RSS
From the Jewish Journal last summer:
Stephen Miller, meet your immigrant great-grandfather
A lesson for Donald Trump’s campaign adviserby Rob Eshman
Posted on Aug. 10, 2016 at 1:58 pmI am fascinated by Stephen Miller.
He is the 30-year-old wunderkind political adviser in the campaign of Donald J. Trump whose job has been to whip up the crowd prior to Trump taking the stage.
Miller’s powerful lines, the ones that really froth the mob, all revolve around immigration. To stoke the emotions, he repeatedly references the brutal murder of Kate Steinle at the hands of an illegal immigrant.
“How many children are dead because of our sanctuary cities?” he asks. “Don’t ever, ever let anyone tell you that you’re not a good person because you want to secure the border!”
And then, playing John the Baptist to Jesus, Miller says, “I have some good news for you, folks, I have some fabulous news.” And he brings on, that’s right, Donald the Savior.
According to a long profile of Miller by Julia Ioffe in Politico, Miller is fast becoming the forward face of the Trump campaign. His former boss, Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, said he can’t think of anyone as valuable to a presidential campaign since Karl Rove. When Trump brought Miller on board, Ann Coulter, America’s blondest race-baiter, tweeted, “I’m in heaven!”
But what stopped me short in Ioffe’s report was this biographical tidbit: Stephen Miller grew up in Santa Monica, in a Jewish family.
Cue the record scratch. What? I doubted the Family Miller came over on the Mayflower, and I was positive they weren’t here to greet the boat. Could it be this young anti-immigrant leader is the descendent of immigrants?
With the help of attorney and genealogy whiz E. Randol Schoenberg, I had my answer. On his mother’s side, Miller is a Glosser — and you could write a book on the Glossers. In fact, someone did.
For $19.99, I bought the Kindle edition of “Long Live Glosser’s” by Robert Jeschonek, a history of Pennsylvania’s first family of retail.
“Imagine living in a place where armed Cossacks ride through the streets, looking to cripple or kill you,” Chapter 3 begins.
And so it was Wolf Lieb Glotzer and his wife, Bessie, sought to flee “dreary, scary” Antopol, in Belarus. On Jan. 7, 1903, Wolf arrived in New York aboard the German ship S.S. Motke with $8 in his pocket. …
By becoming Trump’s anti-immigrant avatar, Miller demonstrates that in America, truly anything is possible: The great-grandson of a desperate refugee can grow up to shill for the demagogue bent on keeping desperate refugees like his great-grandfather out.
But it’s different now, you say. Miller’s forebears came here legally, and Trump is not about stopping legal immigration.
Well, false. Last week at a rally in Portland, Maine, Trump attacked legal immigration from countries that are “prone to terrorism,” including Somalia, Morocco. Uzbekistan, the Philippines, Pakistan, Yemen, Syria and Afghanistan.
“We’re letting people come in from terrorist nations that shouldn’t be allowed because you can’t vet them,” Trump said, according to The Washington Post. He warned the crowd of “outsiders pouring into our country.”
(How a Trump administration will handle immigration from Israel, where far more terrorist acts are committed than in Morocco, is anyone’s guess.) …Then, as now, angry voices fought to keep these immigrants out. They organized the Immigration Restriction League, focused on shutting the ports to swarthy Italians and Jews.
“The floodgates are open,” wrote one anti-immigrant newspaper editor as the Eastern European Jews docked in New York. “The horde of $9.60 steerage slime is being siphoned upon us from Continental mud tanks.”
Such sentiments led to the Immigration Quota Act of 1924 — which effectively shut the door to Jewish immigration on the eve of the Holocaust.Miller’s stump speech taps into that same, ever-present strain in the American body politic. But when an American Jew turns on immigrants, there is a whiff of head-scratching hypocrisy, if not something more clinical. It is taking the side of people who, in a historical blink of the eye, would have met your own great-grandparents at the docks with stones and spitballs.
It is taking a fixable problem like immigration reform and making it intractable by stoking anti-immigrant fear and hate, by calling for a ban on an entire religion, by demeaning the sons and daughters of immigrants by race — all things Miller and his boss are doing. The goal of that behavior isn’t to fix a broken system, but to score political points off it.
ROB ESHMAN is publisher and editor-in-chief of TRIBE Media Corp./Jewish Journal. Email him at [email protected]. You can follow him on Instagram and Twitter @foodaism and @RobEshman.
In other words, the editor-in-chief of TRIBE Media Corp. is baffled by why Stephen Miller doesn’t hold petty grudges against his fellow Americans for slights that are now four generations old.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
He got the Cossacks in right away.
He kept us in suspense as to whether or not he’d manage to work in the Shoah – came in under the wire.
Breaking News!
Rudy’s tired of playing games with you clowns, he’s letting you know EVERYTHING!
http://archive.is/IDBh5
Wait until Rob finds out that Trump’s the son and grandson of immigrants – it’ll blow his mind.
Stephen Miller grew up in Santa Monica and realized that America’s future was a 3rd world-esque Santa Monica if immigration wasn’t curbed and he didn’t want to live in it. The guy has eyes.
One day we dropped into a car wash and he commented off-hand but perfectly seriously that one of the great advantages of unrestricted Mexican immigration into LA was how cheap car washes and other services. I suspect my friend is typical of those destroying California. They cannot conceive how a policy that currently advantages the two or three percent of the population to which they belong might harm everyone else and eventually culminate in ruining life even for their privileged and oblivious class.
A lot of what we got from Europe during the Great Wave wasn’t so great. Fortunately, those who couldn’t cope didn’t park themselves on welfare for five generations, exponentially replicating their failure. And those who were degenerate criminals were either hanged, electrocuted, gassed, or sent back to their point of origin. Now, any degenerate who can get over the border, like Kate Steinle’s murderer, can plant his family tree on US soil and stick us with the poisonous Democrat-voting fruit forever.
Survivorship bias also obscures the relative differences of the successes of European immigrants from subsequent batches of third worlders, and this is itself further obscured by the soft landings afforded by the welfare state and accoutrements that was utterly absent in Steven Miller's great-grandfather's day.
In any event, some of those immigrants from Europe were skilled tradesmen who did jobs Americans couldn't do at that time - decorative stone masons and tile workers from Italy, master plasterers from Ireland (they're still preferred to this day for the increasingly rare craft), etc. and were in demand, particularly to adorn the great public buildings being built at the time. Do we need Somali skiff operators and Pakistani goat herders now for some reason?Replies: @Jack D, @dearieme
Let’s see, Immigration Quota Act happened in 1924…..and the Holocaust started in the Summer of 1941….isn’t 16/17 years a rather protracted “eve?”
Call me crazy, but I’m pretty sure that Israel isn’t very keen on Muslim immigration….
Gotta love the use of Christian imagery….
Obligatory anti-Blondism
Why not? My grandfather was a Jew from Latvia (as he always liked to say, he managed to evade both Stalin and Hitler), and I’m anti-immigration.
MMM, like, say, when Israel builds fences to keep African refugees out…..
So, see, it’s not really about non-White immigrants. It’s really about sticking it to the WASP bastards who tried to keep us out….
TRIBE media? Really? That’s gotta be a joke, right?
That's why Steve didn't feel the need to comment. The joke wrote itself.
Wait until he finds out Trump has a secret Jew in his family tree.
Since I hate waiting
Let’s see, Immigration Quota Act happened in 1924…..and the Holocaust started in the Summer of 1941….isn’t 16/17 years a rather protracted “eve?”
Call me crazy, but I’m pretty sure that Israel isn’t very keen on Muslim immigration….
Gotta love the use of Christian imagery….
Obligatory anti-Blondism
Why not? My grandfather was a Jew from Latvia (as he always liked to say, he managed to evade both Stalin and Hitler), and I’m anti-immigration.
MMM, like, say, when Israel builds fences to keep African refugees out…..
So, see, it’s not really about non-White immigrants. It’s really about sticking it to the WASP bastards who tried to keep us out….
TRIBE media? Really? That’s gotta be a joke, right?
“ROB ESHMAN is publisher and editor-in-chief of TRIBE Media Corp.”
A guy who is the head of “Tribe Media Corp.” is telling us that we shouldn’t be tribal.
Of course he specified American Jews; you don’t think that he’s crazy enough to suggest that Jews in Israel start letting in refugees, do you?
What’s truly extraordinary is that the notion that an American Jew would choose to identify and stand with that “American” part rather than the “Jew” part is taken as incomprehensible. That’s an assumption of a divided loyalty that, if a Gentile were to make it, would bring howling accusations of anti-Semitism.
In a sense.
That’s why Steve didn’t feel the need to comment. The joke wrote itself.
I listened to Miller’s Johnstown Pennsylvania speech where he detailed his family genealogy. It was a revelatory and inspiring tale. I felt that he and I shared the same family pride for our forbears immigration to America. My family’s journey occurred only one generation ago whereas his family’s occurred many genations ago.
I sincerely hope that Miller’s ideas and policies flourish in the forthcoming administration and not be throttled by the inevitable internectine warfare.
Kind of like the Trope Lab at NYU. (#37)
The elephant in the room:
1896 ≠2016
World population 1896 = 1.6 Billion
World population 2016 = 7.3 Billion
Migrant sending nations in 2016 w/ Fertility levels of 2.8 (Guatemala) to 6.8 (Niger)
Western, developed countries did not have welfare states in the 19th Century either.
Whenever I read a story about droughts; pollution; etc; it pretty much signals that the system is overloaded with people. We are told that one problem is Syria is an extended drought, so thus they have to move to Europe. Expect Europe to soon start suffering various droughts.Replies: @Wilkey
Great post, Mr Syon. As often happens when you get to typing.
Like making sure the drawbridge is raised AFTER you cross it? And only then telling the guards that the rest of the people behind you are plague carriers?
I suppose Trump could move to a points system, but the problem is that all that points screen out for is IQ, and beyond a certain point, it is a poor predictor for innovative capacity, Canada and Australia have the points system, and their productivity growth and GDP growth is less than impressive once you correct for population growth, and basically the chief thing keeping those economies afloat are the resources industry and real estate.
The value of such natural resources diminishes as the population increases. Oil reserves and mineral rights are worth over 10x as much to a Canadian or an Aussie than they are to an American. Slower population growth is emphatically more beneficial in resource rich countries. But let's take beautiful, culturally and economically rich First World nations like Australia and Canada and flood each with another 50 million people because...because...why?
The 17th Century wars of religion were positively brilliant compared to the ideological insanity our elites are imposing upon us now.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/poll-canadians-multiculturalism-immigrants-1.3784194
"In a national polling partnership between CBC and the Angus Reid Institute, 68 per cent of Canadian respondents said minorities should be doing more to fit in with mainstream society instead of keeping their own customs and languages.
The same question was put to Americans, with only 53 per cent of respondents saying minorities need to better adjust."Replies: @Jack D
I’m glad that Mr. Miller has been able to ignore these ethnic guilt trips, while viewing America’s immigration policies through the lens of American interests. Ultimately, being an American should be about doing what’s best for your fellow Americans.
Or maybe he’s just a self-hating Jew? I don’t think he’s ever mentioned Jews or Judaism positively. He does come across as the outsider type who’s extra contrarian and provocative, going back to his college and student newspaper days.
He reminds me of Roy Cohn, who was also from a liberal Jewish family background but moved in Republican and conservative circles and was perceived to be self-hating for aggressively going after the Rosenbergs and other Jewish liberals and socialists during the communist red scare. Incidentally, Cohn was also apparently a close advisor and confidante to Trump.
Maybe Miller has become, quelle horreur, an American who puts the interests of the United States and its citizens above those of his hypothetical Somolian "refugee" great-grandfather.
We don’t need any more people in the United States. Let these points people stay and improve their own countries so less of their inhabitants want to leave them.
Rudy's tired of playing games with you clowns, he's letting you know EVERYTHING!
http://archive.is/IDBh5Replies: @black sea, @Jus' Sayin'..., @AnonymousCoward
People make too much about this “pizzagate.” I know it’s fattening, but is it really such a crime to love pizza?
I saw Miller speak at CIS and he described how people are totally bewildered when he talks about limiting legal immigration. It’s a concept that is difficult for people to understand when talking about immigration, like group averages.
1896 ≠2016
World population 1896 = 1.6 Billion
World population 2016 = 7.3 Billion
Migrant sending nations in 2016 w/ Fertility levels of 2.8 (Guatemala) to 6.8 (Niger)
Western, developed countries did not have welfare states in the 19th Century either.Replies: @Lot, @bomag, @gregor
Russian Jew who comes to USA to start a department store in Johnstown ≠ Somali Muslims who are more than 60% completely dependent on the US Gov, with the rest driving down already low wages for unskilled workers.
I’ve decided jews should be welcomed into the fold as White Americans. How to address the loyalty issues some of them have though, such as those seen in this Rob Eshman character?
Or maybe he’s a Jew who loves America and wants what’s best for her?
http://bigthink.com/philip-perry/yale-neuroscientists-can-now-determine-human-intelligence-through-brain-scans
Do you feel like you were born to do something? There is just a certain skill like playing an instrument or sport, or a certain subject, like math, which you naturally excel in? It might have to do with the way your brain is wired. Different people have different aptitudes. The repositories for these lie in different parts of the brain and, as scientists are learning more and more, in the connectome or the connections between regions.
Today, neuroscientists can determine one’s intelligence through a brain scan, as sci-fi as that sounds. Not only that, it’s only a matter of time before they are able to tell each individual’s set of aptitudes and shortcomings, simply from scanning their brain. Researchers at Yale led the study. They interpreted intelligence in this case as abstract reasoning, also known as fluid intelligence. This is the ability to recognize patterns, solve problems, and identify relationships. Fluid intelligence is known to be a consistent predictor of academic performance. Yet, abstract reasoning is difficult to teach, and standardized tests often miss it
The 1924 act did not prohibit Jewish immigration, it limited southern and eastern european immigration. The many Jewish citizens of Germany, France, and the UK could still easily come, and did in large numbers. Russian Jews were still very much able to go to booming Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Cuba, South Africa, and British India. Really anywhere there was a white minority government, which was much of the world in 1924, the local whites were glad to get any sort of European immigrant, whatever their private prejudices might have been.
Jewish thought-leaders like to blame this massive clusterf**k on restrictive immigration policies of western nations, the simple truth is that most Jews did not think there was going to be a Holocaust.Replies: @Jack D
German Jews were not a large community to begin with (500,000 vs 3 million in Poland and another 2.5 million in the Soviet Union) but they mostly fled en masse after '33 so a fair # ended up here. French and GB Jewish communities were even smaller and most never fled so there was no significant Jewish immigration to the US from those countries. You are talking about a few hundred immigrants at most. You are entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts.Replies: @syonredux, @Lot
What’s amazing to me is the state of blissful ignorance the good thinking whites of California walk around in. Their state has debased their standard of living, their safety, their ability to afford to have a family, their job opportunities and their ability to communicate with and relate to their neighbors, and yet they see nothing wrong with doing that to the rest of the country.
A few are lucky enough to live in 'white bubbles' ...white friends, white family, white colleagues and frequent visits to Target
And they are of course brainwashed to not worry if their children will interracially date/marry because they can't think that far ahead and if it does happen will console themselves with television
It doesn't take much to make some people happy
Fundamentally classifying people by their migration status is stupid; there are myriad reasons for this, but one of them is this: Jews leaving Eastern Europe were not fleeing a Jewish country that Jews had misrun into the ground. Mexicans are fleeing Mexico because Mexicans have made a mess of Mexico, Pakistanis are fleeing Pakistanis have made a mess of Pakistan etc.
The elephant in the room, as usual, is HBD. If you live in a country cursed by “We take these truths to be self-evident….” you have to come up with roundabout justifications for why you don’t want your country mobbed by low-functioning barbarians. If you can’t explain – to use the most frequently cited example in Britain – why Huguenots are not similar to Somalis just because both are “immigrants” you can’t get anywhere. Of course, you cannot explain why they are different except through racism and, as such, the rules of discourse in modern democracies mean the Right literally cannot win.
They also have third world chain migration in about equal measure. I don’t think the many Haitian migrants in Quebec got there after killing it on a standardized test.
Well.. America was taken from American Indians. So, what did Anglos owe to anyone else?
Anglos owe something to Indians whose land was taken and blacks who were brought by force.
As Anglos didn’t cause whatever problems Jews faced in the Old World, it was NOT their responsibility to do favors for Jews.
The Current Year logic is totally nuts. Cuz whites took land from American Indians, whites must taken in endless numbers of Asian-Indians. Eh?
And given what Jewish Power did to White America, I think the crucial lesson is that immigration can be dangerous if the newcomers have special talents and hate the native or neo-native population.
And uh… how did it turn out for the Palestinians? Immigration of newcomers sure didn’t do them any good.
True, Jews did face hardships in the old world. But that is a common story in the Old World. Chinese suffered a lot under Japanese and Mao. So, what was US supposed to do? Take in 300 million Chinese to alleviate their suffering?
Gimme a break.
PS. The people in the Middle East and North Africa wouldn’t be on the move in such huge numbers IF NOT FOR NEO-IMPERIALIST INVADE POLICY engineered largely by Jewish globalists.
If the lesson of WWII is that huge catastrophes lead to tragic migrations of refugees, then maybe the US should not be causing havoc around the world. Middle East and North Africa look like Europe and Asia during WWII, not least because of reckless US policies. How convenient to overlook the terrible Jewish-Zionist role in this and just pontificate about ‘compassion’ and ‘inclusion’ from the high horse.
The problem of Europe in WWI, rise of Fascism, rise of communism, and WWII was due the power of extreme ideologies and clash of empires. Also, there was the problem of power parity in Europe, something US didn’t have to worry about. The US had it easier cuz it had no real rivals. Canada was too low in population and happy to play second fiddle to US. Latin America remained stagnant and its Latin elites ruled over backward natives and mestizos.
Anglo-American guns and business could dictate terms to Latin nations. When it came to a shooting war, Anglo-Americans could easily defeat them, take their land, and gain dominance, as over SW territories. Also, American Indians were no match to the whites with guns and growing in numbers.
In contrast, there were several nations of roughly equal power in Europe: Britain, France, Germany, Austro-Hungarian Empire, and Russia. Also, even lesser nations could form alliances that could be formidable. And for a time, there was the Ottomans, a semi-European empire. And this made things much more dangerous in Europe… that is until WWII finally reduced all the great powers of Europe with exception of Russia into second-rate powers dependent on the US for protection from Soviets. With the end of Cold War, even Russia became a second-rate power, though it insists on maintaining its sovereignty.
With the fall of empires after WWII, there was finally peace and mutual cooperation among nations, and all was going pretty well for everyone, including Jews who remained… until Progs and the Glob decided to push Diversity and Degeneracy on EU, which is turning things radical and extreme once again. And this time around, Jews must take considerable blame for the mess that gets worse and worse. And even prior to WWII, despite tragic events involving the Jews, the Jewish role in radical revolutions, extreme ideologies, and financial manipulation mustn’t be overlooked if we are to understand why things got so crazy over there. And things have gotten so poisonous in the US due to PC and diversity, much of it engineered by lunatic Jewish radicals in media and academia. Jews should actually thank Trump for restoring some semblance of order cuz if things continue along globalist path, it’s gonna be bad for everyone, including Jews as politics will only grow more radicalized under increasing duress. I mean Jewish use of anti-whitism is very much like old ‘antisemitism’. Just change ‘white’ in PC talk to ‘Jewish’, and it sounds like MEIN KAMPF.
PSS. Very disappointing that the piece has nothing about Golf.
Nuts, is right. If Whites took land from American Indians, and that's theft, then the endless numbers of Asian-Indians flooding in are knowingly receiving stolen goods.
Which is as big a crime as the theft in the first place. How come nobody guilts THEM about THAT?
That really seems to seriously undercut the author’s essay. Or am I missing something?
When did you see him speak?
Here's the video of the talk from june of last year. He goes into Sapir-Whorf territory.Replies: @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever..., @Opinionator
There were/are no ‘cossacks’ in Belarus.
The “Jewish Journal” should note that Israel is quite literally a land of recent immigrants yet has hyper selective and restrictive immigration membership.
I don’t think Richard Spencer is the best intellectual, but he successfully got the NYT to acknowledge this double standard:
https://t.co/zFrYhRbyTW
I am pro-Jew, and pro-Israel, but I am also pro alt-right here.
Only in my dreams. Rob Eshman would not be excluded. That is a problem I am trying to solve.
Or maybe he really is a self hating Jew?
I think that Steve has made comments along these lines before, but perhaps it’s best to start considering the kind of nation you want your grandchidren to inhabit, as opposed to the nation your grandparents left. The Jewish Journal article reeks of Ellis Island romanticism.
“Pulling up the ladder” is good and appropriate for any nation with a sense of sovereignty. There is no hypocrisy if an immigrant does it. The left makes it sound that way because it mistakes lack of compassion for hypocrisy.
And even if one advocates leaving the ladder there, it would only make sense if the person was keeping the door open for immigrants similar to them, kinda like the way Latinos do.
“many Haitian migrants in Quebec got there after killing it on a standardized test”
I am not sure about their immigration policies, but I think this is because the smart “nationalists” in Quebec think that French language is more important than Anglo-French-Canadian ethnicity, so “hey, let’s bring a lot of people from Haiti and Senegal who already speak French. Plus we score multicultural points”.
Speaking French fluently counts for a lot of points.
Also, even with the “points system”, people lie a lot. Who will investigate if this guy’s diploma from Port Au Prince U is legit or not?
Many Haitians are dating white French-Canadian women too.
You know that the Germans actually never had German prison guards inside the camps and used Jewish collaborators to guard Jews right? So there are more than enough Jews who are willing to shat on their own kind to gain favors
'hhs', meet Tiny. Thanks for the commenting-software option, Mr. Unz!
The whole “but your family were immigrants” argument falls completely apart if you recognize that “immigrants” are not some monolithic commodity, devoid of individual characteristics due to culture, creed or nation of origin, and that today isn’t 75, 100, or 150 years ago.
If this were not so, what point is there to the “diversity” initiatives the proglodytes like so bad?
So, TRIBE is Jewish for La Raza?
One point about Miller. Based on that Slate article Sailer posted a week ago, it looks like Miller had pretty standard Conservatism inc. positions and only evolved into an alt-light figure relatively recently.
Now, with that in mind, watch this video of Ben Shapiro and Ann Coulter.
Basically, he says he loves her book and agrees with her about immigration – legal and illegal – but he can’t believe she supports Trump because he’s not a true conservative. They don’t talk about it much, presumably because Shapiro still thought Trump had no chance of actually winning. Now, since then, Shapiro has basically gone nuts and retreated into his private true conservative cargo cult, but I do wonder if, absent people twitter spamming him with pictures of his children in concentration camps, he might have made the same transition as Miller. Or, to put it another way, if ten years ago Miller had been Twitter spammed with his face on a lampshade, would Trump have just won the election?
http://www.ontheissues.org/International/Jeff_Sessions_War_+_Peace.htm
So circa January this year, Ben Shapiro and Jeff Sessions basically agreed on everything, then the brain trust of the alt right thought it would be fun to spam Ben Shapiro with Treblinka jokes.
Personally, I think Ben Shapiro is an unlistenable to twerp and I thought that long before NeverTrump. What I'm saying is that if the alt-right had been around 5 or 6 years ago, then it seems reasonably likely that Miller would have received their unique form of (((outreach))) and Trump probably would have lost the election (perhaps even the nomination). Food for thought.Replies: @SFG
That said: fewer oven memes, probably less Republican NeverTrumpism. On the other hand, would he have gotten the Internet buzz he did without the Nazi Pepe guys? Who knows?Replies: @Desiderius
There were Gentiles in Belarus. Same difference.
The reason most Jews did not leave Eastern Europe is because they did not want to. In particular, religious Jews believed, accurately enough, that they would not be able to pass on their beliefs to their children. Most prominent Rabbis warned very strongly against emigrating. Bundists stayed because they believed in Socialist revolution at home. Some, mostly Zionists, warned that Jews needed to leave, and fast, but they were mostly ignored.
Jewish thought-leaders like to blame this massive clusterf**k on restrictive immigration policies of western nations, the simple truth is that most Jews did not think there was going to be a Holocaust.
Or maybe he really loves America and really wants what’s best for her?
Let’s see: Jewish guy wants to restrict immigration to the USA= Jews who collaborated with the Nazis….MMMM, kudos for devising the most insane analogy that I’ve seen in months…..
https://twitter.com/JohnRiversX4/status/811324356706050048
https://twitter.com/JohnRiversX4/status/811289474567204864
No I am just saying that some Jews are so ashned of their Jewish identity that they will do anything to suck up to gentiles. Are you saying self hating Jews don’t exist?
These days, an immigration restrionist Jew like Miller is helping both Jews and non-Jews.
TRIBE media, can it get any more blatant than that ? Besides the massive outcry, if somebody wanted to created a company called Aryan media, it would more than likely not be allowed by the government.
As we all know, everybody in Israel is equally likely to commit terrorist acts. It’s unfortunate, but it’s impossible to guess who’s likely to be a risk.
Steve Sailer:
“In other words, the editor-in-chief of TRIBE Media Corp. is baffled by why Stephen Miller doesn’t hold petty grudges against his fellow Americans for slights that are now four generations old.”
Maybe because he’s a coward with no self-respect? If my great-grandparents had been deemed inferior by some ethnicity, I sure wouldn’t act in ways so as to enable the offending ethnicity, by giving them advice, money or by working for them.
But then, you are a coward with no self-respect too, so maybe this is why you condone his behavior. The reason why you’re so nice to Jews is because you know that they are incredibly powerful in America, and you want to be on the side of power Even if that power has been used to disenfranchise you. It is pure cowardice on your part.
The really manly and righteous thing for you to do would be to denounce post-modern, Marxist Jewish intellectuals, and the ethnocentrism of Jewish Zionists who have made the U.S fight multiple wars on the behalf of Israel. Thousands of American boys died in those wars, and you, like a coward, *never* point out Jewish Zionism.
I find it utterly repulsive your flattery and kow-towing to the Jewish Hitler, Netanyahu, a man who has made the U.S spend a few hundred billion Dollars over the past couple decades on Israel’s defense. A man who has ordered his soldiers to beat up little Palestinean children in the Gaza Strip. A man who is not worth a bowl of turd. A man who “builds walls” to segregate the Palestineans, just like the walls of Treblinka and Auschwitz once segregated Jews from gentile Germans. A man you celebrate, and want to emulate.
When will you grow some balls, Steve Sailer? The difference between me and you is that I tell it like it and I don’t pussy foot around. The difference between me and you is that I stick to my principles no matter what, and I do not shake hands with my enemies. I hate and despise conservatives, and it is what it is. I would never shake hands with them. They are my enemies, and I will do my very best to annihilate them.
I find it nauseatingly hypocritical that you moan over and over again about all the changes that have happened to America over the past five decades, changes that you think were bad. Yet, all those changes were heavily supported by Marxist intellectuals, the vast majority of whom were Jewish. Also, the U.S has indebted itself to the point of bankruptcy by spending trillions(yes, trillions) of Dollars in the middle east over the past quarter century, mostly to support the state of Israel. Feminism and cultural Marxism, which were to cause most of the social changes, were were first promoted at Berkely University in the late 1950’s, having as it’s intellectual leader Derrida, the French Jewish intellectual. Do you point that out? No.
You see, as a libertarian, I can say these things. I do not like feminism or cultural Marxism. I am a scientific rationalist, and a social libertarian. I do not believe that white men are responsible for the World’s evils.; quite the opposite, many of the greatest people in history were white men. I do not believe that men and women are similar, on average in talents and inclinations, although I do believe they should be equal legally – including men having the same right as women to not be drafted into the military. I am in favor of people doing whatever they want with their lives, as long as they don’t hurt others. I am not a conservative because conservatism is authoritarian and restritive, putting and emphasis on reproduction and families rather than individuals. Not all of us want to start families, but we are all individuals.
Nevertheless, conservatives are correct that cultural Marxism is ruining the West. The problem is that their solution is to fight authoritarianism with more authoritarianism, by enforcing inequality(against gay marriage), against scientific rationalism(many conservatives literally want to ban Ecolution from schools), bring back the military draft(for men only), are against humanism(ban immigration) favoring the “nation” over individuals, etc.
So *both* cultural Marxists and conservatives are authoritarian, which is why I don’t want anything to do with either of them.
However, I have the mettle to point the finger at my enemies and tell it like it is. Why do you never point the finger at ethnocentric Jewish intellectuals? They are, more than anyone else, responsible for the changes you deplore so much. For instance, both leftist Jewish intellectuals and libertarians support immigration. But the reason why we do so is very different. We libertarians support immigration because “nations” to us are arbitrary geographical constructs, and we believe that human beings should be allowed to pursue their dreams anywhere they want to.. Conversely, Leftists Jewish intellectual support immigration because the rhetoric of cultural Marxism is that the White Man is responsible for all the evils in the World, and that immigration is useful to dilute the power of white people in the U.S and Europe. I don’t not agree with their motivations. These motivations are not noble, and they deserve to have the finger pointed at them.
Sailer, stop cattering to leftist Jews who hate the U.S and it’s people to be on “your side”. It is shameful to try to get your enemies to be on your side even after they have already harmed you. Stop condoning mass murderer, Netanyahu, just because he is one of the most powerful men of the country that treats Americans like their “pets”. You think if you wave your tail enough your master will reward you? He won’t.
Yup, you’re a troll.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVIkAqwcgasBasically, he says he loves her book and agrees with her about immigration - legal and illegal - but he can't believe she supports Trump because he's not a true conservative. They don't talk about it much, presumably because Shapiro still thought Trump had no chance of actually winning. Now, since then, Shapiro has basically gone nuts and retreated into his private true conservative cargo cult, but I do wonder if, absent people twitter spamming him with pictures of his children in concentration camps, he might have made the same transition as Miller. Or, to put it another way, if ten years ago Miller had been Twitter spammed with his face on a lampshade, would Trump have just won the election?Replies: @IHTG, @Thea, @Gabriel M, @SFG
Define “recently”. Remember, he was working with Jeff Sessions. Chose to work with Jeff Sessions.
Seems like Miller is considered a Judas Jew for wanting Israeli style borders somewhere besides Israel.
If you are non white then what you think is best for America is not going to be a white America.
A parasite depends on the host being available in its original form.Replies: @Opinionator
I’m disappointed that Eshman didn’t say anything about country clubs that wouldn’t accept Jews.
I don't think Richard Spencer is the best intellectual, but he successfully got the NYT to acknowledge this double standard:
https://t.co/zFrYhRbyTW
I am pro-Jew, and pro-Israel, but I am also pro alt-right here.Replies: @Karl
> Israel is quite literally a land of recent immigrants yet has hyper selective and restrictive immigration membership.
Only in my dreams. Rob Eshman would not be excluded. That is a problem I am trying to solve.
Journalist Gersh Kuntzman, who once wrote of his experience with temporary PTSD from firing an AR-15, cites precedent:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/don-cry-russia-slain-envoy-putin-lackey-article-1.2917281
But they have still created societies that other people fancy living in. Nigeria also has vast resources and real estate, yet people are leaving all the time. What could be the difference I wonder?
1896 ≠2016
World population 1896 = 1.6 Billion
World population 2016 = 7.3 Billion
Migrant sending nations in 2016 w/ Fertility levels of 2.8 (Guatemala) to 6.8 (Niger)
Western, developed countries did not have welfare states in the 19th Century either.Replies: @Lot, @bomag, @gregor
Very much so. We can grow our population to any arbitrary number, so all these “nice” people who want to take all comers should start offering an upper bound to the final number we can support, and their plan for halting the influx when their glorious magic number arrives.
Whenever I read a story about droughts; pollution; etc; it pretty much signals that the system is overloaded with people. We are told that one problem is Syria is an extended drought, so thus they have to move to Europe. Expect Europe to soon start suffering various droughts.
Considering that Muslim immigration to Europe is making that place plenty uncomfortable for the chosen tribe, I’d suggest the self-haters are those who advocate an irresponsible immigration system.
It is not insane considering that there are a lot of people (including lots of media pundits) that equate restricting immigration to the Third Reich.
About TRIBE. I suspect that whoever it was that suggested that name to the founders of that publication was remembering, as I do, the abreviation MOT. This was an acronym that was used to say to another “Do you think that fellow over there is jewish”, that is he seems to be a Member of the Tribe. Believe it or not, in my childhood (1940s), in the US, jews were discriminated against: 3 letter corporations did not hire jews period. White-shoe law firms did not hire jews period. Medical schools had quotes for admitting jewish applicants. Universities had quotas for admitting jewish applicants. Real estate covenants forbidding sale to jews and Negroes were legally binding. This was merely a fact of life.
At the end of the war, when GIs liberated the death camps, photos of the piles of corpses and the emaciated survivors were published in the daily newspapers. This I remember with great clarity: when I saw the pics [age 11], I lost one’s childhoodh innocence, thinking O my god I could have been one of them if my grandfathers had not immigrated. But public knowledge of the death camps effected a change of attitude, and discrimation, legal and personal, decreased a great deal. Fast forward 70 years and a flood of jew hatred has returned. I could only hazard a guess as to why: the success of Israel, the financial and intellectual success of US jews who now had a level playing field to compete in, the exclusivity of their religion (the Chosen People), the Holocaust industry (a jew murdered in the camps is more historically significant that anyone randomly getting murdered in an alley, say), the resentment by the less successful of the more successful.
So TRIBE or MOT or Member of the Tribe is an innocent guileless phrase, like saying TFB (trust-fund baby).
You worried that you could have been a victim of the death camps if your grandfathers had not immigrated. Well, both of my grandfathers fought in combat against Nazi Germany. You're welcome.
"Fast forward 70 years and a flood of jew hatred has returned."
What the hell are you talking about? Jew hatred because Trump wants to limit immigration of people who really do hate Jews?
Quit feeling sorry for yourself. You've had it pretty good here. Last time I checked, Jews were pretty doing O.K. in the United States.Replies: @Jack D
Even according to the official history, no death camps were liberated by GIs. All asserted death camps are in areas taken by the Soviets. The photos you saw were of people who had fallen victim to typhus and other disease. Again, all official history.Replies: @syonredux
...Medical schools had quotes for admitting jewish applicants. Universities had quotas for admitting jewish applicants.
Admitting jews at 5-10X their share of the population is "discriminating against" them? Oy vey.
Real estate covenants forbidding sale to jews and Negroes were legally binding. This was merely a fact of life.
Did jews ever enter into covenants forbidding sale to "Negroes"?Replies: @Steve Sailer
And this is why the public still holds the law and lawyers in high esteem!Replies: @Jack D
and basically the chief thing keeping [Canadian and Australian] economies afloat are the resources industry and real estate.
The value of such natural resources diminishes as the population increases. Oil reserves and mineral rights are worth over 10x as much to a Canadian or an Aussie than they are to an American. Slower population growth is emphatically more beneficial in resource rich countries. But let’s take beautiful, culturally and economically rich First World nations like Australia and Canada and flood each with another 50 million people because…because…why?
The 17th Century wars of religion were positively brilliant compared to the ideological insanity our elites are imposing upon us now.
Whenever I read a story about droughts; pollution; etc; it pretty much signals that the system is overloaded with people. We are told that one problem is Syria is an extended drought, so thus they have to move to Europe. Expect Europe to soon start suffering various droughts.Replies: @Wilkey
“Very much so. We can grow our population to any arbitrary number, so all these “nice” people who want to take all comers should start offering an upper bound to the final number we can support, and their plan for halting the influx when their glorious magic number arrives.”
But have a conversation with these people and the one thing they will not do is place a number on how much immigration we should actually have. Angela Merkel threw Germany’s borders wide open and refused to place a limit on how many refugees she would accept. Sponsors of amnesty bills often throw out estimates of how many will be legalized as a result, but those numbers never, ever have any legal weight, and when the actual numbers blow through the provided estimates – as they did with the 1986 amnesty, which promised us 1.1 million amnestied aliens by gave us nearly 3 million – no apologies are ever made.
These people tell us that our immigration rates aren’t high enough to accommodate the number of people who want to come (or to meet our supposed economic needs) but ask them how much immigration would be enough and they won’t give any solid answer. Ask them how many people the US (or the UK or Canada or Australia) should have and they won’t give an answer and all they’ll ever tell you is “more, more, more.”
In the 70s our legal immigration rate was around 400,000 per year. Our legal immigration rate has roughly tripled and illegal immigration has increased even faster than that. But it would be “racist” merely to return to 70s rates of legal immigration. If we doubled legal immigration to 2.5 million per year it would soon be declared racist to suggest reducing it back to what it is now.
There is a similar dishonesty that plays out with immigration enforcement. Have a debate over one quasi-enforcement measure or another and their response is always “that policy won’t stop illegal immigration.” We have to give driver’s licenses to illegals because they’re going to be here anyway. We have to let their kids attend pubic schools because they’re going to be here anyway. We have to let them have healthcare, and social security, and allow employers to hire them because they’re going to be here anyway. We have to give citizenship to their kids who are born here because they are going to be here anyway.
I once had a debate about immigration enforcement with a friend of mine who runs a fairly popular left-wing blog. After he dismissed one enforcement proposal after another I finally asked him what enforcement measures we could use that would work. And then it was crickets. That was the end of the debate. After that he never sad a damn thing.
All your guesses are incorrect, other than the Holocaust industry. If you visit any anti jew site where people have the freedom to truly talk about what they feel about jews (not always possible at Unz.com) , then it is because of their endless pushing and funding of all things anti white. The main problem raised is their use of Hollywood and other mass media to push for mass 3rd world immigration, miscegenation, normalizing an ever growing list of crazed practices, etc, etc. The second problem generally raised is the tendency for politicians to make pandering to Israel and jews their number one priority, you mention how “successful” Israel is but will see no problem that it should be the worlds biggest receiver of aid and free military hardware. There is nothing that comes close to an AIPAC, imagine for a moment somebody wanted to form an ARPAC (Russia) or any other nation in fact ?
This canard of saying its all about scapegoating or envy for wealth is simply an excuse to hide the real reasons jews are hated, because they are legitimate reasons.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVIkAqwcgasBasically, he says he loves her book and agrees with her about immigration - legal and illegal - but he can't believe she supports Trump because he's not a true conservative. They don't talk about it much, presumably because Shapiro still thought Trump had no chance of actually winning. Now, since then, Shapiro has basically gone nuts and retreated into his private true conservative cargo cult, but I do wonder if, absent people twitter spamming him with pictures of his children in concentration camps, he might have made the same transition as Miller. Or, to put it another way, if ten years ago Miller had been Twitter spammed with his face on a lampshade, would Trump have just won the election?Replies: @IHTG, @Thea, @Gabriel M, @SFG
Don’t forget he was the lone voice of reason at Duke during the lacrosse kerfuffle.
There is already a system in place that is evident throughout American history. Periods of heavy immigration are followed by periods of heavy restriction to make sure those who came during the previous period are effectively integrated into the body politic. There is no conflict between the existence of such periods and being a nation of immigrants.
I am a body of food. It does not follow that I must spend every waking hour eating.
Thank you so much for saying this. Nobody wants to admit it, either on the left or cuckish right (because they'd have to admit restriction is good) or the alt-right (because it suggests immigration isn't the end of the world). We did it before, but we shut off immigration afterward. It's a cycle. Right now we need to stop inflows to let everyone assimilate.
I admit we had better raw material last time, but it strikes me as the sort of moderate argument for restriction that just might hold water with middle class voters.Replies: @Opinionator
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVIkAqwcgasBasically, he says he loves her book and agrees with her about immigration - legal and illegal - but he can't believe she supports Trump because he's not a true conservative. They don't talk about it much, presumably because Shapiro still thought Trump had no chance of actually winning. Now, since then, Shapiro has basically gone nuts and retreated into his private true conservative cargo cult, but I do wonder if, absent people twitter spamming him with pictures of his children in concentration camps, he might have made the same transition as Miller. Or, to put it another way, if ten years ago Miller had been Twitter spammed with his face on a lampshade, would Trump have just won the election?Replies: @IHTG, @Thea, @Gabriel M, @SFG
If you took Jeff Sessions minus the immigration patriotism you would have what people on Unz would refer to as a “Ziocon Israel Firster”.
http://www.ontheissues.org/International/Jeff_Sessions_War_+_Peace.htm
So circa January this year, Ben Shapiro and Jeff Sessions basically agreed on everything, then the brain trust of the alt right thought it would be fun to spam Ben Shapiro with Treblinka jokes.
Personally, I think Ben Shapiro is an unlistenable to twerp and I thought that long before NeverTrump. What I’m saying is that if the alt-right had been around 5 or 6 years ago, then it seems reasonably likely that Miller would have received their unique form of (((outreach))) and Trump probably would have lost the election (perhaps even the nomination). Food for thought.
While the guy seems to be one of the few ideological conservatives who actually believes in limited government etc., given that he was a senior writer over there I can't help but wonder if there's some backstory involving a personal feud with one of the bigshots over there we're not privy to--they went and doxxed him and his dad after the fact if I remember right.
That said I agree with you overall a lot of these alt-right memes probably aren't good for any sort of immigration restrictionism long-term --the Nazis still have a pretty bad rap with everyone to the left of (and including) John Derbyshire. Spencer actually was doing a pretty smart thing with rebranding NPI etc. but then he had to go and yell 'Hail Trump' and give the MSM exactly what they wanted.
I have to admit, though, they are responsible for one of the few genuinely creative countercultures I've seen in a while. Finding an obscure 1970s Italian disco record and claiming it represents the reincarnation of an Egyptian god is exactly the sort of thing I would have gotten into in my teenage years.Replies: @dfordoom
Rudy's tired of playing games with you clowns, he's letting you know EVERYTHING!
http://archive.is/IDBh5Replies: @black sea, @Jus' Sayin'..., @AnonymousCoward
Nonsense like this, which you are spreading, is used by the MSM and others to portray the whole Pizzagate scandal as a crackpot theory. I’m not sure whether you are just a useful idiot or a deliberate provocateur but the link to which you post to is an obvious fake and can be used to discredit very real evidence regarding the Podestas brothers and others who have been implicated in Pizzagate.
Oh, wait...BECAUSE THEY TOLD YOU SO.
Please excuse me.
They intuitively sense that the correct answer is zero, but they’re not ready to admit it to themselves yet.
"In other words, the editor-in-chief of TRIBE Media Corp. is baffled by why Stephen Miller doesn’t hold petty grudges against his fellow Americans for slights that are now four generations old."
Maybe because he's a coward with no self-respect? If my great-grandparents had been deemed inferior by some ethnicity, I sure wouldn't act in ways so as to enable the offending ethnicity, by giving them advice, money or by working for them.
But then, you are a coward with no self-respect too, so maybe this is why you condone his behavior. The reason why you're so nice to Jews is because you know that they are incredibly powerful in America, and you want to be on the side of power Even if that power has been used to disenfranchise you. It is pure cowardice on your part.
The really manly and righteous thing for you to do would be to denounce post-modern, Marxist Jewish intellectuals, and the ethnocentrism of Jewish Zionists who have made the U.S fight multiple wars on the behalf of Israel. Thousands of American boys died in those wars, and you, like a coward, *never* point out Jewish Zionism.
I find it utterly repulsive your flattery and kow-towing to the Jewish Hitler, Netanyahu, a man who has made the U.S spend a few hundred billion Dollars over the past couple decades on Israel's defense. A man who has ordered his soldiers to beat up little Palestinean children in the Gaza Strip. A man who is not worth a bowl of turd. A man who "builds walls" to segregate the Palestineans, just like the walls of Treblinka and Auschwitz once segregated Jews from gentile Germans. A man you celebrate, and want to emulate.
When will you grow some balls, Steve Sailer? The difference between me and you is that I tell it like it and I don't pussy foot around. The difference between me and you is that I stick to my principles no matter what, and I do not shake hands with my enemies. I hate and despise conservatives, and it is what it is. I would never shake hands with them. They are my enemies, and I will do my very best to annihilate them.
I find it nauseatingly hypocritical that you moan over and over again about all the changes that have happened to America over the past five decades, changes that you think were bad. Yet, all those changes were heavily supported by Marxist intellectuals, the vast majority of whom were Jewish. Also, the U.S has indebted itself to the point of bankruptcy by spending trillions(yes, trillions) of Dollars in the middle east over the past quarter century, mostly to support the state of Israel. Feminism and cultural Marxism, which were to cause most of the social changes, were were first promoted at Berkely University in the late 1950's, having as it's intellectual leader Derrida, the French Jewish intellectual. Do you point that out? No.
You see, as a libertarian, I can say these things. I do not like feminism or cultural Marxism. I am a scientific rationalist, and a social libertarian. I do not believe that white men are responsible for the World's evils.; quite the opposite, many of the greatest people in history were white men. I do not believe that men and women are similar, on average in talents and inclinations, although I do believe they should be equal legally - including men having the same right as women to not be drafted into the military. I am in favor of people doing whatever they want with their lives, as long as they don't hurt others. I am not a conservative because conservatism is authoritarian and restritive, putting and emphasis on reproduction and families rather than individuals. Not all of us want to start families, but we are all individuals.
Nevertheless, conservatives are correct that cultural Marxism is ruining the West. The problem is that their solution is to fight authoritarianism with more authoritarianism, by enforcing inequality(against gay marriage), against scientific rationalism(many conservatives literally want to ban Ecolution from schools), bring back the military draft(for men only), are against humanism(ban immigration) favoring the "nation" over individuals, etc.
So *both* cultural Marxists and conservatives are authoritarian, which is why I don't want anything to do with either of them.
However, I have the mettle to point the finger at my enemies and tell it like it is. Why do you never point the finger at ethnocentric Jewish intellectuals? They are, more than anyone else, responsible for the changes you deplore so much. For instance, both leftist Jewish intellectuals and libertarians support immigration. But the reason why we do so is very different. We libertarians support immigration because "nations" to us are arbitrary geographical constructs, and we believe that human beings should be allowed to pursue their dreams anywhere they want to.. Conversely, Leftists Jewish intellectual support immigration because the rhetoric of cultural Marxism is that the White Man is responsible for all the evils in the World, and that immigration is useful to dilute the power of white people in the U.S and Europe. I don't not agree with their motivations. These motivations are not noble, and they deserve to have the finger pointed at them.
Sailer, stop cattering to leftist Jews who hate the U.S and it's people to be on "your side". It is shameful to try to get your enemies to be on your side even after they have already harmed you. Stop condoning mass murderer, Netanyahu, just because he is one of the most powerful men of the country that treats Americans like their "pets". You think if you wave your tail enough your master will reward you? He won't.Replies: @Gabriel M, @dr kill, @CK
Steve Sailer has a difficult job triangulating his reader base, evidently.
Fo real, yo.
Regardless of his ethnicity, Miller comes across as a normal American who doesn’t want America to be populated by Mexicans, but can’t come right out and say he doesn’t want America to be populated by Mexicans. (Cuz everyone is equal and wonderful. Except for heterosexual, white, cisgendered Christian men, who we all known are EVIL.)
About two decades ago, I visited a friend who a few years previously had gotten a tenured position on the faculty of UCLA. He lived in a small house on Mulholland Drive with a spectacular view of the city and maintained by a staff of part time maids and gardeners. He completely avoided contact with the riff raff outside of his small social and geographic ambit.
One day we dropped into a car wash and he commented off-hand but perfectly seriously that one of the great advantages of unrestricted Mexican immigration into LA was how cheap car washes and other services. I suspect my friend is typical of those destroying California. They cannot conceive how a policy that currently advantages the two or three percent of the population to which they belong might harm everyone else and eventually culminate in ruining life even for their privileged and oblivious class.
I am thinking of a points system like in Australia, where the immigration rate is 3 times that of the US relative to population.
Rudy's tired of playing games with you clowns, he's letting you know EVERYTHING!
http://archive.is/IDBh5Replies: @black sea, @Jus' Sayin'..., @AnonymousCoward
Fake twitter account. You are an idiot, Truth.
"Fake twitter account with 11,000+ followers. You are an idiot, Truth."
There’s a lot of survivorship bias in our national immigration narrative. Thinking back warmly about great grandpa Fiorello coming from his little town near Naples with ten cents in his pocket and with little English and “making it” is the norm. But in addition to the bitter ends you mentioned, lots of immigrants just went back home on their own initiative when they couldn’t make it in the United States. Sometimes they went back and forth several times when the work dried up over here with the greater plan of bringing the wife and kids that was never realized.
Survivorship bias also obscures the relative differences of the successes of European immigrants from subsequent batches of third worlders, and this is itself further obscured by the soft landings afforded by the welfare state and accoutrements that was utterly absent in Steven Miller’s great-grandfather’s day.
In any event, some of those immigrants from Europe were skilled tradesmen who did jobs Americans couldn’t do at that time – decorative stone masons and tile workers from Italy, master plasterers from Ireland (they’re still preferred to this day for the increasingly rare craft), etc. and were in demand, particularly to adorn the great public buildings being built at the time. Do we need Somali skiff operators and Pakistani goat herders now for some reason?
It’s simply because they are not very smart.
A few are lucky enough to live in ‘white bubbles’ …white friends, white family, white colleagues and frequent visits to Target
And they are of course brainwashed to not worry if their children will interracially date/marry because they can’t think that far ahead and if it does happen will console themselves with television
It doesn’t take much to make some people happy
“Yes, and remember, Stephen Miller, your great-grandfather couldn’t get into a country club.”
But I see that Saul Glosser, who is presumably a distant cousin of Stephen Miller, is now on that country club's board of directors.
I don't know if Johnstown was ever large enough to have it's own Jewish country club, much less its own German Jewish and Russian Jewish country clubs (as Birmingham, AL enjoyed for half a century).
What with the Johnstown Flood and all.Replies: @Hibernian, @Jack D
You mention discrimination against Jews and blacks through real estate covenants. I’m not usually one to harp on historical discrimination against blacks but I think they tended to face bigger problems than not getting hired at elite law firms or, God forbid, quotas limiting their medical school enrollment. And, of course, their ancestors didn’t get here the way yours did.
You worried that you could have been a victim of the death camps if your grandfathers had not immigrated. Well, both of my grandfathers fought in combat against Nazi Germany. You’re welcome.
“Fast forward 70 years and a flood of jew hatred has returned.”
What the hell are you talking about? Jew hatred because Trump wants to limit immigration of people who really do hate Jews?
Quit feeling sorry for yourself. You’ve had it pretty good here. Last time I checked, Jews were pretty doing O.K. in the United States.
No, the model depends on Whites being around to fund the welfare and keep the lights on.
A parasite depends on the host being available in its original form.
Any given ethnic group has outliers who do not fit in and and want to join a different ethnic group. I can’t see what’s wrong with that, as long as they don’t actually hurt their own kind by switching loyalties.
These days, an immigration restrionist Jew like Miller is helping both Jews and non-Jews.
Trump’s campaign adviser is a desperate illegal immigrant who brutally murdered a woman just like his desperate illegal immigrant great-grandfather did, or did I miss something?
All the point system does in Canada is bring in various tribes of ethnocentric groups who form their own ethnic enclaves who mostly look down on the natives. There is very little sense of loyalty to the nation it self. It is not surprising a recent poll revealed that more Canadians than Americans think minorities should do a better job of fitting in.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/poll-canadians-multiculturalism-immigrants-1.3784194
“In a national polling partnership between CBC and the Angus Reid Institute, 68 per cent of Canadian respondents said minorities should be doing more to fit in with mainstream society instead of keeping their own customs and languages.
The same question was put to Americans, with only 53 per cent of respondents saying minorities need to better adjust.”
“America’s blondest race-baiter.” Now there’s a nice turn of phrase.
Is it really? People have difficulty understanding the concept of ownership? And inheritance? And dilution of share value through the creation of new shares? And reduction in the value of the going concern through the decrease in the quality of human capital and through the decrease in cooperation and increase in conflict?
Which makes him a self-hating Jew, by hhs’s definition.
You haven’t seen companies refusing to hire Jews or exclusions of Jews from universities though. The closest thing to a major presidential candidate without Jewish grandkids was Gary Johnson. The hatred’s mostly from the bottom at this point.
And they do have a point that arguing against tribalism from an organization called ‘TRIBE’ is kind of hypocritical. I’m not a Spencerian (Richard), but he had a point when he shut down that rabbi–how can you have restricted immigration to Israel but not America?
Of course, you can argue for both.
Makes it hard to screen for plague carriers if the drawbridge isn’t raised, and effectively, it’s an open border system..
“Could it be this young anti-immigrant leader is the descendent of immigrants?”
People who arrived on the Mayflower were immigrants too, weren’t they?
P.S. He means “descendant”.
He’s conveniently forgotten that assassination was exactly what provided the pretext for Kristallnacht. The real one.
Steve, you don’t understand. See, the Jewish race carries the open-borders obligation in their blood. All Jews must pay tribute to this blood-debt, this racial caste, by supporting open borders until the end of time. Judaism is biological determinism, in case you didn’t know.
Actually, 1924 was closer to being the eve of the Holodomor in 1932-33, when the disproportionately Jewish Soviet regime murdered between 2.5 and 7.5 million Ukrainians and other Soviet subject peoples, while the west (Jews, the Jewish press very much included) stood by and watched (at best). The NSDAP regime in Germany didn’t start killing Jews in large numbers until 1941, a full 17 years after the Immigration Act, and 9 years after the Holodomor.
But the equation itself is insane, as is anything drawn from it.
The Third Reich embraced a policy of massive unwanted/illegal immigration.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVIkAqwcgasBasically, he says he loves her book and agrees with her about immigration - legal and illegal - but he can't believe she supports Trump because he's not a true conservative. They don't talk about it much, presumably because Shapiro still thought Trump had no chance of actually winning. Now, since then, Shapiro has basically gone nuts and retreated into his private true conservative cargo cult, but I do wonder if, absent people twitter spamming him with pictures of his children in concentration camps, he might have made the same transition as Miller. Or, to put it another way, if ten years ago Miller had been Twitter spammed with his face on a lampshade, would Trump have just won the election?Replies: @IHTG, @Thea, @Gabriel M, @SFG
Elections are overdetermined systems (in the colloquial sense)–you have a yes-or-no outcome with a probability close to 50-50 and hundreds of interfering and interacting factors. To say one guy made the difference or didn’t make the difference is almost impossible except in extreme cases like Trump who has made me rethink my skepticism of the Great Man idea of history.
That said: fewer oven memes, probably less Republican NeverTrumpism. On the other hand, would he have gotten the Internet buzz he did without the Nazi Pepe guys? Who knows?
Is it possible that the reason so many Jews are in favour of open borders is because on some level they fear the collapse of Israel.
Therefore open borders becomes a kind of Jewish Insurance policy. The main borders they want open are of course first world nations because they want the good life that they offer.
Israel's long-term prospects do look pretty bleak. They only have to make one mistake, like maybe electing one bleeding-heart leftist-liberal government, and they're toast. Look what Tony Blair did to Britain in just a few short years. Demographic disasters can happen real fast.
Military conquest seems very very unlikely but it's certainly possible they could destroy themselves. Even if the odds of Israel destroying itself are only say 25% I can see that Jews would be pretty worried.
Of course if this is the case they're not thinking things through. In thirty years time will a Mexican president of the US suddenly decide that the US can no longer afford to subsidise Israel? And if things went badly wrong for Israel would a Muslim President of France, or a Muslim prime minister of Britain, or a Somali prime minster of Canada, welcome Jewish refugees?Replies: @JSM
Periods of heavy immigration are followed by periods of heavy restriction to make sure those who came during the previous period are effectively integrated into the body politic.
Thank you so much for saying this. Nobody wants to admit it, either on the left or cuckish right (because they’d have to admit restriction is good) or the alt-right (because it suggests immigration isn’t the end of the world). We did it before, but we shut off immigration afterward. It’s a cycle. Right now we need to stop inflows to let everyone assimilate.
I admit we had better raw material last time, but it strikes me as the sort of moderate argument for restriction that just might hold water with middle class voters.
I think you are spot on about the argument's political potency. But because conditions have changed in the United States and the world compared to then and because today's immigrants are different from former immigration, assimilation like that is unlikely. Still worth a try.
1896 ≠2016
World population 1896 = 1.6 Billion
World population 2016 = 7.3 Billion
Migrant sending nations in 2016 w/ Fertility levels of 2.8 (Guatemala) to 6.8 (Niger)
Western, developed countries did not have welfare states in the 19th Century either.Replies: @Lot, @bomag, @gregor
No welfare state and no affirmative action. And complete freedom of association. No such thing as a discrimination lawsuit, no fair housing, etc.
Eshman basically feels that what is good for the Jews is more important than what is good for America and apparently what is good for the Jews is to use non-white immigrants to undermine as many white gentiles as possible.
Anglos owe something to Indians whose land was taken and blacks who were brought by force.
As Anglos didn't cause whatever problems Jews faced in the Old World, it was NOT their responsibility to do favors for Jews.
The Current Year logic is totally nuts. Cuz whites took land from American Indians, whites must taken in endless numbers of Asian-Indians. Eh?
And given what Jewish Power did to White America, I think the crucial lesson is that immigration can be dangerous if the newcomers have special talents and hate the native or neo-native population.
And uh... how did it turn out for the Palestinians? Immigration of newcomers sure didn't do them any good.
True, Jews did face hardships in the old world. But that is a common story in the Old World. Chinese suffered a lot under Japanese and Mao. So, what was US supposed to do? Take in 300 million Chinese to alleviate their suffering?
Gimme a break.
PS. The people in the Middle East and North Africa wouldn't be on the move in such huge numbers IF NOT FOR NEO-IMPERIALIST INVADE POLICY engineered largely by Jewish globalists.
If the lesson of WWII is that huge catastrophes lead to tragic migrations of refugees, then maybe the US should not be causing havoc around the world. Middle East and North Africa look like Europe and Asia during WWII, not least because of reckless US policies. How convenient to overlook the terrible Jewish-Zionist role in this and just pontificate about 'compassion' and 'inclusion' from the high horse.
The problem of Europe in WWI, rise of Fascism, rise of communism, and WWII was due the power of extreme ideologies and clash of empires. Also, there was the problem of power parity in Europe, something US didn't have to worry about. The US had it easier cuz it had no real rivals. Canada was too low in population and happy to play second fiddle to US. Latin America remained stagnant and its Latin elites ruled over backward natives and mestizos.
Anglo-American guns and business could dictate terms to Latin nations. When it came to a shooting war, Anglo-Americans could easily defeat them, take their land, and gain dominance, as over SW territories. Also, American Indians were no match to the whites with guns and growing in numbers.
In contrast, there were several nations of roughly equal power in Europe: Britain, France, Germany, Austro-Hungarian Empire, and Russia. Also, even lesser nations could form alliances that could be formidable. And for a time, there was the Ottomans, a semi-European empire. And this made things much more dangerous in Europe... that is until WWII finally reduced all the great powers of Europe with exception of Russia into second-rate powers dependent on the US for protection from Soviets. With the end of Cold War, even Russia became a second-rate power, though it insists on maintaining its sovereignty.
With the fall of empires after WWII, there was finally peace and mutual cooperation among nations, and all was going pretty well for everyone, including Jews who remained... until Progs and the Glob decided to push Diversity and Degeneracy on EU, which is turning things radical and extreme once again. And this time around, Jews must take considerable blame for the mess that gets worse and worse. And even prior to WWII, despite tragic events involving the Jews, the Jewish role in radical revolutions, extreme ideologies, and financial manipulation mustn't be overlooked if we are to understand why things got so crazy over there. And things have gotten so poisonous in the US due to PC and diversity, much of it engineered by lunatic Jewish radicals in media and academia. Jews should actually thank Trump for restoring some semblance of order cuz if things continue along globalist path, it's gonna be bad for everyone, including Jews as politics will only grow more radicalized under increasing duress. I mean Jewish use of anti-whitism is very much like old 'antisemitism'. Just change 'white' in PC talk to 'Jewish', and it sounds like MEIN KAMPF.
PSS. Very disappointing that the piece has nothing about Golf.Replies: @Opinionator, @JSM
This.
MY MISTAKE, I forgot to mention the GPS built into Jewish DNA;
somewhere over the Atlantic/Mediterraneanall around the borders of Israel, this GPS is triggered, and the polarity on the Jewish open-borders position is reversed.FIFY.
That’s a matter of opinion, and degree, I suppose.
Could that be a tacit admission that conquerors, settlers, pioneers (, and slaves), aren’t “immigrants”? That millions of Americans can trace their ancestry back to people who came here not as immigrants, but as conquerors, settlers, pioneers (, or slaves)?
No. European conquerors, settlers, and pioneers did not take “America” from the peoples they found living on the land here. They conquered, settled, and pioneered the land, and created America atop it. Until they did, there was nothing to immigrate to.
This is a rather problematic statement. For one thing, it implies that all the land that the Europeans acquired, was taken by force. That is manifestly untrue; huge swaths of that land was bought and paid for, fair and square. For another, many, if not most, of the peoples Europeans found living here didn’t “own” the land; they lived a nomadic, warlike lifestyle, fighting with one another for control. By their own lights, control fell to the Europeans, who won a fight with them for the land. The idea that “Indians” were a people is an historical retcon pulled off by White leftists, but it has no bearing on reality. It’s an artificial catch-all term imposed on them by the White descendants of White imperialists. The idea that the non-existent “Indians” “owned” the land in question is another historical retcon pulled off by White leftist inheritors of White imperialists, and has no better relationship to reality.
So did the peoples they oppressed and exploited.
I’m saying they don’t in any real sense. If a Jew was so ashamed of his Jewish identity, he’d need only forget it ever was, and never mention it again. Most people who are ashamed of something, first thing they do is never mention it themselves. Jews are not visible minorities, for the most part. If someone says he’s not a Jew, people tend to take him at his word.
Mostly, “self-hating Jew” is a form of peer pressure, a way to exploit Jewish guilt (for not being ethnocentric enough); a way for Jews to keep other Jews in line. That’s what Miller’s going to get; the full-court-press from Jewry to obey the Jewish line, and sell out America.
Funny, but I can’t help but remember the Holodomor.
Lol! She’s not even a real blonde!
You failed to mention that, in addition to being discriminated against, Jews discriminated in favor of themselves. Why is that okay, while it’s not okay for others to do the same?
The death camps, to the extent they had not been abandoned, were liberated by the Red Army.
A double standard allowing discrimination in one’s favor and prohibiting disadvantageous discrimination is not a level playing field.
I can understand how for a Jew, today’s arguments sound too much like the arguments made by immigration restrictionists 100+ years ago. MIT President Walker’s famous 1896 essay in the Altantic, proclaiming that the then current crop of Jewish and Southern Italian poor were :
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1896/06/restriction-of-immigration/306011/
stings even now and was as wrong as could be. Walker could not see past the rags and the funny accents and did not have the vision to see were not beaten men, they were saplings who had been planted in poor soil and when transplanted to the fertile American earth they blossomed.
BUT, just because Walker was wrong about the Jews and Italians doesn’t mean that Trump is equally wrong about Mexicans and Muslims. Amerindians ain’t Askenazis. Bringing Somalis and Afghans to New York isn’t going to bring back the Jews of Budapest from the fires of Auschwitz. There’s nothing we can do now for those who were lost, but the folks who are being brought in are endangering people who are alive today, including (especially) Jews, so it’s doubly perverse.
You could argue for small numbers of Steve Jobs types, I guess. I personally am willing to see a few less innovative businesses founded in the interest of peace. Close the gates, let the new arrivals learn English and football, and then we can think about letting more people in in 2050.Replies: @Jack D
Especially when immediately followed by:Well said, Jack D.
The challenge is how to detect the fine saplings (and there are some among the Mexicans and Muslims) and even more, given regression to the mean, how to detect those whose children will be credits to the nation.
Remember, if you disagree with liberals, you probably have a mental illness. Better get yourself reeducated at the nearest depot for your Mental Health.
stings even now and was as wrong as could be. Walker could not see past the rags and the funny accents and did not have the vision to see were not beaten men, they were saplings who had been planted in poor soil and when transplanted to the fertile American earth they blossomed.
BUT, just because Walker was wrong about the Jews and Italians doesn't mean that Trump is equally wrong about Mexicans and Muslims. Amerindians ain't Askenazis. Bringing Somalis and Afghans to New York isn't going to bring back the Jews of Budapest from the fires of Auschwitz. There's nothing we can do now for those who were lost, but the folks who are being brought in are endangering people who are alive today, including (especially) Jews, so it's doubly perverse.Replies: @SFG, @res, @Hippopotamusdrome
My argument for restrictionism is less about human capital (I’ll leave the liberalism-vs-achievements arguments over Great Wave Ashkenazi immigration for someone else) and more about economic inequality and inter-ethnic tensions. We needed lots of people to work our factories in 1900; now we don’t have work for everyone who wants it. We have a lot of different groups who don’t like each other; we don’t need more right now.
You could argue for small numbers of Steve Jobs types, I guess. I personally am willing to see a few less innovative businesses founded in the interest of peace. Close the gates, let the new arrivals learn English and football, and then we can think about letting more people in in 2050.
"In other words, the editor-in-chief of TRIBE Media Corp. is baffled by why Stephen Miller doesn’t hold petty grudges against his fellow Americans for slights that are now four generations old."
Maybe because he's a coward with no self-respect? If my great-grandparents had been deemed inferior by some ethnicity, I sure wouldn't act in ways so as to enable the offending ethnicity, by giving them advice, money or by working for them.
But then, you are a coward with no self-respect too, so maybe this is why you condone his behavior. The reason why you're so nice to Jews is because you know that they are incredibly powerful in America, and you want to be on the side of power Even if that power has been used to disenfranchise you. It is pure cowardice on your part.
The really manly and righteous thing for you to do would be to denounce post-modern, Marxist Jewish intellectuals, and the ethnocentrism of Jewish Zionists who have made the U.S fight multiple wars on the behalf of Israel. Thousands of American boys died in those wars, and you, like a coward, *never* point out Jewish Zionism.
I find it utterly repulsive your flattery and kow-towing to the Jewish Hitler, Netanyahu, a man who has made the U.S spend a few hundred billion Dollars over the past couple decades on Israel's defense. A man who has ordered his soldiers to beat up little Palestinean children in the Gaza Strip. A man who is not worth a bowl of turd. A man who "builds walls" to segregate the Palestineans, just like the walls of Treblinka and Auschwitz once segregated Jews from gentile Germans. A man you celebrate, and want to emulate.
When will you grow some balls, Steve Sailer? The difference between me and you is that I tell it like it and I don't pussy foot around. The difference between me and you is that I stick to my principles no matter what, and I do not shake hands with my enemies. I hate and despise conservatives, and it is what it is. I would never shake hands with them. They are my enemies, and I will do my very best to annihilate them.
I find it nauseatingly hypocritical that you moan over and over again about all the changes that have happened to America over the past five decades, changes that you think were bad. Yet, all those changes were heavily supported by Marxist intellectuals, the vast majority of whom were Jewish. Also, the U.S has indebted itself to the point of bankruptcy by spending trillions(yes, trillions) of Dollars in the middle east over the past quarter century, mostly to support the state of Israel. Feminism and cultural Marxism, which were to cause most of the social changes, were were first promoted at Berkely University in the late 1950's, having as it's intellectual leader Derrida, the French Jewish intellectual. Do you point that out? No.
You see, as a libertarian, I can say these things. I do not like feminism or cultural Marxism. I am a scientific rationalist, and a social libertarian. I do not believe that white men are responsible for the World's evils.; quite the opposite, many of the greatest people in history were white men. I do not believe that men and women are similar, on average in talents and inclinations, although I do believe they should be equal legally - including men having the same right as women to not be drafted into the military. I am in favor of people doing whatever they want with their lives, as long as they don't hurt others. I am not a conservative because conservatism is authoritarian and restritive, putting and emphasis on reproduction and families rather than individuals. Not all of us want to start families, but we are all individuals.
Nevertheless, conservatives are correct that cultural Marxism is ruining the West. The problem is that their solution is to fight authoritarianism with more authoritarianism, by enforcing inequality(against gay marriage), against scientific rationalism(many conservatives literally want to ban Ecolution from schools), bring back the military draft(for men only), are against humanism(ban immigration) favoring the "nation" over individuals, etc.
So *both* cultural Marxists and conservatives are authoritarian, which is why I don't want anything to do with either of them.
However, I have the mettle to point the finger at my enemies and tell it like it is. Why do you never point the finger at ethnocentric Jewish intellectuals? They are, more than anyone else, responsible for the changes you deplore so much. For instance, both leftist Jewish intellectuals and libertarians support immigration. But the reason why we do so is very different. We libertarians support immigration because "nations" to us are arbitrary geographical constructs, and we believe that human beings should be allowed to pursue their dreams anywhere they want to.. Conversely, Leftists Jewish intellectual support immigration because the rhetoric of cultural Marxism is that the White Man is responsible for all the evils in the World, and that immigration is useful to dilute the power of white people in the U.S and Europe. I don't not agree with their motivations. These motivations are not noble, and they deserve to have the finger pointed at them.
Sailer, stop cattering to leftist Jews who hate the U.S and it's people to be on "your side". It is shameful to try to get your enemies to be on your side even after they have already harmed you. Stop condoning mass murderer, Netanyahu, just because he is one of the most powerful men of the country that treats Americans like their "pets". You think if you wave your tail enough your master will reward you? He won't.Replies: @Gabriel M, @dr kill, @CK
Not a bad rant, but you sort of skip over the reason individualism can exist – the rule of western law. There is a good reason why people from third world, low-law, crony tin-pot shitholes are tribal. I see the deterioration of law as the primary cause of rediscovering nationalism. When the law, as is happening now, no longer provides a modern western individual with the protection afforded by traditional tribal membership, modern western individuals will rediscover their roots.
You could argue for small numbers of Steve Jobs types, I guess. I personally am willing to see a few less innovative businesses founded in the interest of peace. Close the gates, let the new arrivals learn English and football, and then we can think about letting more people in in 2050.Replies: @Jack D
Walker also made the “times have changed” argument in 1896 – back then he said that the frontier is now closed. Doesn’t mean that you are wrong, although I think an argument can be made that America benefits from a certain amount of controlled immigration. However, this is nothing like the system we have now.
What pile of nonsense.
https://spectator.org/when-liberal-doves-become-russia-hawks/
Survivorship bias also obscures the relative differences of the successes of European immigrants from subsequent batches of third worlders, and this is itself further obscured by the soft landings afforded by the welfare state and accoutrements that was utterly absent in Steven Miller's great-grandfather's day.
In any event, some of those immigrants from Europe were skilled tradesmen who did jobs Americans couldn't do at that time - decorative stone masons and tile workers from Italy, master plasterers from Ireland (they're still preferred to this day for the increasingly rare craft), etc. and were in demand, particularly to adorn the great public buildings being built at the time. Do we need Somali skiff operators and Pakistani goat herders now for some reason?Replies: @Jack D, @dearieme
In addition to the skilled artisans (Jewish immigrants were often skilled tailors and came to dominate the garment sewing industry and Jews practiced other trades such as (surprisingly) blacksmithing – Samuel Yellin was perhaps the greatest ornamental ironworker in American history) Jews were very good at trade so Miller’s great grandfather and his descendants grew his little corner store into a major department store and then a regional chain of discount department stores in Western PA. The same story was repeated in almost every city in America. Gimbels, Macy’s, Filene’s, I Magnin, Neiman-Marcus, Bloomingdales, Bergdorf Goodman, Rich’s of Atlanta, Kauffman’s of Pittsburgh, Lazarus of Columbus, and even Sears-Roebuck – they were all either started by Jews or the non-Jewish founders bought out by Jews at an early stage. What are the chances that the Macy’s of the future will be founded by Somalis?
Can you point to one thing that Miller has said that is “self hating”? I’m not talking about 1 step removed word twisting stuff like Miller hates immigrants and Jews are immigrants, therefore he is self-hating, but actual anti-Jewish (not anti-liberal) remarks?
At the end of the war, when GIs liberated the death camps, photos of the piles of corpses and the emaciated survivors were published in the daily newspapers.
Even according to the official history, no death camps were liberated by GIs. All asserted death camps are in areas taken by the Soviets. The photos you saw were of people who had fallen victim to typhus and other disease. Again, all official history.
How do you know it’s nonsense?
Oh, wait…BECAUSE THEY TOLD YOU SO.
Please excuse me.
So, then, being in favor of what’s good for Ordinary White Americans makes one a self-hating Jew. Fascinating, that. Obviously corollary: Being *against* what’s good for Ordinary White Americans makes one pro-Jew. Even more fascinating, that.
You forgot one important piece of information:
“Fake twitter account with 11,000+ followers. You are an idiot, Truth.”
Believe it or not, in my childhood (1940s), in the US, jews were discriminated against:
…Medical schools had quotes for admitting jewish applicants. Universities had quotas for admitting jewish applicants.
Admitting jews at 5-10X their share of the population is “discriminating against” them? Oy vey.
Real estate covenants forbidding sale to jews and Negroes were legally binding. This was merely a fact of life.
Did jews ever enter into covenants forbidding sale to “Negroes”?
A parasite depends on the host being available in its original form.Replies: @Opinionator
Ownership of the territory and of the existing infrastructure is of greater value to them than the inhabitants.
Our current crop of Third World economic agents are rather famous for not maintaining infrastructure and squandering the territory's civic life and social trust, plus not generating enough economic surplus to maintain such.
Therefore open borders becomes a kind of Jewish Insurance policy. The main borders they want open are of course first world nations because they want the good life that they offer.Replies: @JSM, @dfordoom
Well, that would be swell. Dr. Kevin MacDonald has a standing offer to the Jews: how about, you back us on closing the borders to all the non-White non-Jews, and we agree to keeping our borders open to Jews-only? If the Jews would just be honest enough to agree to it. Alas, no. He receives only vitriol.
This is just not true. After the Great Depression began (only 5 years after the ’24 Act), there were very few countries that were interested in having more immigrants because of the feeling that immigrants would steal job from natives. The famous voyage of the St. Louis shows that nobody was interested in taking in Jews, even (in that case) highly skilled and educated German Jews.
German Jews were not a large community to begin with (500,000 vs 3 million in Poland and another 2.5 million in the Soviet Union) but they mostly fled en masse after ’33 so a fair # ended up here. French and GB Jewish communities were even smaller and most never fled so there was no significant Jewish immigration to the US from those countries. You are talking about a few hundred immigrants at most. You are entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts.
In retrospect the '24 act was bad policy, but I do not like seeing its proponents and 1924 America generally being vilified for not having the foresight to see this.I doubt it was that low, but I agree that Jewish migration went down a lot, in large part because Western Euopean Jews were doing well in the 1920's.
Anglos owe something to Indians whose land was taken and blacks who were brought by force.
As Anglos didn't cause whatever problems Jews faced in the Old World, it was NOT their responsibility to do favors for Jews.
The Current Year logic is totally nuts. Cuz whites took land from American Indians, whites must taken in endless numbers of Asian-Indians. Eh?
And given what Jewish Power did to White America, I think the crucial lesson is that immigration can be dangerous if the newcomers have special talents and hate the native or neo-native population.
And uh... how did it turn out for the Palestinians? Immigration of newcomers sure didn't do them any good.
True, Jews did face hardships in the old world. But that is a common story in the Old World. Chinese suffered a lot under Japanese and Mao. So, what was US supposed to do? Take in 300 million Chinese to alleviate their suffering?
Gimme a break.
PS. The people in the Middle East and North Africa wouldn't be on the move in such huge numbers IF NOT FOR NEO-IMPERIALIST INVADE POLICY engineered largely by Jewish globalists.
If the lesson of WWII is that huge catastrophes lead to tragic migrations of refugees, then maybe the US should not be causing havoc around the world. Middle East and North Africa look like Europe and Asia during WWII, not least because of reckless US policies. How convenient to overlook the terrible Jewish-Zionist role in this and just pontificate about 'compassion' and 'inclusion' from the high horse.
The problem of Europe in WWI, rise of Fascism, rise of communism, and WWII was due the power of extreme ideologies and clash of empires. Also, there was the problem of power parity in Europe, something US didn't have to worry about. The US had it easier cuz it had no real rivals. Canada was too low in population and happy to play second fiddle to US. Latin America remained stagnant and its Latin elites ruled over backward natives and mestizos.
Anglo-American guns and business could dictate terms to Latin nations. When it came to a shooting war, Anglo-Americans could easily defeat them, take their land, and gain dominance, as over SW territories. Also, American Indians were no match to the whites with guns and growing in numbers.
In contrast, there were several nations of roughly equal power in Europe: Britain, France, Germany, Austro-Hungarian Empire, and Russia. Also, even lesser nations could form alliances that could be formidable. And for a time, there was the Ottomans, a semi-European empire. And this made things much more dangerous in Europe... that is until WWII finally reduced all the great powers of Europe with exception of Russia into second-rate powers dependent on the US for protection from Soviets. With the end of Cold War, even Russia became a second-rate power, though it insists on maintaining its sovereignty.
With the fall of empires after WWII, there was finally peace and mutual cooperation among nations, and all was going pretty well for everyone, including Jews who remained... until Progs and the Glob decided to push Diversity and Degeneracy on EU, which is turning things radical and extreme once again. And this time around, Jews must take considerable blame for the mess that gets worse and worse. And even prior to WWII, despite tragic events involving the Jews, the Jewish role in radical revolutions, extreme ideologies, and financial manipulation mustn't be overlooked if we are to understand why things got so crazy over there. And things have gotten so poisonous in the US due to PC and diversity, much of it engineered by lunatic Jewish radicals in media and academia. Jews should actually thank Trump for restoring some semblance of order cuz if things continue along globalist path, it's gonna be bad for everyone, including Jews as politics will only grow more radicalized under increasing duress. I mean Jewish use of anti-whitism is very much like old 'antisemitism'. Just change 'white' in PC talk to 'Jewish', and it sounds like MEIN KAMPF.
PSS. Very disappointing that the piece has nothing about Golf.Replies: @Opinionator, @JSM
The Current Year logic is totally nuts. Cuz whites took land from American Indians, whites must taken in endless numbers of Asian-Indians. Eh?
Nuts, is right. If Whites took land from American Indians, and that’s theft, then the endless numbers of Asian-Indians flooding in are knowingly receiving stolen goods.
Which is as big a crime as the theft in the first place. How come nobody guilts THEM about THAT?
http://www.ontheissues.org/International/Jeff_Sessions_War_+_Peace.htm
So circa January this year, Ben Shapiro and Jeff Sessions basically agreed on everything, then the brain trust of the alt right thought it would be fun to spam Ben Shapiro with Treblinka jokes.
Personally, I think Ben Shapiro is an unlistenable to twerp and I thought that long before NeverTrump. What I'm saying is that if the alt-right had been around 5 or 6 years ago, then it seems reasonably likely that Miller would have received their unique form of (((outreach))) and Trump probably would have lost the election (perhaps even the nomination). Food for thought.Replies: @SFG
Actually, from what I understand they went after Ben Shapiro after he split with Breitbart over Trump.
While the guy seems to be one of the few ideological conservatives who actually believes in limited government etc., given that he was a senior writer over there I can’t help but wonder if there’s some backstory involving a personal feud with one of the bigshots over there we’re not privy to–they went and doxxed him and his dad after the fact if I remember right.
That said I agree with you overall a lot of these alt-right memes probably aren’t good for any sort of immigration restrictionism long-term –the Nazis still have a pretty bad rap with everyone to the left of (and including) John Derbyshire. Spencer actually was doing a pretty smart thing with rebranding NPI etc. but then he had to go and yell ‘Hail Trump’ and give the MSM exactly what they wanted.
I have to admit, though, they are responsible for one of the few genuinely creative countercultures I’ve seen in a while. Finding an obscure 1970s Italian disco record and claiming it represents the reincarnation of an Egyptian god is exactly the sort of thing I would have gotten into in my teenage years.
And yes, they may well end up discrediting anti-immigrationism for generations to come. But obnoxious memes are easier and more fun than reasoned arguments and doing the hard work of trying to get a sensible saleable message across.Replies: @Gabriel M
Thank you so much for saying this. Nobody wants to admit it, either on the left or cuckish right (because they'd have to admit restriction is good) or the alt-right (because it suggests immigration isn't the end of the world). We did it before, but we shut off immigration afterward. It's a cycle. Right now we need to stop inflows to let everyone assimilate.
I admit we had better raw material last time, but it strikes me as the sort of moderate argument for restriction that just might hold water with middle class voters.Replies: @Opinionator
I admit we had better raw material last time, but it strikes me as the sort of moderate argument for restriction that just might hold water with middle class voters.
I think you are spot on about the argument’s political potency. But because conditions have changed in the United States and the world compared to then and because today’s immigrants are different from former immigration, assimilation like that is unlikely. Still worth a try.
Jewish thought-leaders like to blame this massive clusterf**k on restrictive immigration policies of western nations, the simple truth is that most Jews did not think there was going to be a Holocaust.Replies: @Jack D
Most Jews didn’t leave for the same reason that you haven’t left your native land. Most people have families, friends, businesses, etc. which keep them rooted to the place that they were born. Immigration is an extreme step so things have to be pretty bad for people to leave. The new countries formed after WWI were not perfect, but the age of pogroms was pretty much over. In addition to the ’24 Act, once the Depression started the gates closed in most places and in any event it was not attractive to leave for another place where things were not good either. The only group of Jews that left in large #’s in the ’30s were the German Jews and they left only after the Nazis made their life intolerable. In the rest of Europe, very few Jews foresaw that Hitler was going to conquer their country and exterminate all the Jews. This was literally beyond their imagination. Even if they thought that there might be another war, they imagined something like WWI where the front would stall, not that the Germans would sweep thru in a matter of weeks. Hitler made no secret of his dislike of the Jews but never (even after he did) did he publicly announce that he was going to physically exterminate them in a campaign of genocide. Henry Ford also announced his dislike of Jews but no one thought that he wanted to actually murder them all.
Also, as Lot has pointed outis not really true. If your only goal was finding a safe place to go there were plenty of options.
The Holocaust was no surprise to anyone that cared to pay attention. And that's why almost all the German Jews fled. The only surprise was how easily the Panzers swept through the rest of Europe.
You’re right. Cohn should have given the Rosenbergs a pass out of ethnic solidarity. You identify Cohn as the villain and enemy of Jewry instead of, you know, the Jewish Communists in thrall to a hostile foreign power. You disclaim and deracinate Cohn and apologize for the Rosenbergs.
Maybe Miller has become, quelle horreur, an American who puts the interests of the United States and its citizens above those of his hypothetical Somolian “refugee” great-grandfather.
Couldn’t we do this to essentially all adult Jews in Israel at the moment? It’ll certainly be a lot higher proportion than you’d find of any other majority of any country.
I don’t know about you, but I don’t feel like my great grandfathers (All 4 of whom I never met) have much to do with what I should believe. One of them was a soldier, I’m sure he’d have very different opinions on say, army pensions, than I would. But then I’m not a soldier and Stephen Miller isn’t an immigrant…
One day I’d love to see a realistic breakdown of the political opinions of American Jews, as it stands the highly ethnocentric zionists keep a lot of dissenters in fear, but is that because they are so few or because the israel-firsters really are that sociopathic and vicious. Still remember how quickly Goldstone folded under their assault.
Beside being a troll, this is false. Yes, there were Jewish trusties (known as kapos) inside the camps but there were also plenty of non-Jewish guards. These tended to fall in 3 categories – Germans who were ineligible for service at the front due to war injuries, age, etc., ethnic Germans from occupied countries (Volksdeutsche) and non-Jewish collaborators (Ukrainians, Lithuanians, etc.) . The latter were the most sadistic of all.
Leftist Jews in Weimar Germany weakened Germany and this led to the rise of Hitler, so anyone who does this is playing with fire.
Traditional (observant) Jewish wisdom is not to advocate for regime change on the (reasonable) possibility that whoever comes next may be even worse for the Jews. If you had bet that way in the 20th century you would have been right most of the time. Jews become revolutionaries only when they reject Maimonides for Marx. At the beginning of the Exodus story, the Bible says “there came a new king (Pharoah) who knew not Joseph.” In other words, the new guy didn’t owe any favors to the Jews and that’s when the sh-t hit the fan for the Jews. Better the devil that you know (old stock Americans) than the devil that you don’t know (Latinos and Muslims).
So even if you view immigration thru this sick twisted lens of “is it good for the Jews”, the answer is still no.
The Soviets were, in the relative sense, better for the Jews than the Tsars, but worse in the absolute sense that they made things far worse for everyone.
Not to mention that weakening Russia turned out to be rather decidedly Not Good for the Jews.
And, from the Zionist perspective, the anti-Semitism of the old regime might've turned out to be somewhat of a feature rather than a bug. It's easy to imagine a surviving Imperial Russia encouraging or even forcing its Jewish population to move to Israel.
Rather tend to think that Jews who collaborated with the Nazis were thinking more in terms of personal survival, dear fellow…..
Near as I can tell, they are quite thin on the ground, dear fellow. Self-loving Jews seem to be far more prevalent……
German Jews were not a large community to begin with (500,000 vs 3 million in Poland and another 2.5 million in the Soviet Union) but they mostly fled en masse after '33 so a fair # ended up here. French and GB Jewish communities were even smaller and most never fled so there was no significant Jewish immigration to the US from those countries. You are talking about a few hundred immigrants at most. You are entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts.Replies: @syonredux, @Lot
And that even applied to internal migrants. Cf how California treated the Okies and Arkies…..
That’s just not true. You might not win many popularity points but the 1st Amendment in the US does not allow the government to outright ban right wing publications. You could form Aryan Media tomorrow if the name is not already taken.
People who arrived on the Mayflower were immigrants too, weren't they?
P.S. He means "descendant".Replies: @syonredux
Settlers, not immigrants.
I am a settler, the Jews are immigrants, and the Nicaraguans are, what?, invaders.Replies: @syonredux
This is what Orwell referred to as “protective stupidity”.
So, the blame for behavior of death-camp inmates lies with… “The Jews.”
‘hhs’, meet Tiny. Thanks for the commenting-software option, Mr. Unz!
Lulz at the legal immigrant commenters telling the author to piss off. My and my wife’s grandparents are legal immigrants and all of them love the Trump. The reasons are obvious.
A commonly-held insanity, then. Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds.
Which makes us fortunate that Stephen Miller is White.
You worried that you could have been a victim of the death camps if your grandfathers had not immigrated. Well, both of my grandfathers fought in combat against Nazi Germany. You're welcome.
"Fast forward 70 years and a flood of jew hatred has returned."
What the hell are you talking about? Jew hatred because Trump wants to limit immigration of people who really do hate Jews?
Quit feeling sorry for yourself. You've had it pretty good here. Last time I checked, Jews were pretty doing O.K. in the United States.Replies: @Jack D
Although blacks certainly had more problems in general, racial discrimination in higher education and for jobs in elite workplaces actually did have a bigger impact on the Jews for the simple reason that very few blacks were qualified to even apply to these places in the first place, while the institution of the quota system had a very real and measurable impact on Jewish enrollment in Ivy schools, etc., with Jewish enrollment in these institutions cut in half or sometimes even more from their pre-quota (early 1920s) peak.
Someone else mentioned that even with the quotas, Jews were over-represented at elite institutions, considering the Jewish share of the general population of the U.S. Of course, the idea is that if not for the quotas, the Jewish percentage at elite institutions would have been higher still had admissions been based entirely on merit. Maybe it's not that much different today. We probably have a de facto quota on admissions to elite institutions for Jews, Asians, and to a lesser extent, white gentiles. Today's affirmative action is effectively the same kind of quota that was used against Jews in an earlier time. Elite institutions (hell, basically all institutions) will beg for a minimally qualified or maybe even an unqualified black or other "minority." Today we don't put a limit, at least officially, on how many Jews (or Asians, or whatever) can be admitted, but the number admitted is fewer than would be the case based solely on merit.
What nobody has ever explained to me, is so what?
Weren't Jews capable of creating elite, highly erudite colleges of their own?Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Desiderius, @Anonymous, @Jack D
"In other words, the editor-in-chief of TRIBE Media Corp. is baffled by why Stephen Miller doesn’t hold petty grudges against his fellow Americans for slights that are now four generations old."
Maybe because he's a coward with no self-respect? If my great-grandparents had been deemed inferior by some ethnicity, I sure wouldn't act in ways so as to enable the offending ethnicity, by giving them advice, money or by working for them.
But then, you are a coward with no self-respect too, so maybe this is why you condone his behavior. The reason why you're so nice to Jews is because you know that they are incredibly powerful in America, and you want to be on the side of power Even if that power has been used to disenfranchise you. It is pure cowardice on your part.
The really manly and righteous thing for you to do would be to denounce post-modern, Marxist Jewish intellectuals, and the ethnocentrism of Jewish Zionists who have made the U.S fight multiple wars on the behalf of Israel. Thousands of American boys died in those wars, and you, like a coward, *never* point out Jewish Zionism.
I find it utterly repulsive your flattery and kow-towing to the Jewish Hitler, Netanyahu, a man who has made the U.S spend a few hundred billion Dollars over the past couple decades on Israel's defense. A man who has ordered his soldiers to beat up little Palestinean children in the Gaza Strip. A man who is not worth a bowl of turd. A man who "builds walls" to segregate the Palestineans, just like the walls of Treblinka and Auschwitz once segregated Jews from gentile Germans. A man you celebrate, and want to emulate.
When will you grow some balls, Steve Sailer? The difference between me and you is that I tell it like it and I don't pussy foot around. The difference between me and you is that I stick to my principles no matter what, and I do not shake hands with my enemies. I hate and despise conservatives, and it is what it is. I would never shake hands with them. They are my enemies, and I will do my very best to annihilate them.
I find it nauseatingly hypocritical that you moan over and over again about all the changes that have happened to America over the past five decades, changes that you think were bad. Yet, all those changes were heavily supported by Marxist intellectuals, the vast majority of whom were Jewish. Also, the U.S has indebted itself to the point of bankruptcy by spending trillions(yes, trillions) of Dollars in the middle east over the past quarter century, mostly to support the state of Israel. Feminism and cultural Marxism, which were to cause most of the social changes, were were first promoted at Berkely University in the late 1950's, having as it's intellectual leader Derrida, the French Jewish intellectual. Do you point that out? No.
You see, as a libertarian, I can say these things. I do not like feminism or cultural Marxism. I am a scientific rationalist, and a social libertarian. I do not believe that white men are responsible for the World's evils.; quite the opposite, many of the greatest people in history were white men. I do not believe that men and women are similar, on average in talents and inclinations, although I do believe they should be equal legally - including men having the same right as women to not be drafted into the military. I am in favor of people doing whatever they want with their lives, as long as they don't hurt others. I am not a conservative because conservatism is authoritarian and restritive, putting and emphasis on reproduction and families rather than individuals. Not all of us want to start families, but we are all individuals.
Nevertheless, conservatives are correct that cultural Marxism is ruining the West. The problem is that their solution is to fight authoritarianism with more authoritarianism, by enforcing inequality(against gay marriage), against scientific rationalism(many conservatives literally want to ban Ecolution from schools), bring back the military draft(for men only), are against humanism(ban immigration) favoring the "nation" over individuals, etc.
So *both* cultural Marxists and conservatives are authoritarian, which is why I don't want anything to do with either of them.
However, I have the mettle to point the finger at my enemies and tell it like it is. Why do you never point the finger at ethnocentric Jewish intellectuals? They are, more than anyone else, responsible for the changes you deplore so much. For instance, both leftist Jewish intellectuals and libertarians support immigration. But the reason why we do so is very different. We libertarians support immigration because "nations" to us are arbitrary geographical constructs, and we believe that human beings should be allowed to pursue their dreams anywhere they want to.. Conversely, Leftists Jewish intellectual support immigration because the rhetoric of cultural Marxism is that the White Man is responsible for all the evils in the World, and that immigration is useful to dilute the power of white people in the U.S and Europe. I don't not agree with their motivations. These motivations are not noble, and they deserve to have the finger pointed at them.
Sailer, stop cattering to leftist Jews who hate the U.S and it's people to be on "your side". It is shameful to try to get your enemies to be on your side even after they have already harmed you. Stop condoning mass murderer, Netanyahu, just because he is one of the most powerful men of the country that treats Americans like their "pets". You think if you wave your tail enough your master will reward you? He won't.Replies: @Gabriel M, @dr kill, @CK
Do you perchance know Tiny Duck?
So, letting in Gentile Muslims is the answer? Probably not…..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almohad_Caliphate#Status_of_non-Muslims
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/poll-canadians-multiculturalism-immigrants-1.3784194
"In a national polling partnership between CBC and the Angus Reid Institute, 68 per cent of Canadian respondents said minorities should be doing more to fit in with mainstream society instead of keeping their own customs and languages.
The same question was put to Americans, with only 53 per cent of respondents saying minorities need to better adjust."Replies: @Jack D
Yeah, if there’s anything worse than letting in a bunch of immigrants who are inferior to the natives and whom we all look down up, it’s letting in a bunch of immigrants who are superior to the natives and who look down on us.
Drawbridges exist so that they can be raised.
Warning that plague-carriers are trying to get in is just good citizenship.
Something else lost here is the suppression of people who might have been born otherwise. Native Californians could certainly have had more kids in response to any real notion of their population being too small, but their plan to live in a less crowded state gets taken away by importing people who are willing to endure the grief of a higher population pressure.
You make reasonable points, but, as it happens, I did.
Also, as Lot has pointed out
is not really true. If your only goal was finding a safe place to go there were plenty of options.
I meant to reply to this, but I accidentally replied to myself. Short answer: Jeff Sessions is pretty Conservatism inc. himself.
Descending from those who immigrated to the US while standing up for the enforcement of US immigration laws and it’s traditional ethnic make up is very logical. It shows an allegiance to the laws and traditions of your forebear’s adopted country and the understanding to realize that your new homeland could descend into what your people escaped from (0r worse) without border enforcement. Advocating for invasion after your family has been allowed entry shows disloyalty, a disregard for your countries traditions and laws, and only proves that none of your kind should have ever been allowed in.
This is the argument I made (I live in Florida) against Marco Rubio. We did his family a tremendous favor by allowing them to move here and escape Castro, and his method of saying thanks is to collaborate with Chuck Schumer to wave in hordes of 3rd worlders?
I convinced maybe 10 friends to withhold their votes for Rubio (while supporting Trump). Most of us wrote in a lawyer friend of ours. Unfortunately we forgot he was a "junior" so we inadvertently voted for our friend's elderly father
However that father was born in Cuba, so it would have a nice trade!
stings even now and was as wrong as could be. Walker could not see past the rags and the funny accents and did not have the vision to see were not beaten men, they were saplings who had been planted in poor soil and when transplanted to the fertile American earth they blossomed.
BUT, just because Walker was wrong about the Jews and Italians doesn't mean that Trump is equally wrong about Mexicans and Muslims. Amerindians ain't Askenazis. Bringing Somalis and Afghans to New York isn't going to bring back the Jews of Budapest from the fires of Auschwitz. There's nothing we can do now for those who were lost, but the folks who are being brought in are endangering people who are alive today, including (especially) Jews, so it's doubly perverse.Replies: @SFG, @res, @Hippopotamusdrome
This is the kind of pro-immigration rhetoric I can get behind.
Especially when immediately followed by:
Well said, Jack D.
The challenge is how to detect the fine saplings (and there are some among the Mexicans and Muslims) and even more, given regression to the mean, how to detect those whose children will be credits to the nation.
It would be wonderful (and I think much more relevant to current times) if some of the energy being put into Hitler analogies was redirected here.
The link to the tweet above is broken — he mentioned that Twitter forced him to delete a few tweets — it appears the one I linked to was among them.
I’m no hypocrite when I oppose immigration from the 3rd world. In fact I’m being true to my immigrant grandparents, who wanted very much to come live in America among Americans — not in Africa, Mexico, India, China, Afghanistan and most definitely not Syria.
Stories are so important. ‘Narrative’ is just fancy word for story.
What was the source of Jewish power in ancient times? They told a story in their Book, and it caught on. So, even though others had stories, the Jewish narrative came to define how even non-Jews came to see the world.
In a way, idols and images are powerful, on their own, they tell no stories. Jews suppressed idols and focused on story-telling, and they told one hell of a story.
It’s like it’s more fun to listen to a radio story without images than to see a movie without sound(which actually feels suffocating). Words make sense of things in ways mere images cannot.
But with the coming of sound era in movies, there was the mass culture of Image + Sound, and nothing has been more powerful. It is Idolatry and Story-telling fused into one.
Prior to sound-era in cinema, images had limited means to tell stories. Images were in sculpture or painting. Sculpture cannot move. And paintings are fixed. Artists tried to create illusion of motion in sculpture and painting. Or via symbolism and various means, artists tried to tell a story in a painting or sculpture, like in totem poles and reliefs. This is why certain old paintings are so packed with detail and unrealistic. The artist is trying to capture an entire event in a single image.
So, the main way of telling stories was through theater where dialogue was key or through literature where words were king.
Cinema created the flow of images, and this flow could tell a story without words. Silent cinema added intertitles and musical accompaniment, but they were still unsatisfying as story-telling vehicles. Indeed, radios and record players were more fun and engaging. But then came sound cinema, and that became the most effective form of story-telling as there was the power of image, power of words, and power of music all in one.
And TV surpassed the radio in popularity cuz it had sound and image.
No wonder Hollywood is the most powerful Narrative Factory in the world.
Rap is also powerful because it’s not just music but a story-telling format. It’s about the Arrogance of Ignorance — ghetto-trash morons who know nothing but have opinions on everything based on ‘muh gun’ and ‘muh dic*’ — , but it’s told as a tale, and people love stories.
Those who live may tell the tales, but those who tell the tales live to rule the world.
This is why BIRTH OF A NATION has been so threatening to the Progs. It was the first great work in history of cinema, the most powerful medium the world had ever seen, and it was made by D. W. Griffith, the father of cinema-as-art and proud race-ist.
A people who want to prevail and survive must tell the tale. News media, education, and entertainment are all about story-telling. This is why Russians had to regain control of media from the globalists. And this is why MSM is panicking about ‘fake news’ as ‘Russian’ spy stuff. It is alternative narrative, a different story-telling.
Indeed, what makes us human? Storytelling. An intelligent animal like a wolf can lead a most interesting and exciting life filled with all sorts of adventures: hunting bison, fending off cougars, fighting bears, warring with other wolf packs, chasing rabbits, surviving winters, etc. But it can’t convey any of to its cubs since it has no language. So, whatever it and its pack may have gone through, the cubs will know NOTHING of it. And wolf cubs have no sense of ancestry — grandwolves and greatgrand wolves or wolf heritage.
So, there is no narrative, no culture among wolves. It took a human like Jack London to tell the tale of a wolf or half-wolf in White Fang. Humans have this power to tell stories, and that creates memories through time, and that creates culture.
A wolf cannot tell its cubs what it went through, but through stories, human kids can find out about their grandparents and great grandparents and forebears through storytelling EVEN IF the kids never met their forebears. No modern Jew has met David, Moses, and Abraham who died long ago, but he feels the ‘living’ presence of those Biblical figures through the power of storytelling. It’s like the girl in DOCTOR ZHIVAGO. She never met her real father and grew up under nothing but Soviet propaganda. But Yevgraf sets her straight with the simple power of storytelling. (She sort of looks like Putin, so maybe they are related too.)
So, it is incumbent upon every parent to be a story-teller. He or she must tell the story of his/her life, of forebears, and of the race/culture as a whole. And this responsibility must not be outsourced to other groups, especially hostile groups. Imagine Israelis leaving it up to Palestinians to tell the Jewish story.
This isn’t to say we should shut our ears to counter- or alternative-sources of story-telling about OUR story. After all, maybe Arabs can say interesting things about Jews, and Jews can say interesting things about Arabs. Outsiders and even enemies notice things about OUR KIND that we don’t, and we notice things about OTHER folks that they may not notice. It’s like smell. A hindu cannot notice curry smell on himself cuz he is so filled with that stuff. But we notice. A Negro cannot notice raw onion smell on himself cuz he eats too much of that stuff along with the chicken.
Still, the final narrative of any people must be devised by themselves, remembered by themselves, and insisted upon by themselves, and etc. Any people who lose that power, responsibility, and sense of duty are lost.
I mean Jews don’t let gentiles tell Jews what being Jewish is all about.
I recall a Firing Line debate with Buckley, Father Neuhaus, and Dershowitz. Neuhaus said something about Jewishness and what it stood for, and Dershowitz rebutted him by saying that he’s Jewish and he doesn’t agree with any of Neuhaus’ formulation of Jewishness, however sympathetic and flattering it may be.
But look at our culture. So many kids grow up without fathers. That means no story-teller in the home. (And most single-mothers only know trashy TV culture.) Also, even fathers who stick around have no sense of ethnos, culture, history, or spirituality. Their entire culture is pop music and TV and videogames, and their idea of raising kids is playing video games or watching negro-filled sports or watching dumb TV shows filled with morons like the fatso in LOST.
Too many fathers are like that guy we see through the window in the opening of GHOST WORLD. Notice the kid is bored and beating something with a plastic bat.
But even the smarter Jewish father in the movie is a total dolt who has reneged on his fatherly duties. He’s not like Vito Corleone. (And they have the damn TV on during lunch. Rule should be NO TV during eating time.) I love the characters of GHOST WORLD, but they are all so clueless.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VB4q9rcfvvE&feature=youtu.be&t=1m10s
In our world, when the narrative isn’t PC, often anti-white to the point where so many white people are made to feel evil and wicked even to entertain the notion of white identity/history/unity, it is Pop Culture where young people are primarily encouraged to identify with fantasy figures like the dwarf in GAMES IN THRONE, lunatic rappers, mindless celebs like Lena Dunham, has-been trash like madonna(who complains about ‘age-ism’ in a pop culture industry that has no use for older people), and etc.
It wasn’t always like this, even on the Left. Take a movie like IMITATION OF LIFE where the daughter has a black mother but rejects it to totally pass for white. Back then, the theme was Accept What You Really Are. Now, we are supposed to praise Michael Jackson who only only wanted to be a white but a white girl. And Bruce is Caitlyn, an act of ‘courage’ according to Obama.
Now, we can understand the appeal of the ideal. In SHANE, the boy is drawn to Shane as the white knight figure. But Shane of noble heart tells the kid some good lesson in life. We must accept the real over the ideal that is more myth.
But what is totally nuts in our age is that even the ‘ideal’ is totally degenerate. At least we can understand why the boy is drawn to Shane. Alan Ladd is handsome, stylish, dashing, good with gun, and tough. But in our age, Ladd’s character would be the new ideal with a tattoo on his ass, piercing through his nose, and talked like one of Tarantino’s demento characters.
AVALON isn’t a very good movie, but the ending with the TV set is pretty disturbing. It was the beginning of the rise of kids as Pod People zombies who primarily identify with pop culture than their own people and culture. Pop Culture is fine as pop culture but destructive as Core Culture.
Also, the American Narrative via domination of entertainment and education has led to destruction of local narratives around the world. It’s as Americanism expects all the world to revere ‘heroes’ and figures who are particularly rooted in American history. So, the whole world is supposed to look up to MLK when he had nothing to do with other nations. And since the West has Negromania, the whole world must revere Mandela… while shhhh and just forget about it with Arafat who is inconvenient to the peddlers of the globalist narrative.
Parents who don’t develop skills as story-tellers have failed. A wolf cannot tell its tale. Humans can tell tales. And in some ways, human communities were richer in primitive times than today. As rough as it was for primitive folks, they got together around campfires and told their tales and passed these stories to their kids.
Today, white parents have failed to talk to their kids. They outsource storytelling to the TV that is controlled by the hostile and deracinating GLOB. And these parents have themselves been raised in the Age of TV and feel closer to the Jetsons and Flintstones than to their actual forebears and larger racial community. Kids don’t have family albums in the room. They got posters of trashy degenerate celebs on the wall. Bad parenting. Also, there is no respect for nature, ways of which offer so many metaphors for life. If polluting nature is bad, why is polluting culture a good thing?
And things have been made worse by rise of feminism and careerism among women. As women take more higher level jobs, it means men have fewer good jobs, and that means fewer of them will be able to attract wives and raise kids. But the harm doesn’t end there. It also hurts women who want to be wives and mothers because fewer men with good jobs means fewer men as marriage-prospects. Of course, it also hurts many career women cuz they will eventually grow older and lose market value. Also, since they took jobs from men, there are fewer men worth marrying.
In a way, the argument for mass immigration from places like India and Muslim nations is an admittance that feminism and materialism have failed. They have created conditions of such dire demographics that the West must look to non-feminist places for more people.
Sir, regret to inform that young Miller has ‘gone native’. Please advise.
What are the reasons? They are not obvious, since so many descendants of recent legal immigrants are anti-Trump and anti-White. Witness the subcontinental population.
Jeff Sessions’s opposition to immigration and trade makes him the opposite of Conservatism, Inc.
I suggested that deal back in the last decade: Israelis would get a guarantee of a Cuban refugee-style privilege to all move to America in case is Israel destroyed.
Survivorship bias also obscures the relative differences of the successes of European immigrants from subsequent batches of third worlders, and this is itself further obscured by the soft landings afforded by the welfare state and accoutrements that was utterly absent in Steven Miller's great-grandfather's day.
In any event, some of those immigrants from Europe were skilled tradesmen who did jobs Americans couldn't do at that time - decorative stone masons and tile workers from Italy, master plasterers from Ireland (they're still preferred to this day for the increasingly rare craft), etc. and were in demand, particularly to adorn the great public buildings being built at the time. Do we need Somali skiff operators and Pakistani goat herders now for some reason?Replies: @Jack D, @dearieme
“lots of immigrants just went back home on their own initiative when they couldn’t make it in the United States. ” In the case of Italy, lots went to the US to make money and then return to Italy to buy some land. The immigrants of the steamship era didn’t gamble much by trying the US. Return voyages were cheap.
...Medical schools had quotes for admitting jewish applicants. Universities had quotas for admitting jewish applicants.
Admitting jews at 5-10X their share of the population is "discriminating against" them? Oy vey.
Real estate covenants forbidding sale to jews and Negroes were legally binding. This was merely a fact of life.
Did jews ever enter into covenants forbidding sale to "Negroes"?Replies: @Steve Sailer
In Los Angeles they sure did.
A forgotten incident from the early 1960s was when the PGA Championship golf tournament was awarded to the Jewish Brentwood C.C. in west L.A. California’s Jewish attorney general complained about the PGA’s whites-only rule (also, Brentwood CC definitely didn’t have any non-white members, and not many non-Jewish whites, either). The tournament had to be moved to another state, the PGA opened integrated, and no historically Jewish golf club has hosted a major championship since, unlike in the 1920s and 1930s when the PGA and US Open went several times to Jewish clubs.
“Settlers, not immigrants”: priceless.
I am a settler, the Jews are immigrants, and the Nicaraguans are, what?, invaders.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Settler,_One_Bullet
Same here.
This perennial excuse is sometimes comically bad. E.g;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kishinev_pogrom
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiev_pogrom_%281881%29
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1907_Romanian_Peasants%27_revolt
Note that it was 10k peasants who were murdered, not Jews, but this it into Wikipedia’s Anti-Jewish progroms category nonetheless.
Even according to the official history, no death camps were liberated by GIs. All asserted death camps are in areas taken by the Soviets. The photos you saw were of people who had fallen victim to typhus and other disease. Again, all official history.Replies: @syonredux
Yeah. The camps that were liberated by the Anglo powers (Buchenwald, Dachau, etc) were Concentration Camps. Nasty places, to be sure, but they were not designed with mass killing in mind. The actual Death Camps (Treblinka, Bełżec, etc) were in the East and were liberated by the Soviets.
I agree completely. My point was that Jews didn’t have it all that bad in 1940’s America, relatively speaking.
Someone else mentioned that even with the quotas, Jews were over-represented at elite institutions, considering the Jewish share of the general population of the U.S. Of course, the idea is that if not for the quotas, the Jewish percentage at elite institutions would have been higher still had admissions been based entirely on merit. Maybe it’s not that much different today. We probably have a de facto quota on admissions to elite institutions for Jews, Asians, and to a lesser extent, white gentiles. Today’s affirmative action is effectively the same kind of quota that was used against Jews in an earlier time. Elite institutions (hell, basically all institutions) will beg for a minimally qualified or maybe even an unqualified black or other “minority.” Today we don’t put a limit, at least officially, on how many Jews (or Asians, or whatever) can be admitted, but the number admitted is fewer than would be the case based solely on merit.
I am a settler, the Jews are immigrants, and the Nicaraguans are, what?, invaders.Replies: @syonredux
According to the PC dictionary, immigrants are good. Since the people who founded Anglo-America, Australia, and New Zealand are bad, bad, bad, they can’t be immigrants. They are settlers. You know the old saying,” One Settler, One Bullet”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Settler,_One_Bullet
What was the source of Jewish power in ancient times? They told a story in their Book, and it caught on. So, even though others had stories, the Jewish narrative came to define how even non-Jews came to see the world.
In a way, idols and images are powerful, on their own, they tell no stories. Jews suppressed idols and focused on story-telling, and they told one hell of a story.
It's like it's more fun to listen to a radio story without images than to see a movie without sound(which actually feels suffocating). Words make sense of things in ways mere images cannot.
But with the coming of sound era in movies, there was the mass culture of Image + Sound, and nothing has been more powerful. It is Idolatry and Story-telling fused into one.
Prior to sound-era in cinema, images had limited means to tell stories. Images were in sculpture or painting. Sculpture cannot move. And paintings are fixed. Artists tried to create illusion of motion in sculpture and painting. Or via symbolism and various means, artists tried to tell a story in a painting or sculpture, like in totem poles and reliefs. This is why certain old paintings are so packed with detail and unrealistic. The artist is trying to capture an entire event in a single image.
So, the main way of telling stories was through theater where dialogue was key or through literature where words were king.
Cinema created the flow of images, and this flow could tell a story without words. Silent cinema added intertitles and musical accompaniment, but they were still unsatisfying as story-telling vehicles. Indeed, radios and record players were more fun and engaging. But then came sound cinema, and that became the most effective form of story-telling as there was the power of image, power of words, and power of music all in one.
And TV surpassed the radio in popularity cuz it had sound and image.
No wonder Hollywood is the most powerful Narrative Factory in the world.
Rap is also powerful because it's not just music but a story-telling format. It's about the Arrogance of Ignorance --- ghetto-trash morons who know nothing but have opinions on everything based on 'muh gun' and 'muh dic*' --- , but it's told as a tale, and people love stories.
Those who live may tell the tales, but those who tell the tales live to rule the world.
This is why BIRTH OF A NATION has been so threatening to the Progs. It was the first great work in history of cinema, the most powerful medium the world had ever seen, and it was made by D. W. Griffith, the father of cinema-as-art and proud race-ist.
A people who want to prevail and survive must tell the tale. News media, education, and entertainment are all about story-telling. This is why Russians had to regain control of media from the globalists. And this is why MSM is panicking about 'fake news' as 'Russian' spy stuff. It is alternative narrative, a different story-telling.
Indeed, what makes us human? Storytelling. An intelligent animal like a wolf can lead a most interesting and exciting life filled with all sorts of adventures: hunting bison, fending off cougars, fighting bears, warring with other wolf packs, chasing rabbits, surviving winters, etc. But it can't convey any of to its cubs since it has no language. So, whatever it and its pack may have gone through, the cubs will know NOTHING of it. And wolf cubs have no sense of ancestry -- grandwolves and greatgrand wolves or wolf heritage.
So, there is no narrative, no culture among wolves. It took a human like Jack London to tell the tale of a wolf or half-wolf in White Fang. Humans have this power to tell stories, and that creates memories through time, and that creates culture.
A wolf cannot tell its cubs what it went through, but through stories, human kids can find out about their grandparents and great grandparents and forebears through storytelling EVEN IF the kids never met their forebears. No modern Jew has met David, Moses, and Abraham who died long ago, but he feels the 'living' presence of those Biblical figures through the power of storytelling. It's like the girl in DOCTOR ZHIVAGO. She never met her real father and grew up under nothing but Soviet propaganda. But Yevgraf sets her straight with the simple power of storytelling. (She sort of looks like Putin, so maybe they are related too.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOpJKzIzUxw
So, it is incumbent upon every parent to be a story-teller. He or she must tell the story of his/her life, of forebears, and of the race/culture as a whole. And this responsibility must not be outsourced to other groups, especially hostile groups. Imagine Israelis leaving it up to Palestinians to tell the Jewish story.
This isn't to say we should shut our ears to counter- or alternative-sources of story-telling about OUR story. After all, maybe Arabs can say interesting things about Jews, and Jews can say interesting things about Arabs. Outsiders and even enemies notice things about OUR KIND that we don't, and we notice things about OTHER folks that they may not notice. It's like smell. A hindu cannot notice curry smell on himself cuz he is so filled with that stuff. But we notice. A Negro cannot notice raw onion smell on himself cuz he eats too much of that stuff along with the chicken.
Still, the final narrative of any people must be devised by themselves, remembered by themselves, and insisted upon by themselves, and etc. Any people who lose that power, responsibility, and sense of duty are lost.
I mean Jews don't let gentiles tell Jews what being Jewish is all about.
I recall a Firing Line debate with Buckley, Father Neuhaus, and Dershowitz. Neuhaus said something about Jewishness and what it stood for, and Dershowitz rebutted him by saying that he's Jewish and he doesn't agree with any of Neuhaus' formulation of Jewishness, however sympathetic and flattering it may be.
But look at our culture. So many kids grow up without fathers. That means no story-teller in the home. (And most single-mothers only know trashy TV culture.) Also, even fathers who stick around have no sense of ethnos, culture, history, or spirituality. Their entire culture is pop music and TV and videogames, and their idea of raising kids is playing video games or watching negro-filled sports or watching dumb TV shows filled with morons like the fatso in LOST.
Too many fathers are like that guy we see through the window in the opening of GHOST WORLD. Notice the kid is bored and beating something with a plastic bat.
But even the smarter Jewish father in the movie is a total dolt who has reneged on his fatherly duties. He's not like Vito Corleone. (And they have the damn TV on during lunch. Rule should be NO TV during eating time.) I love the characters of GHOST WORLD, but they are all so clueless.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VB4q9rcfvvE&feature=youtu.be&t=1m10s
https://youtu.be/GhRmeVi1jSE?t=7m8s
In our world, when the narrative isn't PC, often anti-white to the point where so many white people are made to feel evil and wicked even to entertain the notion of white identity/history/unity, it is Pop Culture where young people are primarily encouraged to identify with fantasy figures like the dwarf in GAMES IN THRONE, lunatic rappers, mindless celebs like Lena Dunham, has-been trash like madonna(who complains about 'age-ism' in a pop culture industry that has no use for older people), and etc.
It wasn't always like this, even on the Left. Take a movie like IMITATION OF LIFE where the daughter has a black mother but rejects it to totally pass for white. Back then, the theme was Accept What You Really Are. Now, we are supposed to praise Michael Jackson who only only wanted to be a white but a white girl. And Bruce is Caitlyn, an act of 'courage' according to Obama.
Now, we can understand the appeal of the ideal. In SHANE, the boy is drawn to Shane as the white knight figure. But Shane of noble heart tells the kid some good lesson in life. We must accept the real over the ideal that is more myth.
But what is totally nuts in our age is that even the 'ideal' is totally degenerate. At least we can understand why the boy is drawn to Shane. Alan Ladd is handsome, stylish, dashing, good with gun, and tough. But in our age, Ladd's character would be the new ideal with a tattoo on his ass, piercing through his nose, and talked like one of Tarantino's demento characters.
AVALON isn't a very good movie, but the ending with the TV set is pretty disturbing. It was the beginning of the rise of kids as Pod People zombies who primarily identify with pop culture than their own people and culture. Pop Culture is fine as pop culture but destructive as Core Culture.
Also, the American Narrative via domination of entertainment and education has led to destruction of local narratives around the world. It's as Americanism expects all the world to revere 'heroes' and figures who are particularly rooted in American history. So, the whole world is supposed to look up to MLK when he had nothing to do with other nations. And since the West has Negromania, the whole world must revere Mandela... while shhhh and just forget about it with Arafat who is inconvenient to the peddlers of the globalist narrative.
Parents who don't develop skills as story-tellers have failed. A wolf cannot tell its tale. Humans can tell tales. And in some ways, human communities were richer in primitive times than today. As rough as it was for primitive folks, they got together around campfires and told their tales and passed these stories to their kids.
Today, white parents have failed to talk to their kids. They outsource storytelling to the TV that is controlled by the hostile and deracinating GLOB. And these parents have themselves been raised in the Age of TV and feel closer to the Jetsons and Flintstones than to their actual forebears and larger racial community. Kids don't have family albums in the room. They got posters of trashy degenerate celebs on the wall. Bad parenting. Also, there is no respect for nature, ways of which offer so many metaphors for life. If polluting nature is bad, why is polluting culture a good thing?
And things have been made worse by rise of feminism and careerism among women. As women take more higher level jobs, it means men have fewer good jobs, and that means fewer of them will be able to attract wives and raise kids. But the harm doesn't end there. It also hurts women who want to be wives and mothers because fewer men with good jobs means fewer men as marriage-prospects. Of course, it also hurts many career women cuz they will eventually grow older and lose market value. Also, since they took jobs from men, there are fewer men worth marrying.
In a way, the argument for mass immigration from places like India and Muslim nations is an admittance that feminism and materialism have failed. They have created conditions of such dire demographics that the West must look to non-feminist places for more people.Replies: @Opinionator
Where can we learn more about storytelling? How can we develop storytelling skills?
In a way, EVERYTHING is a story. Time + memory + language + interest + entertainment(pleasure) = story. We live through time. We have memory, so traces of time remains even after it's gone. Also, we are easily bored and rely on stories to relieve the oppressive silence. And as organisms and culture, we have interests and tell stories to justify and defend those interests. Sometimes the interests are material. Sometimes, it's egoistic.
Many simple/dumb organisms live through time like we do, but they have no consciousness, no memory, therefore no sense of time. Even most organisms with some measure of consciousness have nothing like the memory of complex animals like elephants, whales, dogs(who can remember master even after long time), and humans.
Higher mammals and some birds have good memory, but ONLY humans have language that can communicate lost time. Stories keep the past alive, in some ways more powerfully than reality in the present.
Maybe there is more to whale 'songs' than primitive communication, but I don't know. Most animals communicate immediate interests via growling, howling, barking, chirping, and etc. It only amounts to "I'm hungry", "I will kill you if you come near", "Me so horny", "muh claws". Animals may remember past incidents but have no means to communicate it others. A wolf mother cannot tell its cubs about its own mother, the grandmother of the cubs.
Everything that we relate in language is a kind of story. History is the Story of Power in the most basic sense. Stories control much. If Bob did John wrong but if you only hear Bob's side of the story, Bob can seem so right while John so wrong even though John didn't do nothing wrong. Stories are building blocks of a civilization, like of a skyscraper.
This is why a garrulous no-good sumfabitch has more power than a quiet decent feller. Whatever may have happened, we only know from stories. This is why MSM is freaking out about 'Russian' stories of the 'fake news' alternative media. They want monopoly on story-telling.
Now, there are other things that have power too. Beauty is a kind of power that needs no story. In BROADCAST NEWS, the Albert Brooks character is a terrific talker, a very bright guy with good memory and sense for details. The wasp character played by William Hurt is a dodo. His mind is good at superficial stuff in making himself likable and in feeding on other people's ideas as he has none of his own. But he's got the looks and style, and he wins over Holly Hunter's character. Clint Eastwood never had to say much to have ladies chasing him, even with a knife like in PLAY MISTY FOR ME. Often in Woody Allen's movies, the superficial guy with the bigger wallet beats the guy with the bigger mouth in winning the girl, so money talks too.
Since most people don't have beauty or magnificence, their power relies on control of stories and narratives. Jews understand this better than others. And songs are esp effective because they add story to music.
The 'Left' loves story-telling more than the 'Right' does. We see this in novel writing, theater(dominated by homos), study of classics, domination of humanities, and etc.
There are two kinds of 'leftist' story-telling. (1) Gritty and real. It is often humanistic and about social problems such as poverty. Consider films like BICYCLE THIEVES and LA TERRA TREMA. (2) Vain and egotistic. This is the specialty of homos, even though they got partly gritty during the HIV years when so many of them were dropping like flies. But even then, the most famous fruit tale was ANGELS IN AMERICA, which was fantastical as well as political.
The gritty-side of leftism(as represented by Chris Hedges who takes it too far and champions the gross Andrea Dworkin, or Jabba's daughter) doesn't go well with the fantastical side. Leftism used to be about pouring cold water on decadent capitalists who were having too good a time. It's like the scene in DOCTOR ZHIVAGO where the Christmas Party is interrupted by gunshot and Strelnikov the impoverished revolutionary comes to escort Lara away.
But in recent times, 'leftism' has turned into a vain-ego-driven fantasy of narcissism where every millennial is encouraged to create his or her or whatever-gender's Neverland of the Mind, one's own Michael-Jackson-ville.
Also, with the merging of the rich GLOB and elite PROGS, leftism became less and less about the working class(seen as too 'white' and 'archie-bunkerish') and more about minorities. When the core minorities used to be poor blacks or struggling immigrants, leftism still had its grit. But the favored minorities today are homos and trannies who are often privileged and in the inner circle of power, like the owners of Comet Pizza. Also, if most immigrants in the started poor and came with little, many new immigrants are cream-of-crop from places like India, Nigeria, China, and etc. In Canada, Chinese arrive to buy up entire blocks of cities. Justin Trudeau isn't reaching out to railroad workers with callused hands. He's reaching out to globalist Chinese business class to come with all that ill-gotten cash. Of course, there are poor immigrants too, esp those who come across the border. But a lot of immigrants who come on plane tend to be economic superiors in their own nations. Look at Fareed Zikavirus.
To be sure, the immigrant narrative wasn't always hostile to the Founding Narrative. There was a time when it was seen as an addition to the original narrative, i.e. immigrants arrived, fell in love with America, respected the founder stock, and sought to assimilate. But over time, the immigrant narrative sought to overtake and even delegitimize the founding narrative. Jews found the founding narrative to favor the Golf Folks or Golfolks. And Latino whites, filled with inferiority complex over the fact that Anglos did such a superior job of building the New World than stupid Latins did, jumped on the neo-immigration-narrative to stick it to yanqui. As for Asian-Indians, they are weasly bunch, and yellows are dogs who just go along with whatever happens to be the Master Narrative. If Jeb is low energy, yellows are no agency.
So, 'leftism' turned into something sickly. It went from 'cultural marxism' to 'cultural capitalism'. But then, this aspect of leftism isn't really new. After all, both the creative bohemian left and toiling prole left saw the bourgeoisie as the common enemy. With the working class, the antagonism was obvious. Workers saw the capitalists as not sharing sufficient wealth with those who toiled.
But why did the bohemian left hate the bourgeois so much when it was rich folks who patronized the arts and culture? Because the bourgeoisie was a contradiction. Unlike the Roman rich that was into decadence, debauchery, orgy-like behavior, piggery, and Felliniesque excesses(like in SATYRICON), the modern bourgeoisie was bound by wealth and work ethic, by both great ambition and hard sobriety. The rule among the rich used to be, "if you got it, flaunt it." Show off your wealth and be splashy(and go broke like the aristocrats who threw too many balls and parties). But bourgeois values called for hard work to gain great wealth but also morals, limits, and moderation(especially in Protestant cultures that disdained ostentatiousness). Bourgeoisie saw themselves as moral exemplars for rest of society. Even though some got very rich, their core value system was still 'middle class'. It was like the Protestant Work Ethic thing, but it's also there in the Jewish tradition where it was more important to make a lot of wealth and be prudent spend it like Roman elites into orgies and stuff. The most negative portrayal of the bourgeois type is Scrooge who is all work, all saving, but no fun. But there have been positive views of the bourgeoisie too, esp by writers like John Lukacs, Jacques Barzun, and Gertrud Himmelfarb -- and I suppose David Brooks to some extent though he is too bobo-happy -- who admired the bourgeoisie's sense of self-restraint and largesse oblige. Whit Stillman is of this type.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7kk7-qoksA
Anyway, if the proles were angry at bourgeoisie for not paying them enough, the bohemian-left were really upset that the bourgeoisie were not splurging enough on the arts. So, even though the working class were into basic needs whereas bohemians were into decadent(even degenerate) privilege, they found themselves on the same side against the bourgeoisie. Also, with the death of religion, the creative class needed a new religion. In the Romantic Era, art(and genius) was the new faith. But modernism questioned and subverted everything. Art began to attack itself, and alienated artists needed some strong faith, and for many, it was Marxism even if they didn't really want to live under communism. Jews were divided in this struggle. On the one hand, most Jews weren't very prole-ish. Too smart, too educated, and too savvy to be part of the Working Class that might be filled with 'Dumb Polac*s' who might still believe Jews killed Jesus. As a brainy people, Jews obviously gravitated to academia, media, and business, the domain of the bourgeoisie. We see this tension in the character in BARTON FINK, a Jewish guy in Hollywood who talks about the People, mostly in the abstract as he would never get along with the real working class.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiN26NHb4ao
Also, even the Jewish bourgeoisie could sometimes make common cause with the Left because they were in competition with the Bigger Bourgeoisie of the Wasps. Anything to de-legitimize the moral foundation of Anglo Power. Later, even rich Jews supported the Civil Rights Movement for the same reason. Anyway, over time, is it any surprise that the Jewish 'left' is now mainly allied with 'creative' homos and immigrant-minority-elites like Fareed Zikavirus, white Latin elites, and Chinese who bring lots of easy cash to California and Canada? As for the working class... why they are worse than deplorable. They are 'Russian'! Soon, they will be putting on Cossack fur coats and burn down Manhattan. By golly, like Richard Spencer is married to some Russian, Trump is also married to some Slav, and all Slavs are the same. And even though Ivanka is married to a Jew, her name Ivanka is Slavic-ish, and besides it even sounds like Eva as in Evanka Braunova. Trump is Hitler and Ivan the Terrible rolled into one. That was why the homosexual Jewish guys had to chase down Ivanka on the airplane and stop her before her father destroys the world. Now, that is some poopchutzpah.
Anyway, one side of leftism cares about social reality, and they feel obligated to tell stories about ordinary people struggling. This is done through reporting, TV, movies, documentaries. Because rightism has traditionally cared less about the have-nots, there has been less stories about the Folks from the right. It was also the Left that revived folk music tradition filled with many stories. Just as the likes of Donna Zuckerberg seek to control the Classics to spin their stories to serve her kind, the Left claimed ownership of the folk music tradition and spun folk songs to be about the Revolution.
The other side of leftism isn't really interested in social reality. It is more about freedom, vanity, and ego, all of which feels restricted and repressed by 'bourgeois morality and respectability'. This side of leftism loves to tell stories based more on fantasy than reality. It's about chasing the dream of one's own delights. So, if Bruce Jenner really wants to be a 'woman', why shouldn't he? If some Jewish billionaire wants to go from man to woman, who are we to say no?
But leftism gets awful weird when it champions both grim reality & fundamental needs(like the Joad story in GRAPES OF WRATH and the black family in RAISIN IN THE SUN) and vainglory, fantasy, & princely delusions(like those of pampered celebs like Michael Jackson, madonna, any Hollywood star).
The left has long been aware of this contradiction and has never been able to resolve it. It's there in the movie KISS OF THE SPIDER WOMAN where a revolutionary meets a fairy who fantasizes about Nazi romance movies in a Brazilian prison cell. The revolutionary is like Che Guevara immersed in grim reality and struggle. The homo is so into fantasy that even Nazi-era movies are appealing to his decadence. In the movie, a kind of soul-sharing eventually takes place. The revolutionary comes to appreciate the homo(and may even take it up the arse, though I don't really wanna know cuz that's so ewwww), and the homo becomes radicalized and dies for a political cause. And the contradiction is in that Jewish kid in DAZED AND CONFUSED too. Linklater is one of those Libs who can't really get along with the Left cuz the Left, like the football coach, have too many rules of do's and don'ts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_iQhBctebg
Rap narrative is also contradictory. On the one hand, the 'left' defend it as raw reporting from the front-lines of problems faced by blacks folks. We are told that we should not attack the messenger. Rap reflects the reality! It's like Black Urban Folk Music, though it's more about f**k than folk. But what is rap about? It's less about the reality of crime and pathology than a mindless fantastical celebration of mayhem and thuggery, and the great hope of rappers isn't a moral community or more justice but the fantasy of waving gold-plated pistols, driving around in a limo, wearing fur, donning sun-glasses and Tony Montana suits, and being surrounded by tramps and ho's. It's about Raisin' Hell with Gun. It's about Loots than Roots.
Still, the 'left' dominates storytelling. It even has a Negro Hamilton in a 1776 that looks more like Prince's 1999. And rap is all around. And media are totally dominated by PC, and colleges fill the same stories in the minds of students.
Is the Right less good at story-telling? The Right has a tradition of sermons, tales of heroes and legends, the patriotic narrative, tradition, and etc. But even those have been stifled by PC that says a lot cannot be told because it is now 'racist' or some such.
The Right has generally been less theoretical and less expressive. Many of the struggled in the 20th century have been between the military vs the Marxists. The Spanish Civil War was key in this regard. The Left had many reasons and ideas for why they had to fight. Franco and military just had tradition and military, the power of might, order, and obedience, whereas the left is more vibrant and colorful with dissent, that is until the new order clamps down on dissent. That is another contradiction of leftism. It fetishizes dissent and argument but is also utopian, which is totalitarian dream of creating a perfect society that has no use for 'wrong' ideas.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VczaeqFHjzU
And the same thing in Chile with Allende vs Pinochet. The Left may have wrong ideas, but they have ideas, and those ideas are expressed in stories of struggling workers, need for social justice, and etc. The Right is mute, offers no explanations, and just crushes the other side with order and obedience. 'Right-wing death squads' sounds terrifyingly ominous in its muteness. It is like a machine built just to kill without thought or reason. It just obeys like the storm-troopers. The Fascists and National Socialists sought to reverse this by creating myths and narratives of their own, creating their own song-and-dance and spectacles. But as fascism was a hodgepodge of many ideas, it was more difficult to put forth a coherent argument and narrative. To many intellectuals, it just seemed like opportunism employing superficial theorizing to defend the status quo of capitalist-reactionary-corporate power.
Now, ideas/theories are not the same as stories, but having an idea creates a sense of vision and destiny. And that can be used as a thread to tell a story. It's like Marx was able to tell his story of entire human history by focusing on the element of class struggle. That idea could be threaded through the story of mankind from primitive hunter-gathering stages to the modern era. The right, being relatively deficient in Grand Ideas, has less of a needle and thread to tie it altogether though men like Spengler and Barzun tried; for them, history rises and falls like organisms, like a tree.
Anyway, modern folks are not lacking in ideas. Stories are all around. Pick up any magazine, newspaper. Watch any movie or TV show. Turn on any radio program. Listen to any song, be it folk, rap, country, whatever. Listen to any politician. Take any college course. Tons of stories about politicians, celebrities, artists, businessmen(like Steve Jobs), activists, the poor, the rich, the military, the criminals, the hustlers, the whores, the spies, the musicians, the actors, the crooks, etc. Any given Village Voice, Reader, LA Review of Books, New York Times magazine, or whatever is filled with accounts, stories, and etc.
But most of those stories are about individuals or anti-white figures(as heroes). Ethnic/racial consciousness, if allowed, must always be non-white or anti-white.
Now, stories about individuals are fine. Any great person has individual worth beyond his or her race or ethnos. Beethoven was more than German. Duke Ellington can be appreciated by anyone who loves music. Edison invented stuff that changed the world, not just America. So, even as great individuals do belong to a community, their greatness is individualistic in the Howard-Roakian sense and rise about mere ethnic relevance. Einstein wasn't just a Jewish scientist. So, this kind of individual-centric story-telling is just fine, and it should be available to people around the world.
But people are not mere individuals, and most people are not great themselves. Their meaning comes from ethnos and morality, and those two things don't require lots of wealth, power, and genius. Any ordinary Irishman can have meaning in being Irish and in being a good person. And there needs to be stories on this level too.
This can be conveyed through the arts. While most movies today focus on the individual(with hardly any mention of his parents, family, and etc), there have been stories that situate the individual within an identity and community. Thus, individuals are not mere individuals but ethno-individuals. This is true of ROOTS. Every Negro character in that series is an individual, but he is also a black individual as part of a Negro story and ancestry. It's like Tom understand he is descended from Toby who was really Kunta. It's also true of THE GODFATHER. Michael is more than an individual businessman-gangster. He is so a son, brother, father, husband. He is an ethno-individual. He is part of a family, a community, a heritage that goes back to Sicily. EMIGRANTS and NEW LAND are masterpieces in this vein. And the TV series based on Michener's CENTENNIAL is pretty good stuff.
But even in the absence of such story-telling by media, it is up to every parent to tell the tale. Now, this can't be done in one setting. There is an 'art' to this. It's like storytelling in movies, esp the one with jumbled chronology. Piecemeal by piecemeal, like so many pieces of a puzzle, the story can be told and retold over a period of time. Also, there are things you can't tell a young child that you can tell when he's older.
And there are ways you can hook a past event to current one. Suppose your kibbler mentions a certain incident, and suppose something that happened to you or your parents(the kid's grandparents) has a similar ring. Comparative narratives are always interesting even though Jews overplay this by turning everything into new pogrom or new holocaust, even not being accepted to a golf club.
Now, HOW TO MAKE AN AMERICAN QUILT is a terrible awful movie, but it's interesting how a young woman in the present with marriage prospects finds relevance in the stories of older women who have their own stories of love and loss.
So, parents have to look for moments when they can slip in stories. And there are times that are ideal for storytelling, like in camping outings like in Sanford and Son.
A puzzle isn't finished at one sitting. It is formed piece by piece. Now, when kids are too young, they don't know nothing. As they grow older, they are interested in what parents have to say and have respect(if you don't raise the kids on TV and smartphones, the horror of the age; they should be called idiotphones). But as kids grow older, they go through the stage of finding parents 'uncool', and they naturally look for their own things, which is a natural part of growing up. Even so, there are times when something could be communicated of the past. Past can always inform and teach the present. Unless this is done right, the kids end up like Emma Sulkowicz or Lena Dunham. Or all those SJW's arrested in Seattle after Trump victory. Granted, most kids will go through a 'prodigal son' stage, esp in modern society filled with freedoms. But if enough seeds were planted in the kids, as the kids grow older and mature, they may grow and take shape and inform the future.
This is why fathers must be patriarchs and gain and maintain the respect of his young ones. Some time ago, I was in this Jewish community, and there was this orthodox-looking men with his kids. He may not be rich or powerful, but there was something real about his role as father. He put away childish things. For sure, he didn't have a tattoo on his ass, and his idea of culture was surely not watching Jerry Springer reruns with kids on TV. It's like that Sean Penn movie THIS MUST BE THE PLACE.
The dufus finally grows up and puts away childish things.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kplFGDHuYy4
The horror of modern parenting is there in A CLOCKWORK ORANGE where the father is an ahistorical non-entity and the mother has funny-shaped hair. (Boy, was that prophetic.) Alex, bright as he is, grew up on diet of junky pop culture.
The parents of AN EDUCATION are far more involved and responsible, but their only concept of education is status-seeking and success. They failed to ground their girl in any meaning sense of past and ethnos. Their social reality is purely class-centered, thus purely economic, and that won't do.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4vN29Lg_p4
In the end, every parent will have to formulate his own way of doing it, but it has to be done. Storytelling has to be a big part of parenting, because mute parents will just leave the kids to be raised on the fiction of pop culture and stupid fantasies.
PS: the fact that the most popular story-telling has been stuff like STAR WARS, AVATAR, LORD OF RINGS, 300, and etc in recent yrs show that the traditional mythopoeic narrative is still the most powerful. Wagner mastered this with Nibelungen, but the Left always feared this as proto-fascist, irrational, and traditional.
So, the GLOB has taken this story-telling format and filled it with 'progressive' elements like Diversity and feminist elements, and etc. But the core nature of this kind of story-telling is essentially 'right-wing', and if the Right were to regain the narrative once again, it could be powerful stuff.
Immigration legal, orderly, peaceful YES. Other than that NO!!
So hard to understand!!
“Such sentiments led to the Immigration Quota Act of 1924 — which effectively shut the door to Jewish immigration”
The 1924 Immigration Act also effectively shut the door to my people the Italians as well as the Greeks, Slavs, Germans, and the Irish. So this person’s claim that the 1924 immigration was anti-Semitic has no leg to stand on because The 1924 immigration affected way more Goys than it Jews. The Left Wing megaphone wants to spread the false myth that the majority of Ellis Island immigrants were Jewish, if that were true why do Jews make up only 2 percent of the U.S population? Lack of breeding? Most Jews die childless without ever becoming parents?
Or in his woodpile.
So this Stephen Miller isn’t the Space Cowboy, Maurice, or the Gangster of Love? Just a pile of pompatus.
, while the institution of the quota system had a very real and measurable impact on Jewish enrollment in Ivy schools, etc., with Jewish enrollment in these institutions cut in half or sometimes even more from their pre-quota (early 1920s) peak.
What nobody has ever explained to me, is so what?
Weren’t Jews capable of creating elite, highly erudite colleges of their own?
This looks like a wealth re-distribution argument from Hell; not much more than justified looting.
Our current crop of Third World economic agents are rather famous for not maintaining infrastructure and squandering the territory’s civic life and social trust, plus not generating enough economic surplus to maintain such.
That said: fewer oven memes, probably less Republican NeverTrumpism. On the other hand, would he have gotten the Internet buzz he did without the Nazi Pepe guys? Who knows?Replies: @Desiderius
Without NeverTrumpism, I don’t think you get the working class groundswell for Trump. Those folks really don’t like NeverTrump types, and that was true before Trump.
As usual, the ideological fault lines are "muh feels" versus actual results. This is why the Alt Right was a bunch of unknown bloggers slapfighting with each other until Trump came along and took the parts that weren't obscure points of order regarding dead Kraut philosophers mainstream.
Thank you.
This is the argument I made (I live in Florida) against Marco Rubio. We did his family a tremendous favor by allowing them to move here and escape Castro, and his method of saying thanks is to collaborate with Chuck Schumer to wave in hordes of 3rd worlders?
I convinced maybe 10 friends to withhold their votes for Rubio (while supporting Trump). Most of us wrote in a lawyer friend of ours. Unfortunately we forgot he was a “junior” so we inadvertently voted for our friend’s elderly father
However that father was born in Cuba, so it would have a nice trade!
What nobody has ever explained to me, is so what?
Weren't Jews capable of creating elite, highly erudite colleges of their own?Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Desiderius, @Anonymous, @Jack D
Brandeis is a perfectly fine private university, and Yeshiva is good too, but it’s striking how few other Jewish universities there are. Catholics are well out ahead both in quantity and, perhaps, in high end quality. American Jews aren’t much ahead of Mormons at university building.
about 12,000-13,000
Combined enrollment of BYU, BYU-Idaho, and BYU-Hawaii:
About 50,000.
A couple of factors to consider: Universities in the Western U.S. (where most Mormons live) are mostly quite young, and developed during times of large-scale institution building. Hence, other than Stanford, Claremont and a handful of others, the best and most recognizable schools in the West are flagship State U's. As you've pointed out before, BYU operates on mostly the same economic principles as the State U's did during the Baby Boom.
Another difference is that the LDS Church is extremely centralized in governance, when compared with other churches, and especially when compared to Judaism. So rather than lots of little colleges like Catholics have, we have three universities which benefit from economies of scale.
There is one tiny liberal arts college, Southern Virginia University, which has no technical affiliation with the LDS Church, but was founded by Mormons, and has a BYU-style honor code, and is probably not far from 100% LDS.
You know the crazy reason they gave for this? It was that the law requires that its practitioners be scrupulously honest, morally upstanding, virtuous and and speak at all times with the utmost candor and probity for the system to work and the law to remain in high esteem among the layman. They believed that making a profession into a base and transactional business would be bad for the profession and bad for the public.
And this is why the public still holds the law and lawyers in high esteem!
That's why, before testifying in an American court, a Jew had to do the following:
The Jew shall stand on a sow's skin and the five books of Master Moses shall lie before him, and his right hand up to the wrist shall lie on the book and he shall repeat after him who administers the oath of the Jews:
Regarding such property of which the man accuses you, you know nothing of it, nor do you have it. You never had it in your possession, you do not have it in any of your chests, you have not buried it in the earth, nor locked it with locks, so help you God who created heaven and earth, valley and hill, woods, trees, and grass, and so help you the law which God himself created and wrote with His own hand and gave Moses on Sinai's mount. And so help you the five books of Moses that you may nevermore enjoy a bite without soiling yourself all over as did the King of Babylon.... {etc. in this vein for 5 more paragraphs). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_More_Judaico
No wait, that was Medieval Europe, not American within living memory.
That's why, when men like Boss Tweed dominated the bar, there were never any shady dealings. Oh no wait, that's not true either.Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome
What nobody has ever explained to me, is so what?
Weren't Jews capable of creating elite, highly erudite colleges of their own?Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Desiderius, @Anonymous, @Jack D
Given the option, a lot of sharp Jews would rather hang out with WASPs than the Orthodox.
Wikipedia says: According to historian David Oshinsky, on writing about Jonas Salk, "Most of the surrounding medical schools (Cornell, Columbia, Pennsylvania, and Yale) had rigid quotas in place. In 1935 Yale accepted 76 applicants from a pool of 501. About 200 of those applicants were Jewish and only five got in."
If you're right, that the reason Jews didn't just go create enough elite colleges to serve all 200 who were Yale material, is because Jews wanted to hang out with WASPs not Orthodox, why is it we hear such kvetching from Jews about the quota, today?
Yale took 76 applicants in 1935. Since 2/5 the applicants were Jews, had they taken a representational proportion of Jewish applicants, they would have taken 30, instead of only 5, and those WASP-loving / Orthodox-not-loving folks would have been surrounded by non-Wasp Orthodox.
The quota *benefited* all those Jews who you say preferred WASPs, so WHAT are the Jews griping about?Replies: @Desiderius
They actually started with Brandeis, but then Harvard started letting Jews back in and so that project never went anywhere.
Even during the bad old days, Jews were well represented at Harvard.
German Jews were not a large community to begin with (500,000 vs 3 million in Poland and another 2.5 million in the Soviet Union) but they mostly fled en masse after '33 so a fair # ended up here. French and GB Jewish communities were even smaller and most never fled so there was no significant Jewish immigration to the US from those countries. You are talking about a few hundred immigrants at most. You are entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts.Replies: @syonredux, @Lot
The point is the ’24 act was not targeted toward Jews, but toward poor European countries. Jews from Western Europe could easily still immigrate. The effect on Jewish immigration was smaller than many if not most other European ethnic groups.
In retrospect the ’24 act was bad policy, but I do not like seeing its proponents and 1924 America generally being vilified for not having the foresight to see this.
I doubt it was that low, but I agree that Jewish migration went down a lot, in large part because Western Euopean Jews were doing well in the 1920’s.
What nobody has ever explained to me, is so what?
Weren't Jews capable of creating elite, highly erudite colleges of their own?Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Desiderius, @Anonymous, @Jack D
Until the 20th century, even the most prestigious American colleges were academic backwaters. American colleges were socially prestigious and elite, but them becoming academically elite and “highly erudite” had a lot to do with them having lots of Jewish students and faculty.
If it was Jewish students and faculty that made those colleges elite, and those colleges weren't elite until the Jews showed up, the Jews should have been even MORE inclined to just go found their own colleges, in numbers sufficient to meet the intellectual needs of all their own Jewish Mental Giants. But, they didn't.
Sure, there's Brandeis and Yeshiva, as Steve points out, but why aren't there dozens more like them and we wouldn't be having to listen to all the kvetching about quotas?
Some people here are twisting their nipples over crass memes, but Kevin Williamson (or whichever NeverTrumper NR writer said it) saying white communities “deserve to die” goes unremarked upon.
As usual, the ideological fault lines are “muh feels” versus actual results. This is why the Alt Right was a bunch of unknown bloggers slapfighting with each other until Trump came along and took the parts that weren’t obscure points of order regarding dead Kraut philosophers mainstream.
LOL!
That should read :”Harvard started letting more Jews in.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerus_clausus#United_States
Even during the bad old days, Jews were well represented at Harvard.
There are cossacks everywhere! Even in the US, now that Trump has been elected. Even in Manhattan you can’t be sure you’re safe from cossacks.
Not true.For example, Harvard became a world-class institution during the presidency of Charles William Eliot (in office, 1869–1909)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_William_Eliot
And it’s not hard to find very distinguished minds at American unis during the 19th century: Josiah Willard Gibbs, Asa Gray, Louis Agassiz, George Ellery Hale, Thomas Hunt Morgan , etc
Combined enrollment of Brandeis and Yeshiva:
about 12,000-13,000
Combined enrollment of BYU, BYU-Idaho, and BYU-Hawaii:
About 50,000.
A couple of factors to consider: Universities in the Western U.S. (where most Mormons live) are mostly quite young, and developed during times of large-scale institution building. Hence, other than Stanford, Claremont and a handful of others, the best and most recognizable schools in the West are flagship State U’s. As you’ve pointed out before, BYU operates on mostly the same economic principles as the State U’s did during the Baby Boom.
Another difference is that the LDS Church is extremely centralized in governance, when compared with other churches, and especially when compared to Judaism. So rather than lots of little colleges like Catholics have, we have three universities which benefit from economies of scale.
There is one tiny liberal arts college, Southern Virginia University, which has no technical affiliation with the LDS Church, but was founded by Mormons, and has a BYU-style honor code, and is probably not far from 100% LDS.
While the guy seems to be one of the few ideological conservatives who actually believes in limited government etc., given that he was a senior writer over there I can't help but wonder if there's some backstory involving a personal feud with one of the bigshots over there we're not privy to--they went and doxxed him and his dad after the fact if I remember right.
That said I agree with you overall a lot of these alt-right memes probably aren't good for any sort of immigration restrictionism long-term --the Nazis still have a pretty bad rap with everyone to the left of (and including) John Derbyshire. Spencer actually was doing a pretty smart thing with rebranding NPI etc. but then he had to go and yell 'Hail Trump' and give the MSM exactly what they wanted.
I have to admit, though, they are responsible for one of the few genuinely creative countercultures I've seen in a while. Finding an obscure 1970s Italian disco record and claiming it represents the reincarnation of an Egyptian god is exactly the sort of thing I would have gotten into in my teenage years.Replies: @dfordoom
The alt-right seems to be more determined on political suicide than any other political movement I can think of.
And yes, they may well end up discrediting anti-immigrationism for generations to come. But obnoxious memes are easier and more fun than reasoned arguments and doing the hard work of trying to get a sensible saleable message across.
Anyway, I suggest that some people want to pursue a parallel strategy of polarizing Jews against Whites. Kevin McMuffin ran a series on VDare called "Jewish Fear and Loathing of Trump". The first article was totally lame, basically bits and bobs from the Forward, but each successive article had more and more legitimate examples of Jewish fear and loathing. What he did not mention is that in the meantime a large amount of Jews had succumbed to fear and loathing of Trump because McMuffin's fanboys had been flooding the internet with material linking Trump to overtly Nazi imagery/ideas and had specifically targeted Jewish writers with pictures of their children in concentration camps etc.
Of course, if you sincerely believe that Leftism is an epiphenomenon of Judaism, then it makes perfect sense.Replies: @snorlax
Therefore open borders becomes a kind of Jewish Insurance policy. The main borders they want open are of course first world nations because they want the good life that they offer.Replies: @JSM, @dfordoom
That actually seems quite plausible. It’s about the only explanation that makes sense. From a Jewish point of view I guess there is a worrying “all our eggs in one basket” aspect to Israel.
Israel’s long-term prospects do look pretty bleak. They only have to make one mistake, like maybe electing one bleeding-heart leftist-liberal government, and they’re toast. Look what Tony Blair did to Britain in just a few short years. Demographic disasters can happen real fast.
Military conquest seems very very unlikely but it’s certainly possible they could destroy themselves. Even if the odds of Israel destroying itself are only say 25% I can see that Jews would be pretty worried.
Of course if this is the case they’re not thinking things through. In thirty years time will a Mexican president of the US suddenly decide that the US can no longer afford to subsidise Israel? And if things went badly wrong for Israel would a Muslim President of France, or a Muslim prime minister of Britain, or a Somali prime minster of Canada, welcome Jewish refugees?
Here’s the video of the talk from june of last year. He goes into Sapir-Whorf territory.
stings even now and was as wrong as could be. Walker could not see past the rags and the funny accents and did not have the vision to see were not beaten men, they were saplings who had been planted in poor soil and when transplanted to the fertile American earth they blossomed.
BUT, just because Walker was wrong about the Jews and Italians doesn't mean that Trump is equally wrong about Mexicans and Muslims. Amerindians ain't Askenazis. Bringing Somalis and Afghans to New York isn't going to bring back the Jews of Budapest from the fires of Auschwitz. There's nothing we can do now for those who were lost, but the folks who are being brought in are endangering people who are alive today, including (especially) Jews, so it's doubly perverse.Replies: @SFG, @res, @Hippopotamusdrome
He was wrong?
Listening to a freedomainradio cast on immigration, & it is fascinating to hear just how much 2 way traffic there was for immigrants before 1950, i.e., before the current welfare state. The number of immigrants who came between 1860 & 1950, tried their luck at a new life, then figured they’d be better off back in Europe was significant. And those people came with a lot more skills & resources than your avg Somali refugee. If, since 1965, there had been no free govt benefits (except for police, fire, water) to immigrants unless they were sterling, law abiding, tax paying residents for say 10 years, how different would would US demographics be today? I suspect the demographics would a lot more like the 70s. The one thing that probably would have prevented immigration w/o free benefits would have been the 24/7 whining of the Hive Narrative (sob stories) to weaken the rules.
Here's the video of the talk from june of last year. He goes into Sapir-Whorf territory.Replies: @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever..., @Opinionator
Steve “Can’t stop the Ribbentrop” Miller!
And yes, they may well end up discrediting anti-immigrationism for generations to come. But obnoxious memes are easier and more fun than reasoned arguments and doing the hard work of trying to get a sensible saleable message across.Replies: @Gabriel M
There’s a school of thought within Marxism which goes under the label of “heighten the contradictions”. The idea is that it has been already demonstrated that capitalist development leads inevitably to socialist revolution and, as such, Marxists should oppose any efforts to obstruct or slow down capitalist development on the part of social-democrats/liberals etc. One group in Britain, the Revolutionary Communist Party, took this view so far that they ended up being Britain’s arguably most high profile group of Libertarian intellectuals.
Anyway, I suggest that some people want to pursue a parallel strategy of polarizing Jews against Whites. Kevin McMuffin ran a series on VDare called “Jewish Fear and Loathing of Trump”. The first article was totally lame, basically bits and bobs from the Forward, but each successive article had more and more legitimate examples of Jewish fear and loathing. What he did not mention is that in the meantime a large amount of Jews had succumbed to fear and loathing of Trump because McMuffin’s fanboys had been flooding the internet with material linking Trump to overtly Nazi imagery/ideas and had specifically targeted Jewish writers with pictures of their children in concentration camps etc.
Of course, if you sincerely believe that Leftism is an epiphenomenon of Judaism, then it makes perfect sense.
The first is trolls from 4chan who started off spamming people with gore pictures and black tranny porn before moving on to concentration camp memes because it generated better reactions. These guys are basically apolitical; they may or may not be legitimate Trump supporters, a decent number are actually Jewish themselves, etc.
The second group is paranoid schizophrenic conspiracy theorist types whom, if they weren't obsessed with the Jewish conspiracy, would do the same with 9/11, the Illuminati, FEMA, lizard people or whatever. It's one of the more popular conspiracy theories because there is something of a grain of truth to it, unlike most of the others.
Anyway, both groups are quite unhelpful. The best strategy to get rid of them (if possible) is for Trump to constantly make loud-bordering-on-over-the-top moves in support of Israel/Jews, in the hope they get discouraged and move on to something else.Replies: @Desiderius
Sure enough, there’s a scholarly book — “Insecure Prosperity – Small-Town Jews in Industrial America, 1890-1940” by Ewa Morawska — that discusses ethnic prejudice against Jews at the Sussnehana Country Club, founded by Bethlehem Steel Company in Johnstown, PA in 1923.
But I see that Saul Glosser, who is presumably a distant cousin of Stephen Miller, is now on that country club’s board of directors.
I don’t know if Johnstown was ever large enough to have it’s own Jewish country club, much less its own German Jewish and Russian Jewish country clubs (as Birmingham, AL enjoyed for half a century).
What with the Johnstown Flood and all.
There’s also the matter that changes which appear on the surface to be Good for the Jews might not have been.
The Soviets were, in the relative sense, better for the Jews than the Tsars, but worse in the absolute sense that they made things far worse for everyone.
Not to mention that weakening Russia turned out to be rather decidedly Not Good for the Jews.
And, from the Zionist perspective, the anti-Semitism of the old regime might’ve turned out to be somewhat of a feature rather than a bug. It’s easy to imagine a surviving Imperial Russia encouraging or even forcing its Jewish population to move to Israel.
Anyway, I suggest that some people want to pursue a parallel strategy of polarizing Jews against Whites. Kevin McMuffin ran a series on VDare called "Jewish Fear and Loathing of Trump". The first article was totally lame, basically bits and bobs from the Forward, but each successive article had more and more legitimate examples of Jewish fear and loathing. What he did not mention is that in the meantime a large amount of Jews had succumbed to fear and loathing of Trump because McMuffin's fanboys had been flooding the internet with material linking Trump to overtly Nazi imagery/ideas and had specifically targeted Jewish writers with pictures of their children in concentration camps etc.
Of course, if you sincerely believe that Leftism is an epiphenomenon of Judaism, then it makes perfect sense.Replies: @snorlax
The Twitter Nazis basically fall into two camps.
The first is trolls from 4chan who started off spamming people with gore pictures and black tranny porn before moving on to concentration camp memes because it generated better reactions. These guys are basically apolitical; they may or may not be legitimate Trump supporters, a decent number are actually Jewish themselves, etc.
The second group is paranoid schizophrenic conspiracy theorist types whom, if they weren’t obsessed with the Jewish conspiracy, would do the same with 9/11, the Illuminati, FEMA, lizard people or whatever. It’s one of the more popular conspiracy theories because there is something of a grain of truth to it, unlike most of the others.
Anyway, both groups are quite unhelpful. The best strategy to get rid of them (if possible) is for Trump to constantly make loud-bordering-on-over-the-top moves in support of Israel/Jews, in the hope they get discouraged and move on to something else.
Are you of the opinion that Pleasureman is a paranoid schizophrenic?Replies: @snorlax
The first is trolls from 4chan who started off spamming people with gore pictures and black tranny porn before moving on to concentration camp memes because it generated better reactions. These guys are basically apolitical; they may or may not be legitimate Trump supporters, a decent number are actually Jewish themselves, etc.
The second group is paranoid schizophrenic conspiracy theorist types whom, if they weren't obsessed with the Jewish conspiracy, would do the same with 9/11, the Illuminati, FEMA, lizard people or whatever. It's one of the more popular conspiracy theories because there is something of a grain of truth to it, unlike most of the others.
Anyway, both groups are quite unhelpful. The best strategy to get rid of them (if possible) is for Trump to constantly make loud-bordering-on-over-the-top moves in support of Israel/Jews, in the hope they get discouraged and move on to something else.Replies: @Desiderius
So where does MPC fall in that taxonomy?
Are you of the opinion that Pleasureman is a paranoid schizophrenic?
Are you of the opinion that Pleasureman is a paranoid schizophrenic?Replies: @snorlax
Don’t know whom you’re talking about but probably yes. Paranoid schizophrenics can be pretty coherent and high-functioning. A number of the real-life top Nazis were probably paranoid schizophrenics (Hitler, Goebbels, Himmler).
Still some comments languishing in limbo, Steve.
Doesn’t make sense.
Wikipedia says: According to historian David Oshinsky, on writing about Jonas Salk, “Most of the surrounding medical schools (Cornell, Columbia, Pennsylvania, and Yale) had rigid quotas in place. In 1935 Yale accepted 76 applicants from a pool of 501. About 200 of those applicants were Jewish and only five got in.”
If you’re right, that the reason Jews didn’t just go create enough elite colleges to serve all 200 who were Yale material, is because Jews wanted to hang out with WASPs not Orthodox, why is it we hear such kvetching from Jews about the quota, today?
Yale took 76 applicants in 1935. Since 2/5 the applicants were Jews, had they taken a representational proportion of Jewish applicants, they would have taken 30, instead of only 5, and those WASP-loving / Orthodox-not-loving folks would have been surrounded by non-Wasp Orthodox.
The quota *benefited* all those Jews who you say preferred WASPs, so WHAT are the Jews griping about?
http://huc.edu/about/history
and Yale wasn't letting them.
Am I missing something?Replies: @JSM
Then, that makes even less sense than Desiderius’ explanation.
If it was Jewish students and faculty that made those colleges elite, and those colleges weren’t elite until the Jews showed up, the Jews should have been even MORE inclined to just go found their own colleges, in numbers sufficient to meet the intellectual needs of all their own Jewish Mental Giants. But, they didn’t.
Sure, there’s Brandeis and Yeshiva, as Steve points out, but why aren’t there dozens more like them and we wouldn’t be having to listen to all the kvetching about quotas?
Israel's long-term prospects do look pretty bleak. They only have to make one mistake, like maybe electing one bleeding-heart leftist-liberal government, and they're toast. Look what Tony Blair did to Britain in just a few short years. Demographic disasters can happen real fast.
Military conquest seems very very unlikely but it's certainly possible they could destroy themselves. Even if the odds of Israel destroying itself are only say 25% I can see that Jews would be pretty worried.
Of course if this is the case they're not thinking things through. In thirty years time will a Mexican president of the US suddenly decide that the US can no longer afford to subsidise Israel? And if things went badly wrong for Israel would a Muslim President of France, or a Muslim prime minister of Britain, or a Somali prime minster of Canada, welcome Jewish refugees?Replies: @JSM
DforDoom:
Your last paragraph contradicts your first.
This excuse, that Jewish promotion of mass immigration is due to worries about escaping Israel should the fit hit the shan for her, is belied by the fact that Jews are letting into America the very people who will deny the Israelis entry / support.
The contradiction is *proof* that “What if Israel goes under” is JUST an excuse, a plausible cover story for the true motive.
Since Jews ARE letting in vast hordes of people who won’t support Israel, meanwhile creating race-replacement of Whites as an “unfortunate, unintentional” side-effect, it’s clear that it’s the *side-effect* they *are* after, and “Oh, what about Israel” is just the fig-leaf excuse.
Jews are doing it for a simple reason: Reversion-to-the-mean means that Elite Jews’ own not-so-impressive spawn must worry about competition for the plum spots in society from the only other demographic capable of producing spawn that can outcompete them: Middle Class White Americans.
Hence, Middle Class White America must be made to not reproduce.
Ergo: Make Family Formation Unaffordable for Middle Class Americans by various means, including race-replacement levels of mass immigration of hostile non-Whites.
The University of Chicago got a boost by admitting women and Jewish students.
But I see that Saul Glosser, who is presumably a distant cousin of Stephen Miller, is now on that country club's board of directors.
I don't know if Johnstown was ever large enough to have it's own Jewish country club, much less its own German Jewish and Russian Jewish country clubs (as Birmingham, AL enjoyed for half a century).
What with the Johnstown Flood and all.Replies: @Hibernian, @Jack D
The Homewood/Flossmoor IL area had separate Jewish and Eastern European Jewish country clubs until one of them, I forget which, folded and sold the facilities to a daily fee golf course operator a few years ago.
What nobody has ever explained to me, is so what?
Weren't Jews capable of creating elite, highly erudite colleges of their own?Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Desiderius, @Anonymous, @Jack D
By the 1920, these universities were supposed to be secular, non-profit, non-religious institutions (even if in their early days they had been theological seminaries) benefiting from tax exemptions, contributions by Jewish alumni, etc. so they were at least in part indirectly funded by Jewish-American citizens.
Even in the ’20s, it was illegal in Mass. to expressly discriminate against Jews so Harvard got around this by announcing a policy of “geographic diversity” meaning that they would take more students from states where there were few Jews.
In short, you are begging the question by assuming that a place like Harvard was “owned” by Protestants so that the Jews should have set up their “own” schools as well. Harvard was supposed to be the greatest American university and not the greatest Protestant university – it belonged to Jewish Americans and Catholic Americans as much as it belong to Protestant Americans.
Starting your own university and making it prestigious is no small thing. Brandeis has done well given the recency of its founding (most top ranked schools are very old) but it could not hope to compete with Harvard. American Jews wanted to play in the academic big leagues, not the academic equivalent of the Negro Leagues.
But I see that Saul Glosser, who is presumably a distant cousin of Stephen Miller, is now on that country club's board of directors.
I don't know if Johnstown was ever large enough to have it's own Jewish country club, much less its own German Jewish and Russian Jewish country clubs (as Birmingham, AL enjoyed for half a century).
What with the Johnstown Flood and all.Replies: @Hibernian, @Jack D
Ironically, the flood was CAUSED by a WASP club. The exclusive South Fork Fishing and Hunting Club (membership included Frick and other big league 19th century rich guys) owned (and failed to properly maintain) the dam that burst, causing the flood. Nowadays it would have been the class action lawsuit of all time.
People might be forgiven for mistaking Bergen Belsen and Dachau for death camps, given that when the Allies liberated them, there were thousands and thousands of unburied dead lying around all over the place (13,000 at Belsen alone). If this was a place that was not a Death Camp, one can only imagine how horrifying a real Death Camp was.
And this is why the public still holds the law and lawyers in high esteem!Replies: @Jack D
Yes, and that’s why there are religious tests in the US Constitution. Oh, no wait, there aren’t.
That’s why, before testifying in an American court, a Jew had to do the following:
The Jew shall stand on a sow’s skin and the five books of Master Moses shall lie before him, and his right hand up to the wrist shall lie on the book and he shall repeat after him who administers the oath of the Jews:
Regarding such property of which the man accuses you, you know nothing of it, nor do you have it. You never had it in your possession, you do not have it in any of your chests, you have not buried it in the earth, nor locked it with locks, so help you God who created heaven and earth, valley and hill, woods, trees, and grass, and so help you the law which God himself created and wrote with His own hand and gave Moses on Sinai’s mount. And so help you the five books of Moses that you may nevermore enjoy a bite without soiling yourself all over as did the King of Babylon…. {etc. in this vein for 5 more paragraphs). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_More_Judaico
No wait, that was Medieval Europe, not American within living memory.
That’s why, when men like Boss Tweed dominated the bar, there were never any shady dealings. Oh no wait, that’s not true either.
That didn’t happen in practice until the 60s, and in some cases officially until long after that.
You can let Jews in without making something non-religious. Or at least we once hoped we could.
Wikipedia says: According to historian David Oshinsky, on writing about Jonas Salk, "Most of the surrounding medical schools (Cornell, Columbia, Pennsylvania, and Yale) had rigid quotas in place. In 1935 Yale accepted 76 applicants from a pool of 501. About 200 of those applicants were Jewish and only five got in."
If you're right, that the reason Jews didn't just go create enough elite colleges to serve all 200 who were Yale material, is because Jews wanted to hang out with WASPs not Orthodox, why is it we hear such kvetching from Jews about the quota, today?
Yale took 76 applicants in 1935. Since 2/5 the applicants were Jews, had they taken a representational proportion of Jewish applicants, they would have taken 30, instead of only 5, and those WASP-loving / Orthodox-not-loving folks would have been surrounded by non-Wasp Orthodox.
The quota *benefited* all those Jews who you say preferred WASPs, so WHAT are the Jews griping about?Replies: @Desiderius
Because they wanted to hang out with the WASPs at Yale, not the Orthodox (or Reform for that matter) at Yeshiva or Hebrew Union:
http://huc.edu/about/history
and Yale wasn’t letting them.
Am I missing something?
Ergo, the Jews that wanted to hang with, not Orthodox Jews but WASPs, who did manage to get in under the quota, those guys oughta have kissed the feet of the WASP-quota-instituters for ensuring there actually were quite a few WASPs at Yale for them to enjoy, rather than letting it become Jews as far as the eye can see.
But, nay, they kvetched and their descendants kvetch still, accusing WASPs of banal evil for not letting Yale be 50% plus Jewish (and thus depriving WASP-loving Jews of the company of their adored ones.)So, your argument doesn't hold water.There must be some *other* reason why Jews today kvetch about that old quota, lo these many years ago, and don't say the Jews back then ought to have started enough colleges to get their educations.
That's why, before testifying in an American court, a Jew had to do the following:
The Jew shall stand on a sow's skin and the five books of Master Moses shall lie before him, and his right hand up to the wrist shall lie on the book and he shall repeat after him who administers the oath of the Jews:
Regarding such property of which the man accuses you, you know nothing of it, nor do you have it. You never had it in your possession, you do not have it in any of your chests, you have not buried it in the earth, nor locked it with locks, so help you God who created heaven and earth, valley and hill, woods, trees, and grass, and so help you the law which God himself created and wrote with His own hand and gave Moses on Sinai's mount. And so help you the five books of Moses that you may nevermore enjoy a bite without soiling yourself all over as did the King of Babylon.... {etc. in this vein for 5 more paragraphs). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_More_Judaico
No wait, that was Medieval Europe, not American within living memory.
That's why, when men like Boss Tweed dominated the bar, there were never any shady dealings. Oh no wait, that's not true either.Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome
Jews should have been treated just like everyone else and have to swear in court on a Christian Bible. Making Jews swear on the Pentateuch is anti-semetic.
Adenoid Hynkel (Charlie Chaplin) in 1940 announced with no great controversy that he intended to kill all the Jews in The Great Dictator. If Hollywood and its international public was well aware by then, it must have been obvious to anyone who read newspapers for years.
The Holocaust was no surprise to anyone that cared to pay attention. And that’s why almost all the German Jews fled. The only surprise was how easily the Panzers swept through the rest of Europe.
http://huc.edu/about/history
and Yale wasn't letting them.
Am I missing something?Replies: @JSM
YES. Sans the quota, there wouldn’t have been enough WASPs let into Yale for the Jews to have them hang out with.
Sans quota, it would have been 50%-plus Jews. It would have been Jews, Jews, Jews (many of them Orthodox) as far as the eye could see.
Ergo, the Jews that wanted to hang with, not Orthodox Jews but WASPs, who did manage to get in under the quota, those guys oughta have kissed the feet of the WASP-quota-instituters for ensuring there actually were quite a few WASPs at Yale for them to enjoy, rather than letting it become Jews as far as the eye can see.
But, nay, they kvetched and their descendants kvetch still, accusing WASPs of banal evil for not letting Yale be 50% plus Jewish (and thus depriving WASP-loving Jews of the company of their adored ones.)
So, your argument doesn’t hold water.
There must be some *other* reason why Jews today kvetch about that old quota, lo these many years ago, and don’t say the Jews back then ought to have started enough colleges to get their educations.
Here's the video of the talk from june of last year. He goes into Sapir-Whorf territory.Replies: @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever..., @Opinionator
Thank you very much for posting.
It’s not necessarily a rational explanation but people’s motivations are often far from rational.
No need to ‘learn’ it. It’s like the theory of Universal Grammar. Our minds are hard-wired to think and communicate via a fixed grammatical logic. Likewise, our minds are geared to remember events and spin them into stories. Stories R Us.
In a way, EVERYTHING is a story. Time + memory + language + interest + entertainment(pleasure) = story. We live through time. We have memory, so traces of time remains even after it’s gone. Also, we are easily bored and rely on stories to relieve the oppressive silence. And as organisms and culture, we have interests and tell stories to justify and defend those interests. Sometimes the interests are material. Sometimes, it’s egoistic.
Many simple/dumb organisms live through time like we do, but they have no consciousness, no memory, therefore no sense of time. Even most organisms with some measure of consciousness have nothing like the memory of complex animals like elephants, whales, dogs(who can remember master even after long time), and humans.
Higher mammals and some birds have good memory, but ONLY humans have language that can communicate lost time. Stories keep the past alive, in some ways more powerfully than reality in the present.
Maybe there is more to whale ‘songs’ than primitive communication, but I don’t know. Most animals communicate immediate interests via growling, howling, barking, chirping, and etc. It only amounts to “I’m hungry”, “I will kill you if you come near”, “Me so horny”, “muh claws”. Animals may remember past incidents but have no means to communicate it others. A wolf mother cannot tell its cubs about its own mother, the grandmother of the cubs.
Everything that we relate in language is a kind of story. History is the Story of Power in the most basic sense. Stories control much. If Bob did John wrong but if you only hear Bob’s side of the story, Bob can seem so right while John so wrong even though John didn’t do nothing wrong. Stories are building blocks of a civilization, like of a skyscraper.
This is why a garrulous no-good sumfabitch has more power than a quiet decent feller. Whatever may have happened, we only know from stories. This is why MSM is freaking out about ‘Russian’ stories of the ‘fake news’ alternative media. They want monopoly on story-telling.
Now, there are other things that have power too. Beauty is a kind of power that needs no story. In BROADCAST NEWS, the Albert Brooks character is a terrific talker, a very bright guy with good memory and sense for details. The wasp character played by William Hurt is a dodo. His mind is good at superficial stuff in making himself likable and in feeding on other people’s ideas as he has none of his own. But he’s got the looks and style, and he wins over Holly Hunter’s character. Clint Eastwood never had to say much to have ladies chasing him, even with a knife like in PLAY MISTY FOR ME. Often in Woody Allen’s movies, the superficial guy with the bigger wallet beats the guy with the bigger mouth in winning the girl, so money talks too.
Since most people don’t have beauty or magnificence, their power relies on control of stories and narratives. Jews understand this better than others. And songs are esp effective because they add story to music.
The ‘Left’ loves story-telling more than the ‘Right’ does. We see this in novel writing, theater(dominated by homos), study of classics, domination of humanities, and etc.
There are two kinds of ‘leftist’ story-telling. (1) Gritty and real. It is often humanistic and about social problems such as poverty. Consider films like BICYCLE THIEVES and LA TERRA TREMA. (2) Vain and egotistic. This is the specialty of homos, even though they got partly gritty during the HIV years when so many of them were dropping like flies. But even then, the most famous fruit tale was ANGELS IN AMERICA, which was fantastical as well as political.
The gritty-side of leftism(as represented by Chris Hedges who takes it too far and champions the gross Andrea Dworkin, or Jabba’s daughter) doesn’t go well with the fantastical side. Leftism used to be about pouring cold water on decadent capitalists who were having too good a time. It’s like the scene in DOCTOR ZHIVAGO where the Christmas Party is interrupted by gunshot and Strelnikov the impoverished revolutionary comes to escort Lara away.
But in recent times, ‘leftism’ has turned into a vain-ego-driven fantasy of narcissism where every millennial is encouraged to create his or her or whatever-gender’s Neverland of the Mind, one’s own Michael-Jackson-ville.
Also, with the merging of the rich GLOB and elite PROGS, leftism became less and less about the working class(seen as too ‘white’ and ‘archie-bunkerish’) and more about minorities. When the core minorities used to be poor blacks or struggling immigrants, leftism still had its grit. But the favored minorities today are homos and trannies who are often privileged and in the inner circle of power, like the owners of Comet Pizza. Also, if most immigrants in the started poor and came with little, many new immigrants are cream-of-crop from places like India, Nigeria, China, and etc. In Canada, Chinese arrive to buy up entire blocks of cities. Justin Trudeau isn’t reaching out to railroad workers with callused hands. He’s reaching out to globalist Chinese business class to come with all that ill-gotten cash. Of course, there are poor immigrants too, esp those who come across the border. But a lot of immigrants who come on plane tend to be economic superiors in their own nations. Look at Fareed Zikavirus.
To be sure, the immigrant narrative wasn’t always hostile to the Founding Narrative. There was a time when it was seen as an addition to the original narrative, i.e. immigrants arrived, fell in love with America, respected the founder stock, and sought to assimilate. But over time, the immigrant narrative sought to overtake and even delegitimize the founding narrative. Jews found the founding narrative to favor the Golf Folks or Golfolks. And Latino whites, filled with inferiority complex over the fact that Anglos did such a superior job of building the New World than stupid Latins did, jumped on the neo-immigration-narrative to stick it to yanqui. As for Asian-Indians, they are weasly bunch, and yellows are dogs who just go along with whatever happens to be the Master Narrative. If Jeb is low energy, yellows are no agency.
So, ‘leftism’ turned into something sickly. It went from ‘cultural marxism’ to ‘cultural capitalism’. But then, this aspect of leftism isn’t really new. After all, both the creative bohemian left and toiling prole left saw the bourgeoisie as the common enemy. With the working class, the antagonism was obvious. Workers saw the capitalists as not sharing sufficient wealth with those who toiled.
But why did the bohemian left hate the bourgeois so much when it was rich folks who patronized the arts and culture? Because the bourgeoisie was a contradiction. Unlike the Roman rich that was into decadence, debauchery, orgy-like behavior, piggery, and Felliniesque excesses(like in SATYRICON), the modern bourgeoisie was bound by wealth and work ethic, by both great ambition and hard sobriety. The rule among the rich used to be, “if you got it, flaunt it.” Show off your wealth and be splashy(and go broke like the aristocrats who threw too many balls and parties). But bourgeois values called for hard work to gain great wealth but also morals, limits, and moderation(especially in Protestant cultures that disdained ostentatiousness). Bourgeoisie saw themselves as moral exemplars for rest of society. Even though some got very rich, their core value system was still ‘middle class’. It was like the Protestant Work Ethic thing, but it’s also there in the Jewish tradition where it was more important to make a lot of wealth and be prudent spend it like Roman elites into orgies and stuff. The most negative portrayal of the bourgeois type is Scrooge who is all work, all saving, but no fun. But there have been positive views of the bourgeoisie too, esp by writers like John Lukacs, Jacques Barzun, and Gertrud Himmelfarb — and I suppose David Brooks to some extent though he is too bobo-happy — who admired the bourgeoisie’s sense of self-restraint and largesse oblige. Whit Stillman is of this type.
Anyway, if the proles were angry at bourgeoisie for not paying them enough, the bohemian-left were really upset that the bourgeoisie were not splurging enough on the arts. So, even though the working class were into basic needs whereas bohemians were into decadent(even degenerate) privilege, they found themselves on the same side against the bourgeoisie. Also, with the death of religion, the creative class needed a new religion. In the Romantic Era, art(and genius) was the new faith. But modernism questioned and subverted everything. Art began to attack itself, and alienated artists needed some strong faith, and for many, it was Marxism even if they didn’t really want to live under communism. Jews were divided in this struggle. On the one hand, most Jews weren’t very prole-ish. Too smart, too educated, and too savvy to be part of the Working Class that might be filled with ‘Dumb Polac*s’ who might still believe Jews killed Jesus. As a brainy people, Jews obviously gravitated to academia, media, and business, the domain of the bourgeoisie. We see this tension in the character in BARTON FINK, a Jewish guy in Hollywood who talks about the People, mostly in the abstract as he would never get along with the real working class.
Also, even the Jewish bourgeoisie could sometimes make common cause with the Left because they were in competition with the Bigger Bourgeoisie of the Wasps. Anything to de-legitimize the moral foundation of Anglo Power. Later, even rich Jews supported the Civil Rights Movement for the same reason. Anyway, over time, is it any surprise that the Jewish ‘left’ is now mainly allied with ‘creative’ homos and immigrant-minority-elites like Fareed Zikavirus, white Latin elites, and Chinese who bring lots of easy cash to California and Canada? As for the working class… why they are worse than deplorable. They are ‘Russian’! Soon, they will be putting on Cossack fur coats and burn down Manhattan. By golly, like Richard Spencer is married to some Russian, Trump is also married to some Slav, and all Slavs are the same. And even though Ivanka is married to a Jew, her name Ivanka is Slavic-ish, and besides it even sounds like Eva as in Evanka Braunova. Trump is Hitler and Ivan the Terrible rolled into one. That was why the homosexual Jewish guys had to chase down Ivanka on the airplane and stop her before her father destroys the world. Now, that is some poopchutzpah.
Anyway, one side of leftism cares about social reality, and they feel obligated to tell stories about ordinary people struggling. This is done through reporting, TV, movies, documentaries. Because rightism has traditionally cared less about the have-nots, there has been less stories about the Folks from the right. It was also the Left that revived folk music tradition filled with many stories. Just as the likes of Donna Zuckerberg seek to control the Classics to spin their stories to serve her kind, the Left claimed ownership of the folk music tradition and spun folk songs to be about the Revolution.
The other side of leftism isn’t really interested in social reality. It is more about freedom, vanity, and ego, all of which feels restricted and repressed by ‘bourgeois morality and respectability’. This side of leftism loves to tell stories based more on fantasy than reality. It’s about chasing the dream of one’s own delights. So, if Bruce Jenner really wants to be a ‘woman’, why shouldn’t he? If some Jewish billionaire wants to go from man to woman, who are we to say no?
But leftism gets awful weird when it champions both grim reality & fundamental needs(like the Joad story in GRAPES OF WRATH and the black family in RAISIN IN THE SUN) and vainglory, fantasy, & princely delusions(like those of pampered celebs like Michael Jackson, madonna, any Hollywood star).
The left has long been aware of this contradiction and has never been able to resolve it. It’s there in the movie KISS OF THE SPIDER WOMAN where a revolutionary meets a fairy who fantasizes about Nazi romance movies in a Brazilian prison cell. The revolutionary is like Che Guevara immersed in grim reality and struggle. The homo is so into fantasy that even Nazi-era movies are appealing to his decadence. In the movie, a kind of soul-sharing eventually takes place. The revolutionary comes to appreciate the homo(and may even take it up the arse, though I don’t really wanna know cuz that’s so ewwww), and the homo becomes radicalized and dies for a political cause. And the contradiction is in that Jewish kid in DAZED AND CONFUSED too. Linklater is one of those Libs who can’t really get along with the Left cuz the Left, like the football coach, have too many rules of do’s and don’ts.
Rap narrative is also contradictory. On the one hand, the ‘left’ defend it as raw reporting from the front-lines of problems faced by blacks folks. We are told that we should not attack the messenger. Rap reflects the reality! It’s like Black Urban Folk Music, though it’s more about f**k than folk. But what is rap about? It’s less about the reality of crime and pathology than a mindless fantastical celebration of mayhem and thuggery, and the great hope of rappers isn’t a moral community or more justice but the fantasy of waving gold-plated pistols, driving around in a limo, wearing fur, donning sun-glasses and Tony Montana suits, and being surrounded by tramps and ho’s. It’s about Raisin’ Hell with Gun. It’s about Loots than Roots.
Still, the ‘left’ dominates storytelling. It even has a Negro Hamilton in a 1776 that looks more like Prince’s 1999. And rap is all around. And media are totally dominated by PC, and colleges fill the same stories in the minds of students.
Is the Right less good at story-telling? The Right has a tradition of sermons, tales of heroes and legends, the patriotic narrative, tradition, and etc. But even those have been stifled by PC that says a lot cannot be told because it is now ‘racist’ or some such.
The Right has generally been less theoretical and less expressive. Many of the struggled in the 20th century have been between the military vs the Marxists. The Spanish Civil War was key in this regard. The Left had many reasons and ideas for why they had to fight. Franco and military just had tradition and military, the power of might, order, and obedience, whereas the left is more vibrant and colorful with dissent, that is until the new order clamps down on dissent. That is another contradiction of leftism. It fetishizes dissent and argument but is also utopian, which is totalitarian dream of creating a perfect society that has no use for ‘wrong’ ideas.
And the same thing in Chile with Allende vs Pinochet. The Left may have wrong ideas, but they have ideas, and those ideas are expressed in stories of struggling workers, need for social justice, and etc. The Right is mute, offers no explanations, and just crushes the other side with order and obedience. ‘Right-wing death squads’ sounds terrifyingly ominous in its muteness. It is like a machine built just to kill without thought or reason. It just obeys like the storm-troopers. The Fascists and National Socialists sought to reverse this by creating myths and narratives of their own, creating their own song-and-dance and spectacles. But as fascism was a hodgepodge of many ideas, it was more difficult to put forth a coherent argument and narrative. To many intellectuals, it just seemed like opportunism employing superficial theorizing to defend the status quo of capitalist-reactionary-corporate power.
Now, ideas/theories are not the same as stories, but having an idea creates a sense of vision and destiny. And that can be used as a thread to tell a story. It’s like Marx was able to tell his story of entire human history by focusing on the element of class struggle. That idea could be threaded through the story of mankind from primitive hunter-gathering stages to the modern era. The right, being relatively deficient in Grand Ideas, has less of a needle and thread to tie it altogether though men like Spengler and Barzun tried; for them, history rises and falls like organisms, like a tree.
Anyway, modern folks are not lacking in ideas. Stories are all around. Pick up any magazine, newspaper. Watch any movie or TV show. Turn on any radio program. Listen to any song, be it folk, rap, country, whatever. Listen to any politician. Take any college course. Tons of stories about politicians, celebrities, artists, businessmen(like Steve Jobs), activists, the poor, the rich, the military, the criminals, the hustlers, the whores, the spies, the musicians, the actors, the crooks, etc. Any given Village Voice, Reader, LA Review of Books, New York Times magazine, or whatever is filled with accounts, stories, and etc.
But most of those stories are about individuals or anti-white figures(as heroes). Ethnic/racial consciousness, if allowed, must always be non-white or anti-white.
Now, stories about individuals are fine. Any great person has individual worth beyond his or her race or ethnos. Beethoven was more than German. Duke Ellington can be appreciated by anyone who loves music. Edison invented stuff that changed the world, not just America. So, even as great individuals do belong to a community, their greatness is individualistic in the Howard-Roakian sense and rise about mere ethnic relevance. Einstein wasn’t just a Jewish scientist. So, this kind of individual-centric story-telling is just fine, and it should be available to people around the world.
But people are not mere individuals, and most people are not great themselves. Their meaning comes from ethnos and morality, and those two things don’t require lots of wealth, power, and genius. Any ordinary Irishman can have meaning in being Irish and in being a good person. And there needs to be stories on this level too.
This can be conveyed through the arts. While most movies today focus on the individual(with hardly any mention of his parents, family, and etc), there have been stories that situate the individual within an identity and community. Thus, individuals are not mere individuals but ethno-individuals. This is true of ROOTS. Every Negro character in that series is an individual, but he is also a black individual as part of a Negro story and ancestry. It’s like Tom understand he is descended from Toby who was really Kunta. It’s also true of THE GODFATHER. Michael is more than an individual businessman-gangster. He is so a son, brother, father, husband. He is an ethno-individual. He is part of a family, a community, a heritage that goes back to Sicily. EMIGRANTS and NEW LAND are masterpieces in this vein. And the TV series based on Michener’s CENTENNIAL is pretty good stuff.
But even in the absence of such story-telling by media, it is up to every parent to tell the tale. Now, this can’t be done in one setting. There is an ‘art’ to this. It’s like storytelling in movies, esp the one with jumbled chronology. Piecemeal by piecemeal, like so many pieces of a puzzle, the story can be told and retold over a period of time. Also, there are things you can’t tell a young child that you can tell when he’s older.
And there are ways you can hook a past event to current one. Suppose your kibbler mentions a certain incident, and suppose something that happened to you or your parents(the kid’s grandparents) has a similar ring. Comparative narratives are always interesting even though Jews overplay this by turning everything into new pogrom or new holocaust, even not being accepted to a golf club.
Now, HOW TO MAKE AN AMERICAN QUILT is a terrible awful movie, but it’s interesting how a young woman in the present with marriage prospects finds relevance in the stories of older women who have their own stories of love and loss.
So, parents have to look for moments when they can slip in stories. And there are times that are ideal for storytelling, like in camping outings like in Sanford and Son.
A puzzle isn’t finished at one sitting. It is formed piece by piece. Now, when kids are too young, they don’t know nothing. As they grow older, they are interested in what parents have to say and have respect(if you don’t raise the kids on TV and smartphones, the horror of the age; they should be called idiotphones). But as kids grow older, they go through the stage of finding parents ‘uncool’, and they naturally look for their own things, which is a natural part of growing up. Even so, there are times when something could be communicated of the past. Past can always inform and teach the present. Unless this is done right, the kids end up like Emma Sulkowicz or Lena Dunham. Or all those SJW’s arrested in Seattle after Trump victory. Granted, most kids will go through a ‘prodigal son’ stage, esp in modern society filled with freedoms. But if enough seeds were planted in the kids, as the kids grow older and mature, they may grow and take shape and inform the future.
This is why fathers must be patriarchs and gain and maintain the respect of his young ones. Some time ago, I was in this Jewish community, and there was this orthodox-looking men with his kids. He may not be rich or powerful, but there was something real about his role as father. He put away childish things. For sure, he didn’t have a tattoo on his ass, and his idea of culture was surely not watching Jerry Springer reruns with kids on TV. It’s like that Sean Penn movie THIS MUST BE THE PLACE.
The dufus finally grows up and puts away childish things.
The horror of modern parenting is there in A CLOCKWORK ORANGE where the father is an ahistorical non-entity and the mother has funny-shaped hair. (Boy, was that prophetic.) Alex, bright as he is, grew up on diet of junky pop culture.
The parents of AN EDUCATION are far more involved and responsible, but their only concept of education is status-seeking and success. They failed to ground their girl in any meaning sense of past and ethnos. Their social reality is purely class-centered, thus purely economic, and that won’t do.
In the end, every parent will have to formulate his own way of doing it, but it has to be done. Storytelling has to be a big part of parenting, because mute parents will just leave the kids to be raised on the fiction of pop culture and stupid fantasies.
PS: the fact that the most popular story-telling has been stuff like STAR WARS, AVATAR, LORD OF RINGS, 300, and etc in recent yrs show that the traditional mythopoeic narrative is still the most powerful. Wagner mastered this with Nibelungen, but the Left always feared this as proto-fascist, irrational, and traditional.
So, the GLOB has taken this story-telling format and filled it with ‘progressive’ elements like Diversity and feminist elements, and etc. But the core nature of this kind of story-telling is essentially ‘right-wing’, and if the Right were to regain the narrative once again, it could be powerful stuff.