Blog has moved, searching new blog...

Friday, September 28, 2007

Committing PC's Most Mortal Sin

Vanishing American wrote a very long and informative post entitled On political correctness, multiculturalism, and their effects. If you have the time I encourage you to read it as a whole and then skip to my comments near the end of this post.

Here I will pull out what I believe to be the most salient bits. For instance, what is it:
Of course we all have a general idea of how and where these poisonous ideas started. Political correctness is also known as 'cultural Marxism', and it is an attempt to apply Marxist ideas to the social sphere. Economic or political Marxism focus on the means of production and the economic connection between human beings, or more accurately, between classes of people. In fact, the economic nexus is the explanation for everything in the Marxist world view. Cultural Marxism tends to focus, again, on groups of people, and on the power relationships between them. And of course those with power, or apparent power, are cast in the role of villains in the same way that the rich or the bourgeoisie are the villains in the economic view according to Marx. The downtrodden, the 'wretched of the earth', the workers, the exploited classes, are the heroes in that scheme of things. In cultural Marxism, socially 'exploited' or oppressed groups, those who are weak in some way, those who are less successful, those who are outsiders or outlaws are the heroes by virtue of their weakness and ascribed victim status. And the system of speech codes and social hierarchies which we call political correctness is just a way of codifying the social order as seen by the cultural Marxists, with minorities, women, gays, and Third Worlders (not necessarily in that order) as the apex of the pyramid. Members of those groups are to be treated with kid gloves, spoken of in exaggeratedly respectful terms, exempted from criticism and from accountability for their actions, and above all, must not be offended in any way, whether by failing to display proper deference or by using a taboo name to designate these groups.
Who originated it and why:
Much of the ferment in leftist thinking occurred in Europe, with the so-called Frankfurt School (link added) and Critical Theory, which attempted to bring down Western culture simply by relentlessly criticizing every aspect of the culture from the angle of every 'oppressed' or aggrieved group. It was an attempt to discredit the existing order of things and to foment more dissatisfaction and anger to be channeled into revolt. And of course by this time, the ideas of Gramsci, who advocated infiltrating all the existing institutions to bring them down from within, had mostly supplanted the old-fashioned idea of armed revolt.
How it ate capitalism:
There was a kind of collusion of interests: Hollywood and the entertainment industry wanted to sell titillating movies and music to a 'repressed' public, especially to the baby-boom generation, who represented a very lucrative new market. So good old capitalism was happy to collude, wittingly or unwittingly, with the left's desire to alienate and radicalize the young, and thus bring down Western culture.
How it coincided with (and I would say invited) the Turd World invasion:
At around this same time in the United States, we began to see mass immigration, on a scale unknown previously, and almost exclusively from non-Western, non-white countries. Slowly at first, and then more quickly, our cities began to be transformed, as more and more exotic peoples and their enclaves became an accepted part of the American landscape. However, during the early phase, most of the immigration was limited to big cities, while small-town and rural America remained as it had always been.
How under its rules everybody is special - except the white Christians who founded and built the West:
In the wake of the Civil Rights movement, Americans of European ancestry had become accustomed to learning to use appropriate terms for black people . . . Women declared that 'women's libber' was a slur, and 'feminist' was the accepted term. Asians demanded not to be called 'Oriental' . . . Homosexuals were soon demanding special rights, including re-labeling as 'gay' rather than homosexual . . .
And, thanks to the agitation by home-grown black Moslems, the term 'Moslem' was out, and the preferred term 'Muslim' was established . . . But this was the beginning in earnest of politically correct language in this country. One of the things which some people quickly objected to was the arbitrary nature of some of the terminology. The frequent changes of names.
All this analysis is spot on. One of the most identifying traits of PC is the use of constantly shifting meaning and euphemism. In support of which I would cite their obsession with framing, proclivity for deconstruction, and enthusiasm for demented postmodernism.

Vanishing American moves on to address the point that:
the West is being defeated by its own values, its own softheartedness and basically humane sensibilites. The Moslems, in Iraq and everywhere they confront us, are doing the same thing: they are turning our virtues into weaknesses by exploiting them. The Mexicans and other illegals who are invading and colonizing our country have our number, too; they know that for every tough gringo, there are half a dozen soft-hearted ones who want to help them, take care of them, treat them as dependent children. Thus we aid in our own destruction.

I've heard it said on numerous occasions that Christianity is to blame for this apparent weakness of Western culture. And I've heard it said on equally numerous occasions that Anglo-Saxons are the most liberal of all ethnic groups in this country. Look at Britain, they say; Britain is farther down the road of national suicide than other European countries. And here in America, they say, it's the WASP elites who sell out their country and advocate multiculturalism and 'diversity'. WASPs invented multiculturalism, I have heard from various people.

. . .

There may be a grain of truth, too, in the charge that Britain and America were more prone to liberalism, given that Britain seems to have more serious problems than say, France or Germany with immigration and multiculturalism. But did the British, or Anglo-Saxons, invent multiculturalism? I see no evidence of that.
All quite right I thought, but there is something to add. Something that is important I restate here for the record because it is something I've been grappling with for some time. It took great effort to think it through, and takes even greater effort say it. To do so requires commission of the most mortal sin there is against political correctness.

I started blogging a little over two years ago with only a vague awareness and revulsion at politically correct dogma and a mild curiousity about its origins and rationale. What I have discovered, slowly, is shocking, and it only gets more shocking with each day's news.

It began with the recognition that the West's education and mainstream media are biased and has progressed to the understanding that they are in fact engaged in mass brainwashing, an indoctrination with PC dogma under the cover of deliberately inverted language such as "free thought" and "fairness". It began with the recognition that this PC dogma interferes with the West's ability to recognize and properly defend itself from the threat of Islamic jihad and has progressed to the understanding that it denies the even larger threat posed by the immigration invasion, which is flooding the West with impoverished, uneducated, dangerous people, including Muslims. It began with the recognition that PC dogma is something believed and propagated by moonbats and progressed to the sad realization that elements of the Right, supposed conservatives, specifically the neocons, are working in concert with the Left in an unholy union called either Globalism or Universalism. It began with an assumption that Jews are white, civilized, and on my side, and has progressed to the tragic and most un-PC of all conclusions that they are indeed my enemy, because their collective words and deeds are destroying my past, present, and future.

As I said, this conclusion has been brewing for a while. Lawrence Auster, a former Jew who often calls out anti-Semitism, helped me recognize the false face of the neocons; and Steve Sailer gave their insane foreign policy a name: Invade the World, Invite the World.

The globalist agenda to erase the world's borders in the name of increasing trade is supported only by promises written on so much toilet paper. The "economy", we are told, requires immigration, because it helps the "economy". Well whatever this "economy" thing is it doesn't seem so important as to negate the obviously horrible effects of the immigration it supposedly requires. What good will any "economy" be when the only people left in the West are Turd Worlders squabbling over its remains? Likewise the Left's pipe dreams of "Civil Rights" and "Universal Healthcare".

Just yesterday I encountered the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. It was a long, dry, scholarly paper by Kevin MacDonald titled Jewish Involvement in Shaping American Immigration Policy, 1881-1965: A Historical Review. You may not want read the whole thing, but at least you should skim and understand it before dismissing me or the sentiments I'm expressing here as anti-Semitic.

A reader named Emerson left a comment for Vanishing American that connected the dots:
I’ve read sources that attributed the origin of Multiculturalism to a Jewish female sociology professor in Canada. I don’t know if that’s true but it seems plausible, as I see the same alien presence running throughout your essay:
Cultural Marxism, Frankfurt School, Marcuse, Fromm, historical culprits behind the Immigration Act of 1965 (Sabath, Dickstein, Celler, Javits, Jocobstein, Perlman, Lehman), Feminist movement (Stein, Freidan, Abzug), the sexual revolution (Freud), 1960s radicals (Hoffman, Horowitz, Elsberg) the Civil Rights movement (SPLC and the Reds), the militant homosexual movement (ACLU, ADL, SPLC), the Universal Nation (Wattenberg, Podhoretz, Kristol, Jacoby, and Shylock), Aztecs marching in our streets (funding by Soros), culminating with the neoconservative movement to initiate genocide on all those nasty Arabs, Persians, Iraqis, Turks, Syrians and Kurds, using the American gentile military.
They do have a history: Jebusites, Hittites, Ammorites, Philistines…
It almost makes one paranoid, or wise.

I’ve also read that multiculturalism was invented to mask the failure of blacks to rise to white standards, after it was obvious that Zangwill’s melting pot didn’t work for blacks or Emma’s refuse, but only worked for Christian Europeans.

Also, your observation is true that the West is being defeated by it’s own values and humane sensibilities. American Christians just don’t grasp the fact that white altruism (Do unto others…) is not a trait of the other races, not even the race that passes itself off as white.
The comment I then left sums up my reasoning and makes the point I wished to reiterate and record here:
I agree with Emerson. And I'd also point out that to criticize Jews is to break the most fundamental of all PC strictures.

Isn't it absurd that anyone would even think to blame Christianity or WASPs for the rise of PC and its catastrophic consequences? Isn't this in fact a reversal of the truth? Hasn't the rise and spread of PC eroded the power of Christianity, WASPs, and whites in general? Blaming them is in effect blaming the victim.

Yes, there are Christians, WASPs, and whites who have fallen for the PC brainwashing. Yes, there are some who have taken it so deeply to heart that they work to expand and protect it. That's the nature of PC. That is its purpose. To control the minds of the people it seeks to destroy. The left, at its root, is all about destruction.

You don't have to be an anti-Semite to notice where these ideas originate from and who benefits. But you do have to violate PC to say: Jews. Why is that? Is it factually incorrect to note that the West's entertainment, mass media, and banking systems are disproportionately controlled, even dominated, by Jews? Am I imagining their inordinate sway in academia? Is it pure speculation to note that these institutions overwhelmingly favor everything PC - they are the very tools by which PC is spread?

If we are going to break the chains of PC then we must not be afraid to speak such truths. The very idea to blame WASPs and Christianity, while ignoring the role of Jews, is an indication just how powerful PC is. But it can and must be broken if we are to fix what is wrong with Western civilization.
Jews are not the only enemy, and not all Jews are enemies. I'm not going to sugar coat what I have to say any more than that.

Labels: , , , ,



Blogger Vanishing American said...

tanstaafl, thanks for your further contribution to the discussion. As I said at the beginning of my blog entry, I was hoping for discussion and input. I realize I gave only a very rough outline of the story. You filled in some of the blanks.

9/28/2007 07:29:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

You're welcome, and thank you for broaching the subject in a way that helped me see a deeper truth I've struggled with for some time.

9/28/2007 09:43:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great post. And Sailers additional 'In hock to the world' was also bang on.

And, sometimes i wonder if in the future it will be necessary to have an Staussian exoteric/escoteric approach to writing.

9/29/2007 01:19:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I did a follow up post to you on the VA track.
It may be of interest.

9/29/2007 12:43:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Emerson, welcome. Whether or not I ever again find my faith, you can count on me to join with the righteous, however weak, against the evil, however strong.
I am a rational man, I believe in Logos.

I am frankly not sure what to make of the prophecies you cited at VA's blog. I'm wary to accept it because it seems to me, even with what little I know of the Christian faith, that the primary danger is deception. We should always prefer our own wits and personal knowledge of the here and now, and consider any information removed in time, place, or language only secondarily, as it is more likely corrupt, perhaps deliberately.

9/29/2007 03:00:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

But keep that prophecy in the back of your mind for those times when your reason fails to rationally explain the relentlessly aggressive nature of the Jewish clan towards the West.

Your comments on PC are very interesting. There is a power there that blinds us to certain things. I had this "inborn" programming that prevented me from accepting Jewish complicity in America's disintegration, even though I kept seeing it over and over. I was actually afraid to talk about it. But once the evidence forces you to cross over, there is no going back. It was like an awakening for me. I also felt like a fool for being brainwashed (and very angry).
Two of the first books I read on the subject was “My Awakening” and "Jewish Supremacism" by the mass killer David Duke. Actually that's how the Jews like to portray him, and only because he began writing about their subversive activities a long time ago. His membership in the KKK was a youthful blip in his history and he never harmed anyone by it. But his real sin was to step through the PC barrier on the topic of Jewish subversion, and the Jews made him pay a heavy price. For instance, think about your opinion of David Duke. What’s stored in your mind? Did you develop that opinion from reason, from experience? You get the idea.
Good blog, my friend, I’ll be back.
Best Regards

9/29/2007 04:31:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


By saying "Jews are not the only enemy" you imply that they are an enemy. Here you are making a statement about the Jews collectively. In reading through the thread on Vanishing American I got the impression that you were jumping back and forth from one side of a line to the other. You approve of the comments of an anti-Semite, and then if someone takes issue you claim that they are being PC. No one was saying that the role of individual Jews in promoting political correctness can't be mentioned, and yet you use this straw man argument as a defense. How about a little less of trying to get in touch with your inner anti-Semite? People like David Duke seem a bit nuts to me. Wouldn't you agree?

9/29/2007 08:55:00 PM  
Blogger Rick Darby said...


I have not considered it worth my while to read thoroughly about the life and thoughts of David Duke. So I can't deny the possibility that some of his claims include a few true observations amid the crackpot ravings.

Nevertheless, anyone who is willing to align himself with the Klu Klux Klan, to wear a Nazi armband (I have seen this in a photograph), and to give vent to the most extreme anti-Jewish propaganda (presumably he would call it "anti-Zionist," but calling poison hemlock champagne doesn't change the reality), has chosen to set himself outside the realm of sane dialogue.

As I wrote to tanstaafl, it is legitimate to oppose the contribution that too many Jews have made to PC and race replacement, as well as their earlier willingness to be suckered by Communism. It is not an act of prejudice to discuss how Jewish "ideology" (not religion) has undermined the best American traditions through its domination of the media and academia.

But to promote enmity of Jews as people is to cross a line that must never be crossed.

9/30/2007 05:37:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

hal k, I'm not being coy. I've just realized and said flat out Jews are my enemy. And I mean it in the same way I mean it when I say Ladeeenyos and Muslims are my enemy and recognized those enemies earlier.

All of these groups are working collectively against me and mine. None of them hesitate to advocate in favor of themselves, and none hesitate to condemn me and mine for advocating in our own favor. It is rank hypocrisy.

PC is certainly what makes people cry anti-Semitism so quickly. As I said at VA's all you have to do to see that is substitute Christian or white or WASP for the word Jew and see if you are just as ready to scold the speaker. Eg. "Whites are my enemy." I read that message virtually every day on the web. Nobody is ostracized or even denounced for saying it. PC dogma protects it as "free speech".

9/30/2007 08:13:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I didn’t think it would be worth my while to read Duke either. But once I became aware that my perception of the Jewish race was completely distorted, I bought dozens of books on their history, their beliefs, and the opinions of their critics. Duke happened to be the author I read first merely because the media had portrayed him as a monster (like you are continuing to do doing here). I expected to quickly skim through the ravings of a mad man and move on to more serious work. But it turns out that contrary to your statement about a “few truths amid the ravings,” it was mostly truth with only a few historical errors (that I could discover). Nor did I find any “extreme anti-Jewish propaganda” in his books, as you maliciously charge.
Why did you say these things, without having read his work?
Duke is a racial separatist, not a supremacist. And that’s a perfectly sane theoretical solution to our race problems, except to liberals and subversive Jews who want to destroy our race. I was shocked to find that Duke hadn’t “lynched any niggers.” In fact, he never harmed anyone. He didn’t rape 12,000 little boys, like the Catholic sodomite clergy. Blacks sexually assault 30,000 white women every year in America, but Duke never assaulted a black, male or female. Duke never used terrorism to set up a rogue nation in Palestine and cleanse the land of the true owners. He doesn’t carry out assassinations or torture Arabs everyday in Israeli prisons. He doesn’t endorse anal sodomy or child pornography like the Jews do. Why so much venom toward Mr. Duke, Rick Darby?
Incidentally, I’ve read ten more books written by Jews themselves that expose (true) things about Jews that are more harsh than anything Duke has ever written.
You say you’ve seen Duke with a swastika. So what?
Look at these quotes:
“The white race is the cancer of human history; it is the white race and it alone — its ideologies and inventions — which eradicates autonomous civilizations wherever it spreads, which has upset the ecological balance of the planet, which now threatens the very existence of life itself." –Susan Sontag
“The racial question is the key to world history…all is race, there is no other truth.”
Benjamin Disraeli, member of the Master Race
Now tell me again, just who is it that places themselves “outside the realm of sane dialogue?”
You may indulge in your fake hysteria about swastikas, but I find Jewish Yarmulkes just as offensive as a swastika, because that stupid little cloth cap is sign of racial superiority. All is race.

You sound oh-so-enlightened and so self-righteous when you say, “To promote enmity of Jews as a people is to cross a line that must never be crossed.” But why do you say this? The Jews cross this line, as do blacks, Aztecs, and Asians. Why do you have a double standard for whites?
You do this because you’re a liberal, or worse. I’ve read your posts on other sites. “Oh, we find one good Jew, we must overlook the behavior of the other six million. We like Walter Williams and Ward Connerly, so we must overlook the behavior of thirty-nine million other blacks.”
This is a liberal deception, introduced under a self-righteous egalitarian posture. It’s a deception that goes against common sense and it’s destroying our country.
This is what exposed you as a liberal, Mr. Darby.
I don’t care what you say about Duke. He can take it. The man has endured three decades of relentless Jewish slander (one of their character traits). But your short post above was obviously a roundabout way of calling Duke an anti-Semite, without actually using the word, because the word has lost it’s power. You joined the assault on an innocent man. Why is it the Jews assault innocent people, even a perfectly sinless One?
It took me a while, but I realize now that you’re not on our side.
You’re part of our problem.
I also suspect that you’re not genetically related to Westerners.
You’re much too crafty and sly.

9/30/2007 01:22:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Those last two posts were from me, Emerson.
I put my name in but I'm having a bit of trouble with this posting software.

9/30/2007 02:55:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

emerson, most of what you say makes sense to me, and I agree with it. But I don't think you should attack Rick. I don't believe he's being devious or sly. From what I've read he is genuinely inquisitive, subtle, and intelligent. I think he gets it. He's just hesitant to speak ill of Jews, and I understand that. It is a powerful taboo to overcome. Until recently I might have described my views just as he has.

The problem here is the overwhelming power of PC. It is multi-layered and ubiquitous. Even as we break free of some pieces we may still be held by others. Most of the people we encounter are befuddled by it to a greater or lesser extent. Very few really have broken entirely free. I don't think I have yet. But I suspect that those who have and have then spoken out are made into pariahs, smeared with undeserved labels, and banished from "polite" conversation. Like David Duke.

What you say about Duke strikes a chord. Pressed I might describe him as Rick has, but as you say I know nothing of him except what I've been fed by the media. The same media that tells me immigration , diversity, and multiculturalism are wonderful. So I will be reading what he has to say, and I suspect I will find him as you describe. They have used the "racist/hater" smear once to often on me, and far from "getting in touch with my inner anti-Semite" it is making me see through the whole "racist/hater" sham. So far in my short career of PC-heresy those smeared as bigots I have found to speak more truth than any PC pundit I have ever encountered.

The point I'd like to make to anyone who reads this, but especially you emerson, and especially regarding Rick, is that the anger and hate we feel towards those who create and deliberately propagate the brainwashing is natural. Nobody likes to be tricked or misled. But we should not extend our anger to those who might merely be held in its sway. Many are in the process of breaking free, as I am, and we need only information and encouragement and time to help us break free completely.

9/30/2007 09:04:00 PM  
Blogger phactoid said...

Regarding the majority of your post on "Committing PC's Most Mortal Sin," I think that European or Marxist influence being responsible for the rise of PC in the US unlikely. Far more likely an explanation is the US's attempt to assimilate blacks as full citizens following the civil war. And then an increasing effort to do that during the civil rights years.

Regarding the roots of multiculturalism, historically the United States was not a multicultural country until slavery. After the civil war, blacks became full citizens. Undoubtedly, this paved the way for US citizens primarily of european decent to eventually accept other cultures immigrating.

Regarding Jews dominating financial industries, etc. It has been shown that races tend to have traits. This doesn't mean everyone in that race exhibits those traits, but the majority do. For example, orientals being more intelligent than whites. Blacks being better at sports.

Some may not consider Jews to be a race per se. But Jews are certainly their own cultural group and as such as a group they seem to be better at certain pursuits and exhibit certain traits. For example, dominance in business or banking can be explained by increased ambition, determination, intelligence. All traits undoubtedly fostered by the Jewish culture who find such traits desirable because they lead to success.

If you truly believe that a race or cultural group is your enemy because they have a cultural identity to encourage success, then I must suppose that you believe this because you find them hurting your own culture in some way.

The Jews and Christians are not my enemies. Their religions are not "convert or die" as the Muslims believe.

I think it's easy to become paranoid, especially when there is evidence of the US media purposely withholding information. Also especially in light of the Latino Invasion and the obvious goal to try to create a borderless continent with an Amero. This is scary stuff to be sure. We have to be vigilant against it. But we also have to be vigilant against creating enemies who may not be enemies.

10/02/2007 12:47:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...


If you're not convinced of PC's relation to Marxism you should read more. For example a link VA provides at the end of her post titled Multiculturalism and Marxism:

"One of the echoes of Marxism that continues to reverberate today is the idea that truth resides in class (or sex or race or erotic orientation)."

The Civil War and the Civil Rights that sprang from its ashes certainly has twisted together with PC. VA talks about this, go read her post.

I speak about Jews collectively. My criticism of their "traits" is just as valid as your praise of their "traits". It is irrelevant to me whether they are a "race" or not. But I would point out that they are a self-consciously insular people who make very strong us/them distinctions, even as their intellectuals try to convince everyone else that us/them divisions are wrong. Why is that? To use your words: because it leads to their success.

Latinos and Muslims, and blacks and Asians for that matter, think likewise to Jews. They all have much stronger group pride and motivations to keep themselves strong than whites have. They are all free to express this pride openly by PC. Whites have been deracinated, they are the only people who are collectively color-blind. That blindness is unnatural and unhealthy and will lead to our extermination. It is caused by PC brainwashing, which was created and is spread in large part by Jewish efforts, though all the other groups, including traitorous whites, participate in and contribute to the vilification of whites.

Jews aren't white. If they were they'd be using their considerable wealth and power to prevent the dehumanization and extermination of whites. Instead they aid and abet it. We're supposed to care about Hitler, Rwanda, and Sudan. But the PC pundits who complain about these genocides don't seem at all concerned that whites, which are only a teen percentage of the world's population and falling, are being simultaneously flooded out of Europe and every place on the globe where they previously were the majority. Can you imagine this happening to blacks or Asians? And when it does happen to primitive people in S America and the Pacific islands the PC crowd is outraged and fights for their protection and right to isolation. Whites however have no right to defend themselves, and no right to a border. Why is that?

10/04/2007 09:57:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Here is an article that points out the lopsided hate-a-phobia and demagoguery of the SPLC. They don't consider JDL or Mexica Movement hate groups.

10/04/2007 01:08:00 PM  
Blogger dienw said...

There needs to be a definition as to what sort of Jews are meant as the source of the political correctness disease: atheist Jews as opposed to the believing. David Horowitz gives a good description of the former in his book Politics of Bad Faith.

As I read Auster and you, his disciples, I find that there are three key elements:
1. A condemnation of the Enlightenment: no distinction is drawn between the Enlightenment as instantiated in the American Revolution and as in the French Revolution. Marxism and Socialism are the direct and self-acknowledged inheritors of the latter.
Just what do you propose to back up to? Do you propose the ancien regime(doubtful)? I do see "reason" bandied about: The Enlightenment, in particular the French branch, was about using reason to resolve humanity's dilemmas; thus eliminating religion and faith. And Marxism/Socialism was promoted as the embodiment of reason in social, economic, and political affairs. So would your "reason" achieve anything different? Not likely...
2. For Auster ( and Brave New World and Conservative Swede as examples of this growing movement of "conservatism") too, as did the French Revolution, reject religion especially Christianity - even blaming it as the source of the PC disease. You are apparently beginning the rejection of the Jews: a predictable step as you have already defamed the Christians . This leaves Materialism as the only starting point for your new philosophy: the same basis for Socialism.
3. A summary defamation of other historical strands of conservatism: you have adopted the false definition of paleo-conservatives and defamed them; and, you have, starting recently, defamed Burkean conservatives. "paleo-conservativism" is the smear initiated by the neo-cons: "paleos" are merely those conservatives who existed before the latter became ascendant. Burkean conservatives are those whose conservatism grew out of the principles of the Christian faith: for Burke, that was Roman Catholicism; for others, it is Protestantism. Also, Burke defended the American Revolution as the best embodiment of his ideas. You Austerian disciples also erroneously conflate Burkean conservativism with the Tory party.

The more I read the Austerian blogs the more I see an ideology taking form that is anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, in its own way, anti-Western, and heathen.

10/04/2007 03:03:00 PM  
Blogger phactoid said...


How are Jews not "white?"

10/04/2007 04:13:00 PM  
Blogger Katrina said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

10/04/2007 07:57:00 PM  
Blogger Katrina said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

10/04/2007 08:01:00 PM  
Blogger flippityflopitty said...

I see PC brings out the best in people...

Why stop at ladeenyos, muslims and jews ... isnt everyone not abiding by your beliefs an enemy? Arent we all out for ourselves in this free market, using any means possible to get ahead as long as we obey the rules of the road (or just dont get caught breaking them)?

The whole concept of "racism" or the PC version "hate-crime" is rubber-stamping a group with a specific moniker - latino, black, jew, gay, whitey, polack, guap and subjecting them to ire on that basis. Not every latino is a wetback, not every black a nigger and not every jew a kyke.

PC and victimology are brothers in arms. PC is this ridiculous concept of redemption for past deeds - not by any of us, but by our fathers and forefathers. That would be a christian trait.

Last time I checked (about twenty minutes ago) David Duke is still an anti-semite or using his PC-phrase anti-Zionist. He's ressurected himself as the PC king:

So our good friend David doesnt think the Iraq debacle was about WMDs, Bush revenge, Oil ... no, no, no, it was for the Jews:

"At this moment our brave young soldiers are enduring terrible personal sacrifices, danger, and sometimes even disfigurement and death in a contrived war not for America but for the state of Israel. To get us into this Jewish holy war against Israel’s long-time enemy, Saddam Hussein, Americans had to be lied to on a massive scale. We were told that Saddam Hussein was connected to the horrible 911 attacks, that he was an ally to Al Qaeda, and that he had huge stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. We were told that he was an imminent danger to America. I could go on and on."

Go thru the whole site and judge for yourself.

What next Dave, a link to 911truthisms telling us the jews had a "heads-up" on 911 and werent in the building when the planes hit?

Phactoid, good synopsis on race, culture and job qualifications. Dig deeper - 900 years ago Jews were money lenders (aka usurists) because christians were banned from the practice by the friggin' pope. And no, David, the jews didnt jump at the chance to charge high interest loans because its in their blood - the friggin' christian aristocracy used jews to push the high interest loans and take their cut afterwards thereby avoiding excommunication.

There is nothing wrong with hating people, even groups of people who in all likelihood hate you too. But the enemy here is PC - we are too quick to curb our thoughts, and the greater sin to spoon-feed our children PC - that it rivals the sin of spoon-feeding hate and racism.

And Tan - "Whites however have no right to defend themselves, and no right to a border. Why is that?"
-Because there the one's holding the money. I dont know about SoCal but the Jews in NY are pretty friggin' white. Maybe you think they dont share in the white plight.

My Favorite PC - Isaiah- "its ok for a nigger to call a nigger, nigger or a black woman hoe or bitch - but if whitey uses those terms, I dont know ... that dont seem right" -Thomas ... Go Knicks!

10/04/2007 08:49:00 PM  
Blogger phactoid said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

10/05/2007 09:02:00 PM  
Blogger Katrina said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

10/06/2007 06:45:00 AM  
Blogger Katrina said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

10/06/2007 06:49:00 AM  
Blogger Katrina said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

10/06/2007 07:31:00 AM  
Blogger flippityflopitty said...

Typical of PC ... Who the f&*k cares what color you are, you could be puke green for all I care. Are you here legally? Do you abide by the laws of the land (within reason)? Do you expect punishment for failure to abide by these laws? Do you have an expectation that your fellow citizenry (including legal residents) will abide by those laws and face punishment for failure to do so? Are you willing to take the necessary steps to protect that expectation?

The whole point of a blog is that its friggin' monochromatic.

"Jews aren't white. If they were they'd be using their considerable wealth and power to prevent the dehumanization and extermination of whites."

"But I would point out that they are a self-consciously insular people who make very strong us/them distinctions, even as their intellectuals try to convince everyone else that us/them divisions are wrong."

Confusing. They are "not white" because they choose to make distinctions between themselves and others (including whites) - which of course bears a negative "us/them" connotation. But, arent you responding in the same us (whites) versus them (non-whites) behavior that promotes PC?

As my [born again] friend Elwood would say - cant we all just treat each other as purple. I have always meant to point out the other group that uses the color purple in our PC society.

10/08/2007 05:04:00 PM  
Blogger flippityflopitty said...

Im officially blowing the dust off my Irish-Italian-German-English moniker and would prefer to be treated with the corresponding PC respect it affords.

Please note the Italian portion may have some non-white arab mixture and the German may have some non-white Jewish mixture. Of course they may be non-genetic in-law connections.

10/10/2007 10:43:00 AM  
Blogger Vocal Majority said...

Not sure how I found this discussion group, but I tell you. It is nice to know I am not alone out here.
Guess I will have to work harder on my blog. I tend to rant a little bit. lol
Thanks guys

10/10/2007 04:58:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Access to information via the internet was driving me crazy. Encounters with those of like mind keep me sane.

vocal majority, where's your blog?

10/14/2007 04:26:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

tanstaafl great post. You are on right track here don't let the naysayers get you down. Just like anything else not all are bad. You can find individuals that work outside the norm of any group but the exceptions are just that. The exceptions. I always find it interesting that the Jews just like blacks are NEVER directly responsible for anything negative or wrongdoing. It is ALWAYS someone elses fault. Of course as you point out they don't hesitate to slander or blame whole groups particularly whites. Jews may be "white" but the majority of them identify as Jews first.

"Are you here legally?"

That is an absurd statement. Abra Cadabra the congress along with the President has just made all illegals legal. Now what?

And to say that color makes no difference to to ignore reality. While on a individual basis you will find some who don't follow the group the majority, the overwhelming majority, do. i.e LaRaza, The Black Caucus, CAIR etc.
They work and think as a race/ethnic group. Why do you think the invasion is so detrimental? By shear numbers they are undermining our language, our culture and out race. They work as a group and LaRaza, MEChA, LULAC and many, many other race based/ethnic groups are supporting them.

Also about David Duke or any other person for that matter. I agree go to the source and read. David Duke is not the monster many wish him to be. Like someone said. What exactly does he advocate? Is he a murderer? A rapist etc? Groups like the ADL, The SPLC would have you believe he is. Just like Lou Dobbs is a bigot and racist etc. Far too many people get their information on certain topics from these sources. But thankfully the internet is helping to change that.

10/26/2007 01:55:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Terrific post. I have to say that I have come to a similar conclusion myself -- although I think we need to recognize that the situation is a bit more nuanced than "Jews are the enemy."

I think MacDonald's conclusions are very right that the Jewish people -- as a quite discrete genetic population -- have worked and still do work for their own benefit. Not surprising -- this is basic biology in action. In many ways, they do seem to work against the larger populations in which they live (i.e. the West). However, no one can deny that they have also brought great benefits to the West -- the financial benefits are some of the most pronounced. They really have served to power financially almost every nation that they have and do reside in.

So, I think we're really talking about a sort of a symbiotic relationship between two+ groups (Europeans and Jews, for instance) -- and there are pros and cons to that relationship.

The PC manipulations I agree have gotten way out of hand.

If you enjoyed MacDonald's treatise on Jews and immigration, then I think you would get a lot out of his "What Makes Western Culture Unique?" Especially the bits about 'altruistic punishment':

[R]esearchers suggest that people from individualistic cultures have an evolved negative emotional reaction to free riding that results in their punishing such people even at a cost to themselves—hence the term "altruistic punishment." ...

Thus the current altruistic punishment so characteristic of contemporary Western civilization: Once Europeans were convinced that their own people were morally bankrupt, any and all means of punishment should be used against their own people. Rather than see other Europeans as part of an encompassing ethnic and tribal community, fellow Europeans were seen as morally blameworthy and the appropriate target of altruistic punishment. For Westerners, morality is individualistic—violations of communal norms by free riders are punished by altruistic aggression. [link]


10/28/2007 11:31:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Right, so each and every one of you had your say (yes, I read the whole thread) and – on the assumption Herr Tan Staffel does not delete my post – I hereby present you with the wall against which your monolithic view of us Jews must crumble. Answer me that:

How come, if we have this plan to destroy the west (a la Hitler, MacDonald, Duke and any other of that ilk), we seem to destroy our own country by inflicting upon it the same diseases “we” released into the west?

Last time I checked, Israel had PC, bussing (“integration”), legal immigration of third world population (Falashmurah Ethiopian, not even nominally Jewish), illegal immigration of third world people crossing the southern border (Moslem Sudanese (!)), guest workers (from Thailand, Nigeria, the Philippines and Eastern Europe) who do the “jobs Israelis won’t do”, a wild supreme court, left wing ruling Junta (aided and abated by the MSM), police force and criminal justice system more occupied with the rights of the criminal than the victim, high taxation, statism, socialist economy dominated by 12 families and much, much more. Sounds familiar? Yes. Exactly the sort of things brought about, or aimed at, in the USA by (according to many of the posters here) those errr, Jews.

In short: if we Jews were as devious as you blame us, don’t you think we would have made certain that there would have been one place where those culture (and economy) destroying aspects of “our” ideology would have not been implemented?


The truth is that the people you refer to as representative of the Jews were never concerned with the “race” as such. Rather, their hate of the West and their desire for its destruction stem from an ideology which is corrosive to all Western-based societies including the one made by Jews in Israel. You want to criticise these ideologues? Fine – you have no argument from me. But to fall into the most primitive of all Hitlerian-influenced, “Jews as a monolith” approaches is simply wrong, misinformed (the poster talking about the war between the “Arians” and the Jews earlier conveniently – and typically - forgets to mention the Jews dying für Kaiser und Heimat during WWI) and makes you all sound like blacks and mestizos who can do no better than to blame everything on whitey.

Sorry, Auster makes more sense.

Some Israeli

12/25/2007 01:53:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I visited this website because of objections Lawrence Auster posted on his regarding comments by Tanstaafl.

Unfortunately for Mr. Auster, these comments cannot be dismissed easily.

It's not the Jewishness of Ashkenazi Jews (or their descendents) that seems to be a problem here. It's that so many of them seem to report to their ethnicity, however fuzzy or ill-defined it might be, rather than to the nation they have chosen to live within. And the latter trait, at times, poses a threat to that nation’s continuity and sovereignty.

Obviously, there are Ashkenazi who liberated themselves from control of their ancestry and assimilated into the American mainstream; those tend to be as patriotic, rational, and pro-Western as anyone else. Accusing them of anti-whatever is not only hurtfully unfair but is utterly false as well. But also there are those who, although look like whites, talk like whites, and walk like whites, perceive gentile whites as pawns in their game of group survival. And that borders with brood parasitism.

For all those who have noticed that most of America's present ethnic problems (outside of the whites-blacks adversarial relationship) originated in 1960ties, please, make an effort and find out what was the prevailing ethnicity of major players (at that time) who pushed for "immigration reform", diversity, globalism, and weakening (some call it "deconstruction") of the U.S. Although these are historically documented facts, anyone who brings these facts up or just researches them is automatically labeled an "anti-Semite", similarly as anyone who objects whites' rip-off by the so-called "under-represented minorities" is labeled a "racist". I would hypothesize that such uses of both epithets have been invented by groups that shared not only political orientation but also the ancestry.

For me, an anti-Semite is a person who, while dealing with individual human being of Jewish ancestry a priori assumes that that individual possess whatever negative attributes the anti-Semite chooses to despise. I have already pointed out that such presumption is invalid. But there is nothing anti-Semitic about noticing statistical correlations between Jewish (or Ashkenazi) ethnicity and certain political and social attitudes (for instance, their resistance against assimilation and leaning towards Liberalism/collectivism), as there is nothing racist about saying that blacks, statistically, have lower average IQ than Jews have. These are facts and it would be utterly absurd to call these facts "anti-Semitic" or "racist".

12/25/2007 07:03:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous at 7:03 PM:

I don’t know how long you have been reading Auster, but he has been repeating for a long time that the type of behavior you mention can and must be criticized. What I see here is the classic “Jews as a monolith” approach which is something shared by all anti-Semites. My gut feeling is that most of those who adopt the above approach are persons who never met a Jew in their life, and who know very little about Jews, if at all. The loudest of all the critics of the culture of critic would probably fall off their chairs were they to experience how garrulous Jews are amongst themselves. It is often said that if you’d put two Americans, or two Englishmen, on an island, you would have two different opinions. Put two Jews on the same island and you’d have three (in the case of Israelis, ten is probably an appropriate number). The thought of Jews being capable of agreeing on a strategy for corrupting Western morals and culture makes me burst into hysteric laughter. Hell, we have been arguing for 20 years on the appropriate route which the Jerusalem light railway should take. Believe me, apart from the feverish minds of few lunatics, the idea of dominating the Goim is not on the agenda.

I am going to repeat my assertion from earlier: the Jews who were the progenitors of all those bad developments in the sixties did not do this to “help the Jews” but in the name of a misguided world view. I note that for every one of these Jews, you had many Gentiles who either aided and abated or were themselves leading lights of said movement. Moreover, it does not say much for mainstream America that it had allowed itself to be conned into following Gramscian nonsense. Oh, for sure, many Jews did tend to follow leftist ideas but, back in the old days, the left was the only club in town for Jews. And yes, there is the idea that perhaps “if we convince the Goim we are all the same, maybe they will stop the pogroms”. But then again, this is the chicken which was hatched from Church persecution – the Church started it, not the Jews. If your argument is that this approach (in the US) has been pushed too far, well, you have no argument from me (again, Auster has and is dealing with this. Search his archives). But to make this into some kind of conspiracy? Give me a break.

Lastly, I have posed a question which nobody seems to want to answer. May I ask another?

You all say: “these influential Jews have corrupted our republic”. OK. How come though the same intellectual rubbish against which you protest has taken control of Europe? Unlike in the US, Jews never had such standing and influence here (no media ownership, no control of the film industry, no pro-Israel lobby etc. – in fact, the EU has been traditionally very anti-Israel)?

Duh and duh again.

Some Israeli

12/26/2007 04:03:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To Some Israeli

You are wrong on several points.

First, you claimed that Jews got interested in leftism (Communism) only because it was the only "club" that was open to them in the U.S. That is utterly false. From Marx, who was born Jewish, to Trotsky (same as the above) and half of the leadership of the Bolshevik party, Ashkenazi Jews have always been at the forefront of Communism, long before the alleged anti-Semitism took roots in the U.S.

Second, you seem to blame most of European nations (from Spaniards to French to Brits to Germans to Eastern Europeans) with an anti-Semitic conspiracy. That's utterly absurd allegation. Nations as different as Spaniards and Russians would not behaved in a similar way if there were no good reason for such a behavior. They perceived Jewish ethnic solidarity and their stubborn refusal to assimilate as a threat and reacted, or over-reacted, accordingly. How can you explain that in the U.S., a country so welcoming for all kinds of immigrants, even those from Sicilly, Poland, and Romanina, the people became so picky as to decide that they will practice just anti-Semitism and not, say, anti-Slavonism, anti-Gypisim, or anti-Italianism?

Your theory just doesn't wash, Pal.

12/26/2007 02:39:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To Some Israeli

P.S. I won't even address your ridiculous (and unsupported by any credible evidence) thesis that Jews have little influence in Europe. For instance, French President Sarkozy is of Jewish ancestry. He seems to be as unsupportive of Israel as anybody else is.

12/26/2007 02:52:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous at 2:32, 2:52 PM:

You said:

“First, you claimed that Jews got interested in leftism (Communism) only because it was the only "club" that was open to them in the U.S. That is utterly false.”

No it is not. I am not talking about the Republican Party, 2007. A Jew in the later part of the 19th century and well into the mid part of the 20th was not welcome in any of the conservative parties of Europe or, for that matter, the US. Please do your research.

“Second, you seem to blame most of European nations…”

Again, you were not reading what I said. My bone is with Church dogma (Google “replacement theory” for a start) which singled out Jews collectively as the killers of Jesus Christ and which allowed Jews only certain occupations. Again, this is a chicken and egg question, and my point was Jews did not start being inward looking until the Church singled them out (FYI, there was no animosity between Christendom and the Jews during the first years of Christianity. How this came about requires me to spend 20,000 words, which I have no intention on doing). If you think the Church indoctrinating people against the Jews in this manner (which was something that took place all across Europe) for more than 1800 years did not effect both Christians and Jews, you are not being realistic (and no, I am not surprised my forefathers bore a slight grudge. Do you?). If your point is: “this (turning left at every junction) cannot be justified in the US of 2007”, then you have no argument from me. Again, it’s not something Lawrence Auster has not tackled and, in fact, he has been scathing of mindlessly left-leaning Jews time and again.

As for Europe, I am not sure what your point about Sarkozy is, as you say: “He seems to be as unsupportive of Israel as anybody else is” which seems to support my argument, which is, to recap, that although there was no vast (as you propose) left-leaning, Jew-dominated media apparatus to influence things (as in the US) the EU still chose Socialism, PC and multiculturalism as its state religion. Well, if it wasn’t those darned Jews, it must have been something else (if you are not convinced, may I point your attention to Sweden, which is perhaps the most Socialist of all the EU member states (and, through no coincidence, also the most accommodating and appeasing to its violent and uncontrollable Moslem population) – there was NEVER EVER any Jewish influence on the politics or the culture of this land (if you want to find out about the EU, forget a hick like Duke and read the Fjordman Report on (scroll down)).

Again, you have not made any comment on my earlier post (that the same left wing nonsense ruining the West is also ruining… Israel).

Please try harder.

Some Israeli

12/27/2007 01:33:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To Some Israeli

Now you are changing your testimony and yet you tell me to “try harder”. It’s your rhetoric and not my argument that doesn’t wash.

I am not going to accept your invitation to this wicked game simply because for every provably false statement that you can make here there is another one that you can switch to before someone can come up with its refutation. As a matter of fact, you have a good chance of entrenching yourself in a set of false but irrefutable doctrines (Gödel’s incompleteness theorem says that such an outcome is perfectly possible), which would not make you any more right than you are.

For instance, your new position in this discussion that all the actual or imaginary anti-Semitism should be blamed on (or derived from) irrational blaming the Jews by Catholic Church of killing Jesus doesn’t withstand the facts. Up until recently, Catholic Church had only marginal influence on minds of average Americans, never mind that there is much more to Church’s skepticism about Jewry than just its disapproval of killing the God’s Son (a Jew himself). The only reason I won’t use word “hysteria” while characterizing your position in this matter is because I am not a leftist.

The bottom line is, when you claim something that contradicts well established perceptions in this country, prove it.

12/27/2007 08:08:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

@ Anonymous 8:08. 9:06 AM

You have still not answered my two very simple questions, because you are probably skimming over what I am saying.


1. How come Israel is being afflicted by the same left wing malaise as the US? Don’t you think the Elders would have had some more sense so as to keep our own land free from all that nonsense?

2. How come EUROPE is so left wing (to remind you: nothing like Hollywood here, no Jewish judiciary, no Jewish lobby, no Jewish control of the MSM, Israel not popular. By the way, in “this country” I meant SWEDEN, not the US)?

I am not saying that – in the US – Jews have not been major supporters of the Dems and all that (FYI, and please do not fall of your seat, I regret it bitterly that Israel had cast its lot with that lot, if you excuse my pun. Unlike Dr. Duke, I think the result for us was that we became far more dependent on the US than we were pre-1972. However, this, on the assumption that a dialog is possible here at all, is for another time). I am only saying that the US is not the world, and many of the countries which have chosen to follow the dead-end road that Socialism is did not possess Jewish intelligentsia in the same way the US did, so it had to be something else (no Jewish influence in China, India, Vietnam, Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia etc.).

Lastly, as for the Church, you again see things in the context of 2007 US, not the Church as it was all through the middle ages until comparatively recently and mainly in Europe, where there was no separation between Church and State, and where the education of the masses was at the hand of priests and nuns.

Some Israeli

12/27/2007 12:11:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

@Anonymus 7:42

It is obvious nothing of what I may say would make any difference to you – even the fact that, from what I wrote, it should be clear that I’m no left winger.

As for whom I identify with and what my allegiances are, I consider myself a part of the Western world, which is to me the West as we had it until the 1960s. I (legally) live in one of the 3 Germanic countries, all my friends are what could be described as “Arians” and I am in the process of obtaining the citizenship of this country. Until then, it would have been dishonest to have identified myself as anything else but what I am: an Israeli national. The day upon I receive my citizen’s status will be the day upon I shall kiss my Israeli passport, and any allegiances I (nominally) owe Israel, goodbye. Using examples from Europe and Israel was because those places, unlike the US, I know well.

Let me finish with the following: the world we know is changing in front of our very eyes. If we do not want to wake up in some multicultural hell, we have to bury the old animosities and perhaps look for new alliances. I, for one, am prepared to do so. You will be surprised how many of “my” tribe would also be willing to give up the Socialist addiction: you can only watch all the current left wing parties of the EU, Australia and the US going to extremes of appeasement towards their newly found voter base – Moslems – so many times before the coin drops. Talk to Jews without the old hysteria and you will be surprised – that’s what Auster understands, but you and the host of this blog do not.

Best wishes,

Some Israeli

12/28/2007 12:53:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To Some Israeli

You wrote: I consider myself a part of the Western world, [...].

And this seems to be the problem here, which you may be on your way to take care of, but many other well meaning and highly ethical Jews leave unaddressed. Most of the time, it doesn't matter. But at time of (cultural) war and (ethnic) conflict, one either sides totally and unconditionally with his fellow compatriots, or lends part of his support to the adversaries. As a matter of fact, the latter is the reason why we are having this huge problem of mass illegal immigration in the U.S. that threatens our national identity and survival.

Lawrence Auster, to his all apparently high IQ and mostly rational views, doesn't seem like he solved that problem, either. For otherwise, he wouldn't care so much about anti-Semitism.

I wish you good luck with your new citizenship and hope you enjoy every aspect of it.

12/28/2007 08:29:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Some Israeli:

1. How come Israel is being afflicted by the same left wing malaise as the US? Don’t you think the Elders would have had some more sense so as to keep our own land free from all that nonsense?

I am not very aware what is or isn't going on in Israel. I don't live there, don't know anybody who does, and have never visited. Surely you're not trying to blame White Christian liberals for Israel's ills, are you? Certainly the "nation of immigrants" rhetoric is more appropriate there than it is in Ireland or the UK.

Your "monolithic view of us Jews" is a strawman, as is your presumption that I blame every problem in the US on jews. I don't know anybody who does. My problem is that nobody can discuss the portion they are responsible for without being branded an anti-semite and hounded out of polite society. Unlike anti-anti-semites who think all the criticism is unfounded and will only try to exaggerate and ridicule it (as you do) I think the reason has just as much to do with jews generally not being able to accept criticism or blame. For most of them anti-semitism is everybody else's fault, jews are always and only innocent victims.

The ironic thing is that jews do have a monolithic view of anti-semites. Auster does a good job of regularly repeating the caricature. To him anti-semites are essentially subhuman automatons, which is pretty much how you think as well. You, like Auster, also think you can dictate who is proper to criticize and who isn't. Nice try. As we say here in America, go fuck yourself.

2. How come EUROPE is so left wing (to remind you: nothing like Hollywood here, no Jewish judiciary, no Jewish lobby, no Jewish control of the MSM, Israel not popular. By the way, in “this country” I meant SWEDEN, not the US)?

I don't know Europe much better than Israel, though I have visited and do regularly read and interact with European bloggers. I follow their news.

Your use of the word "no" is unjustified. You unfairly diminish the effective contribution of a group that by all accounts, including their own, has been instrumental in European finance, business, education, politics, and media for more than 2000 years. Jews may not be as dominant there as they are in Israel or the US, but certainly they are influential, and certainly US films, finance, and academic theories make their way there.

Luke O'Farrell focuses on jewish influence in the UK. He's a self-proclaimed anti-semite, bless his soul, but even he realizes for example that Rousseau wasn't jewish.

Duh and duh. Any more questions?

1/24/2008 09:00:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"people like and trust and prefer to be around others who look and think and act like themselves"----YYYYYES!

I just stumbled on your blog: you are expressing here the very things that I have (reluctantly) concluded myself very recently: I simply could not NOT connect the dots anymore.

Keep fighting the good fight, Tan! {thumbsup}

Grumbly1 (who also is very jittery about living in the heart of Mexifornica)

7/07/2012 02:40:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home