https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eulaULyS5Ho&feature=emb_logo
Conférence Alain Soral et Pierre de Brague Marseille juin 2019
93,961 views
•29 Nov 2019
1.58K subscribers
Quelques photographies de la conférence :
(Retrouvez d’autres photographies de la conférence
dans l’espace de financement participatif d’Alain Soral)
American Pravda: Oddities of the Jewish Religion
About
a decade ago, I happened to be talking with an eminent academic scholar
who had become known for his sharp criticism of Israeli policies in the
Middle East and America’s strong support for them. I mentioned that I
myself had come to very similar conclusions some time before, and he
asked when that had happened. I told him it had been in 1982, and I
think he found my answer quite surprising. I got the sense that date
was decades earlier than would have been given by almost anyone else he
knew.
Sometimes
it is quite difficult to pinpoint when one’s world view on a
contentious topic undergoes sharp transformation, but at other times it
is quite easy. My own perceptions of the Middle East conflict
drastically shifted during Fall 1982, and they have subsequently changed
only to a far smaller extent. As some might remember, that period
marked the first Israeli invasion of Lebanon, and culminated in the
notorious Sabra-Shatila Massacre during which hundreds or even thousands
of Palestinians were slaughtered in their refugee camps. But although
those events were certainly major factors in my ideological realignment,
the crucial trigger was actually a certain letter to the editor
published around that same time.
A few years earlier, I had discovered The London Economist, as it was then called, and it had quickly become my favorite publication,
which I religiously devoured cover-to-cover every week. And as I read
the various articles about the Middle East conflict in that publication,
or others such as the New York Times, the journalists
occasionally included quotes from some particularly fanatic and
irrational Israeli Communist named Israel Shahak, whose views seemed
totally at odds with those of everyone else, and who was consequently
treated as a fringe figure. Opinions that seem totally divorced from
reality tend to stick in one’s mind, and it took only one or two
appearances from that apparently die-hard and delusional Stalinist for
me to guess that he would always take an entirely contrary position on
every given issue.
In
1982 Israel Defense Minister Ariel Sharon launched his massive invasion
of Lebanon using the pretext of the wounding of an Israeli diplomat in
Europe at the hands of a Palestinian attacker, and the extreme nature of
his action was widely condemned in the media outlets I read at the
time. His motive was obviously to root out the PLO’s political and
military infrastructure, which had taken hold in many of Lebanon’s large
Palestinian refugee camps. But back in those days invasions of Middle
Eastern countries on dubious prospects were much less common than they
have subsequently become, after our recent American wars killed or
displaced so many millions, and most observers were horrified by the
utterly disproportionate nature of his attack and the severe destruction
he was inflicted upon Israel’s neighbor, which he seemed eager to
reduce to puppet status. From what I recall from that time, he made
several entirely false assurances to top Reagan officials about his
invasion plans, such that they afterward called him the worst sort of
liar, and he ended up besieging the Lebanese capital of Beirut even
though he had originally promised to limit his assault to a mere border
incursion.
The
Israeli siege of the PLO-controlled areas of Beirut lasted some time,
and negotiations eventually resulted in the departure of the Palestinian
fighters to some other Arab country. Shortly afterward, the Israelis
declared that they were moving into West Beirut in order to better
assure the safety of the Palestinian women and children left behind and
protect them from any retribution at the hands of their Christian
Falangist enemies. And around that same time, I noticed a long letter
in The Economist by Shahak which seemed to me the final proof
of his insanity. He claimed that it was obvious that Sharon had marched
to Beirut with the intent of organizing a massacre of the Palestinians,
and that this would shortly take place. When the slaughter indeed
occurred not long afterward, apparently with heavy Israeli involvement
and complicity, I concluded that if a crazy Communist fanatic like
Shahak had been right, while apparently every mainstream journalist had
been so completely wrong, my understanding of the world and the Middle
East required total recalibration. Or at least that’s how I’ve always
remembered those events from a distance of over thirty-five years.
During
the years that followed, I still periodically saw Shahak’s statements
quoted in my mainstream publications, which sometimes suggested that he
was a Communist and sometimes not. Naturally enough, his ideological
extremism made him a prominent opponent of the 1991 Oslo Peace Agreement
between Israel and the occupied Palestinians, which was supported by
every sensible person, though since Oslo ended up being entirely a
failure, I couldn’t hold it too strongly against him. I stopped paying
much attention to foreign policy issues during the 1990s, but I still
read my New York Times every morning and would occasionally see his quotes, inevitably contrarian and irredentist.
Then
the 9/11 attacks returned foreign policy and the Middle East to the
absolute center of our national agenda, and I eventually read somewhere
or other that Shahak had died at age 68 only a few months earlier,
though I hadn’t noticed any obituary. Over the years, I’d seen some
vague mention that during the previous decade he’d published a couple of
stridently anti-Jewish and anti-Zionist books, just as might be
expected from a hard-line Communist fanatic, and during the early 2000s I
started seeing more and more references to these works, ironically
coming from fringe sources of the anti-Semitic Far Right, thereby once
again proving that extremists flock together. Finally, about a decade
ago, my curiosity got the better of me and clicking a few buttons on
Amazon.com, I ordered copies of his books, all of which were quite
short.
My
first surprise was that Shahak’s writings included introductions or
glowing blurbs by some of America’s most prominent public intellectuals,
including Christopher Hitchens, Gore Vidal, Noam Chomsky, and Edward
Said. Praise also came from quite respectable publications such as The London Review of Books, Middle East International, and Catholic New Times while Allan Brownfeld of The American Council for Judaism had published a very long and laudatory obituary.
And I discovered that Shahak’s background was very different than I
had always imagined. He had spent many years as an award-winning
Chemistry professor at Hebrew University, and was actually anything but a
Communist. Whereas for decades, Israel’s ruling political parties had
been Socialist or Marxist, his personal doubts about Socialism had left
him politically in the wilderness, while his relationship with Israel’s
tiny Communist Party was solely because they were the only group willing
to stand up for the basic human rights issues that were his own central
focus. My casual assumptions about his views and background had been
entirely in error.
Once
I actually began reading his books, and considering his claims, my
shock increased fifty-fold. Throughout my entire life, there have been
very, very few times I have ever been so totally astonished as I was
after I digested Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years,
whose text runs barely a hundred pages. In fact, despite his solid
background in the academic sciences and the glowing testaments provided
by prominent figures, I found it quite difficult to accept the reality
of what I was reading. As a consequence, I paid a considerable sum to a
young graduate student I knew, tasking him to verify the claims in
Shahak’s books, and as far as he could tell, all of the hundreds of
references he checked seemed to be accurate or at least found in other
sources.
Even
with all of that due diligence, I must emphasize that I cannot directly
vouch for Shahak’s claims about Judaism. My own knowledge of that
religion is absolutely negligible, mostly being limited to my childhood,
when my grandmother occasionally managed to drag me down to services at
the local synagogue, where I was seated among a mass of elderly men
praying and chanting in some strange language while wearing various
ritualistic cloths and religious talismans, an experience that I always
found much less enjoyable than my usual Saturday morning cartoons.
Although
Shahak’s books are quite short, they contain such a density of
astonishing material, it would take many, many thousands of words to
begin to summarize them. Essentially almost everything I had known—or
thought I had known—about the religion of Judaism, at least in its
zealously Orthodox traditional form, was utterly wrong.
For
example, traditionally religious Jews pay little attention to most of
the Old Testament, and even very learned rabbis or students who have
devoted many years to intensive study may remain largely ignorant of its
contents. Instead, the center of their religious world view is the
Talmud, an enormously large, complex, and somewhat contradictory mass of
secondary writings and commentary built up over many centuries, which
is why their religious doctrine is sometimes called “Talmudic Judaism.”
Among large portions of the faithful, the Talmud is supplemented by the
Kabala, another large collection of accumulated writings, mostly
focused on mysticism and all sorts of magic. Since these commentaries
and interpretations represent the core of the religion, much of what
everyone takes for granted in the Bible is considered in a very
different manner.
Given
the nature of the Talmudic basis of traditional Judaism and my total
previous ignorance of the subject, any attempt on my part of summarize
some of the more surprising aspects of Shahak’s description may be
partially garbled, and is certainly worthy of correction by someone
better versed in that dogma. And given that so many parts of the Talmud
are highly contradictory and infused with complex mysticism, it would
be impossible for someone like me to attempt to disentangle the seeming
inconsistencies that I am merely repeating. I should note that although
Shahak’s description of the beliefs and practices of Talmudic Judaism
evoked a fire-storm of denunciations, few of those harsh critics seem to
have denied his very specific claims, including the most astonishing
ones, which would seem to strengthen his credibility.
On
the most basic level, the religion of most traditional Jews is actually
not at all monotheistic, but instead contains a wide variety of
different male and female gods, having quite complex relations to each
other, with these entities and their properties varying enormously among
the numerous different Jewish sub-sects, depending upon which portions
of the Talmud and the Kabala they place uppermost. For example, the
traditional Jewish religious cry “The Lord Is One” has always been
interpreted by most people to be an monotheistic affirmation, and
indeed, many Jews take exactly this same view. But large numbers of
other Jews believe this declaration instead refers to achievement of
sexual union between the primary male and female divine entities. And
most bizarrely, Jews having such radically different views see
absolutely no difficulty in praying side by side, and merely
interpreting their identical chants in very different fashion.
Furthermore,
religious Jews apparently pray to Satan almost as readily as they pray
to God, and depending upon the various rabbinical schools, the
particular rituals and sacrifices they practice may be aimed at
enlisting the support of the one or the other. Once again, so long as
the rituals are properly followed, the Satan-worshippers and the
God-worshippers get along perfectly well and consider each other equally
pious Jews, merely of a slightly different tradition. One point that
Shahak repeatedly emphasizes is that in traditional Judaism the nature
of the ritual itself is absolutely uppermost, while the interpretation
of the ritual is rather secondary. So perhaps a Jew who washes his
hands three times clockwise might be horrified by another who follows a
counter-clockwise direction, but whether the hand-washing were meant to
honor God or to honor Satan would be hardly be a matter of much
consequence.
Strangely
enough, many of the traditional rituals are explicitly intended to fool
or trick God or His angels or sometimes Satan, much like the mortal
heroes of some Greek legend might seek to trick Zeus or Aphrodite. For
example, certain prayers must be uttered in Aramaic rather than Hebrew
on the grounds that holy angels apparently don’t understand the former
language, and their confusion allows those verses to slip by unimpeded
and take effect without divine interference.
Furthermore,
since the Talmud represents a massive accretion of published commentary
built up over more than a millennium, even the most explicit mandates
have sometimes been transformed into their opposites. As an example,
Maimonides, one of the highest rabbinical authorities, absolutely
prohibited rabbis from being paid for their religious teaching,
declaring that any rabbi who received a salary was an evil robber
condemned to everlasting torment; yet later rabbis eventually
“reinterpreted” this statement to mean something entirely different, and
today almost all rabbis collect salaries.
Another
fascinating aspect is that up until very recent times, the lives of
religious Jews were often dominated by all sorts of highly superstitious
practices, including magical charms, potions, spells, incantations,
hexes, curses, and sacred talismans, with rabbis often having an
important secondary role as sorcerers, and this even remains entirely
true today among the enormously influential rabbis of Israel and the New
York City area. Shahak’s writings had not endeared him to many of
these individuals, and for years they constantly attacked him with all
sorts of spells and fearful curses aimed at achieving his death or
illness. Many of these traditional Jewish practices seem not entirely
dissimilar to those we typically associate with African witch-doctors or
Voodoo priests, and indeed, the famous legend of the Golem of Prague
described the successful use of rabbinical magic to animate a giant
creature built of clay.
If
these ritualistic issues constituted the central features of traditional
religious Judaism, we might regard it as a rather colorful and
eccentric survival of ancient times. But unfortunately, there is also a
far darker side, primarily involving the relationship between Jews and
non-Jews, with the highly derogatory term goyim frequently used to describe the latter. To put it bluntly, Jews have divine souls and goyim
do not, being merely beasts in the shape of men. Indeed, the primary
reason for the existence of non-Jews is to serve as the slaves of Jews,
with some very high-ranking rabbis occasionally stating this well-known
fact. In 2010, Israel’s top Sephardic rabbi used his weekly sermon to declare
that the only reason for the existence of non-Jews is to serve Jews and
do work for them. The enslavement or extermination of all non-Jews
seems an ultimate implied goal of the religion.
Jewish
lives have infinite value, and non-Jewish ones none at all, which has
obvious policy implications. For example, in a published article a
prominent Israeli rabbi explained that if a Jew needed a liver, it would
be perfectly fine, and indeed obligatory, to kill an innocent Gentile
and take his. Perhaps we should not be too surprised that today Israel
is widely regarded as one of the world centers of organ-trafficking.
As a
further illustration of the seething hatred traditional Judaism
radiates towards all those of a different background, saving the life of
a non-Jew is generally considered improper or even prohibited, and
taking any such action on the Sabbath would be an absolute violation of
religious edict. Such dogmas are certainly ironic given the widespread
presence of Jews in the medical profession during recent centuries, but
they came to the fore in Israel when a religiously-minded military
doctor took them to heart and his position was supported by the
country’s highest religious authorities.
And
while religious Judaism has a decidedly negative view towards all
non-Jews, Christianity in particular is regarded as a total abomination,
which must be wiped from the face of the earth.
Whereas
pious Muslims consider Jesus as the holy prophet of God and Muhammed’s
immediate predecessor, according to the Jewish Talmud, Jesus is perhaps
the vilest being who ever lived, condemned to spend eternity in the
bottommost pit of Hell, immersed in a boiling vat of excrement.
Religious Jews regard the Muslim Quran as just another book, though a
totally mistaken one, but the Christian Bible represents purest evil,
and if circumstances permit, burning Bibles is a very praiseworthy act.
Pious Jews are also enjoined to always spit three times at any cross or
church they encounter, and direct a curse at all Christian cemeteries.
Indeed, many deeply religious Jews utter a prayer each and every day
for the immediate extermination of all Christians.
Over
the years prominent Israeli rabbis have sometimes publicly debated
whether Jewish power has now become sufficiently great that all the
Christian churches of Jerusalem, Bethleham, and other nearby areas can
finally be destroyed, and the entire Holy Land completely cleansed of
all traces of its Christian contamination. Some have taken this
position, but most have urged prudence, arguing that Jews needed to gain
some additional strength before they should take such a risky step.
These days, many tens of millions of zealous Christians and especially
Christian Zionists are enthusiastic advocates for Jews, Judaism, and
Israel, and I strongly suspect that at least some of that enthusiasm is
based upon ignorance.
For
the last two thousand years, Jews have almost invariably existed as
small, relatively weak minorities living in the lands of others, whether
Christian or Muslim, so a religious doctrine so unswervingly hostile to
outsiders has naturally presented considerable obstacles for peaceful
co-existence. The solution to this dilemma has been based on the divine
mandate to preserve Jewish life and well-being above all else,
superseding almost all other religious considerations. Thus, if any of
the behaviors discussed above are considered likely to stir up
resentment from powerful Gentile groups and put Jews at risk, they must
be avoided.
For
example, the prohibition against Jewish physicians treating the
illnesses of non-Jews is waived in the case of powerful non-Jews,
especially national leaders, whose favor might provide benefits to the
Jewish community. And even ordinary non-Jews may be aided unless some
persuasive excuse can be found to explain such lack of assistance since
otherwise the vengeful hostility of their friends and relatives might
cause difficulties for other Jews. Similarly, it is permissible to
exchange gifts with non-Jews but only if such behavior can be justified
in strictly utilitarian terms, with any simple expression of friendship
towards a non-Jew being a violation of holy principles.
If
the Gentile population became aware of these Jewish religious beliefs
and the behaviors they promote, major problems for Jews might develop,
so an elaborate methodology of subterfuge, concealment, and
dissimulation has come into being over the many centuries to minimize
this possibility, especially including the mistranslation of sacred
texts or the complete exclusion of crucial sections. Meanwhile, the
traditional penalty for any Jew who “informs” to the authorities on any
matter regarding the Jewish community has always been death, often
preceded by hideous torture.
Much
of this dishonesty obviously continues down to recent times since it
seems very unlikely that Jewish rabbis, except perhaps for those of the
most avant garde disposition, would remain totally unaware of
the fundamental tenets of the religion that they claim to lead, and
Shahak is scathing toward their apparent self-serving hypocrisy,
especially those who publicly express strongly liberal views. For
example, according to mainstream Talmudic doctrine, black Africans are
traditionally placed somewhere between people and monkeys in their
intrinsic nature, and surely all rabbis, even liberal ones, would be
aware of this religious doctrine. But Shahak notes that the numerous
American rabbis who so eagerly worked with Martin Luther King, Jr. and
other black Civil Rights leaders during the 1950s and 1960s strictly
concealed their religious beliefs while denouncing American society for
its cruel racism, presumably seeking to achieve a political quid pro quo beneficial to Jewish interests from America’s substantial black population.
Shahak
also emphasizes the utterly totalitarian nature of traditional Jewish
society, in which rabbis held the power of life and death over their
congregants, and often sought to punish ideological deviation or heresy
using those means. They were often outraged that this became difficult
as states grew stronger and increasingly prohibited such private
executions. Liberalizing rabbis were sometimes murdered and Baruch
Spinoza, the famous Jewish philosopher of the Age of Reason, only
survived because the Dutch authorities refused to allow his fellow Jews
to kill him.
Given
the complexity and exceptionally controversial nature of this subject
matter, I would urge readers who find this topic of interest to spend
three or four hours reading Shahak’s very short book, and then decide
for themselves whether his claims seem plausible and whether I may have
inadvertently misunderstood them. Aside from the copies on Amazon, the
work may also be found at Archive.org and also a very convenient HTML copy is freely available on the Internet.
My
encounter a decade ago with Shahak’s candid description of the true
doctrines of traditional Judaism was certainly one of the most
world-altering revelations of my entire life. But as I gradually
digested the full implications, all sorts of puzzles and disconnected
facts suddenly became much more clear. There were also some remarkable
ironies, and not long afterward I joked to a (Jewish) friend of mine
that I’d suddenly discovered that Naziism could best be described as
“Judaism for Wimps” or perhaps Judaism as practiced by Mother Teresa of
Calcutta.
There
may actually be a deeper historical truth behind that irony. I think
I’ve read here and there that some scholars believe that Hitler may have
modeled certain aspects of his racially-focused National Socialist
doctrine upon the Jewish example, which really makes perfect sense.
After all, he saw that despite their small numbers Jews had gained
enormous power in the Soviet Union, Weimar Germany, and numerous other
countries throughout Europe, partly due to their extremely strong ethnic
cohesion, and he probably reasoned that his own Germanic people, being
far greater in numbers and historical achievements could do even better
if they adopted similar practices.
It’s
also interesting to note that quite a number of the leading racialist
pioneers of 19th century Europe came from a particular ethnic
background. For example, my history books had always disapprovingly
mentioned Germany’s Max Nordau and Italy’s Cesare Lombroso as two of the
founding figures of European racism and eugenics theories, but it was
only very recently that I also discovered that Nordau had also been the
joint founder with Theodor Herzl of the world Zionist movement, while
his major racialist treatise Degeneration, was dedicated to Lombroso, his Jewish mentor.
Even
as late as the 1930s and afterward, international Zionist groups
closely cooperated with the Third Reich on international economic
projects, and during the world war itself one of the smaller rightwing
factions, led by future Israeli Prime Minister Yizhak Shamir, actually
offered a military alliance to the Axis Powers, denouncing the decadent
Western democracies and hoping to cooperate against their mutual British
enemies. The Transfer Agreement by Edwin Black, 51 Documents
by Lenni Brenner, and other writings have documented all these facts in
detail, though for obvious reasons they have generally been ignored or
mischaracterized by most of our media outlets.
Obviously
the Talmud is hardly regular reading among ordinary Jews these days,
and I would suspect that except for the strongly Orthodox and perhaps
most rabbis, barely a sliver are aware of its highly controversial
teachings. But it is important to keep in mind that until just a few
generations ago, almost all European Jews were deeply Orthodox, and even
today I would guess that the overwhelming majority of Jewish adults had
Orthodox grand-parents. Highly distinctive cultural patterns and
social attitudes can easily seep into a considerably wider population,
especially one that remains ignorant of the origin of those sentiments, a
condition enhancing their unrecognized influence. A religion based
upon the principal of “Love Thy Neighbor” may or may not be workable in
practice, but a religion based upon “Hate Thy Neighbor” may be expected
to have long-term cultural ripple effects that extend far beyond the
direct community of the deeply pious. If nearly all Jews for a thousand
or two thousand years were taught to feel a seething hatred toward all
non-Jews and also developed an enormous infrastructure of cultural
dishonesty to mask that attitude, it is difficult to believe that such
an unfortunate history has had absolutely no consequences for our
present-day world, or that of the relatively recent past.
Furthermore,
Jewish hostility toward non-Jews may have often served the interests of
others, and helped determine the economic role they played, especially
in European countries, with this factor having been obscured by
widespread ignorance of the underlying religious tenets. As most of us
know from our history books, political rulers with little sympathy for
their subjects sometimes restrict military power to a relatively small
group of well-rewarded mercenaries, often of foreign origins so that
they will have little sympathy for the population they harshly repress.
I strongly suspect that some of the most common traditional economic
niches of European Jews, such as tax-farming and the arrenda
estate-management system of Eastern Europe, should be best understood in
a similar light, with Jews being more likely to extract every last
penny of value from the peasants they controlled for the benefit of
their local king or lords, and their notorious antipathy for all
non-Jews ensuring that such behavior was minimally tempered by any human
sympathy. Thus, we should not be surprised that Jews first entered
England in the train of William the Conqueror, in order to help him and
his victorious Norman lords effectively exploit the subjugated
Anglo-Saxon population they now ruled.
But
states in which the vast majority of the population is oppressed and
dominated by a thin slice of rulers and their mercenary enforcers tend
to be much weaker and more brittle than those in which rulers and ruled
share common interests, and I believe this is just as true for economic
enforcers as for military ones. In many cases, lands reliant upon
Jewish economic intermediaries, notably Poland, never successfully
developed a native middle class, and often later fared quite poorly
against their nationally-unified competitors. Spain was actually one of
the last countries in Europe to expel its Jews, and over the next
century or two reached the peak of its military and political glory.
Prof. Kevin MacDonald’s controversial books on Judaism have also
extensively argued that rulers who seem to have been more concerned for
the well-being of their subjects also tend to be the ones more likely to
be labeled “anti-Semitic” in modern history books, and his volumes are
now easily available in my selection of HTML Books:
Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy
Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism
In
2009, Gene Expression blogger Razib Khan interviewed eminent
evolutionary theorist David Sloan Wilson on the group selection ideas
that have been his major focus. During this hour-long discussion, the
theories of MacDonald became a major topic, with Wilson seeming to take
them quite seriously, and pointing out that within the scientific
framework “parasitism” has a simple technical definition, namely the
exploitation of the large by the small. Unsurprisingly, the video
record of such extremely touchy subject matter was quickly truncated to
just the first 11 minutes, and eventually completely removed from both
YouTube and BloggingHeadsTV. But it still at least partially survives in archived form:
In
recent years, the history of Jewish expulsions from various European
societies over the last thousand years has received considerable
attention. The total number is somewhat disputed but almost certainly
in excess of 100, with the 1930s policies of Hitler’s Germany being
merely the most recent example, and Wired Magazine provided an interesting graphical presentation
of this large dataset in 2013. Given these unfortunate facts, it may
be difficult to point to any other group so consistently at bitter odds
with its local neighbors, and the religious details provided by Shahak
certainly make this remarkable historical pattern far less inexplicable.
A
very even-handed but candid description of the behavior pattern of
Jewish newcomers to America was provided in a chapter of a 1914 book on
immigration groups by E.A. Ross, one of America’s greatest early
sociologists. Ross had been one of the towering Progressive
intellectuals of his era, widely quoted by Lothrop Stoddard on the Right
while still so highly regarded by the Left that he was named to the
Dewey Commission to adjudicate the conflicting accusations of Trotsky
and Stalin and also received glowing praise in the pages of the Communist New Masses.
His dismissal on political grounds from Stanford University led to the
formation of the American Association of University Professors. Yet
his name had so totally vanished from our history books I had never even
encountered it until beginning work on my content-archiving project,
and I would not be surprised if that single chapter from one of his many
books played a major role in his disappearance.
The Eastern European Hebrews
Jews
spent two thousand years living as a diaspora people, and their
tightly-bound trans-national colonies provided them with a uniquely
effective international trading network. Since their religious
traditions regarded slavery as the natural and appropriate lot of all
non-Jews, both ideological and practical factors combined to apparently
make them some of the leading slave-traders of Medieval Europe, though
this is hardly emphasized in our histories. Closer to home, in 1991 the
Black Nationalists of The Nation of Islam published The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Volume One,
which seemed to persuasively document the enormous role Jews had played
in the American slave-trade. In 1994, Harold Brackman published a
short attempted rebuttal entitled Ministry of Lies
under the auspices of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, but I found his
denials much less compelling. I very much doubt that most Americans are
aware of these historical facts.
Throughout
most of my life, Nobel Laureate Alexander Solzhenitsyn was generally
regarded as the greatest Russian literary figure of our modern era, and
after reading all of his works, including The First Circle, Cancer Ward, and The Gulag Archipelago,
I certainly concurred with this assertion, and eagerly absorbed Michael
Scammel’s brilliant thousand page biography. Although Russian himself,
many of his closest friends were Jewish, but during the 1980s and
1990s, whispers of his supposed anti-Semitism began floating around,
probably because he had sometimes hinted at the very prominent role of
Jews in both financing and leading the Bolshevik Revolution, and
afterward staffing the NKVD and administering the Gulag labor camps.
Late in his life, he wrote a massive two-volume history of the tangled
relationship between Jews and Russians under the title Two Hundred Years Together,
and although that work soon appeared in Russian, French, and German,
nearly two decades later, no English translation has ever been
authorized. His literary star seems also to greatly waned in America
since that time, and I only very rarely see his name mentioned these
days in any of my regular newspapers.
Samizdat
versions of major sections of his final work may easily be located on
the Internet, and a few years ago Amazon temporarily sold a 750 page
hard copy edition, which I ordered and lightly skimmed. Everything
seemed quite innocuous and factual, and nothing new jumped out at me,
but perhaps the documentation of very heavy Jewish role in Communism was
considered inappropriate for American audiences, as was the discussion
of the extremely exploitative relationship between Jews and Slavic
peasants in pre-revolutionary times, based on liquor-dealing and
money-lending, which the Czars had often sought to mitigate.
When
a ruling elite has limited connection to the population it controls,
benevolent behavior is far less likely to occur, and those problems are
magnified when that elite has a long tradition of ruthlessly extractive
behavior. Enormous numbers of Russians suffered and died in the
aftermath of the Bolshevik Revolution, and given the overwhelmingly
Jewish composition of the top leadership during much of that period, it
is hardly surprising that “anti-Semitism” was deemed a capital offense.
Kevin MacDonald may have been the one who coined the term “hostile
elite,” and discussed the unfortunate consequences when a country comes
under such control.
After
the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, reborn Russia soon fell under
the overwhelming domination of a small group of Oligarchs, almost
entirely of Jewish background, and a decade of total misery and
impoverishment for the general Russian population soon followed. But
once an actual Russian named Vladimir Putin regained control, these
trends reversed and the lives of Russians have enormously improved since
that time. America’s media organs were overwhelmingly friendly toward
Russia when it was under Jewish Oligarchic rule, while Putin has been
demonized in the press more ferociously than any world leader since
Hitler. Indeed, our media pundits regularly identify Putin as “the new
Hitler” and I actually think the analogy might be a reasonable one, but
just not in the way they intend.
Sometimes it is much easier to notice obvious patterns in a foreign country than in one’s own. In the early 2000s I read The Master Switch,
a widely-praised history of modern communications technology by
Columbia University professor Tim Wu, who has subsequently become a
leading Internet-rights activist. I found the account fascinating, with
so many stories never before known to me. However, I couldn’t help but
notice that all the powerful mass-media technologies of our modern
world–film, radio, and television–had been invented and pioneered by
Gentiles, mostly of Anglo-Saxon origin, but in each case control was
seized by ruthless Jewish businessmen, who sometimes destroyed the lives
and careers of those creators. By the 1950s, nearly all of America’s
leading concentrations of electronic media power—with the sole major
exception of Disney Studios—were solidly in Jewish hands. In an open
society such as ours, these are the central levers of political
influence, and over the next generation or so, America’s long-dominant
and heavily Anglo-Saxon ruling elite was replaced by a mostly Jewish
one, a development I alluded to in my long Meritocracy article of a few years ago.
Critics
today of all backgrounds bemoan the total impoverishment of so much of
America’s once comfortably affluent middle class, noting that some sixty percent of the American population today possesses less than $500
in readily available savings. A younger generation has been reduced to
permanent debt-servitude by ruinous student loans, while the the
newspapers report that the opioid drug epidemic has claimed a dreadful
toll in lives and family-breakdown even while Wall Street and other
elite sectors of the financialized economy are richer than they have
ever been before. There are certainly many different explanations for
this sad economic trajectory, including technological change, growing
international competition, and shifts of political power in the American
system of government. But it does sometimes seem like a substantial
fraction of our population has been reduced to a 21st century version of
the drunken, ignorant, exploited, indebted, impoverished, and
immiserated Slavic peasantry of the Jewish-dominated Pale of Settlement,
and a striking graph produced by the Economic Policy Institute
demonstrates that a very sharp economic inflection point occurred in the
early 1970s, right around the time that the aforementioned ethnic
transformation of our ruling elites was fully under way.
Contrary
to widespread popular belief, it is not actually illegal to be a “Nazi”
in America, nor are Nazis prohibited from owning property, even
including media outlets. But suppose that the overwhelming majority of
America’s major media concentrations were owned and controlled by Nazis
of a particularly fanatical type. Surely that might have serious
consequences for the course of our society, and especially that fraction
of the population viewed with considerable disfavor under Nazi
doctrine.
One
important point to consider in the abbreviated history of Hitler’s
Third Reich was that although the ruling Nazi elite was often quite
harsh and extreme in its behavior, well over 98% of the population it
ruled prior to the outbreak of war consisted of Germans, the particular
group which that ruling elite most sought to benefit and uplift in all
possible ways, and despite the obscuring cloud of retrospective
propaganda, this goal seems to have largely been achieved. In 2004, Counterpunch published a column
by the late Alexander Cockburn, its redoubtable editor, noting the
tremendous success of Hitler’s peacetime economic policies, and in 2013
that same webzine carried a much longer column focused entirely on this same subject, citing the analysis of Henry C.K. Liu,
whose Chinese background provided him greater critical distance.
Indeed, during most of the 1930s Hitler received widespread
international praise for the great success of his domestic economic and
social achievements, making the cover of Time Magazine on
numerous occasions and even being named its Man of the Year for 1938.
By contrast, I suspect that a population that was some 98% non-German
but ruled by those same fanatically pro-German leaders might have fared
far worse.
Most
of these disheartening facts that have so completely upended my
understanding of reality over the last decade could not possibly have
come to my attention until the rise of the Internet, which partially
broke centralized control over the distribution of information. But
many other people surely must have known large portions of this
important story long before that, and recognized the very serious
consequences these matters might have for the future of our society.
Why has there been so little public discussion?
I
believe one factor is that over the years and the decades, our dominant
media organs of news and entertainment have successfully conditioned
most Americans to suffer a sort of mental allergic reaction to topics
sensitive to Jews, which leads to all sorts of issues being considered
absolutely out of bounds. And with America’s very powerful Jewish
elites thereby insulated from almost all public scrutiny, Jewish
arrogance and misbehavior remain largely unchecked and can increase
completely without limit.
I’ve
also sometimes suggested to people that one under-emphasized aspect of a
Jewish population, greatly magnifying its problematical character, is
the existence of what might be considered a biological sub-morph of
exceptionally fanatical individuals, always on hair-trigger alert to
launch verbal and sometimes physical attacks of unprecedented fury
against anyone they regard as insufficiently friendly towards Jewish
interests. Every now and then, a particularly brave or foolhardy public
figure challenges some off-limits topic and is almost always
overwhelmed and destroyed by a veritable swarm of these fanatical Jewish
attackers. Just as the painful stings of the self-sacrificing warrior
caste of an ant colony can quickly teach large predators to go
elsewhere, fears of provoking these “Jewish berserkers” can often
severely intimidate writers or politicians, causing them to choose their
words very carefully or even completely avoid discussing certain
controversial subjects, thereby greatly benefiting Jewish interests as a
whole. And the more such influential people are thus intimidated into
avoiding a particular topic, the more that topic is perceived as
strictly taboo, and avoided by everyone else as well.
For
example, about a dozen years ago I was having lunch with an especially
eminent Neoconservative scholar with whom I’d become a little friendly.
We were bemoaning the overwhelmingly leftward skew among America’s
intellectual elites, and I suggested it largely seemed a function of our
most elite universities. Many of our brightest students from across
the nation entered Harvard and the other Ivies holding a variety of
different ideological perspectives, but after four years departed those
halls of learning overwhelmingly in left-liberal lock-step. Although he
agreed with my assessment, he felt I was missing something important.
He nervously glanced to both sides, shifted his head downward, and
lowered his voice. “It’s the Jews,” he said.
I
do not doubt that much of the candid analysis provided above will be
quite distressing to many individuals. Indeed, some may believe that
such material far exceeds the boundaries of mere “anti-Semitism” and
easily crosses the threshold into constituting an actual “blood libel”
against the Jewish people. That extremely harsh accusation, widely used
by stalwart defenders of Israeli behavior, refers to the notorious
Christian superstition, prevalent throughout most of the Middle Ages and
even into more modern times, that Jews sometimes kidnapped small
Christian children in order to drain their blood for use in various
magic rituals, especially in connection with the Purim religious
holiday. One of my more shocking discoveries of the last dozen years is
that there is a fairly strong likelihood that these seemingly
impossible beliefs were actually true.
I
personally have no professional expertise whatsoever in Jewish ritual
traditions, nor the practices of Medieval Jewry. But one of the world’s
foremost scholars in that field is Ariel Toaff, professor of Jewish
Renaissance and Medieval Studies at Bar-Ilan University near Tel Aviv,
and himself the son of the Chief Rabbi of Rome.
http://www.israelshamir.net/BLOODPASSOVER.pdf
In 2007, he published the Italian edition of his academic study Blood Passovers,
based on many years of diligent research, assisted by his graduate
students and guided by the suggestions of his various academic
colleagues, with the initial print run of 1,000 copies selling out on
the first day. Given Toaff’s international eminence and such enormous
interest, further international distribution, including an English
edition by a prestigious American academic press would normally have
followed. But the ADL and various other Jewish-activist groups regarded
such a possibility with extreme disfavor, and although these activists
lacked any scholarly credentials, they apparently applied sufficient
pressure to cancel all additional publication. Although Prof. Toaff
initially attempted to stand his ground in stubborn fashion, he soon
took the same course as Galileo, and his apologies naturally became the
basis of the always-unreliable Wikipedia entry on the topic.
Eventually,
an English translation of his text turned up on the Internet in a PDF
format and was also placed for sale on Amazon.com, where I purchased a
copy and eventually read it. Given those difficult circumstances, this
work of 500 pages is hardly in ideal form, with most of the hundreds of
footnotes disconnected from the text, but it still provides a reasonable
means of evaluating Toaff’s controversial thesis, at least from a
layman’s perspective. He certainly seems an extremely erudite scholar,
drawing heavily upon the secondary literature in English, French,
German, and Italian, as well as the original documentary sources in
Latin, Medieval Latin, Hebrew, and Yiddish. Indeed, despite the
shocking nature of the subject matter, this scholarly work is actually
rather dry and somewhat dull, with very long digressions regarding the
particular intrigues of various obscure Medieval Jews. My own total
lack of expertise in these areas must be emphasized, but overall I
thought Toaff made a quite persuasive case.
It
appears that a considerable number of Ashkenazi Jews traditionally
regarded Christian blood as having powerful magical properties and
considered it a very valuable component of certain important ritual
observances at particular religious holidays. Obviously, obtaining such
blood in large amounts was fraught with considerable risk, which
greatly enhanced its monetary value, and the trade in the vials of this
commodity seems to have been widely practiced. Toaff notes that since
the detailed descriptions of the Jewish ritualistic murder practices are
very similarly described in locations widely separated by geography,
language, culture, and time period, they are almost certainly
independent observations of the same rite. Furthermore, he notes that
when accused Jews were caught and questioned, they often correctly
described obscure religious rituals which could not possibly have been
known to their Gentile interrogators, who often garbled minor details.
Thus, these confessions were very unlikely to have been concocted by the
authorities.
Furthermore,
as extensively discussed by Shahak, the world-view of traditional
Judaism did involve a very widespread emphasis on magical rituals,
spells, charms, and similar things, providing a context in which
ritualistic murder and human sacrifice would hardly be totally
unexpected.
Obviously,
the ritual murder of Christian children for their blood was viewed with
enormous disfavor by the local Gentile population, and the widespread
belief in its existence remained a source of bitter tension between the
two communities, flaring up occasionally when a Christian child
mysteriously disappeared at a particular time of year, or when a body
was found that exhibited suspicious types of wounds or showed a strange
loss of blood. Every now and then, a particular case would reach public
prominence, often leading to a political test of strength between
Jewish and anti-Jewish groups. During the mid-19th century, there was
one such famous case in French-dominated Syria, and just before the
outbreak of the First World War, Russia was wracked by a similar
political conflict in the 1913 Beilis Affair in the Ukraine.
I
first encountered these very surprising ideas almost a dozen years ago
in a long article by Israel Shamir that was referenced in Counterpunch, and this would definitely be worth reading as an overall summary, together with a couple of his follow-up columns, while writer Andrew Hamilton offers the most recent 2012 overview of the controversy. Shamir also helpfully provides a free copy of the book in PDF form,
an updated version with the footnotes properly noted in the text.
Anyway, I lack the expertise to effectively judge the likelihood of the
Toaff Hypothesis, so I would invite those interested to read Toaff’s
book or better yet the related articles and decide for themselves.
The
notion that the world is not only stranger than we imagine, it is
stranger than we can imagine has often been misattributed to the British
astronomer Sir Arthur Eddington, and over the last fifteen-odd years
I’ve sometimes begun to believe that the historical events of our own
era could be considered in a similar light. I’ve also sometimes joked
with my friends that when the true history of our last one hundred years
is finally written and told—probably by a Chinese professor at a
Chinese university—none of the students in his lecture hall will ever
believe a word of it.
Related Readings:
- Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years by Israel Shahak
- The Old World in the New by E.A. Ross
- A People That Shall Dwell Alone by Kevin MacDonald
- Separation and Its Discontents by Kevin MacDonald
- Understanding Jewish Influence I: Background Traits for Jewish Activism by Kevin MacDonald
- The Bloody Passovers of Dr. Toaff by Israel Shamir
RSS 
REVELATION 16:12 (EUPHRATES)
“And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates: and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared.”
EUPHRATES-means rushing water. Isaiah 17:12; “Woe to the multitude of many people, which make a noise like the noise of the seas; and to the rushing of nations, that make a rushing like the rushing of mighty waters!”
This is the rushing waters of last day’s lies and deception. Satan was kept from this last days rushing of lies but now the pit has opened. Revelation 20:3; “And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.” Thousand years the gospel flourished with no lies or deception then Satan was loosed to bring on the rushing waters of deception. All we have left now is this little season.
Jesus Christ put him in the pit at his death.
2 Peter 3:8; “But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.”
Lies and deception for the last days. Isaiah 17:11; “In the day shalt thou make thy plant to grow, and in the morning shalt thou make thy seed to flourish: but the harvest shall be a heap in the day of grief and of desperate sorrow.”
Isaiah 66:4; “I also will choose their delusions, and will bring their fears upon them; because when I called, none did answer; when I spake, they did not hear: but they did evil before mine, eyes, and chose that in which I delighted not.”
Choose your delusion well. What would that be? Israel as the chosen people. Israel inhabits the spirit of hell and is now importing it under the old covenant. They imported it to the Romans and brought in the spirit of death. And it led to the death of Christ. It will again.
19 APRIL 2017
DEUTERONOMY 27:17 (coveting other people’s property)
“Cursed be he that removeth his neighbor’s landmark. And all the people shall say, Amen.”
THIS TALKS OF THE TAKING OF SOMETHING THAT IS NOT YOURS. Genesis 13:15, 16; “For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever. And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth: so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also be numbered.”
No one has the right to take someone else land or possessions. Has this happened today? A great example would be Israel taking land that Palestinians once lived on.
The promise to Abraham was fulfilled in Christ. Galatians 3:16; “Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, AND TO THY SEED, which is Christ.” Ezekiel 36:24, 26; “For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.” This land is the new heart and new spirit of Jesus Christ. Joshua 11:23, 21:43-45. The land promise was fulfilled in the time of Joshua.
WHERE DOES THE BIBLE JUSTIFY PROPERTY THEFT? God does not want us to conquer or control others.
Genesis 3:24; “So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.”
This was God’s property not theirs. There are certain laws that God has laid down for his children to follow yet we see today broken laws with no Godly restraint. When Godly restraint is removed we see lost sovereignty done little by little where slavery comes in, in all shapes and colors. Slavery to make money and then to war.
We see seduction, deceiving and manipulating people in all walks of life taking what is not theirs and reducing many to a slave life.
“Cursed be he that removeth his neighbor’s landmark. And all the people shall say, Amen.”
THIS TALKS OF THE TAKING OF SOMETHING THAT IS NOT YOURS. Genesis 13:15, 16; “For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever. And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth: so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also be numbered.”
No one has the right to take someone else land or possessions. Has this happened today? A great example would be Israel taking land that Palestinians once lived on.
The promise to Abraham was fulfilled in Christ. Galatians 3:16; “Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, AND TO THY SEED, which is Christ.” Ezekiel 36:24, 26; “For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.” This land is the new heart and new spirit of Jesus Christ. Joshua 11:23, 21:43-45. The land promise was fulfilled in the time of Joshua.
WHERE DOES THE BIBLE JUSTIFY PROPERTY THEFT? God does not want us to conquer or control others.
Genesis 3:24; “So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.”
This was God’s property not theirs. There are certain laws that God has laid down for his children to follow yet we see today broken laws with no Godly restraint. When Godly restraint is removed we see lost sovereignty done little by little where slavery comes in, in all shapes and colors. Slavery to make money and then to war.
We see seduction, deceiving and manipulating people in all walks of life taking what is not theirs and reducing many to a slave life.
analysent un phénomène qui avec Internet est de plus en plus répandu, et accessible à des consommateurs de plus en plus jeunes.
ReplyDeleteReprésentations biaisées de la femme, « performances » jetées à la face de jeunes qui ont de moins en moins accès à l’amour, pauvre substitut d’une sexualité de plus en plus agressive, mais également substitut du pauvre, dont le pouvoir d’achat et de séduction le réduit à ne pouvoir plus être que le spectateur de la consommation, la pornographie, pourvoyeuse aussi bien du fantasme que de son assouvissement insatisfait, engendre frustration et mal-être dans un cycle sans fin. Il est temps alors pour nos deux amis en cours de guérison de faire le bilan. Humain, social, psychologique, mais aussi dans sa brutalité marchande : qui produit ? où va l’argent ? dans quel but laisse-t-on ainsi la laideur envahir l’imaginaire ? Quel rapport avec le métissage voulu de l’homme occidental ? avec la « société ouverte », le « progrès », le libéralisme ? Cet avilissement de l’homme, en même temps que celui de la femme, est-il un moyen de son asservissement ? Une étape dans sa disparition programmée ?
Lounès Darbois est né en 1982 en région parisienne. Entre études inachevées, petits boulots, débrouille et voyages, il a connu la pauvreté et la solitude. Mais ayant pu côtoyer, dans sa famille, les « derniers feux de la bourgeoisie classique », il était suffisamment armé intellectuellement pour ne pas assister passivement à son propre déclin et entreprendre, non seulement sa rédemption, mais également la mise en perspective de cette arme de destruction massive, ayant pris conscience, avec Soljenitsyne, qu’ « on asservit les peuples plus facilement avec la pornographie qu’avec des miradors ».