Habakkuk on "incitements to anti-Semitism"

I find this comment by DH to be so striking that I have made it a post. There will be complaints about a lack of paragraphing.  If DH wants to revise it I will re-post it.  pl

-------------

I had not looked back at this thread, so had missed your response.

There will, I think, be better occasions to take up the issues you raise, which are very important ones.

For now, a few remarks.

In the interests of clarity, I should perhaps say that insofar as I am ill at ease with the ‘Hobbits’ of Tolkien’s ‘Shire’, it is because of forefathers who were ‘dwarves’ in the coalfields and smelters of South Wales.

My possessing the name of an Old Testament prophet betokens Calvinist origins, not Jewish. But then, radical Protestants have commonly been philo-Semitic.

There is a figure called Kevin Macdonald, whose writings on Jews as an ‘hostile élite’ you may well know.

(See https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/2068070204_Yuri_Slezkine .)

As it happens, I do not much like him. His reference to ‘the Germans, from Wagner to von Treitschke to Chamberlain and Hitler’, disliking the irony of Heine, seems to me to demonstrate an inability to grasp that groups, be they Germans, Jews, Muslims, or whoever, are rarely monolithic wholes.

That said, an important part of the background to his writing – as of the piece by Lawrence Auster to which you link, which seems to me far superior to Macdonald’s writing – is that very many of the most influential American Jews seem to be queuing up for starring roles in versions of the ‘hostile élite’ drama.

Quite a few of them appear to be doing their level best to persuade people who place any value on the traditional ‘Anglo’ culture of the American Republic that they are something close to an ‘existential threat’ to it.   (editor bolding) 

In Britain, also, ‘tribal’ Jews – ‘ghetto Jews’ sometimes seems to me an appropriate term – have claimed the right to speak for some kind of coherent ‘Jewish people.’

So, for example, concluding his May 2015 article ‘We never forget Jerusalem’, our former Chief Rabbi, Lord Jonathan Sacks, wrote:

‘We have had the privilege to be born in a generation that has seen Jerusalem reunited and rebuilt. We have seen the Jewish people come home. ‘

Today God is calling on us all to be Guardians of Zion. Never has this been more important. We must all stand up for the one home our people has ever known and the one city our people has loved more than any other. We are all shagrirey medinat Yisrael (ambassadors for the State of Israel) and we must all make Israel’s case in a world that sometimes fails to see the beauty we know is here. Let us all take on that task. With Hashem’s help, we will succeed and we pray may the world make its peace with Israel so that Israel and Israel’s God can bring peace to the world.’

(See http://rabbisacks.org/we-never-forget-jerusalem/ .)

As it happens, I think this is an ‘open-and-shut’ case of ‘incitement to anti-Semitism.’

That there are some Jews who have their ‘home’ in this country – and are more than temporary residents – seems to be beyond our former Chief Rabbi’s capacity to imagine.

That he cannot see the possible implications of implicitly defining all Jews as ‘resident aliens’ is, I think, indicative of extraordinary stupidity and recklessness.

It also completely obscures the fact that, for many Jews here, their history is one of lost homes, and the equally important fact that very many of them had long abandoned the Jewish religion.

I mentioned Peter Ganz, for whom ‘home’ had clearly been Mainz: clearly not a Jew, in Rabbi Sachs’s definition.

What then can I say about Peter Stern, who likewise made it over here just before the outbreak of war, leaving relatives who died? He also ended up as a professor of German, having been a sergeant in His Majesty’s Armed Forces.

Again, the comparison with Maxwell is interesting, in that like him Stern came from Czechoslovakia – he served in No 311 Squadron, the Czech bomber squadron in the RAF, hunting U-boats over the Atlantic.

I well remember two fingers clawed around a pipe, a relic of one of the ultimate lucky escapes, when the Wellington bomber in which he served as ‘tail gun Charlie’ was shot down by Ju-88s, and the survivors were picked up, by pure fluke, after fourteen hours in the water.

While Peter Ganz was an agnostic brought up as a Lutheran, Peter Stern was brought up a Catholic, and remained a kind of ‘Jewish Christian’ to the end of his life.

Like so refugees from ‘assimilationist’ families, both completely failed to maintain the concern for group survival which Macdonald appears to think a Jewish characteristic, marrying out.

And then, what can I say of a lifelong friend of my mother’s from schooldays, the daughter of a secular Jewish lawyer, who herself ended up as a pillar of the Russian Orthodox Cathedral in Kensington?

I vividly remember their house, with the walls covered in prints of the St. Petersburg which the father had left in the Civil War, leaving his coat on the door, before finally making it over here through Crimea.

My ‘few remarks’ have got longer than I intended.

What is important is that the kind of ‘tribalism’ which Macdonald sees as a general Jewish characteristic is found among some Jews, but not others.

An obvious fact is that ‘assimilationist’ Jews tend over time to disappear.

However, a situation where the ‘tribal’ Jews who do not want to ‘assimilate’ attempt to shape the fate of non-Jewish polities is, quite patently, fraught with potential for disaster.

That however, does not provide good reason for accepting the simplicities either of Sacks or Macdonald – who agree on a ‘totalitarian’ vision of all true Jews as essentially the same, but simply differ on whether the largely mythical identity in which they believe should be given a ‘positive’ or ‘negative’ sign.  DH

Comments

[Barbara Ann]

Until or unless it is reformatted, for readers' convenience the original comment (with paragraphs) is here.

I hope David has made a report to the ADL on the British Chief Zionist's Rabbi's speech - I wholeheartedly agree with his sentiment re its anti-Semitic nature.

A central tenet of Zionism; that to be a 'good' Jew one must unconditionally support Israel, is profoundly prejudicial to the large section of Jews who may never wish to return 'home' (also to ultra-orthodox 'Israelis' who presumably already are). Further, as DH highlights and I have said previously in this place myself, it is profoundly dangerous for Zionists to hold all Jewry hostage in this way by associating them (many unwillingly) with the deeply racist policies of an apartheid state. Not so long ago a very different set of people set about defining Jews as a monolithic whole of "resident aliens" and history records what happened next. Well said Mr Habakkuk.

[Diana C]

I did try to read it. It is indeed hard to follow without paragraphing.

The topic is one of great interest to me, but I would appreciate some paragraphing. As I tried to scroll down the article, I kept losing my place.

[jdledell]

David – Very interesting summary of a very complex issue. The most important point you made is there is no universally accepted definition of who is or who not Jewish and we are far from monolithic. I know many devout Jews, who try to keep ALL the life characteristics of a Jew as defined by the Talmud, Frankly there a very few who can avoid straying from strict adherence and still live in a modern world.

In my youth I was raised Orthodox and but when I met the modern world in college and employment, it no longer seemed to be relevant that there was only one correct path to G-d. 51 years ago I met and married the daughter of a Lutheran minister (ps we’re still married). The earthquake this decision made among my family has not yet disappeared. I still consider myself to be Jewish but now attend a Reform Temple.

What is interesting is how my relatives in Israel handle my visits. There are some who are accepting and some where I am shunned and not allowed in their home. I do not consider myself to be a secular Jew and I attend Services regularly. Here in the U.S. a Reform Jew is still treated as Jewish but in Israel we might as well be considered an atheist, a lower category than Christian or even Muslim.

Your comment about Jerusalem is quite accurate. I know a number of American Jews but especially Israeli Jews whose religious focus on Jerusalem and/or Israel has become more important than their relationship with G-d. I’ve always considered the focus on Jerusalem as almost a false idol that we were warned about. All of us live in very interesting times and among very interesting people.

[The Twisted Genius]

David Habakkuk,

I took the liberty to add the paragraph breaks from your original comment. Hope you don't mind.

[turcopolier]

TTG
Neither do I but I thought it quite readable.

[turcopolier]

DianaC

Is English your native tongue?

[turcopolier]

Barbara Ann

Ah! You are a German?

[Vegetius]

That the land of Edward I has a "Chief Rabbi" and that the natives of Britain are attacking him because they believe his words are not good for the Jews is a perfect demonstration of the 'pathological altruism' which Kevin MacDonald has been talking about all these years, to an audience that now numbers in the millions globally.

People ought to read MacDonald before attempting to de-construct him, although I doubt you will have either the will or the ability to afterwards. His ideas have not been 'debunked' although Nathan Cofnas' critique of the Culture of Critique is worth reading.

Here DH (hereafter You) have misrepresented the ideas he has spent the last quarter century developing. He is a far subtler thinker than has been presented here, and has been defending and explaining his ideas publicly for years - when he is not being hounded by anti-white and anti-free speech groups like the SPLC. I do not agree with his theory in its entirety - but at least I understand it.

Some points:

I have been kicked out of a bar and tell you it wasn't my fault, would you believe me? If I was kicked out of a second bar, and told you it was someone else causing the problem, would you believe me? How times would I have to be kicked out of bars before you started to think maybe it had something to do with my own behavior? Three? Thirty-Three?

Jews have been asked to leave by their hosts over a hundred times in the last two thousand years and we are expected to believe that at all times and in all places it was due to some sort of irrational, psychopathic behavior of the inhabitants, or some scapegoating tactic by a ruler? And yet everywhere the proffered reasons for the expulsion are twisted and lied about to keep the expelled free from blame, thus allowing them to plead innocence when they ask for refuge from the next mark. It is possible that they themselves actually believe their own lies. And the cycle begins again.

Ponder the case of Leo Frank and the ADL and believe me when I tell you that in fifty or one hundred years Jeffrey Epstein will be rehabilitated and the female goyim he assaulted - and to my knowledge they were all non-Jews - will be called whores and blamed or simply accepted as a small price for the security and glory of Greater Israel.

Similarly, having your own on both sides of a conflict (thereby ensuring some part of the group's survival, per Jacob) or issue (and so attempting to control the intellectual borders of it: see any news commentary in the English speaking world) is an ancient tactic. That this does not jibe with a Western man's sense of what is proper or even immediately intelligible is to be expected. Westerners' morality is in theory universal. Jewish morality has two sides in theory and practice, one for themselves and one for everyone else. "Judeo-Christian" is pernicious and misleading.

Jews are of the West, and the dirt of the West is not so magic that it makes someone a Western man the moment they step foot on it. If so, Britain would not be subject to so many Rotherhams or in such peril from mass non-white immigration (which Jews tend to see as benefitting them and so promote it wherever they live, except of course Israel).

Is it possible someone here is being played for a fool, and is so turned around that he thinks he is behaving virtuously? Try to imagine that others do not see things as you do. Try to imagine that some people will see your sense of what is fair or reasonable as a weakness and exploit it to harm you. Similarly, the historic divisions between English, Irish, Scottish, and Welsh will be exploited to keep them from working together to stop what is happening to their native lands.

A couple of war heroes and a personal anecdote prove nothing. This is what is called the NAXALT fallacy. That is: Not All X Are Like That. This is simply explained. An outlier does not render the median illegitimate.

Suppose that once you step on a viper and it does not strike you. Does this therefore mean that a pattern of recognition which evolved over a million years is to be ignored?

You will note that while Jews constantly use the outlier as a way of keeping goyim from criticizing Jews or defending themselves, Jews never extend it to their own enemies, or indeed anyone they are vying with for any reason. In fact, they will reverse it completely to obtain the advantage and not lose a moment's sleep over this.

Whatever atrocities German soldiers committed in Eastern Europe, those that committed them represented a tiny fraction of the Nazi state apparatus, not to mention the nation as a whole. Yet Jews blame not just the perpetrators, or even all Germans, but Western - which is to say European, which is to say white - civilization as a whole, and seek to undermine it, not just in Germany, but anywhere the natives' appearance would allow them to play the part of a German soldier in one of their propaganda movies like Schindler's List. Western ethnocentrism is a threat to Jewish ethnocentrism.

Thus a Holocaust or Nazi piece on the BBC approximately every 96 hours, forever.

Thus the ugly Moloch they are trying to erect in London.

Despite being on the 'good' side of the conflict, the people of Britain must forever have their noses rubbed in guilt and shame - in what was once their own capital city, and the greatest city on earth - for something that happened in the middle of Europe in the middle of last century, and which they actually fought against. Did their ancestors fight and die so that their descendants could be shamed and subject to a blood libel in their own lands?

And if anyone thinks these memorials have anything to do with the preservation of European culture or identity or cultural norms you need to wake up and not go gently into oblivion. The Shoah is flexible and can be repurposed so that yesterday's victims become tomorrows perps. Go ask the Poles.

The answer to this endless cycle is simple: Jews need to return to their homeland, and that homeland needs to be defended. Their bifurcated sense of identity is causing no end of problems, both to themselves and to everyone around them. Tikkun olam means, in practice, the transformation of other cultures to meet Jewish needs. It is a form of cultural genocide. But, like Sweden, Britain seems destined to become a squalid little police state rather than admit that the 'tolerant' multicultural experiment is failing. The corruption and degeneracy of their royalty is complete, and a Muslim is mayor of London, looking the other way while non-English gang violence spreads across the city.

Some have tried resisting and some resist still:

Morgoth is from the North and you would do well to pay him some attention.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66zOYSghrjA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWvlW_O1IEk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6STp1ogk_qE

Bowden was from the South, and you ought to check him out, too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vLFI8Q75cY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhC5ob8RGQg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_ylhKAWqME

[Babak Makkinejad]

All:

From an essay titled: "It is time to declare war" placed by one Professor Leonard Peikoff - a Jew - in the New York Times, in the Washington Post, and numerous university news papers in the United States on September 20, 2001 -

"What Germany was to Nazism in the 1940s, Iran is to terrorism today. Whatever else it does, therefore, the U.S. can put an end to the Jihad-mongers only by taking out Iran.

Eliminating Iran’s terrorist sanctuaries and military capability is not enough. We must do the equivalent of de-Nazifying the country, by expelling every official and bringing down every branch of its government. This goal cannot be achieved painlessly, by weaponry alone. It requires invasion by ground troops, who will be at serious risk, and perhaps a period of occupation. But nothing less will “end the state” that most cries out to be ended."

[Petrel]

Habakkuk --a great article, but your caustic remark about Tolkien's Shire may have been misplaced.

The Shire described in Tolkien's first Lord of the Rings book is commonly considered a realization of Belloc and Chesterton's DISTRIBUTIST theories -- of small scale ownership of production, by many, many craftsmen, shopkeepers and farmers. Tolkien was a great admirer of these theorists.

In contrast, the Shire shown in the third book is a bare, eroded and treeless expression of the reverse -- in which the means of production is held by a few Capitalists. The task of Merry, Pippin, Sam and Frodo in the last chapters of book three is to restore ownership to the many and thereby rehabilitate the Shire to its former happy self.

[harry]

Thank you. Excellent observations some of which had been brewing somewhere in the back of my mind but had not fully taken form.

[Babak Makkinejad]

The mythos of Jerusalem of David and Solomon is so central now to the contemporary Jewish identity that nothing short of the dicovery of King Solomon's palace in Saudi Arabia can dislodge it.

[Babak Makkinejad]

I think this is the same person who stated that Professor Bloch, a hero of La Resistance, was not a (real) Jew.

A low life, I should think.

[Vegetius]

The man himself:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXJEt8TBlRQ&feature=youtu.be

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWWfPWdbPC8

[Cortes]

Maybe Ferdinand and Isabella (the “Catholic Kings”) knew what they were doing?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_Jews_from_Spain

[doug]

Thank you for posting this.

A Jewish refugee and friend of my dad made a rifle as a gift for me back when I turned 12. I've known a lot of Jews in my life and the only thing I've noted that they seemed to have in common is that most were educated.

[Babak Makkinejad]

Vegetius

To my knowledge, Jews were never expelled from Iran over the last 2500 years.

[JohnH]

The New York Times had an article yesterday on how anti-Semitism has become a major issue in the UK elections, particularly in regards Labour. True to the Times style of reporting "the facts," it didn't really discuss the basis for the charges against Labour. Are they really more anti-Semitic than the Tories, who haven't been condemned?

My suspicion is that Labour has made some statements that might be interpreted as sympathetic with the plight of Palestinians or worse, (gasp) unsupportive to Netanyahu. Obviously Labour's attitude would bother tribalists like Chief Rabbi, Lord Jonathan Sacks, who are simultaneously British and Israeli. But the NYT doesn't bother with helping us understand details like that.

The Times does mention that Jews represent 0.5% of the British population. Subtracting those who are not tribalists, we are left with a population of tribalists that is probably equivalent to the rounding error in most polling.

And yet it's a 'major issue' in this election!?! I mean, what's with that? Are any voters really going to make their decision on this trumped up issue? And if so, who really benefits? Probably not 99%+ of the population.

[catherine]

''However, a situation where the ‘tribal’ Jews who do not want to ‘assimilate’ attempt to shape the fate of non-Jewish polities is, quite patently, fraught with potential for disaster.''

It has already been a disaster. Furthermore imo it is perfectly legitimate to hold both a neutral/positive and negative view of a group or people.
So when it comes to the "Jew qua nation' as opposed to 'Jew qua individual' I am very definitely negative.
I had probably never given 2 seconds thought to Jews prior to 911..after which I set out to educate myself on the ME. I started with the British National Archives where I tripped upon 'Zionism in the ME. I knew little about Israel and had never heard of Zionism before but what I learned there sent me back to the US, the US Department of Historical documents, the Presidential libraries, etc.. what stood out in Presidential/political
decisions on policy for Israel ....straight from the horses mouths in every single administration was....''domestic political considerations''.
I truly did not want to believe that our leadership was so corrupt that it could be bought off and intimidated into actions immoral and detrimental to this country by a group of Zionist who operated like a organized crime family....but that's the way the cookie crumbled on the facts.
I have followed the activities of this Fifth Column and Israel and our congress now for 16 years....and this Isr'merica abomination continues
to grow.
I have no patience for betrayal, lies, bullies, traitors, foreign influence, etc.. so I make no apology for my total opposition to these people.
As for the 'average Jew" while most may not be actively involved with Israel many have been 'lulled' by their leaders and our politicians
into believing they are indeed a 'special case of eternal victims' and therefore 'entitled' to hold a equal or superior loyalty to their Jewish homeland.

Frankly, and I think I speak for many, I am fed up with the character assassinations of principled people who try to speak up against this subversion and against Israeli crimes, fed up with anti Semite slurs, the lies, the spin,the pilpul psycho and bible babble they pretend are legitimate arguments.

I also do not care about the sensitivities and 'hurt feelings' ...hurt feelings don't kill you. Call Israel and their congressional minions in the US what they are for heavens sake....while we still have some free speech.

[catherine]

' Zionists to hold all Jewry hostage in this way by associating them (many unwillingly) with the deeply racist policies of an apartheid state.''

Zionist think of Jews as 'safety in numbers' They appeal to Jews on religion, anti-Semitism fear and a mythologized version of Jewish history, a tale of the vanquished now lifted to their rightful power.

In ancient times it was the Rabbis who propagandized their followers to keep them from running off and joining a bigger more powerful and therefore protected tribe.

[catherine]

''And the cycle begins again''

Self-fulfilling prophecy, .....“a false definition of the situation evoking a new behavior which makes the originally false conception come true.
A process through which an originally false expectation leads to its own confirmation.
The actors within the process fail to understand how their own belief has helped to construct that reality; because their belief is eventually validated, they assume that it had been true at the outset. ''

[catherine]

Frankly I think the US should sign Peace Treaties with Russia and Iran.
This would cause the Zios and Neos the world over to bust into flames from spontaneously human combustion.
Problem solved.

[Mathias Alexander]

What's "white civilisation"?

[ted richard]

my own story somewhat parallels, yours. i do think that a large part of the problem has been the hugely successful effort over the course of the 20th century by certain jews to conflate zionism with being a member of the hebrew religion.... of being jewish.

in fact i think it is the zionists who have stirred up most of the ancient hatred towards jews through their treatment of the paletstinians.

hollywood films have been a primary force for zionism and to keep the holocaust industry well financed. has it ever occurred to anyone why 74 years after the end of WW2 there are numerous films about jews, the holocaust and nazis every year?

no other race, religion or group of any kind has been as well treated with victimhood as the jews of the holocaust. i submit this is intentional on the part of the zionists.

that is the source of real antisemitism in the modern world.

[BrotherJoe]

The Israelis will never be satisfied until the entire Middle East is reduced to small enclaves of farmers and shepherds living under Israel's hegemony. I believe a significant percent still cling to the vision of an Israel from the Nile to the Euphrates.