.D., the new Emperor Constantine issued a decree(the “Edict of Milan”) prohibiting discrimination against Christianity, after many of years of agitation from Christians complaining about their ill treatment compared to other religions. He himself converted to Christianity. That earned Constantine the sobriquet of “the Great” and his later elevation to sainthood. Less than 70 years later in 380, Theodosius issued a decree making Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire and prohibiting government support for other religions. In 393, Theodosius banned the Olympic Games as a “pagan ritual,” after more than a thousand years of celebration. After 380, the Christians, who had been pleading for “tolerance” for hundreds of years, began persecuting the practitioners of pagan religions.

  210. @Vinay
    Off-topic but not by a lot: NYT has an article on London's new Muslim mayor, Sadiq Khan. There's enough there to give you some idea of the kind of mayor he intends to be.

    I think it's a good time for iSteve-ites to put down some markers predicting what to expect during his tenure. If you're worried about Londonistan and take "Submission" seriously, you're certainly not gonna expect an uneventful tenure, right?

    As for me, I expect he'll be a far less radical and identity-politics oriented mayor than the white Christian De Blasio. He sounds very much like a classical liberal, more interested in cheaper housing and public transit than gendered bathrooms and safe spaces. I don't expect him to accuse the London cops of oppressing Muslims or to allow Sharia civil courts.

    What's your prediction?

    As a Londoner, his religion does not seem to be especially politically relevant to him, so I don’t expect it to be very relevant to his tenure, except from a generalised ‘diversity’ standpoint. British ‘political muslims’ seem to dislike him for ignoring or going against their treasured causes (e.g. Palestine). See for example: http://5pillarsuk.com/2016/05/04/london-will-shortly-get-a-muslim-mayor-but-i-cant-find-a-muslim-who-cares/

    • Replies: @Vinay
    "British ‘political muslims’ seem to dislike him"

    It hardly matters. Extreme success brings its own authenticity. Obama gets to define what's authentically black, not Bobby Rush. Similarly, Sadiq Khan will get a chance to define what's compatible with being a good British Muslim.

    Which is very much a good thing.
  211. @Mr. Anon
    "Radix site is certainly antisemitic"

    No, it is not "certainly antisemitic". The authors who are published there are not especially obsessed with Jews or even interested in them. Many of the commenters could rightfully be called anti-semitic, but that could be said of any number of websites.

    "Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile, and brings disrepute onto the site and its many fine authors."

    Nothing worthwhile? Nothing at all?

    In the eyes of some people, just noticing things is "anti-semitic".

    “Radix site is certainly antisemitic”

    No, it is not “certainly antisemitic”. The authors who are published there are not especially obsessed with Jews or even interested in them.

    It seems like a huge subset of the population is unable to discern beyond this all/nothing mentality. Thus all whites are guilty for the 1-2% of American whites who owned slaves during the period when that was legal. Or, on the other side, all Jews are guilty for the very loud and visible proportion who agitated for communism or open borders or abolition of freedom of association/speech. And then there are those who apparently cannot (or willfully do not) process the idea that one can be anti-Zionist without being anti-Jew. Or who refuse to understand how one could be anti-Jewish (as an ideology) without being anti-Jew (the people).

    So questioning any aspect of the official holocaust narrative = “Nazi who wants to genocide all Jews.” Or questioning the American patriotism/loyalty of a Jew who swears eternal allegiance to Israel = “anti-Semite who wants to put Jews into gas chambers.” And of course criticizing negro culture = “racist who wants to put blacks in chains and or lynch them just for the color of their skin.” Wanting to deport everyone who entered America unlawfully and deport all immigrants found guilty of crime or on the public dole = “anti-Hispanic racist.” Public health concerns about male homosexual behaviors = “homophobes.” And etc. Yet, again, they have no trouble labeling all whites as “inherently institutionally racist” or possessing an unearned “white privilege.” They’ll see endless nuances and gradations among their LGBTQ… pals, but anyone who notices negro crime rates or Zionist media manipulation is a hardcore klansman or Nazi.

    My question, since I see this on both the left and the right (more so on the left I think) is whether it’s universal human shorthand (i.e. Stereotyping) or a more insidious effort to dehumanize the “enemy”?

    • Replies: @juster
    I totally agree with you. Radix is not "anti-Semitic", that most certainly isn't their focus. An occasional article has some (((references))) but reminding readers of the disproportionate number of Jews in the media or government, which is normally why these are used, is not in itself anti-Semitic.

    Your further point about degrees of anti-Semitism is really important. I'm Jewish and know people that:
    1. Think Jews are disproportionately influential
    2. Think they use that influence for their own gain
    3. Think they also use that influence to attack their host societies
    4. Think that all Jews should be exiled or exterminated as a result.

    For me, only #4 is truly anti-Semitic. #1 and 2 are obvious, and #3 has enough of an empirical and theoretical basis that it needs to at least be taken seriously and debated, not dismissed as some kind of irrational primal hatred.
  212. @Jack D
    You are assuming (against all evidence) that all gentiles form a single breeding pool so that for some gentiles to undermine their fellow gentiles is maladaptive. This is just wrong - Belmont women avoid public relationships with Fishtown trailer trash at all costs. You might have a fling with the contractor but it has to be on the down low or it lowers your status. The people Belmont men want to undermine in the evolutionary race are precisely those who otherwise would have a chance with their women. By making badwhites into social untouchables, this reduces the competition for babes among goodwhites.

    By the way, if you read the history of leftist movements in America, one of the big motivating factors for guys was they were a great place to pick up chicks. Not only chicks, but chicks who would put out, back when respectable women were expected to be chaste.

    Alt-right types have this idea that the white team is, or should be, united in the same way that black, Jews, etc. are. This was never the case in American history simply because almost everyone was white. Once (and the day is fast approaching) whites are a minority then they might form this kind of bloc identity to protect themselves against the majority, but as long as they are the majority just being "white" is not an identity.

    Your comment is insightful, and by no means do I mean to understate the genetic diversity within the “white” population, but I maintain my claim that focusing the brunt of your hatred on your closest kin is maladaptive, especially when there’s no logical reason to do so.

    As a northerner of significant non-Anglo descent, I can’t say I feel a great deal of kinship with southern whites. I’m a nonreligious Catholic and am not a redneck by any means. I view them as alien and the feeling is mutual. But I view them as much alien than most blacks, many Mexicans and even many Jews. If I had to pick groups for removal from the US, conservative southern whites would be rather far down the list. This is in stark contrast to probably most of the Belmont goodgoyim who you dubiously claim are not really cucks.

    • Replies: @Jack D

    especially when there’s no logical reason to do so
     
    If something keeps happening over and over, chances are there IS a reason why it is happening. Even if the reason doesn't comport with what Spock would call "logic", it must be following its own internal logic somehow.


    A good rule of thumb is that people usually act in what they perceive to be their self-interest, so if they behave in a way that appears self-defeating to you, chances are that they see their self-interest in a way that is different than you do. Often it is the difference between long term and short term interest - most people have a very short time horizon. So if you tell a meth addict that in the long term the drug will destroy them, they will take it anyway because in the short term it feels good. Maybe that is the case here - the short term reinforcement that goodwhites get from making themselves feel superior to badwhites is more important to them than the long term consequences of undermining the country. Or maybe, as I said before, the evolutionary logic really is in favor of them undermining other white competitors - if you can get your (regressed to the mean) kids into the Ivies as a "legacy", they will still end up at the top of the class if everyone sitting around them is an affirmative action admit.

  213. @Jack D
    And the whole goodwhite/badwhite concept is really a sort of distorted Calvinism and has its roots in Christian (Protestant), not Jewish, doctrine. The whole modern Jewish "Tikkun Olam" (repair the world) thing has very little to do with traditional Jewish doctrine where "repairing the world" did not mean instituting free lunches for underprivileged black children but rather meant preparing for the coming of the Messiah. But it does have a lot to do with traditional WASP do-goodism.

    As a gedankenexperiment, imagine a large white country that thru some terrible tragedy has lost most of its Jewish population. Then see if the same liberal currents (for example a lady president who wants to let in millions of refugees into her country) exist in that country as in the US. If they do, this is proof that the goodwhite phenomenon would exist with or without the Jews.

    Just because you see Jews riding the bandwagon and playing the tune (even improvising riffs) doesn't mean that they wrote the song that they are playing.

    “Traditional WASP do-goodism” like all but banning immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe? Jews and other immigrants were feared during that time partly because they brought anarchist, socialist, communist, etc. ideologies that were not popular in the US. Moldbug has no idea what he’s talking about when he tries to put the blame on the Yankees (and I’m no fan of theirs) http://racehist.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-boston-upper-class-circa-1950.html

  214. @William Badwhite
    O'Rourke was funny for a bit back in the early 90's, but his act quickly wears thin. He did have a funny crack about Mexico though. "Welcome to Mexico...the Republic of Dirt...a country whose national sport consists of torturing farm animals"

    O’Rourke was very funny for a very long time.

    • Replies: @William Badwhite
    "O’Rourke was very funny for a very long time."

    Potato, Patahto.

    After reading "Holidays in Hell" and enjoying it, I made the mistake of immediately reading all of his other books (up to that point in time, circa 1992). I grant he is extremely witty, but the style wears thin. I may have felt differently if I'd spread the books out a bit.

    His rationale for why he's endorsing Clinton is mostly him trying to make jokes, with some ad hominem thrown in. Its not at all funny, though by saying "was" rather than "is" maybe you were acknowledging O'Rourke is no longer funny.
  215. Lot says:
    @Luke Ford
    Kevin MacDonald is less anti-Semitic and less critical of Jews than the God of the Hebrew Bible. Is the Torah anti-Semitic?

    On Seinfeld, Bryan Cranston converted to Judiasm for the jokes. You converted so you could be an eccentric weirdo self hating Jew like Norman Finkelstein, as well as to drop more Yiddish into your writing than natives speakers in New York would have circa 1920.

    You are so wonderfully unique Luke Ford!

    Please try to avoid knocking up any of my co-ethnics though.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    You're usually one of the sanest and most intelligent commenters on iSteve, but you've gone off your rocker.
  216. @fredyetagain aka superhonky
    "Celler was a lowly US Rep."

    Nice try minimizing Celler's role, but no sale. The act (which bore his name, along with Hart's) was proposed and steered to passage by Celler.

    True but who remembers Celler today other than neurotic nativists on the internet? Ted Kennedy, in contrast, is still a household name and AFAIK never publicly (if at all) repudiated that act.

    • Agree: PV van der Byl
  217. @Buddwing
    Steve, I recently found that there is a useful term in anthropology and cognitive linguistics for the Sapir-Whorf phenomenon, namely hypocognition. This term, and its opposite, hypercognition, was coined by Robert Levy to account for the differences between the way in which Tahitians construed their emotional experience and the way an outsider might do so.

    http://www.jasonthroop.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Levy.pdf

    Turning to Levy’s highly influential distinction between “hypercognition” and “hypocognition,” we find that he demonstrates that for his informants there seem to be a number of emotions such as “anger” (riri) that are hypercognized in Tahitian society. “That is, relative to some other feeling states (for example, interpersonal longing and loneliness, which... may be interpreted as some vague ‘being out of sorts’), there is considerable doctrine about anger, its effects, and what to do about it”

    In contrast to hypercognized emotion, which “is related to a considerable amount of theorizing,” there are a number of other affective states that are not so clearly delineated or culturally elaborated. These Levy terms “hypocognized emotions”. Significantly, Levy’s formulation of hyper- and hypocognition is greatly informed by Ernst Schachtel’s discussion of the relationship between focal attention and memory. According to Schachtel, there is an important connection between shared schemata, an individual’s focal attention, and the process of selectively parsing the vast field of sensory experience that confronts individuals from the moment of their birth. Central to Schachtel’s perspective is the idea that schemata—a term he borrows from Bartlett(1932)—selectively highlight some forms of experience, while “starving” others. Accordingly, it is often the case that non-schematic experience is difficult to incorporate and preserve in memory.

     

    The respective hypo- and hypercognitized elements of our political culture are a constant theme of your blog, but even here, the discussion of non-schematic experience is impeded by lack of vocabulary.

    Thanks. Sounds useful.

    For example, nerdishness / autism spectrum / Asperger’s thinking was hypocognized in the 20th Century and is becoming hypercognized in the 21st Century.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    I detest most academic jargon and feel that its purpose is more to obfuscate than to elucidate. English got along for 1000 years without those words.

    Other than making you appear not as erudite, "a thing" works just as well here:

    For example, nerdishness / autism spectrum / Asperger’s thinking was not a "thing" in the 20th Century and is becoming a "thing" in the 21st Century.
    , @Buddwing
    Things that I used to have difficulty recognizing, that are now instantaneous, thanks to hypercognition: Fake breasts, botoxed brows, 50ish transgendered former males.
  218. @Reg Cæsar

    OT Pat, but on some site I think you said you were 200 years removed from Ireland. Are you ever going to become an Australian?
     
    If Australia is like Canada, the Irish can't become valid citizens. They have to cross their fingers, or mumble, when they swear the oath to Her Majesty.

    This is an often-discussed problem among Irish immigrants to Canada.

    Well, if you can’t stand swearing an oath of allegiance to Her Majesty in Australia or Canada (or, New Zealand), may I suggest you immigrate instead to a republic?

    There’s a rather big one in North America where, I am reliably informed, they speak English….

  219. @Lot
    On Seinfeld, Bryan Cranston converted to Judiasm for the jokes. You converted so you could be an eccentric weirdo self hating Jew like Norman Finkelstein, as well as to drop more Yiddish into your writing than natives speakers in New York would have circa 1920.

    You are so wonderfully unique Luke Ford!

    Please try to avoid knocking up any of my co-ethnics though.

    You’re usually one of the sanest and most intelligent commenters on iSteve, but you’ve gone off your rocker.

    • Replies: @SFG
    Everyone has buttons. They can lead to silly behavior if pressed, like posting 20 comments on a thread that's already reached 200.
  220. but as long as they are the majority just being “white” is not an identity.

    You seem to think everything must be conscious, but that isn’t so. Whites seem to me to have some kind of white tribal identity. They know perfectly well to hold one another to one, higher, racial standard, and other groups to another, lower one. E.g., whites will give one another crap over up-PC slip-ups waaay quicker than they’ll give blacks crap about equivalent slip-ups, if at all.

    The contempt of goodwhites for badwhites is not self-destructive. They don’t recognize badwhites as members of their tribe.

    Yet they know to apply the white tribal rules to badwhites, and not badnonwhites. And the soft white supremacist “white trash” is still in their lexicon.

  221. @Steve Sailer
    Thanks. Sounds useful.

    For example, nerdishness / autism spectrum / Asperger's thinking was hypocognized in the 20th Century and is becoming hypercognized in the 21st Century.

    I detest most academic jargon and feel that its purpose is more to obfuscate than to elucidate. English got along for 1000 years without those words.

    Other than making you appear not as erudite, “a thing” works just as well here:

    For example, nerdishness / autism spectrum / Asperger’s thinking was not a “thing” in the 20th Century and is becoming a “thing” in the 21st Century.

  222. @Steve Sailer
    O'Rourke was very funny for a very long time.

    “O’Rourke was very funny for a very long time.”

    Potato, Patahto.

    After reading “Holidays in Hell” and enjoying it, I made the mistake of immediately reading all of his other books (up to that point in time, circa 1992). I grant he is extremely witty, but the style wears thin. I may have felt differently if I’d spread the books out a bit.

    His rationale for why he’s endorsing Clinton is mostly him trying to make jokes, with some ad hominem thrown in. Its not at all funny, though by saying “was” rather than “is” maybe you were acknowledging O’Rourke is no longer funny.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I don't think his health has been good for a long time. I recall hearing he had cancer in 2008, so I'm glad to hear he's still around.

    Anyway, his forte was magazine-length articles, so piling them all up in books gets in to problems of overload.

  223. Lot says:
    @Luke Ford
    I have not read The International Jew and so I have no opinion on it.

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

    I have read Culture of Critique. Have you?

    There are only two honorable forms of argumentation -- disputing facts or logic. Name-calling is not honorable argument.

    I remain a big fan of your posts.

    I have not read The International Jew and so I have no opinion on it.

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

    It is basically MacDonald’s antisemitism, plus a better style, minus the crappy pop-evo gloss.

    I have read Culture of Critique. Have you?

    There are only two honorable forms of argumentation — disputing facts or logic. Name-calling is not honorable argument.

    Generally, that’s right, but I do not believe you write in good faith seeking the truth, but rather out of attention-whoring. Look, a Jew who endorses Kevin MacDonald! As such, you lose the privilege of being taken seriously.

    I remain a big fan of your posts.

    The feeling is not mutual. In the unlikely event I’ve got you wrong, however, I will take you on directly. MacDonald is a sociology professor at a third-rate college out of his depth discussing evolution of human intellectual traits. His thesis that Jews have “group evolved” the tendency to “undermine the culture” of their neighbors is just old style anti-semitism with a shoddy academic veneer. It relies, as well, on “group selection,” a concept you can read about here:

    https://www.edge.org/conversation/the-false-allure-of-group-selection

    • Replies: @whorefinder

    His thesis that Jews have “group evolved” the tendency to “undermine the culture” of their neighbors is just old style anti-semitism with a shoddy academic veneer.
     
    Name calling doesn't work. His theories answer questions about Jewish group behavior throughout history and their conflicts with various other cultures they live with. All with plausible explanations.

    He may be wrong or right, but his theories aren't bunk. They are merely falsifiable. Pinker is on the extreme end of rejecting them outright; most evolutionary dudes are cool to the idea of group selection, but not about to say it couldn't be possible.

    And you really shouldn't employ the fallacy of appealing to authority in order to "prove" another fallacy in action. Rather self-defeating.
    , @Luke Ford
    Have you read Culture of Critique? Have you read The International Jew? It seems you have not. That you would make proclamations about books you have not read does not speak well of you.
    , @Luke Ford
    Reading Steve Sailer, I learned that attention-seeking is not masculine, so I've really got to cut that out...one day at a time.

    I know personally about a dozen Jewish intellectuals (including Orthodox rabbis) who read Kevin MacDonald and believe he is basically correct. They can't say so publicly for fear of the consequences, to protect their children, etc. There's no contradiction between loving being Jewish, leading a traditional Jewish life, and accepting truth from any source. There's nothing unique in Jewish life in my respecting Kevin MacDonald.

  224. @Smitty
    Time will tell. If this sociology prof (posing as a sciencey "evo psych" prof) never gets his due as the pioneer explainer of something supposedly important it won't be for lack of hype on his groupies' part. Since the non-U.S./Euro flank of the academy isn't controlled by pro-Jew forces shouldn't ol' Kev devote his energies there? Or does he like it fine where he is

    Well, given that MacDonald has tenure, he’d be a fool to give it up as his publications have rendered him unemployable elsewhere.

    And he isn’t unemployable because he’s wrong, but because he offends certain well-heeled lobbies.

    MacDonald’s “groupies” by the way, are completely and utterly outnumbered by his opponents who have a damned sight more influence.

  225. @Whiskey
    Steve is not an anti-Semite, but he and many of his commenters make a huge mistake in assigning Assimilated Jewish anti-White behavior into Jewish ethno centrism. Because Steve and his commenters are fish not seeing the water, or wish to make excuses or apologies for the larger White culture being explicitly anti-White as a result of post-Christian religious belief.

    The tragedy of modern, Western, assimilated Jews like Cathy Young is that they traded their heritage and Jewishness for ... a mess of pottage. Lennonism. Of the two, John was more dangerous than Vladimir because his post-Christian Utopia fit more with the comfortable virtue and status signaling that Young embodies than the hard struggle of throwing bombs into crowds that Vladimir required.

    How Jewish is Mark Zuckerberg? He's the Jewish !Jeb!, who wants desperately to be Chinese like his wife. And that is not very Jewish, but is very WASP adventurers. Its Dances With Wolves, Avatar, James Michener's "Hawaii," and Pocahontas and Capt. Smith. Marry the foreign native princess and lead the natives as a Big Man (which lower/ordinary White man could NEVER be at home) against his fellow Whites/Europeans/Nationals.

    Fundamentally Kevin McDonald is horrible, because he's WRONG. He is prescribing leeches for a patient beset by anemia. The problem of anti-Whitism in the West is not Jerry Seinfeld and Patton Oswalt conspiring with Howard Stern to turn America into Africa-meets-Pakistan, because that would be so good for Seinfeld, Oswalt, and Stern. The problem is John Lennonism Utopian virtue signaling at **ZERO COST** for status-seekers who are mostly **NOT JEWS**.

    Cathy Young stands out because she's confirmation bias. But nothing she says would be out of place among Bill Gates mouth. Or Warren Buffet's. Or Elizabeth Warren's. Or Hillary Clinton's.

    Jews are uniquely vulnerable to the post-Calvinist Witch Finding Puritanism without Jesus that characterizes our **EXTREME RELIGIOUS AGE**. Instead of being a Chosen People by God -- who caused them to be born Jewish, they ... choose their salvation willingly by being anti-White (which is also anti-Jewish --- Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan, ISIS, Iran, and Erdogan all consider Jews to be both White and the enemy to be exterminated in some form or another).

    This has no cost, because as part of a highly insulated, bubble dwelling elite they don't have their daughters raped and forced into prostitution like White working class people in Britain. Instead they live in a Seinfeld episode that never ends, where obscure and ever changing rules bring status. Jerry Seinfeld in the series was well, himself. A famous stand up comedian. But even his character was challenged by the constant and ever changing rules of PC that gave or took away status and standing.

    Anti-Whitism is not a Jewish conspiracy to undermine Gentiles and Christmas. It is instead a function of the constant, ever increasing, status chasing among a bubble dwelling elite that incurs no personal cost for anti-Whitism by their insulation and finds no status by accomplishment.

    And that last is key. Accomplishment means nothing, not fame, not money, not military prowess, nothing. Chris Kyle was the most accomplished sniper, and demonstrated bravery, and yet the SWPL crowd found him tedious and lower class -- because he did not adhere to their rules of religion and status chasing within Lennonism religion.

    THAT is the rot in the West. Not Jews, who in the West traded their identity held onto for thousands of years for ... saying "not that there is anything wrong with that."

    Except that American Jews support – and often fight for – a Jewish state, a state that goes against all of their (and gentile whites’) silly we-are-the-world talk and philosophy that American Jews promote for white countries.

    Gentile whites don’t support a white homeland across the sea that uses bad-ass fences and armed guards to protect their race. Jews do.

    Your argument is laughable in the face of that hypocrisy.

    Jews are different from SWPL gentiles.

  226. @iffen
    erect a false consciousness among gentiles and prevent the emergence of organized opposition.

    Jews tend to prevail in these conflicts, despite their smaller numbers, when they are able to act as a group while we are not.



    while we are not.


    It might be because they are stuck with fewer imbeciles such as yourself.

    It might be because they are stuck with fewer imbeciles such as yourself.

    It’s depressing that despite a curated comment section and despite my well-stocked “Commenters to Ignore” list, I still can’t make it through a thread without seeing this kind of ad hominem remark. Even here, amid one of the smartest cadres of commentariat in the blogosphere, we find those who fail to grasp that ad hominem attacks say much about the commenter while saying nothing about his target. And so my “Ignore” list continues to expand..

  227. From the Vox thread linked above:

    Izzy Rolfe May 10, 2016 2:30 PM

    I hope one day we can ban this kind of odious hate speech. It has no place in a diverse multicultural society.

    The Troll Of A Thousand Names inhabits other blogs too, I see.

    I dub it “Legion.”

  228. “As such, you lose the privilege of being taken seriously. “

    …By Jews.

  229. Tracy says: • Website
    @Anonymous
    Good Lord, you people are a bunch of creeps. (Oh, and by the way... the so-called "racial" component of being Jewish is an ethnicity, not a race. "Whiteness" is not an ethnicity. And Israel recognizes black Ethiopian Jews as Jewish.

    So, a white rich fraternity had to be inconvenienced for a bit. Boo fucking hoo

    Good Lord, you people are a bunch of creeps. (Oh, and by the way… the so-called “racial” component of being Jewish is an ethnicity, not a race. “Whiteness” is not an ethnicity. And Israel recognizes black Ethiopian Jews as Jewish.

    So, a white rich fraternity had to be inconvenienced for a bit. Boo fucking hoo

    Whites are treated as a group; it’s ridiculous to expect us to not react as a group. “White guilt,” “white privilege,” cis white males,” “the white race is the cancer of the world” — give me a break.

    I take note of your last line there about a “rich white fraternity” who endured what you characterize as an “inconvenience.” Nice.

    Further, Ethiopian Jews are treated like crap in Israel. See The tribulations of being an Ethiopian Jew, The plight of Ethiopian Jews in Israel, and Israel: No promised land for Ethiopian Jews. There are plenty more articles like that out there. Do a search.

    • Replies: @Brutusale
    The comment by Nike was ridiculous. He must not get out much.

    http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/israel-admits-ethiopian-women-were-given-birth-control-shots.premium-1.496519
  230. @Lot

    As for anti-gentilism, anyone who has grown up with a large Jewish population as I have can serve as a witness to the prevailing sense of fear and contempt toward gentiles that many Jews seem to harbor (one that is much more freely discussed among Jews themselves).
     
    So your evidence is "everyone who knows Jews knows this to be true" and "things you heard from Jewish acquaintances"

    That's awfully persuasive!

    Maybe you are feeling a bit of envy and resentment at the single ethnic group most successful at skimming off the best women of your race? I mean, Amy Chua is quite a catch: best selling author, as politically incorrect as she feels like, daughter of one of the leading professors of electrical engineering in the nation, makes a ton of money, raises polite and intelligent children. And in her wikipedia pic, at age 50, she is still smoking hot.

    See the three minute mark: https://youtu.be/TDIrPXNXzJw

  231. the history of anti-semitism

    This is Jewish dialect for “the history of Jewish-Gentile conflict.”

    Cathy Young reminds me of the rabid fundamentalists

    I prefer to think of it as Princess and the Pea Syndrome. They’re very used to getting their own way, and any small divergence sets them off. But you’re right, “rabid fundamentalism” is apropos.

    I now view posts like the above as iSteve’s version of “fan service.” There is good stuff routinely posted here in the spirit of unique, candid and topical food for thought. And then there’s vain feuding with random verbiage artists Steve logically must consider to be his peer group, evidently pleasing a key slice of loyal readers wetting themselves in excitement to hiss in uni-

    My God you’re so clever. I just couldn’t stand any more of your brilliance.

    Ronald McDonald says:

    Oh, it’s you again. Still too soon. My pupils need to dilate.

    The next president will be Trump or Clinton; no plausible third option exists. For some of us, more of the same but even worse with Clinton is preferable to a whole new level of public depravity with Trump. Others like depravity and would be Trump if they could, so this stance is beyond their understanding.

    The Mrs. Manners vote. These people really do exist. Policy? What’s that? How these people let televisions into their homes is anyone’s guess.

  232. I urge anyone entertaining notions that Kevin MacDonald is (insult here) should just buy his books and read them. Then read the criticism, and see who is left standing. Make up one’s own mind, crazy talk, I know. Much safer to just read the criticism and skip the books, right?

    • Replies: @whorefinder
    But this way is so much more fun and internet-y.
  233. @William Badwhite
    "O’Rourke was very funny for a very long time."

    Potato, Patahto.

    After reading "Holidays in Hell" and enjoying it, I made the mistake of immediately reading all of his other books (up to that point in time, circa 1992). I grant he is extremely witty, but the style wears thin. I may have felt differently if I'd spread the books out a bit.

    His rationale for why he's endorsing Clinton is mostly him trying to make jokes, with some ad hominem thrown in. Its not at all funny, though by saying "was" rather than "is" maybe you were acknowledging O'Rourke is no longer funny.

    I don’t think his health has been good for a long time. I recall hearing he had cancer in 2008, so I’m glad to hear he’s still around.

    Anyway, his forte was magazine-length articles, so piling them all up in books gets in to problems of overload.

  234. @Bill P

    If it weren’t for the obsession with Erdely’s Jewishness in certain quarters, I would have assumed that “Kristallnacht” was just a fancy metaphor. But was it actually a not-so-subtle reversal of an infamous attack on Jews in which a “militant Jew” becomes the perpetrator inflicting a Kristallnacht on gentiles? You decide.
     
    Funny, sounds like Cathy hasn't quite made her mind up on the matter herself.

    If I recall correctly, the "broken glass" metaphor was so overdone, so campy and so permeated the narrative that I don't know how anyone can plausibly question Erdely's intent. She really tried that hard.

    Not that I think it's characteristic of Jews in general. If I were Jewish, it would have embarrassed me, so I tend to assume that rational-minded Jews who read the piece had that reaction.

    I am Jewish. Unfortunately I read the piece only after I had read about the piece here. So when reading it, I only found it ridiculous, although I think its main point of reference was to the generalized media coverage of date raping and fraternities. That was in the news a lot then if I remember. As the “victim” was not Jewish, what the hell point could the author have been making exactly, if that was her intent?

    • Replies: @Bill P

    As the “victim” was not Jewish, what the hell point could the author have been making exactly, if that was her intent?
     
    That's just the thing. The point wasn't the victim, but the "culture" (which was a total fabrication on Sabrina's part).

    Read it with a close eye, and you see the references to blondes, neoclassical architecture, group behavior, and finally repeated references to dominance, group violence and broken glass. It's clearly a ham-fisted attempt to evoke National Socialist tropes and imagery.

    Maybe, having read a lot of feminist bullshit over the years, I'm more attuned to this stuff than the average reader, but I'm pretty sure I could sit down with any perceptive person and point it out part by part without once having to grasp at a straw.
  235. @Alec Leamas
    I never took Paglia as anti-WASP so much as embracing her (perhaps idealized) earthy and passionate Southern Italian roots. Necessarily this requires some opposition to WASP cultural control and the stoic WASP style but I don't think there was much desire to obliterate it so much as to make cultural space for her own sort. Perhaps I've just read the wrong books/columns and seen the wrong talks by her. Other than on TV in her youth, I can't imagine that Syracuse at the time was a bastion of WASP privilege. Likely the blondes of whom she was jealous, desirous or both were Polish, German, or Irish Catholics of modest, working class means.

    For a few nights about two weeks ago I suffered from some insomnia. In the wee hours I watched two films in particular on cable that I had never before seen out of sheer boredom among others - 1987's Dirty Dancing, and 1988's Beaches. Now, I'm not much younger than Erdely and I'm Catholic from blue collar neighborhoods in Philadelphia and sent to parochial schools but my mother was a striving working sort who sent me and my brother to a Jewish day camp (though not explicitly so) in a Jewish belt of suburban Montgomery County as kids to get rid of us for the day after my parents got divorced. We were two of a very, very few gentiles there and I can tell you that those two movies were seen, discussed and part of the cultural ether for those kids (not just the girls! Aside: what sort of thirteen year old boy is a Bette Midler fan?). It's just an educated guess, but if I recall Erdely is from that same part of Montgomery County, probably very culturally similar to those kids (hell, she may have gone to that camp herself) and I'd bet given her age she saw both of those movies over and over.

    I suppose the point in mentioning the films is that they're sort of a window into the mind of a person like Erdely - the simultaneous chauvinism and feelings of inferiority, their view of the Jew/goy divide, etc. In Beaches, the main goy is a WASP who learns to live a little after befriending a loud and brash Jewish child entertainer (there is even a pseudo Country Club scene where the little Jewish girl is asked to leave a restaurant). In Dirty Dancing, the goys are prole white trash who work at the Catskills resort by day and drink and dance in ways that amount to open acts of coitus at night, while the Jews are wealthy and educated if reserved, one learning to dance and her sexual passions awaken with the Buck goy while a Jewish doctor first unwittingly pays for a botched backalley abortion (pre-Roe), and then sweeps in to heroically save the life of the pretty blonde white trash slut and keep everything quiet.

    Syracuse, in Paglia’s time was Irish on the west side, Italian and German on the north side, Jewish on the east side, and black on the south side. WASPs weren’t a thing. The pols were mainly Irish and Italian. Long time corrupt mayor was Greek.

  236. @Lot

    I have not read The International Jew and so I have no opinion on it.

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

     

    It is basically MacDonald's antisemitism, plus a better style, minus the crappy pop-evo gloss.

    I have read Culture of Critique. Have you?

    There are only two honorable forms of argumentation — disputing facts or logic. Name-calling is not honorable argument.
     
    Generally, that's right, but I do not believe you write in good faith seeking the truth, but rather out of attention-whoring. Look, a Jew who endorses Kevin MacDonald! As such, you lose the privilege of being taken seriously.

    I remain a big fan of your posts.
     
    The feeling is not mutual. In the unlikely event I've got you wrong, however, I will take you on directly. MacDonald is a sociology professor at a third-rate college out of his depth discussing evolution of human intellectual traits. His thesis that Jews have "group evolved" the tendency to "undermine the culture" of their neighbors is just old style anti-semitism with a shoddy academic veneer. It relies, as well, on "group selection," a concept you can read about here:

    https://www.edge.org/conversation/the-false-allure-of-group-selection

    His thesis that Jews have “group evolved” the tendency to “undermine the culture” of their neighbors is just old style anti-semitism with a shoddy academic veneer.

    Name calling doesn’t work. His theories answer questions about Jewish group behavior throughout history and their conflicts with various other cultures they live with. All with plausible explanations.

    He may be wrong or right, but his theories aren’t bunk. They are merely falsifiable. Pinker is on the extreme end of rejecting them outright; most evolutionary dudes are cool to the idea of group selection, but not about to say it couldn’t be possible.

    And you really shouldn’t employ the fallacy of appealing to authority in order to “prove” another fallacy in action. Rather self-defeating.

  237. @Svigor
    I urge anyone entertaining notions that Kevin MacDonald is (insult here) should just buy his books and read them. Then read the criticism, and see who is left standing. Make up one's own mind, crazy talk, I know. Much safer to just read the criticism and skip the books, right?

    But this way is so much more fun and internet-y.

  238. @Vinay
    Off-topic but not by a lot: NYT has an article on London's new Muslim mayor, Sadiq Khan. There's enough there to give you some idea of the kind of mayor he intends to be.

    I think it's a good time for iSteve-ites to put down some markers predicting what to expect during his tenure. If you're worried about Londonistan and take "Submission" seriously, you're certainly not gonna expect an uneventful tenure, right?

    As for me, I expect he'll be a far less radical and identity-politics oriented mayor than the white Christian De Blasio. He sounds very much like a classical liberal, more interested in cheaper housing and public transit than gendered bathrooms and safe spaces. I don't expect him to accuse the London cops of oppressing Muslims or to allow Sharia civil courts.

    What's your prediction?

    He’ll be better behaved than Livingstone.

  239. @Lot

    I have not read The International Jew and so I have no opinion on it.

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

     

    It is basically MacDonald's antisemitism, plus a better style, minus the crappy pop-evo gloss.

    I have read Culture of Critique. Have you?

    There are only two honorable forms of argumentation — disputing facts or logic. Name-calling is not honorable argument.
     
    Generally, that's right, but I do not believe you write in good faith seeking the truth, but rather out of attention-whoring. Look, a Jew who endorses Kevin MacDonald! As such, you lose the privilege of being taken seriously.

    I remain a big fan of your posts.
     
    The feeling is not mutual. In the unlikely event I've got you wrong, however, I will take you on directly. MacDonald is a sociology professor at a third-rate college out of his depth discussing evolution of human intellectual traits. His thesis that Jews have "group evolved" the tendency to "undermine the culture" of their neighbors is just old style anti-semitism with a shoddy academic veneer. It relies, as well, on "group selection," a concept you can read about here:

    https://www.edge.org/conversation/the-false-allure-of-group-selection

    Have you read Culture of Critique? Have you read The International Jew? It seems you have not. That you would make proclamations about books you have not read does not speak well of you.

  240. @anon

    The only perpetual “anti-white” movement is the one concocted in your mind.
     
    The entire media are clearly and explicitly anti-white.

    There are lots of examples but the simplest is the way Asians disappear when they break the anti-white narrative and reappear when they don't.

    “The entire media are clearly and explicitly anti-white. There are lots of examples but the simplest is the way Asians disappear when they break the anti-white narrative and reappear when they don’t.”

    [Shakes head] So you can’t find the words to define “anti-white”, then offer some nondescript, vague “example”. I get it, the boys at the bridge club made it clear to maintain the narrative regardless of how foolish it looks.

  241. @Jack D

    Tell you all what: I concede Congressmen Celler sucks. Can we move on?
     
    The irony here is that Steve is always complaining about how for the left , 1965 was just yesterday and not two generations ago. Apparently, for some on the right, Congressman Celler has just stepped off the House floor even though he has been out of office since 1973.

    Celler by the way had an incredible life - he was first elected to Congress during the election of 1922 and made his first important speech on the House floor during consideration of Immigration Act. The Immigration Act of 1924.

    If you spend any time perusing PBS, it is either the 1960s or the 1860s in America. So 1965 is, like, yesterday.

  242. @Twinkie

    Sabrina Rubin Erdely’s Kristallnacht
     
    I thought the allusion was particularly apt given not just actual the thuggery of the attack on the fraternity, but especially because of the official support for the prevailing narrative and the ineffectual investigation of the actual vandalism. It definitely had the whiff (there goes the world that leftists love to use anytime some black/homosexual/transgender person is lynched mythically somewhere) of Nazi-condoned thuggery or even Maoist Cultural Revolution.

    As for anti-gentilism, anyone who has grown up with a large Jewish population as I have can serve as a witness to the prevailing sense of fear and contempt toward gentiles that many Jews seem to harbor (one that is much more freely discussed among Jews themselves). Even though I am not Jewish, I frequently heard disparaging remarks about non-Jews, especially white Catholics and Asians, from Jewish acquaintances and colleagues particularly while I was in academia. For some reason, people seem to feel very free about their thoughts around me, and would tell me their inner thoughts readily (this came in VERY HANDY when I used to work as an investigator).

    Growing up, I used to have a highly positive view of Jews, but that began to change once I grew up and began to see beyond the propaganda ("Light unto nations") and Holocaust victimology.

    For some reason, people seem to feel very free about their thoughts around me, and would tell me their inner thoughts readily (this came in VERY HANDY when I used to work as an investigator).

    It would seem you are telling us your inner fantasies quite readily. Although I don’t find any of it VERY HANDY or even very handy.

    the prevailing sense of fear and contempt toward gentiles that many Jews seem to harbor

    I can assure you, there is no Jew that “fears” you. Although after reading one email from you, I suspect many Jews have contempt for you.

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    I can assure you, there is no Jew that “fears” you.
     
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970204076204578076613986930932

    Some of the more vehement attacks on Amy Chua's deliberately provocative 2011 memoir of child rearing, "Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother," were perhaps fueled by resentment of Asian-American ascendancy, especially in the context of raising "perfect" children. Confession: I was one of the book's more vocal detractors. Was I, a Jewish-American writer, driven to pique, in part, by a member of a group that threatens Jewish-American cultural domination, just as American Jews once threatened the WASP mandarinate? Well, maybe.

    The subtle vying for success in various realms of American life between Asian-Americans and American Jews makes one wonder what mores and tastes will look like when Asian-Americans begin to exert their own influence over the culture. Will the verbal brio and intellectual bent of Jews, their edgy irony and frank super-competitiveness give way to Asian discretion, deference to the community, and gifts for less verbal pursuits like music, science and math? Will things become, as they once were under WASP hegemony, quieter?
     
    As for me personally, my Jewish friends of youth were not fearful of me at all. I used to protect them from blacks youths who predated upon them. But I was blessed with size and grew up doing combat sports (Judo and boxing) since I was a young child. My father used to get me up at 5 AM to train since I was about 4 or 5 years old (I am a softie as a parent - my kids started Judo at 6 or 7 years old, and I let them sleep until they wake up naturally; we train in the evenings). I hated seeing black kids beat up and terrorize my white (Jewish and non-Jewish) and Asian friends.

    However, (as an adult) A LOT of American Jews seem, er, "wary" of the fact that I am a gun-toter. Funny enough, though, this was never an issue in Israel where I spent some time. I still have a Browning Hi-Power an Israeli colleague gave me as a parting gift.

    I suppose this is my way of confirming, from my experience, the "Men without Chests" theory regarding Diaspora Jews, as described by Martin van Creveld of Hebrew University in his book, "The Culture of War."
  243. @Lot

    I have not read The International Jew and so I have no opinion on it.

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

     

    It is basically MacDonald's antisemitism, plus a better style, minus the crappy pop-evo gloss.

    I have read Culture of Critique. Have you?

    There are only two honorable forms of argumentation — disputing facts or logic. Name-calling is not honorable argument.
     
    Generally, that's right, but I do not believe you write in good faith seeking the truth, but rather out of attention-whoring. Look, a Jew who endorses Kevin MacDonald! As such, you lose the privilege of being taken seriously.

    I remain a big fan of your posts.
     
    The feeling is not mutual. In the unlikely event I've got you wrong, however, I will take you on directly. MacDonald is a sociology professor at a third-rate college out of his depth discussing evolution of human intellectual traits. His thesis that Jews have "group evolved" the tendency to "undermine the culture" of their neighbors is just old style anti-semitism with a shoddy academic veneer. It relies, as well, on "group selection," a concept you can read about here:

    https://www.edge.org/conversation/the-false-allure-of-group-selection

    Reading Steve Sailer, I learned that attention-seeking is not masculine, so I’ve really got to cut that out…one day at a time.

    I know personally about a dozen Jewish intellectuals (including Orthodox rabbis) who read Kevin MacDonald and believe he is basically correct. They can’t say so publicly for fear of the consequences, to protect their children, etc. There’s no contradiction between loving being Jewish, leading a traditional Jewish life, and accepting truth from any source. There’s nothing unique in Jewish life in my respecting Kevin MacDonald.

    • Replies: @Luke Ford
    An Orthodox rabbi I admire calls me a "hasid of Kevin MacDonald." That cracked me up. I have a small following among some intellectuals and journalists in Los Angeles Judaism and they know that I respect MacDonald and his brethren on the Alt-Right (Steve Sailer, Richard Spencer, Jared Taylor, Gregory Hood, Greg Johnson, Tom Sunic, Roger Devlin) and I constantly advocate for engaging with them and their ideas (restricting our arguments to logic and facts and dispensing with slurs). I had a public dialogue one Sunday afternoon at a Chabad shul with Tom Sunic. I'm not sure it has been done before.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RItI0_o_Kmc

    http://www.lukeford.net/blog/?p=58103

    I have had many conversations about these topics in and out of shul and around the Shabbos table. MacDonald is not the third-rate hate-obsessed thinker he's caricatured as and many thoughtful Jews know that. It's just very painful as a Jew to engage with Kevin's theses and the Alt-Right challenge. It's much more comfortable to simply dismiss them as haters.

    , @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    "I learned that attention-seeking is not masculine"

    Hold it, hold it. Donald Trump is quite an attention seeker and has been most of his career. No one would dare say that he isn't an alpha male, let alone not very masculine.

    I mean, for nearly the last year of this election, one person has managed to drive it and make it mainly about himself, and the issues that he promotes. Trying to think how far back in history one has to go to find that kind of comparison. Was Bill Clinton that influential on driving the narrative day after day? Just on the issues alone I mean. I tend to think he wasn't. This is a unique candidate: One who inspires near total and equal attention to both his personality AND the issues that he promotes in his candidacy. It's almost unprecedented.

  244. @Jack D
    There is no doubt (in my mind at least) that anti-Semitic kooks are present in the Sailer comments, along with various other points of view. I can't imagine that they form a big part of his fundraising base - how much can be left over from the SSI check after you have paid the rent on the trailer and bought beer, cigarettes and jerky? The reason that they stand out so much here is that they have pretty much been purged from the rest of "polite" American society. While I understand the impetus to do so (for Jews this can be regarded literally as a matter of life and death because the last time these viewpoints were given free rein it turned out very very badly), there is also supposed to be an American tradition of free speech where all viewpoints, even unpopular ones were permissible. We don't need a First Amendment to protect popular points of view. The Left used to understand this quite well when theirs were the viewpoints in need of protection, but now that they shoe is on the other foot they have no problem resorting to McCarthyite tactics and doing their best to see that those with the "wrong" opinions lose their jobs and everything else.

    “There is no doubt (in my mind at least) that anti-Semitic kooks are present in the Sailer comments, along with various other points of view. I can’t imagine that they form a big part of his fundraising base – how much can be left over from the SSI check after you have paid the rent on the trailer and bought beer, cigarettes and jerky? The reason that they stand out so much here is that they have pretty much been purged from the rest of “polite” American society.”

    Of course, and everyone else throughout history who eventually came to despise Jews from ancient Egypt to Rome to modern Muslims were just rednecks in a trailer park in Kentucky watching The Price is Right while waiting for the meth dealer to show up right?

    Answer something honestly; do you really believe that someone like you’ve described would be reading and commenting at a site like this? Or is it more likely that more and more educated “normal” people (the sort that visit and comment here) might be starting to develop the same thing that everyone else who’s lived amongst Jews has over the past five thousand years; anti – Semitism?

    • Replies: @Virgínia Dare
    I dont think theres anything particularly educated or normal about the readership here.
    Sure the articles and some of the commenters here are are great, but the common denominator of a standard reader is beleif in black stupidity, dislike of jews, and a hardon for big daddy vlad.
  245. Tracy says: • Website
    @Jack D
    And the whole goodwhite/badwhite concept is really a sort of distorted Calvinism and has its roots in Christian (Protestant), not Jewish, doctrine. The whole modern Jewish "Tikkun Olam" (repair the world) thing has very little to do with traditional Jewish doctrine where "repairing the world" did not mean instituting free lunches for underprivileged black children but rather meant preparing for the coming of the Messiah. But it does have a lot to do with traditional WASP do-goodism.

    As a gedankenexperiment, imagine a large white country that thru some terrible tragedy has lost most of its Jewish population. Then see if the same liberal currents (for example a lady president who wants to let in millions of refugees into her country) exist in that country as in the US. If they do, this is proof that the goodwhite phenomenon would exist with or without the Jews.

    Just because you see Jews riding the bandwagon and playing the tune (even improvising riffs) doesn't mean that they wrote the song that they are playing.

    And the whole goodwhite/badwhite concept is really a sort of distorted Calvinism and has its roots in Christian (Protestant), not Jewish, doctrine.

    Protestantism is Judaized Christianity. Even Martin Luther started off extremely philosemitic, and check out what Cromwell was pushing religiously as he was slaughtering Catholics and re-admitting Jews into England at the same time. Things got really obvious after Darby and Scofield, with their Dispensationalist nonsense.

  246. ((Jon Stewart)) shows his sour and nasty view of America in this clip on Trump:

    At the 9min mark: “Someone needs to tell the voters they’re a*****s. Someone needs to tell them it’s not okay to have nostalgia for the ‘Mad Men’ society and think that kind of ignorance is virtue” He goes on to the “Happy Holidays”, “war on Christmas” thing a minute or so later. Then he’s asking “when was America great? When was this time …?”

    The whole talk with Axelrod is at the University of Chicago YouTube account. ((Stewart)) is clearly unhappy with the Obama administration.

    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome
    " ... take it up with the Age of Reason, ... all men are created equal, thats f***ed the whole thing up."
  247. @Lot

    “Radix site is certainly antisemitic”

    No, it is not “certainly antisemitic”
     
    That's my memory of it looking at the article titles and trying to read some of the poorly-written, long, overly ambitious articles on it. I agree that it isn't a focus of the site, though going to the homepage now one is greeted by a big picture of Kevin MacDonald and link to a speech.

    Now if you want to define MacDonald as "not antisemitic" I am not going to stop you, but I will not be using your non-standard English myself.

    “Now if you want to define MacDonald as “not antisemitic” I am not going to stop you, but I will not be using your non-standard English myself.”

    As Joseph Sobran noted, the operating definition of “anti-semitism” employed by many people nowadays is not “someone who dislikes Jews” but rather “someone whom Jews dislike”.

    Is any criticism of tendencies that may be found among Jews, and is in some way characteristic of them, to be considered anti-semitism? Is simply noticing trends concerning Jews to be considered anti-semitism?

    In any event, the frequent use of the term anti-semitism, much like the frequenct use of the word racism, seems to be wearing it out. It is a magic incantation which is losing its power.

  248. @Lot
    You called it just right on every point.

    And it is sad, because with Trump we are potentially on the cusp of actually doing something about America's ongoing demographic disaster. Rather than focus on the very hard work of reaching 50% + 1 in elections, a big part of the nationalist right in America would prefer to wallow in the filth you describe.

    When you look at Europe, you see what happens when the nationalist right rejects kooks and wins elections, sometimes able to join governments in return for major concessions on immigration, versus when it takes the "let's going over for the millionth time the perfidy of the Jews!" path.

    Tell you all what: I concede Congressmen Celler sucks. Can we move on?

    “Tell you all what: I concede Congressmen Celler sucks. Can we move on?”

    No. A problem must be identified before it can be solved. And the roots of our immigration problems have not been identified by most of the public. Most Americans don’t even know of the 1965 immigration act, let alone who was behind it.

    • Replies: @Sailer has an interesting life
    The root of your problem is in your genes. There's nothing to be done about that.
  249. @Luke Ford
    Reading Steve Sailer, I learned that attention-seeking is not masculine, so I've really got to cut that out...one day at a time.

    I know personally about a dozen Jewish intellectuals (including Orthodox rabbis) who read Kevin MacDonald and believe he is basically correct. They can't say so publicly for fear of the consequences, to protect their children, etc. There's no contradiction between loving being Jewish, leading a traditional Jewish life, and accepting truth from any source. There's nothing unique in Jewish life in my respecting Kevin MacDonald.

    An Orthodox rabbi I admire calls me a “hasid of Kevin MacDonald.” That cracked me up. I have a small following among some intellectuals and journalists in Los Angeles Judaism and they know that I respect MacDonald and his brethren on the Alt-Right (Steve Sailer, Richard Spencer, Jared Taylor, Gregory Hood, Greg Johnson, Tom Sunic, Roger Devlin) and I constantly advocate for engaging with them and their ideas (restricting our arguments to logic and facts and dispensing with slurs). I had a public dialogue one Sunday afternoon at a Chabad shul with Tom Sunic. I’m not sure it has been done before.

    http://www.lukeford.net/blog/?p=58103

    I have had many conversations about these topics in and out of shul and around the Shabbos table. MacDonald is not the third-rate hate-obsessed thinker he’s caricatured as and many thoughtful Jews know that. It’s just very painful as a Jew to engage with Kevin’s theses and the Alt-Right challenge. It’s much more comfortable to simply dismiss them as haters.

    • Replies: @Virgínia Dare
    Reb Luke: what do you think of the reception of MacDonald's ideas by the reverend Dr David Duke? MacDonald seems to like Duke's ideas, since he publishes him in OccidentalObserver.
    Am I wrong to think that Duke is an antisemite?
    Having read "A people that shall dwell alone" I think MacDonald cherry picks examples from jewish history to support a conclusion he has already reached. No sane person reading the Tanakh could seriously think that the real God of the jewish people is their gene pool.
  250. @Jack D

    Tell you all what: I concede Congressmen Celler sucks. Can we move on?
     
    The irony here is that Steve is always complaining about how for the left , 1965 was just yesterday and not two generations ago. Apparently, for some on the right, Congressman Celler has just stepped off the House floor even though he has been out of office since 1973.

    Celler by the way had an incredible life - he was first elected to Congress during the election of 1922 and made his first important speech on the House floor during consideration of Immigration Act. The Immigration Act of 1924.

    “Celler by the way had an incredible life – he was first elected to Congress during the election of 1922 and made his first important speech on the House floor during consideration of Immigration Act. The Immigration Act of 1924.”

    Yes, he had an incredible career, undermining the nation that permitted his ancestors to immigrate into it.

  251. @Johnny Smoggins
    "There is no doubt (in my mind at least) that anti-Semitic kooks are present in the Sailer comments, along with various other points of view. I can’t imagine that they form a big part of his fundraising base – how much can be left over from the SSI check after you have paid the rent on the trailer and bought beer, cigarettes and jerky? The reason that they stand out so much here is that they have pretty much been purged from the rest of “polite” American society."

    Of course, and everyone else throughout history who eventually came to despise Jews from ancient Egypt to Rome to modern Muslims were just rednecks in a trailer park in Kentucky watching The Price is Right while waiting for the meth dealer to show up right?

    Answer something honestly; do you really believe that someone like you've described would be reading and commenting at a site like this? Or is it more likely that more and more educated "normal" people (the sort that visit and comment here) might be starting to develop the same thing that everyone else who's lived amongst Jews has over the past five thousand years; anti - Semitism?

    I dont think theres anything particularly educated or normal about the readership here.
    Sure the articles and some of the commenters here are are great, but the common denominator of a standard reader is beleif in black stupidity, dislike of jews, and a hardon for big daddy vlad.

  252. @San Fernando Curt
    'Anti-Gentilism' is a term whose time has long-since come. With Trump's popularity confirming that our 50-60 year experiment in soft-Marxism has soured with a huge balance of the American goy public, the West's social reign of terror is proven soft and flabby, weak and stagnant. Its once fearsome enforcers don't seem to notice yet - but Curt Schilling sure does. We got a sea-change goin' here.

    So, it also may be time for an easily recognizable, Sapir-Whorf red-letter on "crime of noticing" felony realities. The only thing I can come up with is clumsy conjunction of obscene and observation - obscenervation.

    Someone- please do better. Let's set them on the run.

    (And thanks for all you did to put that UVa atrocity to rest.)

    I think the portmanteau word “obscenervation” would be best applied to people who become bored with looking at porn.

    We already have “thoughtcrime” to cover the mortal offense of observing the fact that human groups tend to act, and think, and rehash the same arguments in in concert.

    BTW, this is not about “conspiracies”: this is about the fact that groups will tend to have similar goals, interests, and values, and thus are predictable in their actions, either affective or “rational.” For example, there is a tendency to make vast generalizations about black people on this blog, and about how predictable their actions, opinions, and so on will be. But no one would attribute this to a conspiracy among black people.

    I’ve made it clear that vast generalizations about Jews are a waste of time and at minimum will aggrieve Jewish posters here: that’s why I call it unhelpful. But then, if we start labeling such things “anti-semitic”, next we will start calling things “racist”, then “homophobic”, then “misogynist”, then “transphobic” and by that time this blog will be indistinguishable from “The Atlantic”.

    Let’s get back to the case. Is there some “thing” that connotes a hostility to “rich whites” or “WASPs” or “gentiles” or “goyim”? If there is such a thing. is there a particular strain of it that comes from Jews towards whites? I think the answer to both questions is affirmative, the problem is that just because some Jewish person (credibly, Sabrina) is hostile to preppy well to do whites. that doesn’t mean it applies to all or even a lot of Jews. But what I have read in this thread is Jews and non-Jews largely playing the dozens, reaching for ever more extreme group insults. Is this productive, or is it merely entertainment?

    Is Cathy Young another person who fits the stereotype, that is, of a certain type of Jewish person who basically resents beautiful and privileged honkies? There are people like that. And to answer the question, I don’t know. I don’t think very highly of her anymore, however.

  253. @Luke Ford
    An Orthodox rabbi I admire calls me a "hasid of Kevin MacDonald." That cracked me up. I have a small following among some intellectuals and journalists in Los Angeles Judaism and they know that I respect MacDonald and his brethren on the Alt-Right (Steve Sailer, Richard Spencer, Jared Taylor, Gregory Hood, Greg Johnson, Tom Sunic, Roger Devlin) and I constantly advocate for engaging with them and their ideas (restricting our arguments to logic and facts and dispensing with slurs). I had a public dialogue one Sunday afternoon at a Chabad shul with Tom Sunic. I'm not sure it has been done before.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RItI0_o_Kmc

    http://www.lukeford.net/blog/?p=58103

    I have had many conversations about these topics in and out of shul and around the Shabbos table. MacDonald is not the third-rate hate-obsessed thinker he's caricatured as and many thoughtful Jews know that. It's just very painful as a Jew to engage with Kevin's theses and the Alt-Right challenge. It's much more comfortable to simply dismiss them as haters.

    Reb Luke: what do you think of the reception of MacDonald’s ideas by the reverend Dr David Duke? MacDonald seems to like Duke’s ideas, since he publishes him in OccidentalObserver.
    Am I wrong to think that Duke is an antisemite?
    Having read “A people that shall dwell alone” I think MacDonald cherry picks examples from jewish history to support a conclusion he has already reached. No sane person reading the Tanakh could seriously think that the real God of the jewish people is their gene pool.

    • Replies: @Luke Ford
    David Duke is an advocate for whites. Because it is rare that white cohesion and Jewish strength go together, he understandably has many negative views of Jews. I find it hard to listen to Duke because his distaste for Jews is so intense. By comparison, because he is so dry and scholarly, Kevin MacDonald is easier for me to hear.

    It would be weird for white nationalists to not hate Jews, just as it would be weird for Palestinians or Arabs or Muslims not to have many negative views of Jews due to the establishment of a Jewish state on a land they regard as their land, just as it would be weird for a Jew versed in Jewish history not to have negative views of Christianity and Islam.

    Different groups have different interests. If you love your people you will likely hate your people's enemies.

    There's no good group or bad group in the universe (unless you have a particular faith and there's no point arguing over faith). There's just different groups, each one regarding itself as the center of the universe, competing with each other for scarce resources.

    , @Tracy

    No sane person reading the Tanakh could seriously think that the real God of the jewish people is their gene pool.
     
    The Old Testament isn't the rule for Jewish life; the Talmud and what rabbis say is.
  254. @jtgw
    Just because some Jews are Christophobic doesn't mean all are. We should be able to point out that some people have irrational fears of Christianity without implying that everyone else in that group shares the prejudice.

    Without Xtians there would no longer be any Jews – just sayin’.

  255. @ATX Hipster
    Don't forget the libel. Reputations never seem to fully bounce back after a rape accusation, no matter how thoroughly debunked.

    Yeah, that’s the thing. Feminists making it easier to make false accusations will mean more of them are made. It really is us or them.

  256. @Mr. Anon
    "Tell you all what: I concede Congressmen Celler sucks. Can we move on?"

    No. A problem must be identified before it can be solved. And the roots of our immigration problems have not been identified by most of the public. Most Americans don't even know of the 1965 immigration act, let alone who was behind it.

    The root of your problem is in your genes. There’s nothing to be done about that.

  257. @ben tillman

    The contempt of goodwhites for badwhites is not self-destructive. They don’t recognize badwhites as members of their tribe.
     
    You're being very unclear. What are the "post-WASP Joneses"? And why would they generate and propagate a belief system that is -- yes -- undeniably self-destructive (other than as a result of inluence from its beneficiaries)? (Whether they consider it self-destructive is irrelevant.) And why would you favor that explanation over the much more parsimonious explanation that the system was generated by the people who benefit from it and whose existence predated the "post-WASP Joneses"?

    Thanks for asking.

    What are the “post-WASP Joneses”?

    SWPLs and “conservative” corporate types.

    And why would they generate and propagate a belief system that is — yes — undeniably self-destructive (other than as a result of inluence from its beneficiaries)? (Whether they consider it self-destructive is irrelevant.)

    I could ask why your fellow American citizens who happen to be Jewish don’t count in your own accounting of “self.” My guess would be that you perceive your interests to diverge from theirs’. Same phenomenon.

    And why would you favor that explanation over the much more parsimonious explanation that the system was generated by the people who benefit from it and whose existence predated the “post-WASP Joneses”?

    Because I live among the post-WASP Joneses and have seen it happening my whole life.

    Jews benefit from a solidarity and sense of community that many white goy abandoned long ago. There are Jews among those who promoted/promote that abandonment, but they’re far from alone.

  258. SFG says:
    @Lot

    As for anti-gentilism, anyone who has grown up with a large Jewish population as I have can serve as a witness to the prevailing sense of fear and contempt toward gentiles that many Jews seem to harbor (one that is much more freely discussed among Jews themselves).
     
    So your evidence is "everyone who knows Jews knows this to be true" and "things you heard from Jewish acquaintances"

    That's awfully persuasive!

    Maybe you are feeling a bit of envy and resentment at the single ethnic group most successful at skimming off the best women of your race? I mean, Amy Chua is quite a catch: best selling author, as politically incorrect as she feels like, daughter of one of the leading professors of electrical engineering in the nation, makes a ton of money, raises polite and intelligent children. And in her wikipedia pic, at age 50, she is still smoking hot.

    Dude, I often agree with you, but enough impugning the masculinity of other commenters or their ethnic groups. It’s kind of pointless. It’s like these guys on alt-right blogs who point out how fat feminists are–sure, but does that make them wrong?

    Honestly, neither Jews nor Asians are paragons of masculinity *on average* (never mind your brother who served in the Marines, we are talking means and medians here)–which is precisely why those groups are so successful. Success in an industrialized, capitalist society requires the feminine traits of deceit and false kindness, and you have to sit still in a classroom and study to get into a good college.

    Hell, even in war discipline, organization, and technology count more than muscles.

    What are the macho groups? Blacks and Hispanics. How are they doing?

    Alpha males, beta culture. Beta males, alpha culture. It’s one of the paradoxes of life.

    • Replies: @Desiderius

    How are they doing?
     
    Who's scratching the checks? Who's cashing them?
  259. @5371
    [“Whiteness” is not an ethnicity]

    Yes it is. It originated as an umbrella ethnicity, which very commonly become an ethnicity tout court, as in this case.

    I’d argue ‘white American’ has become its own ethnicity. Back in Europe you have Italians, Irish, etc.

  260. @Mike Sylwester
    I like the Kristallnacht reference because the Jackie-Youth threw stones through the fraternity's windows, shattering the glass. The analogy was:

    * Nazis = Jackie-Youth

    * Jewish synagogues and stores = Fraternity

    ---------

    I like also the pogrom reference. The analogy was:

    * Gentile boy found dead right before Easter = Jackie did not get a weekend date

    * Jewish village deserves to be attacked = Fraternity deserves to be attacked

    ---------

    Cathy Young seems to think that these analogies incite hostility toward Jews. I thought she was smarter than that.

    Young grew up in Moscow, Russia. Her family was allowed to emigrate from there to the USA because the family is Jewish. Now she is spending her time and energy making bogus accusations of anti-Semitism against her fellow American citizens here. Her Jewish resentments are making her behave stupidly.

    I have to say, she’s done quite a bit criticizing feminism, so I hate to pile on her too much.

    • Replies: @Matra
    When you publicly accuse someone of anti-Semitism it's not like having a public disagreement about taxes or school vouchers. Young is trying to destroy Coulter. Young is not powerful enough to do that on her own but by getting it out there that Coulter is an evil bigot she could get others to do it or at least hurt Coulter and, more importantly, the Trump campaign. Even if she's good on other issues - I've seen little evidence of it - Young instigated this and commenters here are responding in kind. As Trump has demonstrated responding to overt hostility in kind is more effective than the gentlemanly way milquetoast conservatives have been doing for generations.
  261. @Gross Terry
    "Even though I am not Jewish, I frequently heard disparaging remarks about non-Jews, especially white Catholics and Asians, from Jewish acquaintances and colleagues particularly while I was in academia"

    a cursory survey of jewish marriage habits suggests you are full of shit.

    They’re not mutually exclusive. In fact, the widespread intermarriage might well be a cause of jealousy among people who decided to sacrifice to marry within the tribe.

    Which means the ‘all Jews hate gentiles’ meme is BS, but the attitudes Twinkie’s describing I will certainly believe in.

  262. SFG says:
    @Luke Ford
    Kevin MacDonald is a giant. I do not know how anyone could read Kevin's book Culture of Critique and not come to the same conclusion. Rabbinical friends of mine have read it and been deeply moved. The entire series is compelling.

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

    Yidden desperately need something like this:

    http://www.lukeford.net/blog/?p=63983

    "Jews for Consistency" monitors the proclamations and actions of Jewish groups in the light of Jewish text and Jewish history.

    We point out when they seek the the opposite things for Jews that they seek for non-Jews. Too often organized Jewry pursues cohesion for Jews (in 2016 Israel's Sephardic Chief Rabbi, in line with the Torah tradition, said non-Jews were not permitted to live in the Jewish state) but multiculturalism for non-Jews (more non-white immigration into white countries, more rights for minorities such as blacks, latinos, gays, and the transgendered, more rights for atheists and less Christianity in the public square, etc). Rarely do these Jewish groups show the same concern for non-Jewish minorities in the Jewish state.

    If unity, strength and cohesion are good for Jews, then these qualities are equally good for gentiles. When you maximize rights and power for minorities, as Jewish activists often try to do in the West, it always comes at the cost of cohesion for the majority. How would you like your country being disunited and fragmented? How would you like the Jewish state to stop being the Jewish state and start being another multicultural hodgepodge of warring groups? Do you want Tibet to stop being Tibetan and Japan to stop being Japanese? So why do America, England, and Australia need to lose their historic identities as Anglo countries?

    We ask Jewish organizations -- such as the ADL (Anti-Defamation League), the SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center), and the SWC (Simon Wiesenthal Center) -- to follow the Golden Rule and to only do unto others as they would want done to Jews and to the Jewish state. If they want to wrap themselves in the mantle of Torah and tolerance, we check their claims because sometimes these groups are running a con.

    I am convert to Orthodox Judaism and a hasid of Kevin MacDonald. And now I must daven and study a page of Talmud.

    Only thing I’d add is it’s often not the same people–the last issue of Race Traitor (‘Treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity’) was about the persecution of the Palestinians, for instance, and hardcore Orthodox types usually don’t spend lots of time going on about the wonders of immigration.

    They intersect in the neocons, who genuinely do preach ‘diversity for America/homogeneity for Israel’. But a lot of liberal Jews will criticize the Palestinians, and a lot of the Orthodox don’t spend their time agitating for more diversity.

  263. SFG says:
    @Johnny Smoggins
    Why do so many Jews change their names to things like "Young", "Sanders" and "Stewart" that are clearly not Jewish? It's almost as though in spite of their "achievements" Jews are ashamed to be seen as Jewish.

    More to the point; regardless of how "libertarian" they might be pretending to be in the moment, have we not seen enough of the malice and destructiveness of Jewish feminism to know to completely ignore what a female Jewish writer has to say about anything? Any potential UVA rape hoax of the future can be avoided if everyone takes my sage advice.

    Assimilation? ‘Cathy Young’ is pretty much a literal translation of ‘Ekaterina Jung’.

    She’s criticized a lot of the more extreme manifestations of feminism, which has always been my #1 peeve with the left. It’s rare to find anyone attacking feminism, honestly.

    Coulter hit her anti-Semitism button and she reacted, but it’s not as if that’s all she’s ever talked about.

    • Agree: PV van der Byl
  264. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    They won’t learn of my Jewish heritage until they are fully grown
     
    If you want your kids to spit on your grave, the best way is to hide something really big from them that they learn of when they are adults (extra points if they find out from someone else, which they will) and which rocks their world. Maybe one of your kids wants to be the grand wizard of the KKK - imagine when he finds out that he is really 1/2 Jewish himself. He'll probably convert and become a rabbi just to spite you.

    On the other hand, if you tell kids the most unimaginable things when they are little ("The Lubavitcher Rebbe was your grandfather") it doesn't bother them one bit because the world that they are presented with seems "normal" to them no matter how strange it is to anyone else.

    I assume that you must not have any relationship with you parents, siblings or any other blood relatives? If you are going to keep this secret, it wouldn't do to attend Cousin Eddie's bar mitzvah.

    To be a self hating anything, including a self-hating Jew, is a sad thing. Get some therapy and learn to be comfortable in your own skin.

    Maybe one of your kids wants to be the grand wizard of the KKK – imagine when he finds out that he is really 1/2 Jewish himself.

    Frank Collin, onetime leader of a Nazi-faction party in Chicago and who is famous for declaring his intention to march on Skokie back in the late 70’s, had a father whose family name was Cohen, changed to Collin. He was aware of it but denied it. Strange stuff happens.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    This is actually has happened more than you might think, also in right wing movements in E. Europe. The Nazis believed (and in this they were probably not wrong) that Jews would rise to the top of any organization that does not take active measures to bar them. This makes sense given the gap in IQ, especially verbal IQ.

    The cream of the (1/2) Jewish crop doesn't usually look for work in the leadership of right wing anti-Semitic organizations, but compared to the toothless dimwits that form the bulk of the membership, even an average mischling is a rocket scientist.
  265. I think we should instead be using the term “antijaphetic” when we are discussing anti-white bias among some Jews. (Which is often specifically what we are talking about – not bias against all non-Jews in general, but against white Gentiles)*. Not only does it parallel the term “antisemitic” (antisemitic = anti-Jewish, who are descendants of Shem, antijaphetic = anti-white Gentiles, who are descendants of Japheth).

    • Replies: @SFG
    I like it, but if I used it, nobody would have any clue what I was talking about.
  266. SFG says:
    @Jewish Conservative Race Realist
    I agree with you Bill.

    I used to think it would be possible to remain a patriot (of America) and a Jew at the same time. After all, there are American Catholics who are patriots of America and not Ireland or Italy or some other Catholic nation. For me personally, it's never been difficult to do this at all. Of course I love America more than Israel. America is where my forefathers have lived for almost two centuries. Israel is nothing to me.

    But Jewish activism in this country is burning every possible bridge with patriots, and I don't really see how this gets walked back anymore. Due to this invidious rhetoric from my co-ethnics, I'm sadly coming to the conclusion that the only viable options for Jewish diaspora in America are complete assimilation (reject entirely Jewish identity and blend into Stale Pale America) or emigration. Split loyalty and "dual" loyalty are bogus ideas. As I learned from Sailer on this very blog, politics is primarily about Whose Side Are You On. Loyalty comes in a strict hierarchy and at some point each person is called upon to declare, stand, and deliver.

    Any Jew who advocates open borders for their home country and ethnic preservation policies for Israel should be ostracized, silenced, or deported to Israel, in that order. The insanity has got to end.

    For me personally, Jewish identity is nothing at all compared to White American identity. But after spending so much time in alt-right circles, I can't deny that there's really something to the Jewish ethnocentrism case. (With many notable exceptions. Many great men of the Right are Jewish or Jewish ethnicity.)

    For me, I've given up on Jewish identity completely. It's easy for me since I'm not a believer. My wife is a believing Christian, and my kids are coming up Christian. They won't learn of my Jewish heritage until they are fully grown because I don't want to open the door to childhood self-reimagining as a poor oppressed Jew. Nobody has it better than the Jews in this country. They have all the advantages of high status and few of the disadvantages of being Pale and Stale. The only dignified disposition of Jewish Americans towards the USA is gratitude and service.

    I don’t know if I’d go lying to your kids–as Jack D said, they might join the alt-right and find an unpleasant surprise if someone goes digging. Besides, you don’t want to create neuroses (especially if you don’t want them acting too Jewish 😉 ). Just tell them, hey, you’re Christian, teach them about European and American history, and let them decide the rest. Ultimately they’ll do what they want anyway.

    I have been thinking about what you said a lot, though. It seems like you either go Reform/Conservative, and swallow all this left-wing SJW crap, or Orthodox, and have to go live in one of 3 areas of the country that are really expensive and follow a bunch of rules useful for desert nomads 2000 years ago. The neocons actually had a nice ‘secular right-wing’ option, but then they went and started a war with Iraq for the benefit of Israel.

    I’d say, to any pro-white Jew reading this, you have 2 options. If you live near NYC, you can find a right-wing Jew who agrees with you and agree to disagree on immigration. If you don’t, just find a suitable denomination and convert, or you can be the weird right-wing guy in your temple. If you really want to get involved in activism, find a group like AmRen that tolerates your ancestry. Hey, it’s better than being conservative and black.

    • Replies: @Luke Ford
    In Jewish life, it seems like either you are Orthodox or you are marching for transgender rights.
    , @Jewish Conservative Race Realist
    Hey, I'd never lie to them. I just wouldn't bring it up. But I'll consider your words too. Maybe just mention it in passing and downplay it is the best.

    "It seems like you either go Reform/Conservative, and swallow all this left-wing SJW crap, or Orthodox, and have to go live in one of 3 areas of the country that are really expensive and follow a bunch of rules useful for desert nomads 2000 years ago."

    If you want to hold onto Judaism, I do think those are the main options in the US. Israel is also an option. I do know some other straight-laced conservative Jews, but it's not so common.

    "Find a denomination and convert" is really the best plan for those who don't actually have faith in the religion. And these "Jews without religion" are doing that in record numbers, too. (58% of American Jews who got married in the last decade did so to a non-Jew, of those that are intermarried, only 20% say they will raise their kids in the Jewish tradition: http://www.pewforum.org/2013/10/01/jewish-american-beliefs-attitudes-culture-survey/. [The 27% who say they'll raise their kids partly in the Jewish tradition hardly count, because really they're almost all just secularists who think it's cool to have a menorah and a Christmas tree every year. Their kids are not going to have a Jewish identity when they grow up and are not going to have much of a mate-selection bias towards Jews, so they'll effectively boil out of the Jewish population.] )

    One theory I have about why those identifying as Jewish are disproportionately leftist culti-marxists is that the ones who don't see identity politics as a candidate for the next Olympic sport are just converting and assimilating; no megaphones or sandwich boards are involved in that process, and such stories don't generate clickbait for alt-right rage porn sites, so the alt-rightosphere never gets exposed.
    , @Bill P

    I don’t know if I’d go lying to your kids–as Jack D said, they might join the alt-right and find an unpleasant surprise if someone goes digging. Besides, you don’t want to create neuroses (especially if you don’t want them acting too Jewish ;) ). Just tell them, hey, you’re Christian, teach them about European and American history, and let them decide the rest. Ultimately they’ll do what they want anyway.
     
    I don't know why it's such a struggle for Christians to tell their kids they have Jewish ancestry.

    Go back far enough and I have 100% pagan ancestry (as far as I know -- all the ancestors I know of come from the Atlantic fringe where Jews seldom bothered to go), and here I am raised Catholic and thereby partially a product of Jewish priests and rabbis who lived 2,500 years ago. Doesn't that make me half Jewish or something like that? Of course I know Jews disagree with the New Covenant, but you get my point.

    Having some Hebrew ancestry can be - and often is - a point of pride for Christians. This is why I'm convinced that the conflict between European Christians and Jews is 90% religious and only 10% racial if that. But then again, religion and race are tied up in a lot of ways. It's complicated...
  267. @Gabriel M
    Ann Coulter is not an anti-Semite and she doesn't pander to anti-Semites.

    Steve Sailer, on the other hand, really does pander to anti-Semites and, in fact, it seems to be a pretty central part of his business model because he, without fail, ramps it up in line with his quarterly fundraisers.

    I was reading some old Lawrence Auster stuff the other day. He exemplified the ability the criticize Jews for what the do wrong, both as individuals and as a group, without dabbling in unhinged anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and demented anti-Zionism. Similarly he was able to criticize blacks and other protected minorities without dabbling in racist trash. He ceaselessly warned about the gutter Richard Spencer and others were leading the anti multicultural right into.

    Unfortunately, it was to no avail. Any remotely honest person knows the alt-right is up to its neck in filth at this point. Any sensible person knows that its all going to blow up in your face before too long. You made your pact with the devil, laughing about it is not going to make it go away.

    As Tom Sunic has pointed out, the biggest problem with the alt right is narcissism and low-level sociopathy. Lawrence Auster himself was guilty of this in the way he constantly rubbed people up the wrong way, even when they were 80 percent in agreement with him.

    • Replies: @rvg
    One thing I wonder, what is the typical psychological profile of a WN female, because it is very unlikely that the typical female would lean WN.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "As Tom Sunic has pointed out, the biggest problem with the alt right is narcissism and low-level sociopathy."

    As opposed to what? The narcissism and high-level sociopathy of people like Bryan Caplan?
  268. @Cagey Beast
    ((Jon Stewart)) shows his sour and nasty view of America in this clip on Trump: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJnbcn7mZ14

    At the 9min mark: "Someone needs to tell the voters they're a*****s. Someone needs to tell them it's not okay to have nostalgia for the 'Mad Men' society and think that kind of ignorance is virtue" He goes on to the "Happy Holidays", "war on Christmas" thing a minute or so later. Then he's asking "when was America great? When was this time ...?"

    The whole talk with Axelrod is at the University of Chicago YouTube account. ((Stewart)) is clearly unhappy with the Obama administration.

    ” … take it up with the Age of Reason, … all men are created equal, thats f***ed the whole thing up.”

    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    Yes, he uses swearing throughout his talk to paper over his lack of an argument. He also can't get over the fact that it's "two Jews" (himself and Alexrod) talking in a church. Vile and lowbrow, despite being one of the most fortunate people on earth.
  269. @Zachary Latif
    Gentile is the right word to use for a Westerner, both secular & Christian, who is traditional heritage as opposed to Semitic (Jewish or Muslim).

    Cathy has lost all my respect when she tries to deny Steve's role in the Rolling Stone story (private discussion is not public).

    The evidence is kind of circumstantial, though I do think Steve called it to Richard’s attention as well.

  270. @Virgínia Dare
    Reb Luke: what do you think of the reception of MacDonald's ideas by the reverend Dr David Duke? MacDonald seems to like Duke's ideas, since he publishes him in OccidentalObserver.
    Am I wrong to think that Duke is an antisemite?
    Having read "A people that shall dwell alone" I think MacDonald cherry picks examples from jewish history to support a conclusion he has already reached. No sane person reading the Tanakh could seriously think that the real God of the jewish people is their gene pool.

    David Duke is an advocate for whites. Because it is rare that white cohesion and Jewish strength go together, he understandably has many negative views of Jews. I find it hard to listen to Duke because his distaste for Jews is so intense. By comparison, because he is so dry and scholarly, Kevin MacDonald is easier for me to hear.

    It would be weird for white nationalists to not hate Jews, just as it would be weird for Palestinians or Arabs or Muslims not to have many negative views of Jews due to the establishment of a Jewish state on a land they regard as their land, just as it would be weird for a Jew versed in Jewish history not to have negative views of Christianity and Islam.

    Different groups have different interests. If you love your people you will likely hate your people’s enemies.

    There’s no good group or bad group in the universe (unless you have a particular faith and there’s no point arguing over faith). There’s just different groups, each one regarding itself as the center of the universe, competing with each other for scarce resources.

    • Replies: @rvg
    I think a good way for WNs to get more female supporters will be to propose an alternating leadership between a man and a woman in a WN state, say you will have a male leader for 5 year, and a female leader for 5 years, and so on and so forth, sort of how in Lebanon the President has to be Christian while the prime minister has to be Muslim.
  271. SFG says:
    @biz
    How can so many people here, presumably with a straight face, accuse a group which currently has a 70% intermarriage rate of acting as an enthocentric block?

    Because groups are heterogeneous. 70% of Jews are out marrying Whites and Asians. The other 30% work in opinion journalism and churn out articles like this.

    (Joke–there is overlap.)

    I exaggerate, of course, but I suspect a lot of this is actually a response to intermarriage–they think the tribe will be gone in 50 years, leaving only larger noses among the upper middle class in the Northeast, so they go looking for threats.

  272. @David F.
    In my experience most Jews simply can't grasp the concept of gentiles victimized by Jews. *A priori*, gentiles always have secure, unshakable power to oppress Jews; and Jews are always the struggling underdog and justified in taking any advantage against their opponents.

    Showing evidence doesn't make a difference. Erdley is Jewish; therefore by definition she is punching up.

    I don’t know, there are all those ‘Jewish Voice for Peace’ guys going on about the Palestinians.

  273. SFG says:
    @kaganovitch
    Somewhat OT, it looks like the Apostle Steve's "Mission to the Jews" is starting to bear fruit;

    https://pjmedia.com/spengler/2016/05/11/alien-vs-predator/?singlepage=true

    It’s like these low-probability/high-payoff investments the millionaires do–it probably won’t work, but if it does, all our problems are over. Buckley corrupted the neocons and got them on America’s side for about 40 years–and, hey, anticommunism was OK again. ‘Turn’ enough Jews to the white side and the media will gain a Strange New Respect for populism.

    I’m not saying he’ll succeed, but he might as well try.

  274. @Svigor
    It's funny, but, the Jews' frequent refrain of "look how often we're intermarrying" actually reveals their particularism. Whites don't notice so-called "intermarriage" at all. It's their norm. They don't even think to bring it up, and they don't track its frequency (and if they do it's usually on Jews' behalf!). That this is not so for Jews reveals that they're concerned about it in a way that whites are not.

    Actually, that’s not true–whites definitely notice when a white person marries someone who isn’t white, and there are statistics on marriages between races. Even with Asians people joke about aspects of it like the differential gender intermarriage rates.

    Other white subgroups like Italian, Irish, etc. may not.

  275. @Steve Sailer
    Thanks. Sounds useful.

    For example, nerdishness / autism spectrum / Asperger's thinking was hypocognized in the 20th Century and is becoming hypercognized in the 21st Century.

    Things that I used to have difficulty recognizing, that are now instantaneous, thanks to hypercognition: Fake breasts, botoxed brows, 50ish transgendered former males.

  276. rvg says:
    @Luke Ford
    David Duke is an advocate for whites. Because it is rare that white cohesion and Jewish strength go together, he understandably has many negative views of Jews. I find it hard to listen to Duke because his distaste for Jews is so intense. By comparison, because he is so dry and scholarly, Kevin MacDonald is easier for me to hear.

    It would be weird for white nationalists to not hate Jews, just as it would be weird for Palestinians or Arabs or Muslims not to have many negative views of Jews due to the establishment of a Jewish state on a land they regard as their land, just as it would be weird for a Jew versed in Jewish history not to have negative views of Christianity and Islam.

    Different groups have different interests. If you love your people you will likely hate your people's enemies.

    There's no good group or bad group in the universe (unless you have a particular faith and there's no point arguing over faith). There's just different groups, each one regarding itself as the center of the universe, competing with each other for scarce resources.

    I think a good way for WNs to get more female supporters will be to propose an alternating leadership between a man and a woman in a WN state, say you will have a male leader for 5 year, and a female leader for 5 years, and so on and so forth, sort of how in Lebanon the President has to be Christian while the prime minister has to be Muslim.

  277. SFG says:
    @Smitty
    I now view posts like the above as iSteve's version of "fan service." There is good stuff routinely posted here in the spirit of unique, candid and topical food for thought. And then there's vain feuding with random verbiage artists Steve logically must consider to be his peer group, evidently pleasing a key slice of loyal readers wetting themselves in excitement to hiss in unison at the hook-schnozzed Bum Of The Week. There's a similar vibe here to cheering from the curb in the outlaw street racing scene, except that crowd isn't as heavily East Asian... N.B. Steve's one of the few second-tier politibloggers -- famous but not TV famous as of yet -- known for contemplating local crime stories and Patch.com-level village anecdotes: "curious" or egotistical? Well who says he can't be both. Looking forward to how your neighbor isn't tending to his lawn care and a report that the Zoroastrian family across the street refused to put out Halloween candy this year

    Yeah, I was always trying to figure out if the Jew stuff goes up when he’s asking for money or when he’s not asking for money. Other commenters seem to have figured out it’s the first. I find it hard to believe a guy would be that anti-semitic and choose to live in LA and review movies.

    Having aged past my prime myself, I’ve come to conclude a man may have to do many undesirable things to make a living. Of course the Jewish fraction of the commentariat could start sending larger checks… 😉

  278. SFG says:
    @Frau Katze
    Could you elaborate on "badwhites" and "goodwhites"? I'm not quite sure what it means but it sounds promising.

    I think it started with our esteemed host and may have been a reference to the Saberhagen ‘berserker’ series where ‘goodlife’ serve the evil humanity-destroying machines, but ‘goodwhites’ are SWPL whites who hate their whiteness, whereas ‘badwhites’ are rednecks or similar ‘evil whites’ who are proud of their roots. I think.

  279. SFG says:
    @riches
    "censor abusive comments about Jews yet allow offensive comments about the Irish"

    Good luck with your inquiries, sincerity and groveling. You can throw in donating too, believe it or not. I've tried 'em all.

    I think slur names of most European nationalities are allowed—even encouraged—in the comments. (The one that applies to my heritage makes frequent appearances.)

    Just stay away from the common one for Jews. Or African-Americans.

    From what I understand, if you leave slurs about Jews or blacks in, you get a lot of illiterate Nazi (‘alt-right’ is too generous) commenters.

    Given the general tone of the comments, all Steve is doing is making you clean up your language, which usually results in more cogent arguments. Most people here can complete sentences. The tone of the comments is generally not philosemitic, and while Jews have a large and vocal minority here, almost nobody defends blacks.

  280. Most readers here would find common cause on many social issues with Cathy Young. I disagree with her overall take on the alt-right and agree she was unfairly dismissive of Sailer, but she doesn’t warrant the level of hostility she’s getting here.

  281. @Alec Leamas
    Well, whether it is adaptive or maladaptive for goodwhites depends upon whether they see themselves as the rulers of Brazil North when it finally arrives (i.e., as in Central and South American regimes) or rather as tax cattle who won't be allowed to have nice things and who will from time to time suffer partial purges and consistent harassment and abuse (as in the Chinese merchant classes in South East Asia). It's a risky bet - the upside of freezing themselves and their progeny in a ruling class impervious to competitive forces from the badwhites via meritocratic institutions, while the downside is simply potentially disastrous for themselves and their progeny.

    If one believes that the latter is a more likely outcome, and that present trends make it inevitable without a course correction in the present, it is maladaptive to status signal. If the former outcome, it is a ruthless form of competition elimination.

    Agree 100%. They think the former–they’ll assimilate everyone into a multicultural utopia, and being superior they and their progeny will rise to the top. (Blue-collar guy in Alabama? Too bad.)

    I’m betting on the latter.

  282. @unpc downunder
    As Tom Sunic has pointed out, the biggest problem with the alt right is narcissism and low-level sociopathy. Lawrence Auster himself was guilty of this in the way he constantly rubbed people up the wrong way, even when they were 80 percent in agreement with him.

    One thing I wonder, what is the typical psychological profile of a WN female, because it is very unlikely that the typical female would lean WN.

  283. @Chrisnonymous
    You're usually one of the sanest and most intelligent commenters on iSteve, but you've gone off your rocker.

    Everyone has buttons. They can lead to silly behavior if pressed, like posting 20 comments on a thread that’s already reached 200.

  284. @Bhroham
    As a Londoner, his religion does not seem to be especially politically relevant to him, so I don't expect it to be very relevant to his tenure, except from a generalised 'diversity' standpoint. British 'political muslims' seem to dislike him for ignoring or going against their treasured causes (e.g. Palestine). See for example: http://5pillarsuk.com/2016/05/04/london-will-shortly-get-a-muslim-mayor-but-i-cant-find-a-muslim-who-cares/

    “British ‘political muslims’ seem to dislike him”

    It hardly matters. Extreme success brings its own authenticity. Obama gets to define what’s authentically black, not Bobby Rush. Similarly, Sadiq Khan will get a chance to define what’s compatible with being a good British Muslim.

    Which is very much a good thing.

  285. @Glaivester
    I think we should instead be using the term "antijaphetic" when we are discussing anti-white bias among some Jews. (Which is often specifically what we are talking about - not bias against all non-Jews in general, but against white Gentiles)*. Not only does it parallel the term "antisemitic" (antisemitic = anti-Jewish, who are descendants of Shem, antijaphetic = anti-white Gentiles, who are descendants of Japheth).

    I like it, but if I used it, nobody would have any clue what I was talking about.

    • Replies: @Glaivester
    They won't if you have that attitude. ;)
  286. @Jack D

    Tell you all what: I concede Congressmen Celler sucks. Can we move on?
     
    The irony here is that Steve is always complaining about how for the left , 1965 was just yesterday and not two generations ago. Apparently, for some on the right, Congressman Celler has just stepped off the House floor even though he has been out of office since 1973.

    Celler by the way had an incredible life - he was first elected to Congress during the election of 1922 and made his first important speech on the House floor during consideration of Immigration Act. The Immigration Act of 1924.

    “Celler by the way had an incredible life – he was first elected to Congress during the election of 1922 and made his first important speech on the House floor during consideration of Immigration Act. The Immigration Act of 1924.”

    Who cares how incredible his life was? He played a key role in transforming the United States into an overpopulated, multicultural hell dominated by plutocrats and oligarchs. People try to excuse this by saying he and other proponents of higher immigration at the time were really only trying make sure Jews and other Europeans (such as the aforementioned Irish) could more easily immigrate to the US, but I suspect spite played a major role. When you open the gates to the entire world beyond Europe, what do you expect to happen? He was a great, incredible, villain (much worse than Ted Kennedy), and I hope history will one day remember him as such.

  287. @SFG
    I like it, but if I used it, nobody would have any clue what I was talking about.

    They won’t if you have that attitude. 😉

    • Replies: @SFG
    I'm famously pessimistic. But OK.
  288. @SFG
    I don't know if I'd go lying to your kids--as Jack D said, they might join the alt-right and find an unpleasant surprise if someone goes digging. Besides, you don't want to create neuroses (especially if you don't want them acting too Jewish ;) ). Just tell them, hey, you're Christian, teach them about European and American history, and let them decide the rest. Ultimately they'll do what they want anyway.

    I have been thinking about what you said a lot, though. It seems like you either go Reform/Conservative, and swallow all this left-wing SJW crap, or Orthodox, and have to go live in one of 3 areas of the country that are really expensive and follow a bunch of rules useful for desert nomads 2000 years ago. The neocons actually had a nice 'secular right-wing' option, but then they went and started a war with Iraq for the benefit of Israel.

    I'd say, to any pro-white Jew reading this, you have 2 options. If you live near NYC, you can find a right-wing Jew who agrees with you and agree to disagree on immigration. If you don't, just find a suitable denomination and convert, or you can be the weird right-wing guy in your temple. If you really want to get involved in activism, find a group like AmRen that tolerates your ancestry. Hey, it's better than being conservative and black.

    In Jewish life, it seems like either you are Orthodox or you are marching for transgender rights.

    • Replies: @SFG
    Right. I wonder how many people just opt out? How much of intermarriage is driven by moderately-conservative Jewish guys who don't want to hear lectures on feminism all day? Any clue?

    I suspect a lot of the Jews 'on our side' just don't make a lot of noise about being Jewish and do whatever else is required. Heck, Drudge has been beating the drum for Trump this whole time.

  289. @Glaivester
    They won't if you have that attitude. ;)

    I’m famously pessimistic. But OK.

  290. Actually, that’s not true–whites definitely notice when a white person marries someone who isn’t white, and there are statistics on marriages between races. Even with Asians people joke about aspects of it like the differential gender intermarriage rates.

    Other white subgroups like Italian, Irish, etc. may not.

    Actually, it is. What Jews call “intermarriage” (white marrying white), whites call “marriage.” That’s the oranges to oranges comparison, and the one I was making. Interracial marriage and “intermarriage” are apples and oranges in this context.

    • Replies: @iSteveFan
    Good point. I keep hearing about the increasing number of Jews intermarrying. But most of the intermarrying I see are white Jews marrying white Europeans, who increasingly seem to be converting to Judaism.

    When whites refer to intermarriage it generally means marrying someone of another race. I suppose a hundred years ago white ethnics tended to marry others of their same ethnic background. But now we don't even seem to notice when an ethnic German marries a Englishman or a Scot. In fact most of us Europeans (including yours truly) are European mutts.

    Jews seem to be getting all worked up over an issue other Europeans have been dealing with for the past century. I wonder how'd they react if their intermarriages where interracial instead. They probably give George Wallace a run for his money.

    , @Corvinus
    What "true whites" call marriage between a "white" and a "nonwhite" is miscegenation, which is deemed "anti-white".

    Which is truly "whack", as dey call it in da hood.
  291. @SFG
    I have to say, she's done quite a bit criticizing feminism, so I hate to pile on her too much.

    When you publicly accuse someone of anti-Semitism it’s not like having a public disagreement about taxes or school vouchers. Young is trying to destroy Coulter. Young is not powerful enough to do that on her own but by getting it out there that Coulter is an evil bigot she could get others to do it or at least hurt Coulter and, more importantly, the Trump campaign. Even if she’s good on other issues – I’ve seen little evidence of it – Young instigated this and commenters here are responding in kind. As Trump has demonstrated responding to overt hostility in kind is more effective than the gentlemanly way milquetoast conservatives have been doing for generations.

    • Replies: @SFG
    I'm not all that inclined to go to bat for Young either--I don't really care that much, I just didn't get to post on here all day. I did enjoy some of the stuff she wrote on feminism, and she hadn't written anything antijaphetic before.

    I have my doubts Coulter cares that much--she's staked out a position for herself as 'attractive woman who says outrageous things' (Sarah Silverman did as much, ironically), and there's enough alt-right buzz going she can support herself off their money now. Whether it's going to burn her long-term or not depends a lot on what happens after November.

  292. SFG says:
    @Matra
    When you publicly accuse someone of anti-Semitism it's not like having a public disagreement about taxes or school vouchers. Young is trying to destroy Coulter. Young is not powerful enough to do that on her own but by getting it out there that Coulter is an evil bigot she could get others to do it or at least hurt Coulter and, more importantly, the Trump campaign. Even if she's good on other issues - I've seen little evidence of it - Young instigated this and commenters here are responding in kind. As Trump has demonstrated responding to overt hostility in kind is more effective than the gentlemanly way milquetoast conservatives have been doing for generations.

    I’m not all that inclined to go to bat for Young either–I don’t really care that much, I just didn’t get to post on here all day. I did enjoy some of the stuff she wrote on feminism, and she hadn’t written anything antijaphetic before.

    I have my doubts Coulter cares that much–she’s staked out a position for herself as ‘attractive woman who says outrageous things’ (Sarah Silverman did as much, ironically), and there’s enough alt-right buzz going she can support herself off their money now. Whether it’s going to burn her long-term or not depends a lot on what happens after November.

    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    It's not gonna burn her. If National Review supposedly "banned" her for her comments post-9/11 and that didn't hurt her earning ability, then nothing will. She wisely saw that Trump's candidacy was something larger than anything in at least 20 yrs and got on board from day one. She also wisely gave a copy of her book to Trump.

    Also, Ann has probably met Trump on a few occasions in the past since they were at one time both part of the GOP establishment so the likelihood increases that they knew one another before last yr.

    Regarding Ann, the idea that she's well off, is actually a good point inadvertently backed into.

    I mean, she lives in three areas; NY; CA; and FL. How exactly is that possible? Just from book royalties; syndicated column; and occasional speaking appearances? It really doesn't seem like it would be THAT kind of money. For instance, Steve once mentioned that Malcolm Gladwell makes around 40k per speaking appearance. Ann Coulter doesn't make anywhere near that amount for the occasional college speaking appearance, does she?

    Just asking. How exactly does someone make enough money to afford that kind of lifestyle? She doesn't work in Hollywood, and she's not on the network news. Conservative author Michelle Malkin has a successful national column and roughly the same career trajectory as Ann Coulter yet she doesn't have three living areas and resides in Colorado Springs. Something else must be going on.

  293. @AndrewR
    Celler was a lowly US Rep. Hart and Kennedy were Senators and Kennedy was arguably already the most well-known person in Congress.

    It's also notable that Celler's single goy grandparent was Catholic.

    Few would accuse me of philosemetism but I do not think Coulter's omission was terribly egregious.

    Celler was a lowly US Rep. Hart and Kennedy were Senators and Kennedy was arguably already the most well-known person in Congress.

    First, no Senator can introduce legislation into the House. It takes a Representative to do that. Second,Celler was the author. In fact Celler’s problem was that he was not a Senator and therefore needed someone to introduce HIS bill into the Senate. This is where Hart came in.

    There is no dispute Teddy spoke on its behalf. But Celler was the immigration expert having spent forty years of his career focusing on this issue. He became an immigrationist after the 1924 Act passed and finally got his victory in 1965.

    Think of a modern analogy involving Marco Rubio and Chuck Schumer. Marco headlined the ‘Gang of 8’ bill in the Senate. But does anyone doubt Chuck Schumer was the brains behind it? As Steve pointed out at the time, Schumer was the guy with the perfect SAT and Marco was the guy who went to the now defunct Tarkio College. Chuck was smart enough to use Marco as the face of the bill. And I suppose had it passed, Ann would be calling it ‘Marco’s immigration act’, even though we all know Chuck wrote it.

  294. @AndrewR
    Celler was a lowly US Rep. Hart and Kennedy were Senators and Kennedy was arguably already the most well-known person in Congress.

    It's also notable that Celler's single goy grandparent was Catholic.

    Few would accuse me of philosemetism but I do not think Coulter's omission was terribly egregious.

    In 1965, Ted Kennedy was nowhere near the most well known person in Congress. His older brother Robert Kennedy had just been elected as US Senator from NY in 1964. There were also Senators Barry Goldwater (who had just run for president in ’64); Strom Thurmond of SC; Albert Gore, Sr of TN; etc.

    Ted Kennedy had been in the US Senate for all of three yrs and had just been elected to his first full term, so no, he was nowhere near the elite names in all of Congress in 1965.

  295. @Lot
    The evidence for Coulter's supposed antisemitism is extremely thin.

    She never "touted" Radix, she retweeted a tweet that was anti-NRO that had a Radix hashtag, one of several.

    I mean, it was not even a link, it was a retweet of a hashtag mention!

    Radix site is certainly antisemitic, but honestly the various alt-right sites like Radix that post ambitious, boring, long-winded articles kind of blur together for me, and quite likely Ann as well.

    The second retweet had nothing to do whatsoever with Jews, but a joke about how Hillary's anti-Trump ad makes Trump look really good. If I had twitter I'd retweet it myself, it was funny! Is she supposed to do a background check on everyone she retweets?

    Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile, and brings disrepute onto the site and its many fine authors. However, he's one of dozens of authors, and they run maybe one thing a year from him on average. He's not even in the top 50 or so authors there, and he is not listed on the main directory of authors.

    Balance this thin evidence against the fact that Ann (1) is a strong supporter of Israel (2) retweets Mickey Kaus about 20 times more often than any supposed anti-semite (3) supports Trump and his objectively pro-jewish policies, and calling her anti-semitic is simply slander.

    Finally, we have Ann affection for supposed anti-semite Steve. The evidence for this is a single quote, which is indeed pretty ugly and antisemitic:

    Or in the case of the wealthiest, most powerful group, they use their influence over the media to instill [insecurity] in their children and to depress, demoralize, and divide other groups` children.
     

    This and a sparse number of other flirtations with MacDonald-style antisemitism, if they were the main theme of Steve's rather voluminous writing about Jews, could indeed justify the label. But they are not very typical at all. At most they show Steve is at times anti-semitism-curious. Is Ann supposed to boycott him now for that or else be guilty by association?

    Kevin MacDonald cracked our code. We’re f***ed. We have to make a deal.

    • Replies: @SFG
    I'd like to see the leadership make a deal too, but Kevin MacDonald is not going to usher in an American Holocaust. The country as a whole just isn't antisemitic enough, dictatorial powers are harder to assume with Congress fighting the President, and Americans don't follow orders as well as Germans, for better or worse.
  296. @Svigor

    Actually, that’s not true–whites definitely notice when a white person marries someone who isn’t white, and there are statistics on marriages between races. Even with Asians people joke about aspects of it like the differential gender intermarriage rates.

    Other white subgroups like Italian, Irish, etc. may not.
     
    Actually, it is. What Jews call "intermarriage" (white marrying white), whites call "marriage." That's the oranges to oranges comparison, and the one I was making. Interracial marriage and "intermarriage" are apples and oranges in this context.

    Good point. I keep hearing about the increasing number of Jews intermarrying. But most of the intermarrying I see are white Jews marrying white Europeans, who increasingly seem to be converting to Judaism.

    When whites refer to intermarriage it generally means marrying someone of another race. I suppose a hundred years ago white ethnics tended to marry others of their same ethnic background. But now we don’t even seem to notice when an ethnic German marries a Englishman or a Scot. In fact most of us Europeans (including yours truly) are European mutts.

    Jews seem to be getting all worked up over an issue other Europeans have been dealing with for the past century. I wonder how’d they react if their intermarriages where interracial instead. They probably give George Wallace a run for his money.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    No, some of the Jewish intermarriages involve Asians (e.g. Amy Chua-Jed Rubenfeld) and, less often, blacks (e.g. Mark Ndesandjo).
  297. @SFG
    I'm not all that inclined to go to bat for Young either--I don't really care that much, I just didn't get to post on here all day. I did enjoy some of the stuff she wrote on feminism, and she hadn't written anything antijaphetic before.

    I have my doubts Coulter cares that much--she's staked out a position for herself as 'attractive woman who says outrageous things' (Sarah Silverman did as much, ironically), and there's enough alt-right buzz going she can support herself off their money now. Whether it's going to burn her long-term or not depends a lot on what happens after November.

    It’s not gonna burn her. If National Review supposedly “banned” her for her comments post-9/11 and that didn’t hurt her earning ability, then nothing will. She wisely saw that Trump’s candidacy was something larger than anything in at least 20 yrs and got on board from day one. She also wisely gave a copy of her book to Trump.

    Also, Ann has probably met Trump on a few occasions in the past since they were at one time both part of the GOP establishment so the likelihood increases that they knew one another before last yr.

    Regarding Ann, the idea that she’s well off, is actually a good point inadvertently backed into.

    I mean, she lives in three areas; NY; CA; and FL. How exactly is that possible? Just from book royalties; syndicated column; and occasional speaking appearances? It really doesn’t seem like it would be THAT kind of money. For instance, Steve once mentioned that Malcolm Gladwell makes around 40k per speaking appearance. Ann Coulter doesn’t make anywhere near that amount for the occasional college speaking appearance, does she?

    Just asking. How exactly does someone make enough money to afford that kind of lifestyle? She doesn’t work in Hollywood, and she’s not on the network news. Conservative author Michelle Malkin has a successful national column and roughly the same career trajectory as Ann Coulter yet she doesn’t have three living areas and resides in Colorado Springs. Something else must be going on.

    • Replies: @Boomstick
    She's written a many best sellers and sold at least three million books. As I understand it royalties run around 5-10%; she may get more since she's a reliable seller and that probably commands a premium. That's at least a few million in royalties alone. The speaking circuit seems relatively lucrative.

    I think the syndicated columns pay next to nothing. The columns basically act as a publicity platform.
    , @SFG
    She's made quite a bit off her books, but the big thing is she's old money.
  298. @unpc downunder
    As Tom Sunic has pointed out, the biggest problem with the alt right is narcissism and low-level sociopathy. Lawrence Auster himself was guilty of this in the way he constantly rubbed people up the wrong way, even when they were 80 percent in agreement with him.

    “As Tom Sunic has pointed out, the biggest problem with the alt right is narcissism and low-level sociopathy.”

    As opposed to what? The narcissism and high-level sociopathy of people like Bryan Caplan?

  299. “In 1965, Ted Kennedy was nowhere near the most well known person in Congress. ”

    He was not the most influential Senator, but it is entirely possible that he was one of the best known men in Congress. He was the brother of a recent President and of an Attorney General and Senator.

    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    That's not what was said. In 1965, he was not the most famous person in Congress. Now by 1970, post Chappaquiddik and with the death of his older brother, certainly the case can be made that from then on he was the most well known person nationally in the Senate if not all of Congress. But definitely not in Congress or the Senate in 1965 or perhaps during his first term.

    I mean, former FL Gov. Jeb! is the brother of a recent president and his dad was president. How'd that work out for him getting to the GOP nomination?

  300. @SFG
    I don't know if I'd go lying to your kids--as Jack D said, they might join the alt-right and find an unpleasant surprise if someone goes digging. Besides, you don't want to create neuroses (especially if you don't want them acting too Jewish ;) ). Just tell them, hey, you're Christian, teach them about European and American history, and let them decide the rest. Ultimately they'll do what they want anyway.

    I have been thinking about what you said a lot, though. It seems like you either go Reform/Conservative, and swallow all this left-wing SJW crap, or Orthodox, and have to go live in one of 3 areas of the country that are really expensive and follow a bunch of rules useful for desert nomads 2000 years ago. The neocons actually had a nice 'secular right-wing' option, but then they went and started a war with Iraq for the benefit of Israel.

    I'd say, to any pro-white Jew reading this, you have 2 options. If you live near NYC, you can find a right-wing Jew who agrees with you and agree to disagree on immigration. If you don't, just find a suitable denomination and convert, or you can be the weird right-wing guy in your temple. If you really want to get involved in activism, find a group like AmRen that tolerates your ancestry. Hey, it's better than being conservative and black.

    Hey, I’d never lie to them. I just wouldn’t bring it up. But I’ll consider your words too. Maybe just mention it in passing and downplay it is the best.

    “It seems like you either go Reform/Conservative, and swallow all this left-wing SJW crap, or Orthodox, and have to go live in one of 3 areas of the country that are really expensive and follow a bunch of rules useful for desert nomads 2000 years ago.”

    If you want to hold onto Judaism, I do think those are the main options in the US. Israel is also an option. I do know some other straight-laced conservative Jews, but it’s not so common.

    “Find a denomination and convert” is really the best plan for those who don’t actually have faith in the religion. And these “Jews without religion” are doing that in record numbers, too. (58% of American Jews who got married in the last decade did so to a non-Jew, of those that are intermarried, only 20% say they will raise their kids in the Jewish tradition: http://www.pewforum.org/2013/10/01/jewish-american-beliefs-attitudes-culture-survey/. [The 27% who say they’ll raise their kids partly in the Jewish tradition hardly count, because really they’re almost all just secularists who think it’s cool to have a menorah and a Christmas tree every year. Their kids are not going to have a Jewish identity when they grow up and are not going to have much of a mate-selection bias towards Jews, so they’ll effectively boil out of the Jewish population.] )

    One theory I have about why those identifying as Jewish are disproportionately leftist culti-marxists is that the ones who don’t see identity politics as a candidate for the next Olympic sport are just converting and assimilating; no megaphones or sandwich boards are involved in that process, and such stories don’t generate clickbait for alt-right rage porn sites, so the alt-rightosphere never gets exposed.

  301. @SFG
    I don't know if I'd go lying to your kids--as Jack D said, they might join the alt-right and find an unpleasant surprise if someone goes digging. Besides, you don't want to create neuroses (especially if you don't want them acting too Jewish ;) ). Just tell them, hey, you're Christian, teach them about European and American history, and let them decide the rest. Ultimately they'll do what they want anyway.

    I have been thinking about what you said a lot, though. It seems like you either go Reform/Conservative, and swallow all this left-wing SJW crap, or Orthodox, and have to go live in one of 3 areas of the country that are really expensive and follow a bunch of rules useful for desert nomads 2000 years ago. The neocons actually had a nice 'secular right-wing' option, but then they went and started a war with Iraq for the benefit of Israel.

    I'd say, to any pro-white Jew reading this, you have 2 options. If you live near NYC, you can find a right-wing Jew who agrees with you and agree to disagree on immigration. If you don't, just find a suitable denomination and convert, or you can be the weird right-wing guy in your temple. If you really want to get involved in activism, find a group like AmRen that tolerates your ancestry. Hey, it's better than being conservative and black.

    I don’t know if I’d go lying to your kids–as Jack D said, they might join the alt-right and find an unpleasant surprise if someone goes digging. Besides, you don’t want to create neuroses (especially if you don’t want them acting too Jewish 😉 ). Just tell them, hey, you’re Christian, teach them about European and American history, and let them decide the rest. Ultimately they’ll do what they want anyway.

    I don’t know why it’s such a struggle for Christians to tell their kids they have Jewish ancestry.

    Go back far enough and I have 100% pagan ancestry (as far as I know — all the ancestors I know of come from the Atlantic fringe where Jews seldom bothered to go), and here I am raised Catholic and thereby partially a product of Jewish priests and rabbis who lived 2,500 years ago. Doesn’t that make me half Jewish or something like that? Of course I know Jews disagree with the New Covenant, but you get my point.

    Having some Hebrew ancestry can be – and often is – a point of pride for Christians. This is why I’m convinced that the conflict between European Christians and Jews is 90% religious and only 10% racial if that. But then again, religion and race are tied up in a lot of ways. It’s complicated…

    • Replies: @SFG
    'Cause a bunch of pseudo-pagans 70 years ago killed people who were even a quarter Jewish (while going on to trash most of Europe), and everyone is afraid history will repeat itself.

    I don't think the US government would actually do that--Americans don't like government enough, for one--but you can see why people might be worried.
  302. @Virgínia Dare
    Reb Luke: what do you think of the reception of MacDonald's ideas by the reverend Dr David Duke? MacDonald seems to like Duke's ideas, since he publishes him in OccidentalObserver.
    Am I wrong to think that Duke is an antisemite?
    Having read "A people that shall dwell alone" I think MacDonald cherry picks examples from jewish history to support a conclusion he has already reached. No sane person reading the Tanakh could seriously think that the real God of the jewish people is their gene pool.

    No sane person reading the Tanakh could seriously think that the real God of the jewish people is their gene pool.

    The Old Testament isn’t the rule for Jewish life; the Talmud and what rabbis say is.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Thanks for being pedantic but the talmud isnt quite the rule either.

    And my point still stands, Kevin Macdonald grossly exaggerates the importance of these themes. Its easy to find ridiculous things in the talmud (what should you do if a man falls off a building and impregnates a woman?) but most jews arent even aware of these passages and they have little to no influence on judaism or jews or even jewish law
  303. @Mr. Anon
    "In 1965, Ted Kennedy was nowhere near the most well known person in Congress. "

    He was not the most influential Senator, but it is entirely possible that he was one of the best known men in Congress. He was the brother of a recent President and of an Attorney General and Senator.

    That’s not what was said. In 1965, he was not the most famous person in Congress. Now by 1970, post Chappaquiddik and with the death of his older brother, certainly the case can be made that from then on he was the most well known person nationally in the Senate if not all of Congress. But definitely not in Congress or the Senate in 1965 or perhaps during his first term.

    I mean, former FL Gov. Jeb! is the brother of a recent president and his dad was president. How’d that work out for him getting to the GOP nomination?

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "That’s not what was said. In 1965, he was not the most famous person in Congress."

    You said best known - i.e. most famous. It is entirely possible that Ted Kennedy was one of the most famous Senators in 1965 - just by name recognition alone. Kim Kardasian is one of the most famous people on Earth. Is she important or consequential in any way? Of course not. Fame and intrinsic worth often have little to do with each other.

    "I mean, former FL Gov. Jeb! is the brother of a recent president and his dad was president. How’d that work out for him getting to the GOP nomination?"

    That is not what is at issue, or at least what you were talking about - being well known. !Jeb! is indeed well known.

  304. @cwhatfuture
    I am Jewish. Unfortunately I read the piece only after I had read about the piece here. So when reading it, I only found it ridiculous, although I think its main point of reference was to the generalized media coverage of date raping and fraternities. That was in the news a lot then if I remember. As the "victim" was not Jewish, what the hell point could the author have been making exactly, if that was her intent?

    As the “victim” was not Jewish, what the hell point could the author have been making exactly, if that was her intent?

    That’s just the thing. The point wasn’t the victim, but the “culture” (which was a total fabrication on Sabrina’s part).

    Read it with a close eye, and you see the references to blondes, neoclassical architecture, group behavior, and finally repeated references to dominance, group violence and broken glass. It’s clearly a ham-fisted attempt to evoke National Socialist tropes and imagery.

    Maybe, having read a lot of feminist bullshit over the years, I’m more attuned to this stuff than the average reader, but I’m pretty sure I could sit down with any perceptive person and point it out part by part without once having to grasp at a straw.

    • Replies: @Cwhatfuture
    Yeah, for sure she over-did it with the blond southern thing. If you read it after Sailer, as I did, though, it was almost comical. But I do see what you mean. I am guessing she was waiting for the reviewers to spell it all out and point out what a brilliant and sensitive writer she was.
    , @Steve Sailer
    Sabrina Rubin Erdely put a fair amount of literary effort into her smear. It's a fairly sophisticated and effective attempt to manipulate readers' emotions with Kristallnacht imagery about broken glass and blonds.

    The weirder part are the ties to the Stephen Glass hoaxes at The New Republic, which was made into the movie "Shattered Glass." Rubin Erdely worked for Stephen Glass on the Penn paper.
  305. @Lot

    As for anti-gentilism, anyone who has grown up with a large Jewish population as I have can serve as a witness to the prevailing sense of fear and contempt toward gentiles that many Jews seem to harbor (one that is much more freely discussed among Jews themselves).
     
    So your evidence is "everyone who knows Jews knows this to be true" and "things you heard from Jewish acquaintances"

    That's awfully persuasive!

    Maybe you are feeling a bit of envy and resentment at the single ethnic group most successful at skimming off the best women of your race? I mean, Amy Chua is quite a catch: best selling author, as politically incorrect as she feels like, daughter of one of the leading professors of electrical engineering in the nation, makes a ton of money, raises polite and intelligent children. And in her wikipedia pic, at age 50, she is still smoking hot.

    So your evidence is “everyone who knows Jews knows this to be true” and “things you heard from Jewish acquaintances”

    That’s awfully persuasive!

    What I presented was a tiny snippet from my life experience – take it however you will. It was not intended to be a scientific survey of American Jewish attitudes. I grew up thinking that the whole “Light unto nations” rhetoric was earnest. I had many Jewish friends as a young person. I also developed an enormous sympathy for the horrors their ancestors suffered in Europe.

    But much of that opinion has been changed by what I experienced and witnessed. And it’s not just about me or my particular ethnic group. I just heard Jewish administrators at universities expressing both fear and contempt toward non-Jewish white goy (usually not about ethnic Italians or Irish, but almost always about “flyover country” whites) too many times in their “unguarded” moments.

    The fear was in the sense that they were a privileged minority in a sea of potentially aggrieved majority – the traditional Diaspora Jewish anxiety. The contempt was along the lines of “They are dumber than we are.” It was really shocking for me the first couple of times I heard such sentiments. But I was a naïve young man.

    This does not mean that I think all or even most Jews feel that way toward non-Jewish whites. It’s more that such sentiments do exist and that anytime someone critiques it, that person is met with accusations of racism, ignorance, prejudice, etc. – all the while Jews themselves frequently fall back on accusations of “anti-Semitism” against those with whom they disagree.

    Maybe you are feeling a bit of envy and resentment at the single ethnic group most successful at skimming off the best women of your race?

    You should know by now that I could not care less whom Asian-American women marry. I am a bit busy being married to a gorgeous Midwestern Shiksa, with whom I have a large brood. As an I assimilationist, I am all for Asians – male or female – marrying whites (though I would prefer they married good Christian whites).

    Amy Chua

    She’s not my type. Too short, for starters. And not athletic enough. Sorry.

  306. @Luke Ford
    Reading Steve Sailer, I learned that attention-seeking is not masculine, so I've really got to cut that out...one day at a time.

    I know personally about a dozen Jewish intellectuals (including Orthodox rabbis) who read Kevin MacDonald and believe he is basically correct. They can't say so publicly for fear of the consequences, to protect their children, etc. There's no contradiction between loving being Jewish, leading a traditional Jewish life, and accepting truth from any source. There's nothing unique in Jewish life in my respecting Kevin MacDonald.

    “I learned that attention-seeking is not masculine”

    Hold it, hold it. Donald Trump is quite an attention seeker and has been most of his career. No one would dare say that he isn’t an alpha male, let alone not very masculine.

    I mean, for nearly the last year of this election, one person has managed to drive it and make it mainly about himself, and the issues that he promotes. Trying to think how far back in history one has to go to find that kind of comparison. Was Bill Clinton that influential on driving the narrative day after day? Just on the issues alone I mean. I tend to think he wasn’t. This is a unique candidate: One who inspires near total and equal attention to both his personality AND the issues that he promotes in his candidacy. It’s almost unprecedented.

  307. @Whiskey
    Steve is not an anti-Semite, but he and many of his commenters make a huge mistake in assigning Assimilated Jewish anti-White behavior into Jewish ethno centrism. Because Steve and his commenters are fish not seeing the water, or wish to make excuses or apologies for the larger White culture being explicitly anti-White as a result of post-Christian religious belief.

    The tragedy of modern, Western, assimilated Jews like Cathy Young is that they traded their heritage and Jewishness for ... a mess of pottage. Lennonism. Of the two, John was more dangerous than Vladimir because his post-Christian Utopia fit more with the comfortable virtue and status signaling that Young embodies than the hard struggle of throwing bombs into crowds that Vladimir required.

    How Jewish is Mark Zuckerberg? He's the Jewish !Jeb!, who wants desperately to be Chinese like his wife. And that is not very Jewish, but is very WASP adventurers. Its Dances With Wolves, Avatar, James Michener's "Hawaii," and Pocahontas and Capt. Smith. Marry the foreign native princess and lead the natives as a Big Man (which lower/ordinary White man could NEVER be at home) against his fellow Whites/Europeans/Nationals.

    Fundamentally Kevin McDonald is horrible, because he's WRONG. He is prescribing leeches for a patient beset by anemia. The problem of anti-Whitism in the West is not Jerry Seinfeld and Patton Oswalt conspiring with Howard Stern to turn America into Africa-meets-Pakistan, because that would be so good for Seinfeld, Oswalt, and Stern. The problem is John Lennonism Utopian virtue signaling at **ZERO COST** for status-seekers who are mostly **NOT JEWS**.

    Cathy Young stands out because she's confirmation bias. But nothing she says would be out of place among Bill Gates mouth. Or Warren Buffet's. Or Elizabeth Warren's. Or Hillary Clinton's.

    Jews are uniquely vulnerable to the post-Calvinist Witch Finding Puritanism without Jesus that characterizes our **EXTREME RELIGIOUS AGE**. Instead of being a Chosen People by God -- who caused them to be born Jewish, they ... choose their salvation willingly by being anti-White (which is also anti-Jewish --- Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan, ISIS, Iran, and Erdogan all consider Jews to be both White and the enemy to be exterminated in some form or another).

    This has no cost, because as part of a highly insulated, bubble dwelling elite they don't have their daughters raped and forced into prostitution like White working class people in Britain. Instead they live in a Seinfeld episode that never ends, where obscure and ever changing rules bring status. Jerry Seinfeld in the series was well, himself. A famous stand up comedian. But even his character was challenged by the constant and ever changing rules of PC that gave or took away status and standing.

    Anti-Whitism is not a Jewish conspiracy to undermine Gentiles and Christmas. It is instead a function of the constant, ever increasing, status chasing among a bubble dwelling elite that incurs no personal cost for anti-Whitism by their insulation and finds no status by accomplishment.

    And that last is key. Accomplishment means nothing, not fame, not money, not military prowess, nothing. Chris Kyle was the most accomplished sniper, and demonstrated bravery, and yet the SWPL crowd found him tedious and lower class -- because he did not adhere to their rules of religion and status chasing within Lennonism religion.

    THAT is the rot in the West. Not Jews, who in the West traded their identity held onto for thousands of years for ... saying "not that there is anything wrong with that."

    >The problem of anti-Whitism in the West is not Jerry Seinfeld and Patton Oswalt conspiring with Howard Stern to turn America into Africa-meets-Pakistan…

    For what it’s worth, Patton Oswalt is not Jewish.

  308. @Gabe Marks
    Another day, another foray into the blogosphere wars of who is more racist than who and whose commenters are the bigger meanies. All while trying to passively dismiss any argument you as the author overlooked. Keep up the good fight, Cathy.

    Life is too short to deal with stupid and dishonest people like Cathy Young…..there are a million others just the same….

  309. @Gross Terry
    "Even though I am not Jewish, I frequently heard disparaging remarks about non-Jews, especially white Catholics and Asians, from Jewish acquaintances and colleagues particularly while I was in academia"

    a cursory survey of jewish marriage habits suggests you are full of shit.

    a cursory survey of jewish marriage habits suggests you are full of shit.

    Not all intermarriages are the same. For examples, in white-Asian intermarriages, the children tend to identify as whites rather than as Asians. In fact, there was a recent study that showed that in generations two and three, those with partial Asian ancestry overwhelmingly identified themselves as whites. And among American-born Asians, a sizable minority of even FULL-blooded Asians identified as whites in generations two and up!

    On the other hand, in Jewish intermarriages, it is very common for the non-Jewish partner to assimilate into the Jewish spouse’s culture. A classic example that captures both trends is Amy Chua. Her children are on record as stating that they identify themselves as Jewish and that they are “only Chinese” to the extent that they do “stuff like eat Chinese food.” Even though Chua’s husband is a non-practicing Jews, I believe it was *Amy Chua* who encouraged her daughters to undergo Jewish rituals.

    So, despite the handwringing about intermarriage among Jews, their intermarriages seem to assimilate others into their minority – expand the Tribe – if you will. Meanwhile Asian intermarriages seem to be far more assimilative into the majority population.

  310. @biz
    How can so many people here, presumably with a straight face, accuse a group which currently has a 70% intermarriage rate of acting as an enthocentric block?

    How can so many people here, presumably with a straight face, accuse a group which currently has a 70% intermarriage rate of acting as an enthocentric block?

    Please see my response to another commenter regarding this: https://www.unz.com/isteve/cathy-young-ann-coulter-is-anti-semitic-but-sabrina-rubin-erdely-couldnt-possibly-be-anti-gentilic/#comment-1417773

  311. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Tracy

    No sane person reading the Tanakh could seriously think that the real God of the jewish people is their gene pool.
     
    The Old Testament isn't the rule for Jewish life; the Talmud and what rabbis say is.

    Thanks for being pedantic but the talmud isnt quite the rule either.

    And my point still stands, Kevin Macdonald grossly exaggerates the importance of these themes. Its easy to find ridiculous things in the talmud (what should you do if a man falls off a building and impregnates a woman?) but most jews arent even aware of these passages and they have little to no influence on judaism or jews or even jewish law

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    (what should you do if a man falls off a building and impregnates a woman?)
     
    Donny Hathaway? Juzo Itami? Carter Cooper? Karl Wallenda?
    , @Tracy
    I agree that most Jews don't know what's in the Talmud, but it informs their culture in the same way that the Bill of Rights does American culture, even though not one in a hundred Americans can enumerate those rights. And along with 'the ridiculous things' in the Talmud are plenty of racist, anti-Gentile ugliness and outright anti-Christ nastiness.
  312. @cwhatfuture

    For some reason, people seem to feel very free about their thoughts around me, and would tell me their inner thoughts readily (this came in VERY HANDY when I used to work as an investigator).
     
    It would seem you are telling us your inner fantasies quite readily. Although I don't find any of it VERY HANDY or even very handy.

    the prevailing sense of fear and contempt toward gentiles that many Jews seem to harbor
     
    I can assure you, there is no Jew that "fears" you. Although after reading one email from you, I suspect many Jews have contempt for you.

    I can assure you, there is no Jew that “fears” you.

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970204076204578076613986930932

    Some of the more vehement attacks on Amy Chua’s deliberately provocative 2011 memoir of child rearing, “Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother,” were perhaps fueled by resentment of Asian-American ascendancy, especially in the context of raising “perfect” children. Confession: I was one of the book’s more vocal detractors. Was I, a Jewish-American writer, driven to pique, in part, by a member of a group that threatens Jewish-American cultural domination, just as American Jews once threatened the WASP mandarinate? Well, maybe.

    The subtle vying for success in various realms of American life between Asian-Americans and American Jews makes one wonder what mores and tastes will look like when Asian-Americans begin to exert their own influence over the culture. Will the verbal brio and intellectual bent of Jews, their edgy irony and frank super-competitiveness give way to Asian discretion, deference to the community, and gifts for less verbal pursuits like music, science and math? Will things become, as they once were under WASP hegemony, quieter?

    As for me personally, my Jewish friends of youth were not fearful of me at all. I used to protect them from blacks youths who predated upon them. But I was blessed with size and grew up doing combat sports (Judo and boxing) since I was a young child. My father used to get me up at 5 AM to train since I was about 4 or 5 years old (I am a softie as a parent – my kids started Judo at 6 or 7 years old, and I let them sleep until they wake up naturally; we train in the evenings). I hated seeing black kids beat up and terrorize my white (Jewish and non-Jewish) and Asian friends.

    However, (as an adult) A LOT of American Jews seem, er, “wary” of the fact that I am a gun-toter. Funny enough, though, this was never an issue in Israel where I spent some time. I still have a Browning Hi-Power an Israeli colleague gave me as a parting gift.

    I suppose this is my way of confirming, from my experience, the “Men without Chests” theory regarding Diaspora Jews, as described by Martin van Creveld of Hebrew University in his book, “The Culture of War.”

    • Replies: @Cwhatfuture
    I grew up in the south. Everyone had a gun, including my father and my uncles and my grandfather and all of our neighbors. I am not wary of guns in the least. What is your point?

    And I see your Fantasy continues. You grew up and learned to dislike Jews as they expressed their inner feelings to you but you went to Israel. Did you tell your friends there how you felt about Jews. Did you bestow your wisdom about Jews upon them? Or did you find Van Creveld in Jerusalem and tell him ?

    And what the hell is that long paragraph supposed to mean? Amy Chua and Asians do not interest me. I do not get satisfaction from group success, only my family's success.

  313. @Bill P

    As the “victim” was not Jewish, what the hell point could the author have been making exactly, if that was her intent?
     
    That's just the thing. The point wasn't the victim, but the "culture" (which was a total fabrication on Sabrina's part).

    Read it with a close eye, and you see the references to blondes, neoclassical architecture, group behavior, and finally repeated references to dominance, group violence and broken glass. It's clearly a ham-fisted attempt to evoke National Socialist tropes and imagery.

    Maybe, having read a lot of feminist bullshit over the years, I'm more attuned to this stuff than the average reader, but I'm pretty sure I could sit down with any perceptive person and point it out part by part without once having to grasp at a straw.

    Yeah, for sure she over-did it with the blond southern thing. If you read it after Sailer, as I did, though, it was almost comical. But I do see what you mean. I am guessing she was waiting for the reviewers to spell it all out and point out what a brilliant and sensitive writer she was.

  314. @Lot
    The evidence for Coulter's supposed antisemitism is extremely thin.

    She never "touted" Radix, she retweeted a tweet that was anti-NRO that had a Radix hashtag, one of several.

    I mean, it was not even a link, it was a retweet of a hashtag mention!

    Radix site is certainly antisemitic, but honestly the various alt-right sites like Radix that post ambitious, boring, long-winded articles kind of blur together for me, and quite likely Ann as well.

    The second retweet had nothing to do whatsoever with Jews, but a joke about how Hillary's anti-Trump ad makes Trump look really good. If I had twitter I'd retweet it myself, it was funny! Is she supposed to do a background check on everyone she retweets?

    Next is that Ann links to VDare, which in turns publishes Kevin MacDonald. Now I think VDare doing so is an idiotic mistake. The man says nothing worthwhile, and brings disrepute onto the site and its many fine authors. However, he's one of dozens of authors, and they run maybe one thing a year from him on average. He's not even in the top 50 or so authors there, and he is not listed on the main directory of authors.

    Balance this thin evidence against the fact that Ann (1) is a strong supporter of Israel (2) retweets Mickey Kaus about 20 times more often than any supposed anti-semite (3) supports Trump and his objectively pro-jewish policies, and calling her anti-semitic is simply slander.

    Finally, we have Ann affection for supposed anti-semite Steve. The evidence for this is a single quote, which is indeed pretty ugly and antisemitic:

    Or in the case of the wealthiest, most powerful group, they use their influence over the media to instill [insecurity] in their children and to depress, demoralize, and divide other groups` children.
     

    This and a sparse number of other flirtations with MacDonald-style antisemitism, if they were the main theme of Steve's rather voluminous writing about Jews, could indeed justify the label. But they are not very typical at all. At most they show Steve is at times anti-semitism-curious. Is Ann supposed to boycott him now for that or else be guilty by association?

    If someone’s writings are going to be attributed to “antisemitism” then one might as well describe what “semitism” is. The antisemites are against something besides Jewish DNA and stereotypical hook noses, right?

    Whatever semitism is the antisemitic are opposed to it.

  315. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    It's not gonna burn her. If National Review supposedly "banned" her for her comments post-9/11 and that didn't hurt her earning ability, then nothing will. She wisely saw that Trump's candidacy was something larger than anything in at least 20 yrs and got on board from day one. She also wisely gave a copy of her book to Trump.

    Also, Ann has probably met Trump on a few occasions in the past since they were at one time both part of the GOP establishment so the likelihood increases that they knew one another before last yr.

    Regarding Ann, the idea that she's well off, is actually a good point inadvertently backed into.

    I mean, she lives in three areas; NY; CA; and FL. How exactly is that possible? Just from book royalties; syndicated column; and occasional speaking appearances? It really doesn't seem like it would be THAT kind of money. For instance, Steve once mentioned that Malcolm Gladwell makes around 40k per speaking appearance. Ann Coulter doesn't make anywhere near that amount for the occasional college speaking appearance, does she?

    Just asking. How exactly does someone make enough money to afford that kind of lifestyle? She doesn't work in Hollywood, and she's not on the network news. Conservative author Michelle Malkin has a successful national column and roughly the same career trajectory as Ann Coulter yet she doesn't have three living areas and resides in Colorado Springs. Something else must be going on.

    She’s written a many best sellers and sold at least three million books. As I understand it royalties run around 5-10%; she may get more since she’s a reliable seller and that probably commands a premium. That’s at least a few million in royalties alone. The speaking circuit seems relatively lucrative.

    I think the syndicated columns pay next to nothing. The columns basically act as a publicity platform.

    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Speaking primarily at second tier colleges doesn't pay anywhere near Malcolm Gladwell 40k per speech. If syndicated columns don't pay and merely serve as publicity its totally irrelevant now compared to Twitter and Facebook, and she is approaching a million followers (fairly respectable in her niche market).

    But again, that doesn't explain it entirely. After all, Michelle Malkin also has sold millions of books and is a regular feature on FOX but she lives in lower cost of living Colorado. I mean, Coulter lives in Beverly Hills, NYC; and FL. The first two are not only super zips, they have been among the top ranked in cost of living for several decades. There's something else going on here.

    Joe Conason, a far leftist not much quoted in conservative circles in his book on the Right Wing Noise Machine contrasted conservatives's straw man epithet "limosine liberals" by examining how many of the conservative luminaries live their lives. He mentioned that Coulter wasn't born poor. In other words, Ann came from a very well off and possibly well connected family in the Northeast. Perhaps she is a trust fund child. If she is, then that would definitely explain how she can afford to maintain a mega lifestyle at multiple super zips because otherwise it simply doesn't add up. I like her articles and the loyalty that she has shown by supporting Trump publicly (although that's not going to hurt her career since her brand is simply too mainstream by this point), but that doesn't mean I don't see both sides of the issue.

    Say what you will about Bernie Sanders; he wasn't born rich and he clearly hasn't pocketed millions as opposed to say the Clintons in a lifetime of public service. That's not to say he hasn't taken advantage of some financial perks and benefits along the way, perhaps he has. But compared to his peers in Congress I tend to think that he has shown a certain amount of integrity and personal ethics of a sort.

  316. @biz
    How can so many people here, presumably with a straight face, accuse a group which currently has a 70% intermarriage rate of acting as an enthocentric block?

    “How can so many people here, presumably with a straight face, accuse a group which currently has a 70% intermarriage rate of acting as an enthocentric block?”

    The Kennedy family had a 100% intermarriage-rate and yet managed to act as a Kennedy block. The same could be said of the Rockefeller family, the Trump family, and many other wealthy clans.

  317. @Twinkie

    I can assure you, there is no Jew that “fears” you.
     
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970204076204578076613986930932

    Some of the more vehement attacks on Amy Chua's deliberately provocative 2011 memoir of child rearing, "Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother," were perhaps fueled by resentment of Asian-American ascendancy, especially in the context of raising "perfect" children. Confession: I was one of the book's more vocal detractors. Was I, a Jewish-American writer, driven to pique, in part, by a member of a group that threatens Jewish-American cultural domination, just as American Jews once threatened the WASP mandarinate? Well, maybe.

    The subtle vying for success in various realms of American life between Asian-Americans and American Jews makes one wonder what mores and tastes will look like when Asian-Americans begin to exert their own influence over the culture. Will the verbal brio and intellectual bent of Jews, their edgy irony and frank super-competitiveness give way to Asian discretion, deference to the community, and gifts for less verbal pursuits like music, science and math? Will things become, as they once were under WASP hegemony, quieter?
     
    As for me personally, my Jewish friends of youth were not fearful of me at all. I used to protect them from blacks youths who predated upon them. But I was blessed with size and grew up doing combat sports (Judo and boxing) since I was a young child. My father used to get me up at 5 AM to train since I was about 4 or 5 years old (I am a softie as a parent - my kids started Judo at 6 or 7 years old, and I let them sleep until they wake up naturally; we train in the evenings). I hated seeing black kids beat up and terrorize my white (Jewish and non-Jewish) and Asian friends.

    However, (as an adult) A LOT of American Jews seem, er, "wary" of the fact that I am a gun-toter. Funny enough, though, this was never an issue in Israel where I spent some time. I still have a Browning Hi-Power an Israeli colleague gave me as a parting gift.

    I suppose this is my way of confirming, from my experience, the "Men without Chests" theory regarding Diaspora Jews, as described by Martin van Creveld of Hebrew University in his book, "The Culture of War."

    I grew up in the south. Everyone had a gun, including my father and my uncles and my grandfather and all of our neighbors. I am not wary of guns in the least. What is your point?

    And I see your Fantasy continues. You grew up and learned to dislike Jews as they expressed their inner feelings to you but you went to Israel. Did you tell your friends there how you felt about Jews. Did you bestow your wisdom about Jews upon them? Or did you find Van Creveld in Jerusalem and tell him ?

    And what the hell is that long paragraph supposed to mean? Amy Chua and Asians do not interest me. I do not get satisfaction from group success, only my family’s success.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "I do not get satisfaction from group success, only my family’s success."

    And you imagine that the latter has nothing to do with the former?
    , @Twinkie

    I grew up in the south. Everyone had a gun, including my father and my uncles and my grandfather and all of our neighbors. I am not wary of guns in the least. What is your point?
     
    While you, personally, may not be "wary of guns in the least," many, perhaps most, Jewish-Americans are. They are certainly vastly overrepresented in the anti-gun movement. This isn't about you personally - it's about group tendencies. A part of the reason may be that Jews are largely urban and suburban dwellers in the U.S. Another reason might be more in the way of an ingrained culture of fear of "men on horseback." I think I am not the only one to think that many urban, elite Jews see, unreasonably in my view, a vast horde of armed "flyover country" Christians as potential "cossacks" on the pogrom in the making. It seems to me many Jews share the idea that a divided - multicultural, if you will - gentile population is far safer for Jews than being amidst a monolithic and massive Christian white majority.

    Look, I am someone who is ethnically East Asian who spends most of his free time riding horses and hunting on his West Virginia farm. But that doesn't mean I am typical of Asians in America. I don't have a problem accepting reasoned critiques about Asian immigrants in the U.S., toward whom, to be frank, I do not feel any great affinity, and, about whom, in fact, I make some of my own critiques frequently.

    You, on the other hand, seem unable to separate yourself from critiques about Jews in general, which seems to indicate stronger tribalism on your part.

    And I see your Fantasy continues. You grew up and learned to dislike Jews as they expressed their inner feelings to you but you went to Israel. Did you tell your friends there how you felt about Jews. Did you bestow your wisdom about Jews upon them? Or did you find Van Creveld in Jerusalem and tell him ?
     
    What "fantasy" might that be? I guess the Ben Gurion border control stamps on my old passport are just figments of my imagination, eh?

    First of all, I did not "learn to dislike Jews." It would be more accurate to say that, as I matured, I no longer saw Jews in an overwhelmingly positive manner as I did in youth. That doesn't mean I "dislike" Jews. I welcome all Americans of good will (yes, "even" blacks).

    As a group, Jews are what Amy Chua called "a market-dominant minority" - one of a different religion, to boot - with all that entails. As Michael Barone wrote in "New Americans," Jews are always "voting against the Czar," which means that, overwhelmingly, they vote against my team in domestic politics.

    Second, I have a high degree of admiration for Sabras (native Israelis), and have told my Sabra friends so. You might be surprised to hear that some of my Israeli colleagues actually have a pretty dim view of American Jews. They told me that they don't usually criticize the American Jewry in public given the latter's enormous political and economic importance to the State of Israel. But their private cricism - shared over many nights of drinks - seems to be that 1) many American Jews are "all talk, no action" types (van Creveld's "men without chests") whom they do not respect; 2) meanwhile some of the overrought ones who made Aliyah and settled in West Bank (Judea/Samaria) seem to be unhinged people who want to play cowboys and Indians with the Arabs... unlike many Sabras who have grown up next to ordinary Arabs and want to live in peace with them at some point.

    Third, I did speak to van Creveld at length, but it was about counter-terrorism, which was the reason I spent time in Israel.

    And what the hell is that long paragraph supposed to mean?
     
    I wrote of Jewish fear of, and contempt for, gentiles - especially non-Jewish whites and Asians earlier, to which you seem to take great offense. But here is a Jewish writer, on a major U.S. newspaper, clearly expressing that anxiety: "Was I, a Jewish-American writer, driven to pique, in part, by a member of a group that threatens Jewish-American cultural domination, just as American Jews once threatened the WASP mandarinate? Well, maybe... Will the verbal brio and intellectual bent of Jews, their edgy irony and frank super-competitiveness give way to Asian discretion, deference to the community, and gifts for less verbal pursuits like music, science and math? Will things become, as they once were under WASP hegemony, quieter?"

    He seems to view WASPs as a defeated rival group and see Asians as a future rival group, a sentiment that I heard more than once from other Jews in America.

    Amy Chua and Asians do not interest me. I do not get satisfaction from group success, only my family’s success.
     
    Good for you. But you seem to be implying that I do, which is a straw man.

    Your overreaction to my general criticism of Jews as a group, rather than about individuals among them who vary, seems to confirm what I wrote rather than invalidate it. It seems that unless I spoke about Jews in only the most positive terms, a swift reaction of personal attacks is in order. Again, that's the very point I made earlier when I wrote the following:

    I don’t think anyone is implying that ALL Jews hate Christians. The sentiment seems to me to be more about the double standard/hypocrisy now common in the media and mainstream popular culture – that the accusation of “anti-Semitism” is utilized frequently by Jews, true or not, but any critique of ant-gentilism by Jews is immediately denounced as anti-Semitism/racism/irrational and ignorant prejudice.
     
  318. @Alec Leamas
    I never took Paglia as anti-WASP so much as embracing her (perhaps idealized) earthy and passionate Southern Italian roots. Necessarily this requires some opposition to WASP cultural control and the stoic WASP style but I don't think there was much desire to obliterate it so much as to make cultural space for her own sort. Perhaps I've just read the wrong books/columns and seen the wrong talks by her. Other than on TV in her youth, I can't imagine that Syracuse at the time was a bastion of WASP privilege. Likely the blondes of whom she was jealous, desirous or both were Polish, German, or Irish Catholics of modest, working class means.

    For a few nights about two weeks ago I suffered from some insomnia. In the wee hours I watched two films in particular on cable that I had never before seen out of sheer boredom among others - 1987's Dirty Dancing, and 1988's Beaches. Now, I'm not much younger than Erdely and I'm Catholic from blue collar neighborhoods in Philadelphia and sent to parochial schools but my mother was a striving working sort who sent me and my brother to a Jewish day camp (though not explicitly so) in a Jewish belt of suburban Montgomery County as kids to get rid of us for the day after my parents got divorced. We were two of a very, very few gentiles there and I can tell you that those two movies were seen, discussed and part of the cultural ether for those kids (not just the girls! Aside: what sort of thirteen year old boy is a Bette Midler fan?). It's just an educated guess, but if I recall Erdely is from that same part of Montgomery County, probably very culturally similar to those kids (hell, she may have gone to that camp herself) and I'd bet given her age she saw both of those movies over and over.

    I suppose the point in mentioning the films is that they're sort of a window into the mind of a person like Erdely - the simultaneous chauvinism and feelings of inferiority, their view of the Jew/goy divide, etc. In Beaches, the main goy is a WASP who learns to live a little after befriending a loud and brash Jewish child entertainer (there is even a pseudo Country Club scene where the little Jewish girl is asked to leave a restaurant). In Dirty Dancing, the goys are prole white trash who work at the Catskills resort by day and drink and dance in ways that amount to open acts of coitus at night, while the Jews are wealthy and educated if reserved, one learning to dance and her sexual passions awaken with the Buck goy while a Jewish doctor first unwittingly pays for a botched backalley abortion (pre-Roe), and then sweeps in to heroically save the life of the pretty blonde white trash slut and keep everything quiet.

    lust/hate

  319. @Whiskey
    Steve is not an anti-Semite, but he and many of his commenters make a huge mistake in assigning Assimilated Jewish anti-White behavior into Jewish ethno centrism. Because Steve and his commenters are fish not seeing the water, or wish to make excuses or apologies for the larger White culture being explicitly anti-White as a result of post-Christian religious belief.

    The tragedy of modern, Western, assimilated Jews like Cathy Young is that they traded their heritage and Jewishness for ... a mess of pottage. Lennonism. Of the two, John was more dangerous than Vladimir because his post-Christian Utopia fit more with the comfortable virtue and status signaling that Young embodies than the hard struggle of throwing bombs into crowds that Vladimir required.

    How Jewish is Mark Zuckerberg? He's the Jewish !Jeb!, who wants desperately to be Chinese like his wife. And that is not very Jewish, but is very WASP adventurers. Its Dances With Wolves, Avatar, James Michener's "Hawaii," and Pocahontas and Capt. Smith. Marry the foreign native princess and lead the natives as a Big Man (which lower/ordinary White man could NEVER be at home) against his fellow Whites/Europeans/Nationals.

    Fundamentally Kevin McDonald is horrible, because he's WRONG. He is prescribing leeches for a patient beset by anemia. The problem of anti-Whitism in the West is not Jerry Seinfeld and Patton Oswalt conspiring with Howard Stern to turn America into Africa-meets-Pakistan, because that would be so good for Seinfeld, Oswalt, and Stern. The problem is John Lennonism Utopian virtue signaling at **ZERO COST** for status-seekers who are mostly **NOT JEWS**.

    Cathy Young stands out because she's confirmation bias. But nothing she says would be out of place among Bill Gates mouth. Or Warren Buffet's. Or Elizabeth Warren's. Or Hillary Clinton's.

    Jews are uniquely vulnerable to the post-Calvinist Witch Finding Puritanism without Jesus that characterizes our **EXTREME RELIGIOUS AGE**. Instead of being a Chosen People by God -- who caused them to be born Jewish, they ... choose their salvation willingly by being anti-White (which is also anti-Jewish --- Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan, ISIS, Iran, and Erdogan all consider Jews to be both White and the enemy to be exterminated in some form or another).

    This has no cost, because as part of a highly insulated, bubble dwelling elite they don't have their daughters raped and forced into prostitution like White working class people in Britain. Instead they live in a Seinfeld episode that never ends, where obscure and ever changing rules bring status. Jerry Seinfeld in the series was well, himself. A famous stand up comedian. But even his character was challenged by the constant and ever changing rules of PC that gave or took away status and standing.

    Anti-Whitism is not a Jewish conspiracy to undermine Gentiles and Christmas. It is instead a function of the constant, ever increasing, status chasing among a bubble dwelling elite that incurs no personal cost for anti-Whitism by their insulation and finds no status by accomplishment.

    And that last is key. Accomplishment means nothing, not fame, not money, not military prowess, nothing. Chris Kyle was the most accomplished sniper, and demonstrated bravery, and yet the SWPL crowd found him tedious and lower class -- because he did not adhere to their rules of religion and status chasing within Lennonism religion.

    THAT is the rot in the West. Not Jews, who in the West traded their identity held onto for thousands of years for ... saying "not that there is anything wrong with that."

    Lennonism. Of the two, John was more dangerous than Vladimir because his post-Christian Utopia fit more with the comfortable virtue and status signaling…

    I wouldn’t put much of the blame on Beatle John himself.

    “Not a Second Time”, “Misery”, “I’m a Loser”, “Bad to Me”, and the like were wonderfully crafted pop jingles which lifted the spirit despite the downer titles. “A Day in the Life”, “Come Together”, and “Imagine” were self-indulgent stoner crap.

    It’s not John’s fault that the former are dismissed and the latter get all the unmerited analysis. All he wanted to do was to enjoy a good pop song, his or someone else’s. He said as much.

  320. @Boomstick
    She's written a many best sellers and sold at least three million books. As I understand it royalties run around 5-10%; she may get more since she's a reliable seller and that probably commands a premium. That's at least a few million in royalties alone. The speaking circuit seems relatively lucrative.

    I think the syndicated columns pay next to nothing. The columns basically act as a publicity platform.

    Speaking primarily at second tier colleges doesn’t pay anywhere near Malcolm Gladwell 40k per speech. If syndicated columns don’t pay and merely serve as publicity its totally irrelevant now compared to Twitter and Facebook, and she is approaching a million followers (fairly respectable in her niche market).

    But again, that doesn’t explain it entirely. After all, Michelle Malkin also has sold millions of books and is a regular feature on FOX but she lives in lower cost of living Colorado. I mean, Coulter lives in Beverly Hills, NYC; and FL. The first two are not only super zips, they have been among the top ranked in cost of living for several decades. There’s something else going on here.

    Joe Conason, a far leftist not much quoted in conservative circles in his book on the Right Wing Noise Machine contrasted conservatives’s straw man epithet “limosine liberals” by examining how many of the conservative luminaries live their lives. He mentioned that Coulter wasn’t born poor. In other words, Ann came from a very well off and possibly well connected family in the Northeast. Perhaps she is a trust fund child. If she is, then that would definitely explain how she can afford to maintain a mega lifestyle at multiple super zips because otherwise it simply doesn’t add up. I like her articles and the loyalty that she has shown by supporting Trump publicly (although that’s not going to hurt her career since her brand is simply too mainstream by this point), but that doesn’t mean I don’t see both sides of the issue.

    Say what you will about Bernie Sanders; he wasn’t born rich and he clearly hasn’t pocketed millions as opposed to say the Clintons in a lifetime of public service. That’s not to say he hasn’t taken advantage of some financial perks and benefits along the way, perhaps he has. But compared to his peers in Congress I tend to think that he has shown a certain amount of integrity and personal ethics of a sort.

    • Replies: @Boomstick
    Coulter's speaking fee is reportedly in the $25K range. She was a University of Michigan law grad (Law review editor, clerked at the Appeals Court level) and was a lawyer in New York for a time, though that income probably pales in comparison to what she pulls down now.

    She's written eleven NYT best sellers, one every year or two for the last 15 years, all of them consistent sellers with some breakouts, which doubtless helps in her contract negotiations. She has lots of TV appearances; no idea what they pay. The columns are kind of old fashioned these days but it does check a box for some. Supposedly the columns pay $5-$100 per paper per column when used, trending very much to the lower end of that for most podunk papers.

    Judging from the emphasis on her web site she makes money from books and speeches.

    (Hey, maybe Steve can go on the speaker circuit. Epic triggering.)

    She says her background is upper middle class. Her father was an attorney. So she's not a trust fund baby.
  321. @Anonymous
    Thanks for being pedantic but the talmud isnt quite the rule either.

    And my point still stands, Kevin Macdonald grossly exaggerates the importance of these themes. Its easy to find ridiculous things in the talmud (what should you do if a man falls off a building and impregnates a woman?) but most jews arent even aware of these passages and they have little to no influence on judaism or jews or even jewish law

    (what should you do if a man falls off a building and impregnates a woman?)

    Donny Hathaway? Juzo Itami? Carter Cooper? Karl Wallenda?

  322. @SFG
    Dude, I often agree with you, but enough impugning the masculinity of other commenters or their ethnic groups. It's kind of pointless. It's like these guys on alt-right blogs who point out how fat feminists are--sure, but does that make them wrong?

    Honestly, neither Jews nor Asians are paragons of masculinity *on average* (never mind your brother who served in the Marines, we are talking means and medians here)--which is precisely why those groups are so successful. Success in an industrialized, capitalist society requires the feminine traits of deceit and false kindness, and you have to sit still in a classroom and study to get into a good college.

    Hell, even in war discipline, organization, and technology count more than muscles.

    What are the macho groups? Blacks and Hispanics. How are they doing?

    Alpha males, beta culture. Beta males, alpha culture. It's one of the paradoxes of life.

    How are they doing?

    Who’s scratching the checks? Who’s cashing them?

  323. anon • Disclaimer says:

    KMac’s theory is simply coming to the same conclusions as game theory but starting from an anthropological perspective.

    “The Evolutionary Dominance of Ethnocentric Cooperation”

    http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html

    One aspect of that is it makes possible a group version of “free riding” – if one group maintains their own ethno-centricity while undermining it in other groups they gain a competitive advantage.

    Why Jews? Because they lost their country I guess.

    Gene-culture co-evolution ftw.

    (although in this case i’d guess culture-gene co-evolution where some rabbis figured out how to survive as a group till got country back and made rules which applied selection pressure leading to both “boiling off” and the spread of common genetic ethnic traits which act like an ethnic signature e.g. inability to process reciprocal morality and dishonest debating style)

    TL;DR

    – culture of critique = bad
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Jewish-Century-Yuri-Slezkine/dp/0691127603 = good

    even though they’re effectively the same book from a different perspective.

  324. Tracy says: • Website
    @Anonymous
    Thanks for being pedantic but the talmud isnt quite the rule either.

    And my point still stands, Kevin Macdonald grossly exaggerates the importance of these themes. Its easy to find ridiculous things in the talmud (what should you do if a man falls off a building and impregnates a woman?) but most jews arent even aware of these passages and they have little to no influence on judaism or jews or even jewish law

    I agree that most Jews don’t know what’s in the Talmud, but it informs their culture in the same way that the Bill of Rights does American culture, even though not one in a hundred Americans can enumerate those rights. And along with ‘the ridiculous things’ in the Talmud are plenty of racist, anti-Gentile ugliness and outright anti-Christ nastiness.

    • Replies: @Luke Ford
    Every strongly identifying group holds negative views of outsiders, or what is called "racist" or "bigoted" or "nasty" or "ugly." Jews no more or less than the Japanese, the Australians, the Tibetans, the Muslims, etc.

    When a goy strongly identifies with his race, religion or nation, he will be likely to hold some anti-Jewish views, just as when a Jew strongly identifies with being Jews, he will likely hold anti-goyim views.

    That's how social identity works. It is normal, natural and usually healthy.

    If people are arbitrarily divided into teams, they will quickly identify with their team and develop a filter that makes their team superior.

    Every people view themselves as specially chosen, the center of the universe, etc.

    , @Virgínia Dare
    Its more like the articles of confederation or magna carta than the constitution/bill of rights.
    I think it would be unfair to pick out the three fifths clause as something informing the thinking of your average american.
    Though I think that would be fairer than saying all nasty parts of the Talmud inform the thinking of Jews since 1. the Talmud is 6000 pages long 2. There are explicitly rejected opinions that are included in the Talmud 3. As I mentioned much of its content is nonsense at worst, metaphor at best
  325. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Speaking primarily at second tier colleges doesn't pay anywhere near Malcolm Gladwell 40k per speech. If syndicated columns don't pay and merely serve as publicity its totally irrelevant now compared to Twitter and Facebook, and she is approaching a million followers (fairly respectable in her niche market).

    But again, that doesn't explain it entirely. After all, Michelle Malkin also has sold millions of books and is a regular feature on FOX but she lives in lower cost of living Colorado. I mean, Coulter lives in Beverly Hills, NYC; and FL. The first two are not only super zips, they have been among the top ranked in cost of living for several decades. There's something else going on here.

    Joe Conason, a far leftist not much quoted in conservative circles in his book on the Right Wing Noise Machine contrasted conservatives's straw man epithet "limosine liberals" by examining how many of the conservative luminaries live their lives. He mentioned that Coulter wasn't born poor. In other words, Ann came from a very well off and possibly well connected family in the Northeast. Perhaps she is a trust fund child. If she is, then that would definitely explain how she can afford to maintain a mega lifestyle at multiple super zips because otherwise it simply doesn't add up. I like her articles and the loyalty that she has shown by supporting Trump publicly (although that's not going to hurt her career since her brand is simply too mainstream by this point), but that doesn't mean I don't see both sides of the issue.

    Say what you will about Bernie Sanders; he wasn't born rich and he clearly hasn't pocketed millions as opposed to say the Clintons in a lifetime of public service. That's not to say he hasn't taken advantage of some financial perks and benefits along the way, perhaps he has. But compared to his peers in Congress I tend to think that he has shown a certain amount of integrity and personal ethics of a sort.

    Coulter’s speaking fee is reportedly in the $25K range. She was a University of Michigan law grad (Law review editor, clerked at the Appeals Court level) and was a lawyer in New York for a time, though that income probably pales in comparison to what she pulls down now.

    She’s written eleven NYT best sellers, one every year or two for the last 15 years, all of them consistent sellers with some breakouts, which doubtless helps in her contract negotiations. She has lots of TV appearances; no idea what they pay. The columns are kind of old fashioned these days but it does check a box for some. Supposedly the columns pay $5-$100 per paper per column when used, trending very much to the lower end of that for most podunk papers.

    Judging from the emphasis on her web site she makes money from books and speeches.

    (Hey, maybe Steve can go on the speaker circuit. Epic triggering.)

    She says her background is upper middle class. Her father was an attorney. So she’s not a trust fund baby.

    • Replies: @Percy Gryce

    Hey, maybe Steve can go on the speaker circuit.
     
    Or maybe not. I heard Steve on that podcast a while back. Let's just say that he's got a voice made for blogging.
    , @Steve Sailer
    Here's her obituary for her father:

    http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2008-01-09.html
    , @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    I'm sorry, but that still does not in any way explain the fact that she can afford three separate elite living locations. Beverly Hills and either Upper East Side or Upper West Side are very exclusive and cost a lot.

    Rush; Hannity; and Glenn Beck are obviously wealthy and its understandable how they could afford that kind of top one percent lifestyle. But its not so obvious with Ann.

    Books + Speeches simply don't equal up to Beverly Hills; NYC and FL. They don't. Unless there's another additional source of income somewhere. Like for example if Ann has an annual contract with FOX News that paid her between 5-10 million dollars, then that definitely would explain it since that's a sizable guaranteed annual source of income whereas the book royalties aren't annually paid (she doesn't write a book every single yr).

    Again, it simply doesn't add up and there is another additional source of income somewhere for her to afford that kind of top one percent lifestyle. Michelle Malkin has the same career trajectory (successful books, national column) and she's living in CO.
  326. anon • Disclaimer says:

    1. The MSM constantly attack white people on the basis that disparate impact is proof of racism.

    2. The MSM is overwhelmingly Jewish.

    so either

    1) they got there by merit in which case using disparate impact as proof of racism to attack others makes them dishonest hypocrites

    or

    2) they got there through ethnic nepotism which makes them dishonest hypocrites

    so all this bloviating over anti-semitism is a joke.

    If semitism = dishonest hypocrisy then anti-semitism is a good thing

    and Cathy Young can go **** herself.

    • Agree: Jack Hanson
  327. @Anon
    "I’m not really sure why I should have credited Steve Sailer, who posted about the case on his Unz Review blog and then wrote about it for Taki Magazine but added nothing original."

    I think folks here were most creative in surmising the psychology of Coakley, as with the 'catfishing' business.

    I think I was one of the first to hypothesize her mental illness:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/rolling-stone-apologizes-for-gang-rape-store/#comment-792002

  328. @Boomstick
    Coulter's speaking fee is reportedly in the $25K range. She was a University of Michigan law grad (Law review editor, clerked at the Appeals Court level) and was a lawyer in New York for a time, though that income probably pales in comparison to what she pulls down now.

    She's written eleven NYT best sellers, one every year or two for the last 15 years, all of them consistent sellers with some breakouts, which doubtless helps in her contract negotiations. She has lots of TV appearances; no idea what they pay. The columns are kind of old fashioned these days but it does check a box for some. Supposedly the columns pay $5-$100 per paper per column when used, trending very much to the lower end of that for most podunk papers.

    Judging from the emphasis on her web site she makes money from books and speeches.

    (Hey, maybe Steve can go on the speaker circuit. Epic triggering.)

    She says her background is upper middle class. Her father was an attorney. So she's not a trust fund baby.

    Hey, maybe Steve can go on the speaker circuit.

    Or maybe not. I heard Steve on that podcast a while back. Let’s just say that he’s got a voice made for blogging.

  329. @Boomstick
    Coulter's speaking fee is reportedly in the $25K range. She was a University of Michigan law grad (Law review editor, clerked at the Appeals Court level) and was a lawyer in New York for a time, though that income probably pales in comparison to what she pulls down now.

    She's written eleven NYT best sellers, one every year or two for the last 15 years, all of them consistent sellers with some breakouts, which doubtless helps in her contract negotiations. She has lots of TV appearances; no idea what they pay. The columns are kind of old fashioned these days but it does check a box for some. Supposedly the columns pay $5-$100 per paper per column when used, trending very much to the lower end of that for most podunk papers.

    Judging from the emphasis on her web site she makes money from books and speeches.

    (Hey, maybe Steve can go on the speaker circuit. Epic triggering.)

    She says her background is upper middle class. Her father was an attorney. So she's not a trust fund baby.

    Here’s her obituary for her father:

    http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2008-01-09.html

    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Ok, reading between the lines and balancing it with Joe Conason's description, it does appear that while Ann may not be technically a trust fund child, she did come from probably the top 1-2% of the US at that time (or what Charles Murray affectionately termed the top centiles of American society).

    Like Bill Gates's father, who was a corporate lawyer who represented firms accused of anti-trust laws, it appears that Coulter's father was not a public defender but did quite well in private practice, well enough to go on to head a corporation (and corporation heads ain't poor broke).

    "In the early 1980s, as vice president and labor lawyer for Phelps Dodge copper company"

    Example: Leftist Marvin Miller, future labor head of MLB was union executive for US Steel's union during the '60's but obviously not on management's side.

    Also, the giveaway that Ann comes from mucho big bucks is the fact that she slips in that her family vacationed in Europe back at a time when only the very top two or three percent of US could afford to do that on a regular basis.

    So basically her upbringing is Dan Quayle's: Country clubs but public schools. Some of the trappings of elite wealth but not quite Kennedy money of the time. So top 2% or barely top 1% is what she came from. Joe Conason was correct.

    I like Ann's work, but I like to be consistent as well. I have a feeling that Trump doesn't share the whole anti-union thing to the extreme. Unions do share a part of the blame for NAFTA and other trade agreements being passed as they sold out their own members but they weren't pushing for those trade deals the way that management/Chamber of Commerce/big incs. were. When push came to shove, only the AFL-CIO; Richard Gephardt; Ross Perot; and Pat Buchanan were virtually the only public entities/figures publicly attacking NAFTA.

  330. @biz
    How can so many people here, presumably with a straight face, accuse a group which currently has a 70% intermarriage rate of acting as an enthocentric block?

    Because people marry people they are attracted to as individuals, even if they are wary of the tribe they come from?

    Are you suggesting that no black dude who is married to a white chick could possibly have a chip on his shoulder toward whites?

  331. SFG says:
    @Luke Ford
    In Jewish life, it seems like either you are Orthodox or you are marching for transgender rights.

    Right. I wonder how many people just opt out? How much of intermarriage is driven by moderately-conservative Jewish guys who don’t want to hear lectures on feminism all day? Any clue?

    I suspect a lot of the Jews ‘on our side’ just don’t make a lot of noise about being Jewish and do whatever else is required. Heck, Drudge has been beating the drum for Trump this whole time.

    • Replies: @Lot
    Drudge is a non-fem gay Jew. Such people often have off-the-charts verbal/creative skills. He was broke and poor in LA for a few years, and just by working 60-hour weeks, week after week, built a simple website that made him millions of dollars and huge influence.

    While Drudge is not technically a paleo given that he gets caught up in pro-war fevers, he's closer than most other right-wing online people with big audiences, and does provide plenty of links to anti-war conservatives. He has always been a generous linker to Pat Buchanan and Ann Coulter. As well as the very dovish Republican Bob Novak when he was still alive.

    The anti-semite crowd, which presumably has the goal of getting the broader paleo right to adopt its views, really has no plan to replace the sizable Jewish talent like Drudge currently working for us.

    Drudge's really unique contribution is finding and promoting the articles that provide the best possible hard-right spin on the story of the day, plus promoting under-the-radar stories that have the potential to help our narrative, whether it is a Clinton scandal or news-worthy crime by blacks or illegals the MSM wants to avoid.
  332. SFG says:
    @Luke Ford
    Kevin MacDonald cracked our code. We're f***ed. We have to make a deal.

    I’d like to see the leadership make a deal too, but Kevin MacDonald is not going to usher in an American Holocaust. The country as a whole just isn’t antisemitic enough, dictatorial powers are harder to assume with Congress fighting the President, and Americans don’t follow orders as well as Germans, for better or worse.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I used to hold that opinion, but reading the comments at sites like this blog and Radix (the educated Jew-haters) convinced me that hatred of Jews was palatable to a much broader segment of society than I had previously supposed. You're a half-Jew and so possibly more protected than I am - the Nazis left the final disposition of half and quarter-Jews in Germany for after the war (though the East European mischlings were targeted for extermination). But if I were you, I'd keep my passport up to date and a packed bag in the closet just in case. What is so sad is that it didn't have to be this way. If the Jewish community could have controlled its radical social justice warriors and pro-immigration fanatics, there would have been less reason for a backlash against us, not to mention a nicer country in which to live.
  333. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    It's not gonna burn her. If National Review supposedly "banned" her for her comments post-9/11 and that didn't hurt her earning ability, then nothing will. She wisely saw that Trump's candidacy was something larger than anything in at least 20 yrs and got on board from day one. She also wisely gave a copy of her book to Trump.

    Also, Ann has probably met Trump on a few occasions in the past since they were at one time both part of the GOP establishment so the likelihood increases that they knew one another before last yr.

    Regarding Ann, the idea that she's well off, is actually a good point inadvertently backed into.

    I mean, she lives in three areas; NY; CA; and FL. How exactly is that possible? Just from book royalties; syndicated column; and occasional speaking appearances? It really doesn't seem like it would be THAT kind of money. For instance, Steve once mentioned that Malcolm Gladwell makes around 40k per speaking appearance. Ann Coulter doesn't make anywhere near that amount for the occasional college speaking appearance, does she?

    Just asking. How exactly does someone make enough money to afford that kind of lifestyle? She doesn't work in Hollywood, and she's not on the network news. Conservative author Michelle Malkin has a successful national column and roughly the same career trajectory as Ann Coulter yet she doesn't have three living areas and resides in Colorado Springs. Something else must be going on.

    She’s made quite a bit off her books, but the big thing is she’s old money.

    • Replies: @PV van der Byl
    He father was a labor lawyer and she did grow up in New Canaan but I think she made almost all her money herself. She went to the local public school before college and the family house, though nice, was not grand by the standards of New Canaan. I'd categorise her as upper-middle class rather than rich.
  334. SFG says:
    @Bill P

    I don’t know if I’d go lying to your kids–as Jack D said, they might join the alt-right and find an unpleasant surprise if someone goes digging. Besides, you don’t want to create neuroses (especially if you don’t want them acting too Jewish ;) ). Just tell them, hey, you’re Christian, teach them about European and American history, and let them decide the rest. Ultimately they’ll do what they want anyway.
     
    I don't know why it's such a struggle for Christians to tell their kids they have Jewish ancestry.

    Go back far enough and I have 100% pagan ancestry (as far as I know -- all the ancestors I know of come from the Atlantic fringe where Jews seldom bothered to go), and here I am raised Catholic and thereby partially a product of Jewish priests and rabbis who lived 2,500 years ago. Doesn't that make me half Jewish or something like that? Of course I know Jews disagree with the New Covenant, but you get my point.

    Having some Hebrew ancestry can be - and often is - a point of pride for Christians. This is why I'm convinced that the conflict between European Christians and Jews is 90% religious and only 10% racial if that. But then again, religion and race are tied up in a lot of ways. It's complicated...

    ‘Cause a bunch of pseudo-pagans 70 years ago killed people who were even a quarter Jewish (while going on to trash most of Europe), and everyone is afraid history will repeat itself.

    I don’t think the US government would actually do that–Americans don’t like government enough, for one–but you can see why people might be worried.

  335. @Alec Leamas
    Well, whether it is adaptive or maladaptive for goodwhites depends upon whether they see themselves as the rulers of Brazil North when it finally arrives (i.e., as in Central and South American regimes) or rather as tax cattle who won't be allowed to have nice things and who will from time to time suffer partial purges and consistent harassment and abuse (as in the Chinese merchant classes in South East Asia). It's a risky bet - the upside of freezing themselves and their progeny in a ruling class impervious to competitive forces from the badwhites via meritocratic institutions, while the downside is simply potentially disastrous for themselves and their progeny.

    If one believes that the latter is a more likely outcome, and that present trends make it inevitable without a course correction in the present, it is maladaptive to status signal. If the former outcome, it is a ruthless form of competition elimination.

    As a data point, EVERYONE thinks that they are an above average driver. I’m guessing goodwhites see themselves and their descendants as the natural meritocratic rulers of the future Brasil do Norte. They may even be right.

  336. @anonymous

    Maybe one of your kids wants to be the grand wizard of the KKK – imagine when he finds out that he is really 1/2 Jewish himself.
     
    Frank Collin, onetime leader of a Nazi-faction party in Chicago and who is famous for declaring his intention to march on Skokie back in the late 70's, had a father whose family name was Cohen, changed to Collin. He was aware of it but denied it. Strange stuff happens.

    This is actually has happened more than you might think, also in right wing movements in E. Europe. The Nazis believed (and in this they were probably not wrong) that Jews would rise to the top of any organization that does not take active measures to bar them. This makes sense given the gap in IQ, especially verbal IQ.

    The cream of the (1/2) Jewish crop doesn’t usually look for work in the leadership of right wing anti-Semitic organizations, but compared to the toothless dimwits that form the bulk of the membership, even an average mischling is a rocket scientist.

    • Replies: @5371
    Jew supremacism, ladies and gentlemen.
    , @Luke Ford
    The more free the country, the more likely that Jews will rule it.
    , @Matra
    The Nazis believed (and in this they were probably not wrong) that Jews would rise to the top of any organization that does not take active measures to bar them. This makes sense given the gap in IQ, especially verbal IQ.

    It's a relief to know that it's all about meritocracy based on IQ rather than anything inappropriate like nepotism.

  337. @AndrewR
    Your comment is insightful, and by no means do I mean to understate the genetic diversity within the "white" population, but I maintain my claim that focusing the brunt of your hatred on your closest kin is maladaptive, especially when there's no logical reason to do so.

    As a northerner of significant non-Anglo descent, I can't say I feel a great deal of kinship with southern whites. I'm a nonreligious Catholic and am not a redneck by any means. I view them as alien and the feeling is mutual. But I view them as much alien than most blacks, many Mexicans and even many Jews. If I had to pick groups for removal from the US, conservative southern whites would be rather far down the list. This is in stark contrast to probably most of the Belmont goodgoyim who you dubiously claim are not really cucks.

    especially when there’s no logical reason to do so

    If something keeps happening over and over, chances are there IS a reason why it is happening. Even if the reason doesn’t comport with what Spock would call “logic”, it must be following its own internal logic somehow.

    A good rule of thumb is that people usually act in what they perceive to be their self-interest, so if they behave in a way that appears self-defeating to you, chances are that they see their self-interest in a way that is different than you do. Often it is the difference between long term and short term interest – most people have a very short time horizon. So if you tell a meth addict that in the long term the drug will destroy them, they will take it anyway because in the short term it feels good. Maybe that is the case here – the short term reinforcement that goodwhites get from making themselves feel superior to badwhites is more important to them than the long term consequences of undermining the country. Or maybe, as I said before, the evolutionary logic really is in favor of them undermining other white competitors – if you can get your (regressed to the mean) kids into the Ivies as a “legacy”, they will still end up at the top of the class if everyone sitting around them is an affirmative action admit.

  338. @AndrewR
    I'm not obsessed with Jews. I just recognize that they tend to act in ways hostile to whites even while claiming to be white.

    “I’m not obsessed with Jews. I just recognize that they tend to act in ways hostile to whites even while claiming to be white.”

    Lamenting over and over about Jews as an entire group that they focus their energies against “whites” or “white interests”–without even a clear definition of what those terms engender–is indeed an obsession. It’s ok to own up to it.

  339. @Svigor

    Actually, that’s not true–whites definitely notice when a white person marries someone who isn’t white, and there are statistics on marriages between races. Even with Asians people joke about aspects of it like the differential gender intermarriage rates.

    Other white subgroups like Italian, Irish, etc. may not.
     
    Actually, it is. What Jews call "intermarriage" (white marrying white), whites call "marriage." That's the oranges to oranges comparison, and the one I was making. Interracial marriage and "intermarriage" are apples and oranges in this context.

    What “true whites” call marriage between a “white” and a “nonwhite” is miscegenation, which is deemed “anti-white”.

    Which is truly “whack”, as dey call it in da hood.

  340. @Tracy

    Good Lord, you people are a bunch of creeps. (Oh, and by the way… the so-called “racial” component of being Jewish is an ethnicity, not a race. “Whiteness” is not an ethnicity. And Israel recognizes black Ethiopian Jews as Jewish.

    So, a white rich fraternity had to be inconvenienced for a bit. Boo fucking hoo
     
    Whites are treated as a group; it's ridiculous to expect us to not react as a group. "White guilt," "white privilege," cis white males," "the white race is the cancer of the world" -- give me a break.

    I take note of your last line there about a "rich white fraternity" who endured what you characterize as an "inconvenience." Nice.

    Further, Ethiopian Jews are treated like crap in Israel. See The tribulations of being an Ethiopian Jew, The plight of Ethiopian Jews in Israel, and Israel: No promised land for Ethiopian Jews. There are plenty more articles like that out there. Do a search.
  341. @Jack D
    This is actually has happened more than you might think, also in right wing movements in E. Europe. The Nazis believed (and in this they were probably not wrong) that Jews would rise to the top of any organization that does not take active measures to bar them. This makes sense given the gap in IQ, especially verbal IQ.

    The cream of the (1/2) Jewish crop doesn't usually look for work in the leadership of right wing anti-Semitic organizations, but compared to the toothless dimwits that form the bulk of the membership, even an average mischling is a rocket scientist.

    Jew supremacism, ladies and gentlemen.

  342. @Tracy
    I agree that most Jews don't know what's in the Talmud, but it informs their culture in the same way that the Bill of Rights does American culture, even though not one in a hundred Americans can enumerate those rights. And along with 'the ridiculous things' in the Talmud are plenty of racist, anti-Gentile ugliness and outright anti-Christ nastiness.

    Every strongly identifying group holds negative views of outsiders, or what is called “racist” or “bigoted” or “nasty” or “ugly.” Jews no more or less than the Japanese, the Australians, the Tibetans, the Muslims, etc.

    When a goy strongly identifies with his race, religion or nation, he will be likely to hold some anti-Jewish views, just as when a Jew strongly identifies with being Jews, he will likely hold anti-goyim views.

    That’s how social identity works. It is normal, natural and usually healthy.

    If people are arbitrarily divided into teams, they will quickly identify with their team and develop a filter that makes their team superior.

    Every people view themselves as specially chosen, the center of the universe, etc.

    • Agree: reiner Tor
  343. @Jack D
    This is actually has happened more than you might think, also in right wing movements in E. Europe. The Nazis believed (and in this they were probably not wrong) that Jews would rise to the top of any organization that does not take active measures to bar them. This makes sense given the gap in IQ, especially verbal IQ.

    The cream of the (1/2) Jewish crop doesn't usually look for work in the leadership of right wing anti-Semitic organizations, but compared to the toothless dimwits that form the bulk of the membership, even an average mischling is a rocket scientist.

    The more free the country, the more likely that Jews will rule it.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    In that case, Israel must be the only free country because I can't think of any others that are "ruled" by Jews.

    Or, if what you are saying is right, then the only way to have a Jew free country is to eliminate freedom. I believe this is also called "cutting off your nose to spite your face". This strategy worked out really well for the Germans in the '40s, when their atomic weapons enabled them to win WWII. Once the Soviet Union got rid of all the disloyal Jews in its power structure and replaced them with drunken Russians, this turned the tide in the Cold War in their favor. As we can see from the great success that Zimbabwe is experiencing, the best way for your country to prosper is to replace all the smart people at the top with people who have the interest of the natives at heart. You can trust that being of the same race they will look out for their own people and not for themselves first.

  344. @Anonymous
    Good Lord, you people are a bunch of creeps. (Oh, and by the way... the so-called "racial" component of being Jewish is an ethnicity, not a race. "Whiteness" is not an ethnicity. And Israel recognizes black Ethiopian Jews as Jewish.

    So, a white rich fraternity had to be inconvenienced for a bit. Boo fucking hoo

    It’s endemic to our civilization’s ongoing collapse that it’s now nearly impossible to determine if you are a non-white – say, for instance, a Jew – sugaring the other guy’s gas tank for the home team; or just another newly-minted Race Traitor trundling off the higher education conveyor belt, eager to get in there and throw the game while repeatedly winking at the men on the other sideline.

    That it’s now 50/50 either way tells you that the hour is late and the reckoning is near.

  345. @Lot
    You called it just right on every point.

    And it is sad, because with Trump we are potentially on the cusp of actually doing something about America's ongoing demographic disaster. Rather than focus on the very hard work of reaching 50% + 1 in elections, a big part of the nationalist right in America would prefer to wallow in the filth you describe.

    When you look at Europe, you see what happens when the nationalist right rejects kooks and wins elections, sometimes able to join governments in return for major concessions on immigration, versus when it takes the "let's going over for the millionth time the perfidy of the Jews!" path.

    Tell you all what: I concede Congressmen Celler sucks. Can we move on?

    when the nationalist right rejects kooks and wins elections

    Hope springs eternal.

    Jews on the brain disease is one of the reasons all is lost.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    Back in the glorious days of the Third Reich, having Jew on the brain disease (an apparently incurable condition) was no impediment to electoral success (especially since they didn't bother with free elections once they took power). In Current Year America, even for a candidate running from the right and who expects to finally (after 200 years) unite all the White People of America under his banner, I think that it is. But it is a characteristic of all fanatics (which include those with JOTBD) that ideological purity is more important than trivial things such as actually winning elections. If Donald Trump would stand up at the Republican Convention and once and for all openly denounce Israel and the Joos and all their works and all their empty promises, it would feel so so good, much better than actually winning an election.
  346. @biz
    How can so many people here, presumably with a straight face, accuse a group which currently has a 70% intermarriage rate of acting as an enthocentric block?

    How can so many people here, presumably with a straight face, accuse a group which currently has a 70% intermarriage rate of acting as an enthocentric block?

    The group does not have a 70% intermarriage rate. You know, there are Jews in Israel, too. And the 70% rate is a gross exaggeration for the US. And even if it weren’t, it wouldn’t prove your point, would it?

    • Replies: @Brutusale
    It's about half:

    http://www.timesofisrael.com/why-is-jewish-intermarriage-the-highest-among-all-us-faiths/

    I'll leave it to someone more interested in the subject to drill down and find out how many of these marriages bring the kids up Jewish.
  347. @Jewish Conservative Race Realist
    I agree with you Bill.

    I used to think it would be possible to remain a patriot (of America) and a Jew at the same time. After all, there are American Catholics who are patriots of America and not Ireland or Italy or some other Catholic nation. For me personally, it's never been difficult to do this at all. Of course I love America more than Israel. America is where my forefathers have lived for almost two centuries. Israel is nothing to me.

    But Jewish activism in this country is burning every possible bridge with patriots, and I don't really see how this gets walked back anymore. Due to this invidious rhetoric from my co-ethnics, I'm sadly coming to the conclusion that the only viable options for Jewish diaspora in America are complete assimilation (reject entirely Jewish identity and blend into Stale Pale America) or emigration. Split loyalty and "dual" loyalty are bogus ideas. As I learned from Sailer on this very blog, politics is primarily about Whose Side Are You On. Loyalty comes in a strict hierarchy and at some point each person is called upon to declare, stand, and deliver.

    Any Jew who advocates open borders for their home country and ethnic preservation policies for Israel should be ostracized, silenced, or deported to Israel, in that order. The insanity has got to end.

    For me personally, Jewish identity is nothing at all compared to White American identity. But after spending so much time in alt-right circles, I can't deny that there's really something to the Jewish ethnocentrism case. (With many notable exceptions. Many great men of the Right are Jewish or Jewish ethnicity.)

    For me, I've given up on Jewish identity completely. It's easy for me since I'm not a believer. My wife is a believing Christian, and my kids are coming up Christian. They won't learn of my Jewish heritage until they are fully grown because I don't want to open the door to childhood self-reimagining as a poor oppressed Jew. Nobody has it better than the Jews in this country. They have all the advantages of high status and few of the disadvantages of being Pale and Stale. The only dignified disposition of Jewish Americans towards the USA is gratitude and service.

    I would be honest with them but also be honest about Jewish power. Basically talk to them about their Jewish heritage in the same way that Goodthinking White Liberal parents are expected to talk to their children about whiteness. As for the holocaust narrative, say that human history is full of atrocities but that the holocaust is today used cynically as a weapon to push a Jewish Supremacist agenda. Leaving aside the questions over the veracity of the official narrative, nothing the Germans could have ever done justifies the way they’re currently treated, let alone the way that Jews treat other people of European descent.

  348. @Boomstick
    Coulter's speaking fee is reportedly in the $25K range. She was a University of Michigan law grad (Law review editor, clerked at the Appeals Court level) and was a lawyer in New York for a time, though that income probably pales in comparison to what she pulls down now.

    She's written eleven NYT best sellers, one every year or two for the last 15 years, all of them consistent sellers with some breakouts, which doubtless helps in her contract negotiations. She has lots of TV appearances; no idea what they pay. The columns are kind of old fashioned these days but it does check a box for some. Supposedly the columns pay $5-$100 per paper per column when used, trending very much to the lower end of that for most podunk papers.

    Judging from the emphasis on her web site she makes money from books and speeches.

    (Hey, maybe Steve can go on the speaker circuit. Epic triggering.)

    She says her background is upper middle class. Her father was an attorney. So she's not a trust fund baby.

    I’m sorry, but that still does not in any way explain the fact that she can afford three separate elite living locations. Beverly Hills and either Upper East Side or Upper West Side are very exclusive and cost a lot.

    Rush; Hannity; and Glenn Beck are obviously wealthy and its understandable how they could afford that kind of top one percent lifestyle. But its not so obvious with Ann.

    Books + Speeches simply don’t equal up to Beverly Hills; NYC and FL. They don’t. Unless there’s another additional source of income somewhere. Like for example if Ann has an annual contract with FOX News that paid her between 5-10 million dollars, then that definitely would explain it since that’s a sizable guaranteed annual source of income whereas the book royalties aren’t annually paid (she doesn’t write a book every single yr).

    Again, it simply doesn’t add up and there is another additional source of income somewhere for her to afford that kind of top one percent lifestyle. Michelle Malkin has the same career trajectory (successful books, national column) and she’s living in CO.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Coulter has never married and is childless, so on that alone she can afford a more extravagant lifestyle than Malkin, who supports her husband and children. She comes from a thrifty "High WASP" background, and may have made wise investments, or have a wealthy patron or two. If she's a homeowner, her homes in expensive areas are no doubt also investments.
  349. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    What I don’t get is why this woman would change her name from Ekaterina Jung to something bland and generic like Cathy Young. The old name seems jazzier than the new one. Arnold Schwarzenegger was advised to change his name but refused and it didn’t harm him any. If one’s purpose is to disguise their ethnic origins it usually doesn’t work since people will smoke you out anyway.

    • Replies: @writers
    Are you American? Anglicizing your name is a normal practice by immigrants to America, far more so than in Europe. The former emphasized assimilation a lot more, or at least used to, so Schwarzenegger is more the exception, and Young the rule. Framing it as disguising your ethnic origins is the negative slant. Many do it to less to hide their heritage than to embrace their new American identity. Based on her background and political positions, Young might fit this mold. I know a Russian immigrant who didn't change her name, but would get irritated when people pronounced her name Xenia the Russian way as Ksenia, rather than the Americanized Zenia. I moved away from Russia for a reason, she would say. Immigrants often have painful relationships with their countries of origin, and what's more New World than wanting to wipe the slate clean and start over anew? I can't rag on that.
  350. @Steve Sailer
    Here's her obituary for her father:

    http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2008-01-09.html

    Ok, reading between the lines and balancing it with Joe Conason’s description, it does appear that while Ann may not be technically a trust fund child, she did come from probably the top 1-2% of the US at that time (or what Charles Murray affectionately termed the top centiles of American society).

    Like Bill Gates’s father, who was a corporate lawyer who represented firms accused of anti-trust laws, it appears that Coulter’s father was not a public defender but did quite well in private practice, well enough to go on to head a corporation (and corporation heads ain’t poor broke).

    “In the early 1980s, as vice president and labor lawyer for Phelps Dodge copper company”

    Example: Leftist Marvin Miller, future labor head of MLB was union executive for US Steel’s union during the ’60’s but obviously not on management’s side.

    Also, the giveaway that Ann comes from mucho big bucks is the fact that she slips in that her family vacationed in Europe back at a time when only the very top two or three percent of US could afford to do that on a regular basis.

    So basically her upbringing is Dan Quayle’s: Country clubs but public schools. Some of the trappings of elite wealth but not quite Kennedy money of the time. So top 2% or barely top 1% is what she came from. Joe Conason was correct.

    I like Ann’s work, but I like to be consistent as well. I have a feeling that Trump doesn’t share the whole anti-union thing to the extreme. Unions do share a part of the blame for NAFTA and other trade agreements being passed as they sold out their own members but they weren’t pushing for those trade deals the way that management/Chamber of Commerce/big incs. were. When push came to shove, only the AFL-CIO; Richard Gephardt; Ross Perot; and Pat Buchanan were virtually the only public entities/figures publicly attacking NAFTA.

    • Replies: @Boomstick
    Some poking around on the web reveals Coulter's 3/2 childhood home in New Canaan, CT is in a leafy neighborhood, has about 1500 square feet, and has a current valuation in the $900K range. There's been a gigantic run-up in prices since she was a kid in the 70's both in absolute and relative terms as New Canaan has become highly desirable real estate. The home is consistent with her self-description of an "upper middle class" upbringing, and certainly not that of the top 2%. Trips to Europe in that era weren't quite as unusual as you make out.

    Median home price in New Canaan is around $1.4M now.
  351. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    That's not what was said. In 1965, he was not the most famous person in Congress. Now by 1970, post Chappaquiddik and with the death of his older brother, certainly the case can be made that from then on he was the most well known person nationally in the Senate if not all of Congress. But definitely not in Congress or the Senate in 1965 or perhaps during his first term.

    I mean, former FL Gov. Jeb! is the brother of a recent president and his dad was president. How'd that work out for him getting to the GOP nomination?

    “That’s not what was said. In 1965, he was not the most famous person in Congress.”

    You said best known – i.e. most famous. It is entirely possible that Ted Kennedy was one of the most famous Senators in 1965 – just by name recognition alone. Kim Kardasian is one of the most famous people on Earth. Is she important or consequential in any way? Of course not. Fame and intrinsic worth often have little to do with each other.

    “I mean, former FL Gov. Jeb! is the brother of a recent president and his dad was president. How’d that work out for him getting to the GOP nomination?”

    That is not what is at issue, or at least what you were talking about – being well known. !Jeb! is indeed well known.

  352. @iffen
    when the nationalist right rejects kooks and wins elections

    Hope springs eternal.

    Jews on the brain disease is one of the reasons all is lost.

    Back in the glorious days of the Third Reich, having Jew on the brain disease (an apparently incurable condition) was no impediment to electoral success (especially since they didn’t bother with free elections once they took power). In Current Year America, even for a candidate running from the right and who expects to finally (after 200 years) unite all the White People of America under his banner, I think that it is. But it is a characteristic of all fanatics (which include those with JOTBD) that ideological purity is more important than trivial things such as actually winning elections. If Donald Trump would stand up at the Republican Convention and once and for all openly denounce Israel and the Joos and all their works and all their empty promises, it would feel so so good, much better than actually winning an election.

    • Replies: @iffen
    (an apparently incurable condition)

    Do you know for sure that this is true?

    Any in from the cold stories?

    I am talking hard-core, not the relatively benign, squeezing a nickel until the buffalo jumps off type infections.
  353. @Luke Ford
    The more free the country, the more likely that Jews will rule it.

    In that case, Israel must be the only free country because I can’t think of any others that are “ruled” by Jews.

    Or, if what you are saying is right, then the only way to have a Jew free country is to eliminate freedom. I believe this is also called “cutting off your nose to spite your face”. This strategy worked out really well for the Germans in the ’40s, when their atomic weapons enabled them to win WWII. Once the Soviet Union got rid of all the disloyal Jews in its power structure and replaced them with drunken Russians, this turned the tide in the Cold War in their favor. As we can see from the great success that Zimbabwe is experiencing, the best way for your country to prosper is to replace all the smart people at the top with people who have the interest of the natives at heart. You can trust that being of the same race they will look out for their own people and not for themselves first.

    • Replies: @Luke Ford
    Rabbi Mayer Schiller said in 1999: “The State of Israel poses a problem for Jews living in the diaspora. A Jew living in America, France or England but yet somehow says I am an Israeli or a Zionist, that creates a tremendous amount of tension. Herzl envisioned Zionism as Jews leaving Gentile nations and going to live in Israel, not staying in France and England and saying I am a Zionist. Jews living in America, England, France, etc, have three moral possibilities: They can be loyal citizens, they can be Zionists which means to leave [for Israel] or they can adopt the Neterui Karta position of non-involvement in the affairs of the nations.”

    http://www.lukeford.net/blog/?p=56926

    Rabbi Schiller seems to have studied the works of Kevin MacDonald and thought through their troubling implications.
    , @peterike

    As we can see from the great success that Zimbabwe is experiencing, the best way for your country to prosper is to replace all the smart people at the top with people who have the interest of the natives at heart.

     

    Ironically, the entire Rhodesia/South Africa demolition was brought about with the relentless and able assistance of... ohh, you know who!
  354. @Tracy
    I agree that most Jews don't know what's in the Talmud, but it informs their culture in the same way that the Bill of Rights does American culture, even though not one in a hundred Americans can enumerate those rights. And along with 'the ridiculous things' in the Talmud are plenty of racist, anti-Gentile ugliness and outright anti-Christ nastiness.

    Its more like the articles of confederation or magna carta than the constitution/bill of rights.
    I think it would be unfair to pick out the three fifths clause as something informing the thinking of your average american.
    Though I think that would be fairer than saying all nasty parts of the Talmud inform the thinking of Jews since 1. the Talmud is 6000 pages long 2. There are explicitly rejected opinions that are included in the Talmud 3. As I mentioned much of its content is nonsense at worst, metaphor at best

    • Agree: juster
    • Replies: @juster
    Honestly, I've been Jewish for a while, and I've never even opened a Talmud. I probably see parts at Passover or the very occasional time I go to synagogue but basically no clue.

    I think this holds for most reform and secular Jews. We hear these wild tales about the awful stuff in it but it might as well be the Dead Sea Scrolls in terms of any influence it actually has on us.
  355. @Jack D
    This is actually has happened more than you might think, also in right wing movements in E. Europe. The Nazis believed (and in this they were probably not wrong) that Jews would rise to the top of any organization that does not take active measures to bar them. This makes sense given the gap in IQ, especially verbal IQ.

    The cream of the (1/2) Jewish crop doesn't usually look for work in the leadership of right wing anti-Semitic organizations, but compared to the toothless dimwits that form the bulk of the membership, even an average mischling is a rocket scientist.

    The Nazis believed (and in this they were probably not wrong) that Jews would rise to the top of any organization that does not take active measures to bar them. This makes sense given the gap in IQ, especially verbal IQ.

    It’s a relief to know that it’s all about meritocracy based on IQ rather than anything inappropriate like nepotism.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    If you read the thread, it was regarding Jews rising to the top of right wing, even anti-Semitic organizations. Presumably you don't get to the head of the KKK organization via Jewish nepotism. In fact, I would say that it tends to prove the opposite.
  356. @Jack D
    And the whole goodwhite/badwhite concept is really a sort of distorted Calvinism and has its roots in Christian (Protestant), not Jewish, doctrine. The whole modern Jewish "Tikkun Olam" (repair the world) thing has very little to do with traditional Jewish doctrine where "repairing the world" did not mean instituting free lunches for underprivileged black children but rather meant preparing for the coming of the Messiah. But it does have a lot to do with traditional WASP do-goodism.

    As a gedankenexperiment, imagine a large white country that thru some terrible tragedy has lost most of its Jewish population. Then see if the same liberal currents (for example a lady president who wants to let in millions of refugees into her country) exist in that country as in the US. If they do, this is proof that the goodwhite phenomenon would exist with or without the Jews.

    Just because you see Jews riding the bandwagon and playing the tune (even improvising riffs) doesn't mean that they wrote the song that they are playing.

    And the whole goodwhite/badwhite concept is really a sort of distorted Calvinism and has its roots in Christian (Protestant), not Jewish, doctrine. The whole modern Jewish “Tikkun Olam” (repair the world) thing has very little to do with traditional Jewish doctrine where “repairing the world” did not mean instituting free lunches for underprivileged black children but rather meant preparing for the coming of the Messiah.

    This is all just manufactured out of thin air.

    Calvinism never involved any sort of “Tikkun Olam” in the “free lunches for underprivileged black children” sense. Nothing even close. Instead, to the practitioners of the Christian version of Tikkun Olam (the Puritans), it was more like what you described as the traditional Jewish doctrine — which should not be surprising since they apparently picked it up from their Jewish next-door neighbors in the Netherlands. Notably, other Calvinists like the Huguenots or those in Scotland, never picked up “Tikkun Olam” at all.

    As a gedankenexperiment, imagine a large white country that thru some terrible tragedy has lost most of its Jewish population. Then see if the same liberal currents (for example a lady president who wants to let in millions of refugees into her country) exist in that country as in the US. If they do, this is proof that the goodwhite phenomenon would exist with or without the Jews.

    No, it would prove nothing of the sort. Things can be done from a distance.

  357. @Matra
    The Nazis believed (and in this they were probably not wrong) that Jews would rise to the top of any organization that does not take active measures to bar them. This makes sense given the gap in IQ, especially verbal IQ.

    It's a relief to know that it's all about meritocracy based on IQ rather than anything inappropriate like nepotism.

    If you read the thread, it was regarding Jews rising to the top of right wing, even anti-Semitic organizations. Presumably you don’t get to the head of the KKK organization via Jewish nepotism. In fact, I would say that it tends to prove the opposite.

  358. @Jack D
    In that case, Israel must be the only free country because I can't think of any others that are "ruled" by Jews.

    Or, if what you are saying is right, then the only way to have a Jew free country is to eliminate freedom. I believe this is also called "cutting off your nose to spite your face". This strategy worked out really well for the Germans in the '40s, when their atomic weapons enabled them to win WWII. Once the Soviet Union got rid of all the disloyal Jews in its power structure and replaced them with drunken Russians, this turned the tide in the Cold War in their favor. As we can see from the great success that Zimbabwe is experiencing, the best way for your country to prosper is to replace all the smart people at the top with people who have the interest of the natives at heart. You can trust that being of the same race they will look out for their own people and not for themselves first.

    Rabbi Mayer Schiller said in 1999: “The State of Israel poses a problem for Jews living in the diaspora. A Jew living in America, France or England but yet somehow says I am an Israeli or a Zionist, that creates a tremendous amount of tension. Herzl envisioned Zionism as Jews leaving Gentile nations and going to live in Israel, not staying in France and England and saying I am a Zionist. Jews living in America, England, France, etc, have three moral possibilities: They can be loyal citizens, they can be Zionists which means to leave [for Israel] or they can adopt the Neterui Karta position of non-involvement in the affairs of the nations.”

    http://www.lukeford.net/blog/?p=56926

    Rabbi Schiller seems to have studied the works of Kevin MacDonald and thought through their troubling implications.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    Dual loyalty is always a canard. Are Catholics more loyal to the Pope than they are to America? Do Cuban Americans remain loyal to Castro or do they become American ultra-patriots? Are Irish Americans suspect because they send their kids to Irish dance school and march in the St. Patricks day parade? Or are Jews the only ones who must be suspected of dual loyalty?

    Isn't there a fourth possibility - that you are a loyal American but that you wish your paisans back in the homeland well? Just because Herzl said that all Jews should up and leave for Palestine doesn't mean that they all did. Herzl himself didn't (until after he was dead) and most of the people who did, did so under duress. Out of six million American Jews, a couple of thousand leave for Israel each year - a fraction of 1%. And yet most American Jews count themselves as Zionists. So Schiller was wrong.
  359. @Jack D
    There is no doubt (in my mind at least) that anti-Semitic kooks are present in the Sailer comments, along with various other points of view. I can't imagine that they form a big part of his fundraising base - how much can be left over from the SSI check after you have paid the rent on the trailer and bought beer, cigarettes and jerky? The reason that they stand out so much here is that they have pretty much been purged from the rest of "polite" American society. While I understand the impetus to do so (for Jews this can be regarded literally as a matter of life and death because the last time these viewpoints were given free rein it turned out very very badly), there is also supposed to be an American tradition of free speech where all viewpoints, even unpopular ones were permissible. We don't need a First Amendment to protect popular points of view. The Left used to understand this quite well when theirs were the viewpoints in need of protection, but now that they shoe is on the other foot they have no problem resorting to McCarthyite tactics and doing their best to see that those with the "wrong" opinions lose their jobs and everything else.

    how much can be left over from the SSI check after you have paid the rent on the trailer and bought beer, cigarettes and jerky

    I like your comments, but you are going to have to lay off my peeps or we will have words.

    Do you even realize how difficult it is to find good jerky?

  360. “Celler by the way had an incredible life – he was first elected to Congress during the election of 1922 and made his first important speech on the House floor during consideration of Immigration Act. The Immigration Act of 1924.”

    K so maybe Celler was working to end the 1924 act from its inception to its destruction in 1965.

    Jews seem to be getting all worked up over an issue other Europeans have been dealing with for the past century.

    Same could be said for Israel. But Jews think of themselves as “progressive.” Yeah, in what they push for others, maybe.

    “As Tom Sunic has pointed out, the biggest problem with the alt right is narcissism and low-level sociopathy.”

    As opposed to what? The narcissism and high-level sociopathy of people like Bryan Caplan?

    Sunic sounds like a glass half empty kind of guy. Hasn’t he heard of cause and effect? Nationalists are probably still nationalists only because of observed nationalist quirks. Otherwise they’d all be humming dirges along with the Hive.

    For what it’s worth, Patton Oswalt is not Jewish.

    For what it’s worth, he never pinged my Jewdar, even before I knew his name.

    How can so many people here, presumably with a straight face, accuse a group which currently has a 70% intermarriage rate of acting as an enthocentric block?

    Like I said, this figure is LOW. Most white ethnicities have “intermarriage” rates much higher than that. “Intermarriage” isn’t even a word for them. It’s totally not a thing. But it is for Jews, who keep close track of it, have groups and measures that work to counteract it, and activists who call it a “silent holocaust.” How does this not evidence particularism and ethnocentrism?

    You’ve just provided another data point; how many Irish even know what their “intermarriage” rate is? How many Irish will even know WTF you’re talking about when you ask about their “intermarriage” rate? There are many values you can substitute for “Irish” here.

    But Jews all seem to know their “intermarriage rate” (the Jewish interracial marriage rate, however, seems to be a state secret, and probably not because it makes them look honest in their supposed commitment to diversity and tolerance).

    Joe Conason, a far leftist not much quoted in conservative circles in his book on the Right Wing Noise Machine contrasted conservatives’s straw man epithet “limosine liberals” by examining how many of the conservative luminaries live their lives.

    Much easier to get by in media by agreeing with the king. Rebellion is expensive.

    This is actually has happened more than you might think, also in right wing movements in E. Europe. The Nazis believed (and in this they were probably not wrong) that Jews would rise to the top of any organization that does not take active measures to bar them. This makes sense given the gap in IQ, especially verbal IQ.

    And, more recently, in Israel. There far more people in China with 120+ IQ than there are Jews in the world. The Chinese would run Israel much more efficiently. But Israel isn’t buying.

    Every strongly identifying group holds negative views of outsiders, or what is called “racist” or “bigoted” or “nasty” or “ugly.” Jews no more or less than the Japanese, the Australians, the Tibetans, the Muslims, etc.

    There’s no white Israel, unless you count Israel. So this reciprocal thing you’re peddling doesn’t exactly sell itself.

    The more free the country, the more likely that Jews will rule it.

    Which makes Israel sort of a paradox.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    I'm guessing that the Catholic Church has a pretty good idea on what % of American Catholics marry non-Catholics.

    Re: Chinese w/ high IQs in Israel:

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

    Actually there are around 23,000 Chinese in Israel, most of whom are illegal alien workers who have overstayed their visas:

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

    The idea that Israel is some kind of supernationalist place that doesn't put up with illegal aliens, ergo American Jews, all of whom support open borders in the US, are hypocrites, is total BS all around.
  361. @Jack D
    Back in the glorious days of the Third Reich, having Jew on the brain disease (an apparently incurable condition) was no impediment to electoral success (especially since they didn't bother with free elections once they took power). In Current Year America, even for a candidate running from the right and who expects to finally (after 200 years) unite all the White People of America under his banner, I think that it is. But it is a characteristic of all fanatics (which include those with JOTBD) that ideological purity is more important than trivial things such as actually winning elections. If Donald Trump would stand up at the Republican Convention and once and for all openly denounce Israel and the Joos and all their works and all their empty promises, it would feel so so good, much better than actually winning an election.

    (an apparently incurable condition)

    Do you know for sure that this is true?

    Any in from the cold stories?

    I am talking hard-core, not the relatively benign, squeezing a nickel until the buffalo jumps off type infections.

  362. This is all just manufactured out of thin air.

    https://nickbsteves.wordpress.com/foundational-readings/american-malvern/

    Your ignorance does not constitute lack of evidence.

  363. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    I'm sorry, but that still does not in any way explain the fact that she can afford three separate elite living locations. Beverly Hills and either Upper East Side or Upper West Side are very exclusive and cost a lot.

    Rush; Hannity; and Glenn Beck are obviously wealthy and its understandable how they could afford that kind of top one percent lifestyle. But its not so obvious with Ann.

    Books + Speeches simply don't equal up to Beverly Hills; NYC and FL. They don't. Unless there's another additional source of income somewhere. Like for example if Ann has an annual contract with FOX News that paid her between 5-10 million dollars, then that definitely would explain it since that's a sizable guaranteed annual source of income whereas the book royalties aren't annually paid (she doesn't write a book every single yr).

    Again, it simply doesn't add up and there is another additional source of income somewhere for her to afford that kind of top one percent lifestyle. Michelle Malkin has the same career trajectory (successful books, national column) and she's living in CO.

    Coulter has never married and is childless, so on that alone she can afford a more extravagant lifestyle than Malkin, who supports her husband and children. She comes from a thrifty “High WASP” background, and may have made wise investments, or have a wealthy patron or two. If she’s a homeowner, her homes in expensive areas are no doubt also investments.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Coulter's father was an Irish-German FBI agent from upstate New York, and her mother is from Kentucky. She's not from a "High WASP" background. She's a striver.

    Incidentally, growing up with an Irish-German FBI agent father in Connecticut in the 60s, she almost certainly grew up in a culture of casual, suburban anti-Semitism.
  364. @Jack D
    In that case, Israel must be the only free country because I can't think of any others that are "ruled" by Jews.

    Or, if what you are saying is right, then the only way to have a Jew free country is to eliminate freedom. I believe this is also called "cutting off your nose to spite your face". This strategy worked out really well for the Germans in the '40s, when their atomic weapons enabled them to win WWII. Once the Soviet Union got rid of all the disloyal Jews in its power structure and replaced them with drunken Russians, this turned the tide in the Cold War in their favor. As we can see from the great success that Zimbabwe is experiencing, the best way for your country to prosper is to replace all the smart people at the top with people who have the interest of the natives at heart. You can trust that being of the same race they will look out for their own people and not for themselves first.

    As we can see from the great success that Zimbabwe is experiencing, the best way for your country to prosper is to replace all the smart people at the top with people who have the interest of the natives at heart.

    Ironically, the entire Rhodesia/South Africa demolition was brought about with the relentless and able assistance of… ohh, you know who!

  365. Lot says:
    @SFG
    Right. I wonder how many people just opt out? How much of intermarriage is driven by moderately-conservative Jewish guys who don't want to hear lectures on feminism all day? Any clue?

    I suspect a lot of the Jews 'on our side' just don't make a lot of noise about being Jewish and do whatever else is required. Heck, Drudge has been beating the drum for Trump this whole time.

    Drudge is a non-fem gay Jew. Such people often have off-the-charts verbal/creative skills. He was broke and poor in LA for a few years, and just by working 60-hour weeks, week after week, built a simple website that made him millions of dollars and huge influence.

    While Drudge is not technically a paleo given that he gets caught up in pro-war fevers, he’s closer than most other right-wing online people with big audiences, and does provide plenty of links to anti-war conservatives. He has always been a generous linker to Pat Buchanan and Ann Coulter. As well as the very dovish Republican Bob Novak when he was still alive.

    The anti-semite crowd, which presumably has the goal of getting the broader paleo right to adopt its views, really has no plan to replace the sizable Jewish talent like Drudge currently working for us.

    Drudge’s really unique contribution is finding and promoting the articles that provide the best possible hard-right spin on the story of the day, plus promoting under-the-radar stories that have the potential to help our narrative, whether it is a Clinton scandal or news-worthy crime by blacks or illegals the MSM wants to avoid.

  366. @anonymous
    What I don't get is why this woman would change her name from Ekaterina Jung to something bland and generic like Cathy Young. The old name seems jazzier than the new one. Arnold Schwarzenegger was advised to change his name but refused and it didn't harm him any. If one's purpose is to disguise their ethnic origins it usually doesn't work since people will smoke you out anyway.

    Are you American? Anglicizing your name is a normal practice by immigrants to America, far more so than in Europe. The former emphasized assimilation a lot more, or at least used to, so Schwarzenegger is more the exception, and Young the rule. Framing it as disguising your ethnic origins is the negative slant. Many do it to less to hide their heritage than to embrace their new American identity. Based on her background and political positions, Young might fit this mold. I know a Russian immigrant who didn’t change her name, but would get irritated when people pronounced her name Xenia the Russian way as Ksenia, rather than the Americanized Zenia. I moved away from Russia for a reason, she would say. Immigrants often have painful relationships with their countries of origin, and what’s more New World than wanting to wipe the slate clean and start over anew? I can’t rag on that.

  367. @Cwhatfuture
    I grew up in the south. Everyone had a gun, including my father and my uncles and my grandfather and all of our neighbors. I am not wary of guns in the least. What is your point?

    And I see your Fantasy continues. You grew up and learned to dislike Jews as they expressed their inner feelings to you but you went to Israel. Did you tell your friends there how you felt about Jews. Did you bestow your wisdom about Jews upon them? Or did you find Van Creveld in Jerusalem and tell him ?

    And what the hell is that long paragraph supposed to mean? Amy Chua and Asians do not interest me. I do not get satisfaction from group success, only my family's success.

    “I do not get satisfaction from group success, only my family’s success.”

    And you imagine that the latter has nothing to do with the former?

    • Replies: @Cwhatfuture
    Not for me. I don't take pride in what strangers accomplish, even if they are Jewish. If Einstein won a Nobel prize, it is no credit to me. Bernie Madoff was a crook, it is no reflection on me. I don't belong to a gang. I have a family.
  368. @Luke Ford
    Rabbi Mayer Schiller said in 1999: “The State of Israel poses a problem for Jews living in the diaspora. A Jew living in America, France or England but yet somehow says I am an Israeli or a Zionist, that creates a tremendous amount of tension. Herzl envisioned Zionism as Jews leaving Gentile nations and going to live in Israel, not staying in France and England and saying I am a Zionist. Jews living in America, England, France, etc, have three moral possibilities: They can be loyal citizens, they can be Zionists which means to leave [for Israel] or they can adopt the Neterui Karta position of non-involvement in the affairs of the nations.”

    http://www.lukeford.net/blog/?p=56926

    Rabbi Schiller seems to have studied the works of Kevin MacDonald and thought through their troubling implications.

    Dual loyalty is always a canard. Are Catholics more loyal to the Pope than they are to America? Do Cuban Americans remain loyal to Castro or do they become American ultra-patriots? Are Irish Americans suspect because they send their kids to Irish dance school and march in the St. Patricks day parade? Or are Jews the only ones who must be suspected of dual loyalty?

    Isn’t there a fourth possibility – that you are a loyal American but that you wish your paisans back in the homeland well? Just because Herzl said that all Jews should up and leave for Palestine doesn’t mean that they all did. Herzl himself didn’t (until after he was dead) and most of the people who did, did so under duress. Out of six million American Jews, a couple of thousand leave for Israel each year – a fraction of 1%. And yet most American Jews count themselves as Zionists. So Schiller was wrong.

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    Dual loyalty is always a canard. Jonathan Pollard.

    The Pope doesn't have an army and he isn't occupying territory or expecting the US to enhance his foreign policy. furthermore Catholics are not an ethnicity or nationality. Cuban Americans are here precisely because they are not loyal to Castro. Irish Americans can be iffy: if they used the US to raise funds for the IRA, then they have dual loyalty.

    Dual loyalty exists, the same way dual citizenship exists. Personally, I don't think Americans should be allowed to hold dual citizenship, but apparently a lot of people do, I assume mostly non-Jews. I also don't believe an American citizen should be allowed to serve in foreign armies. But some do.

    Can dual loyalty a problem? Perhaps. A case by case analysis might be useful. But there's no question that any American who puts the interest of a foreign country ahead or even equal to the interests of the US can fairly be accused of dual loyalty. And this doesn't just pertain to Jewish Americans and Israel: it could be applied to other citizens and other countries. For example, in the first decades of the 20th Century it was applied to many groups, particularly Germans and other central and southern Europeans.
    , @iffen
    yet most American Jews count themselves as Zionists. So Schiller was wrong.

    Are you asking us to think of Vatican City as analogous to Israel?

    When was the last time the Irish Prime Minister publically tried to dictate the amount and conditions of American foreign aid to Ireland?

    Wishing the homeland well is okay. Hell, I wish that I had a back-up country, but American Jews are over-playing their hand.
  369. @Svigor

    “Celler by the way had an incredible life – he was first elected to Congress during the election of 1922 and made his first important speech on the House floor during consideration of Immigration Act. The Immigration Act of 1924.”
     
    K so maybe Celler was working to end the 1924 act from its inception to its destruction in 1965.

    Jews seem to be getting all worked up over an issue other Europeans have been dealing with for the past century.
     
    Same could be said for Israel. But Jews think of themselves as "progressive." Yeah, in what they push for others, maybe.

    “As Tom Sunic has pointed out, the biggest problem with the alt right is narcissism and low-level sociopathy.”

    As opposed to what? The narcissism and high-level sociopathy of people like Bryan Caplan?
     
    Sunic sounds like a glass half empty kind of guy. Hasn't he heard of cause and effect? Nationalists are probably still nationalists only because of observed nationalist quirks. Otherwise they'd all be humming dirges along with the Hive.

    For what it’s worth, Patton Oswalt is not Jewish.
     
    For what it's worth, he never pinged my Jewdar, even before I knew his name.

    How can so many people here, presumably with a straight face, accuse a group which currently has a 70% intermarriage rate of acting as an enthocentric block?
     
    Like I said, this figure is LOW. Most white ethnicities have "intermarriage" rates much higher than that. "Intermarriage" isn't even a word for them. It's totally not a thing. But it is for Jews, who keep close track of it, have groups and measures that work to counteract it, and activists who call it a "silent holocaust." How does this not evidence particularism and ethnocentrism?

    You've just provided another data point; how many Irish even know what their "intermarriage" rate is? How many Irish will even know WTF you're talking about when you ask about their "intermarriage" rate? There are many values you can substitute for "Irish" here.

    But Jews all seem to know their "intermarriage rate" (the Jewish interracial marriage rate, however, seems to be a state secret, and probably not because it makes them look honest in their supposed commitment to diversity and tolerance).

    Joe Conason, a far leftist not much quoted in conservative circles in his book on the Right Wing Noise Machine contrasted conservatives’s straw man epithet “limosine liberals” by examining how many of the conservative luminaries live their lives.
     
    Much easier to get by in media by agreeing with the king. Rebellion is expensive.

    This is actually has happened more than you might think, also in right wing movements in E. Europe. The Nazis believed (and in this they were probably not wrong) that Jews would rise to the top of any organization that does not take active measures to bar them. This makes sense given the gap in IQ, especially verbal IQ.
     
    And, more re