Blog has moved, searching new blog...

Monday, September 29, 2008

Minority Disproportions and the Fraud They Produce

Steve Sailer has written several essays noting the disproportional large involvement of "minorities" in the housing bubble that triggered the Wall Street bailout, and noting the disproportionately small amount of attention the media has paid to it. More specifically he has focused on the role of "NAMs", non-asian minorities, the euphemism he and his regular commenters use for blacks and latinos.

Sailer attributes the past decade of frenzied borrowing and spending in large part to the trendy but misplaced faith among our politically correct managerial class that relatively poor, uneducated, irresponsible blacks and latinos would pay back loans at the same rate as relatively wealthy, educated, responsible Whites. He labels this zeitgeist The Bullshit Years and calls the resulting bubble-bailout The Diversity Recession.

As usual there are some misguided souls who spring forth to defend the "brown people". Often their argument is based on the rationale that putting minorities in a negative light, i.e. discriminating against them, is nothing but a nefarious attempt to blame everything on them, to make them scapegoats, because this is the only thing racists driven mad by hatred can think to do.

This is a dishonest but predictable response made by seemingly intelligent people. It epitomizes the prevailing political correctness and actually helps demonstrate Sailer's point that "the Establishment" is infected with a mental disease which causes them to deliberately deny certain facts, as well as the consequences of this denial - and to villify anyone who will not behave likewise.

The fact is the plutocrats and their managerial class are more than willing to discriminate, to see minorities and their disproportions, even to the point that this willingness motivates offical policies which disproportionately aid minorities, even to the point where such policies are obviously detrimental to indigenous Whites.

Yesterday Sailer posted a reader's more intelligent objection to his ideas. The argument in The Diversity Recession: A debunking is not based on the virtue of ignoring minorities, or the evil of not ignoring them, but instead aims at denying that minorities were disproportionately involved.

In accepting the validity of discussing disproportion such an argument is a small concession to the truth, and possibly even made in good faith, but the net result is the same: it is an attempt to defuse and deflect attribution of blame away from where it rightfully belongs. When "the Establishment" wishes to do favors for minorities there is little hesitation not only to fudge the numbers in whatever way is required to produce disproportions that need correcting, but also to blame those disproportions, sometimes explicitly, sometimes by implication, on the machinations of Whites who are ostensibly disporportionately "racist".

In the case of Sailer's would-be debunker, if the argument that blacks and latinos were not disproportionately involved in housing bubble foreclosures is correct, then by implication Whites and/or asians must have been. Sailer and his commenters have already provided plenty of evidence countering this debunking, and at any rate it seems a moot point. Under the leadership of Carter, Clinton, and Bush the government stated its belief that blacks and (later) latinos were disproportionately suffering injustice and explicitly sought to right that wrong by applying new, discriminatory standards. Those are the facts.

Sailer's point, which several of his commenters have pointed out to his you-just-want-to-blame-brown-people critics, is not that the "NAMs" conspired to enrich themselves. The point is that intelligent non-"NAMs" in positions of authority consciously chose to pander to "NAMs" and pursue related fiscal policies that on their face would seem highly unintelligent because the macroeconomic consequences are turning out, as some predicted, to be incredibly bad.

This begs the question: why assume these otherwise supra-intelligent people in government and finance were behaving stupidly? Obviously some people got wealthy in the feeding frenzy leading up to the collapse. Some are now getting wealthy shorting and speculating during the collapse. Still more stand to get wealthy by securing taxpayer subsidies for themselves. There are plenty of people who simply do not care how much the macroeconomy suffers as long as their microeconomy gains.

Indeed Sailer and many of his commenters don't really seem to assume "the Establishment" is stupid. They insinuate that the negative results of the malfeasence were mostly unintentional and attribute the blame in part to short-sighted greed and in part to the hopeless naivete of "whiter people" - i.e. liberal, politically correct "whites".

For me this also is only a partial and thus unacceptable concession to the truth. The truth is there is another minority embroiled in this scandal. A minority whose participation nobody seems to want to note. I posted the following comment to The Diversity Recession: A debunking, but it did not make it past moderation:
As long as we're examining disproportions of minorities, what about the disproportion of jews who:

A) argue any disproportion perceived as harmful to a minority is caused by White racism (described variously as redlining, institutional racism, White privilege)

B) "innovated" ways around regulation and created new forms of leverage built on the loosened lending resulting largely from A (described variously as mortgage-backed securities, credit default swaps, collateralized debt obligation)

C) advocate taxpayer-funded subsidies for private enterprises (described variously as loans, buyouts, bailouts)

D) enriched themselves via A, B, or C

E) are in positions of authority and oversight, and should now be seeking to ferret out and punish wrongdoing rather than what they are doing, which is trying to find some way, any way to provide more C

I have a theory that explains why the disproportionate involvement of the jewish minority goes even less frequently mentioned than the disproportionate involvement of either blacks or latinos. It has to do with the phrase "anti-semitism".

First, obviously, anyone who would mention the jewish minority in such a negative light can expect it to be denounced as "anti-semitism" (refer to item A). Second, but more important, this same defensive tendency means that if even a relatively small number of the jewish minority perceived that the effects of either the housing bubble or the bailout were bad for themselves or jews in general (disproportionately or not) then they would have already blamed either situation on "anti-semitism".

My theory is that the general jewish perception is that they have participated and benefited disproportionately. But most pundits, even the non-jewish ones who realize this and are un-PC enough to attribute blame to other minorities, dare not even mention jewish involvement for fear of the consequences of criticizing the most powerful and favored minority of all.

Perhaps someone here would do those of us in the White soon-to-be-minority who have been disproportionately defrauded the favor of trying to debunk this theory.
To support my assertion of jewish disproportions I direct the reader to look into the matter for themselves. This would involve familiarizing yourself with the concept of disproportion, jewish population statistics, and the rather laborious process of finding and reading wikipedia and NNDB biographical entries of the principals involved. The most common objections are likely to be based on either innumeracy or an inability to discriminate.

These obstacles should not impede Sailer or his disproportionately intelligent commenters. They have already expended great energy researching and arguing statistics concerning "NAM" disproportions. News From The West has started the task, but it's only the very tip of the jewish-disproportion iceberg. If jews are not disproportionately benefiting, then why haven't they been complaining about disproportionately suffering? It's fairly obvious that jews comprise more than 3% of the reality-twisting race hustlers, government officials who legislated that hustle, financiers who built the house of cards on top of it, economists who validated it, bureacrats and advisors negotiating a "fix" for it, and political and market pundits whose words and voices are right now so overwhelmingly shilling in favor of that fix. Are we to believe that jews enjoyed precisely 3% of the loosened lending largesse and 3% of the financial wizardry profits, and stand to receive only 3% of the bailout money and pay only 3% of the taxes that will fund it?

Hypothetically, if a disproportion of blacks and latinos in "the Establishment" had arranged to dole taxpayer money out to a disproportion of black and latino borrowers and then reward disproportionately black and latino financiers for "failing" because of those policies, then I trust intelligent and honest people would notice and discuss it as the ethnically motivated scandal it would be. Is the fact that the actual circumstances involve a jewish minority indirectly disproportionately enriching themselves by first lobbying for and then leveraging the disproportionate enrichment of blacks and latinos really so much harder to understand or accept?

Come now, what's constraining this discussion of minorities and disproportions?

Labels: , , , ,

white

54 Comments:

Blogger teacher.paris said...

Making sense is forbidden. It will not be tolerated. Stop!

9/29/2008 09:09:00 PM  
Anonymous jim jones said...

I recall reading a year ago, in the WSJ I think, how the securitization of subprime mortgages was dreamt up. A bunch of "New York" bankers were sitting around a table late at night, the story said. The bankers were hungry, and some wanted to order some non-kosher food, I forget exactly what it was. A small but significant contingent started whining that they couldn't eat that. My reaction upon reading that was one of shock: if there are that many observant jews in the Wall Street World, how many jews must there be total, given the fact that they are predominantly secular?

I don't blame Jews qua Jews for this. Bankers and their ilk are usually greedy, and there are plenty of white CEO's and bankers guilty of the same. But you're right, you would think someone would have commented by now on the fact that in this country of "white privilege," a highly disproportionate percentage of home loans went to nonwhites, and most of them originated with the Reuben Goldsteins of the world.

I am disappointed to hear Sailer censored that. I disagree with him sometimes, but I have always respected him as someone who tries to identify the truth.

9/29/2008 11:57:00 PM  
Anonymous jim jones said...

Sorry, mean to say "subprime loans" in place of "home loans." And the IDEA of the subprime loans, and the market for them, was created by Reuben Goldstein.

9/29/2008 11:59:00 PM  
Anonymous desmond jones said...

The JQ is a tough issue for Stevo. He's got to make a living and anyone who writes under their own name is exposed to tremendous retribution if too critical.

However, in the same vain, demagoguery appears to prevail in the...bipartisan Free Speech Protection Act of 2008. Sponsored by Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.), and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) in the Senate and Reps. Pete King (R-NY), Anthony Weiner (D-NY) and ten others in the House, the act would protect all U.S. authors from 'libel tourism.' As Lieberman and Specter note, 'The new legislation would not shield those who recklessly or maliciously print false information. It would ensure that Americans are held to and protected by American standards.' "

Is this really about protecting free speech?

"...the bill is arguably under-inclusive. If Congress is truly concerned with the chilling effect that less-speech-protective Europe law has on U.S. speech, it should not stop with defamation law, but should provide protection from all European laws that potentially abridge expression that would be protected under the First Amendment. Consider Yahoo! v. LICRA, the Ninth Circuit case dealing with the enforceability of First-Amendment violative foreign judgments. Yahoo! was sued in France not for defamation, but for providing access to Nazi paraphernalia and other materials (such as Mein Kampf) that violated the more-speech-restrictive French hate speech laws, but that would be protected by the First Amendment. If the idea of the federal cause of action is to protect U.S. speakers from foreign judgments imposed for protected speech in the United States, Yahoo! needs the insulation of a damages claim just as much as a defamation defendant. So, too, might a future domestic publisher or author who runs afoul of some future European hate-speech regulation that prohibits, or example, cartoons criticizing radical Islam."

Sometime in early April 2000, LICRA’s [La Ligue Contre Le Racisme et L’Antisemitisme (“LICRA”) and L’Union des Etudiants Juifs de France (“UEJF”)] chairman sent by mail and fax a cease and desist letter, dated April 5, 2000, to Yahoo!’s headquarters in Santa Clara, California. The letter, written in English, stated in part:

[W]e are particularly choked [sic] to see that your Company keeps on presenting every day hundreds of nazi symbols or objects for sale on the Web. This practice is illegal according to French legislation and it is incumbent upon you to stop it, at least on the French Territory."

9/30/2008 02:47:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Congress quiet on Jewish New Year:

A day after the House defeat of a financial bailout plan that sent Wall Street into a frantic downward spiral, the Capitol was largely deserted Tuesday as Congress marked the Jewish New Year, Rosh Hashana.

This is hard to square with all the sky-is-falling rhetoric during the past few weeks. How many times have the shills told us that immediate action is absolutely critical?

That they can set the frenzy aside to enjoy a leisurely jewish holiday is just one more reminder of the influence the jewish minority has on US politics and finance.

There are currently 13 Jewish lawmakers in the 100-member Senate and 29 Jews in the 435-member House.

13% and 6.7% respectively. This is oddly disproportionate for a minority that comprises some 3% of the overall population, especially considering that their numbers are concentrated mostly in a handful of places.

10/01/2008 02:34:00 AM  
Anonymous WLindsayWheeler said...

Political correctness is Jewish ideology. The Carter, Bushes and Clinton presidencies were all about fulfilling the Jewish ideology of political correctness.

Your absolutely right. No one wants to face the fact that it is political correctness that is the cause of this subprime mortgage bubble. I call the Bailout--the Jewish bailout. It is about bailing out all those people and their political correctness. It is about using taxpayer money to support Jewish ideology and hegemony. We live under ZOG. What do you expect?

Making sense is forbidden. And pointing out Jewish involvement is also verbotten.

10/01/2008 04:06:00 PM  
Blogger teacher.paris said...

Kirsten Brydum is described as a “free spirited community activist” by friends. She was apparently shot in the head for being white, while campaigning for Negro presidential candidate Barack Hussein Obama.

EXPECT THIS STORY TO BE 100% CENSORED, COVERED UP, AND BLACKED OUT BY THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA.

From the Council of Conservative Citizens:

A 25 year old white female Obama campaigner was riding her bicycle in a virtually all black neighborhood of New Orleans. She was on a “cross country trek” to support Obama. So brainwashed by multi-cultural propaganda that this “community activist” thought nothing about venturing around a black NOLA neighborhood after dark. She was SHOT IN THE HEAD, and her body was left lying on the sidewalk.

Apparently it didn’t matter that she had come all the way from San Fransisco to campaign for Obama. She was just another white victim to the local residents. Local residents left her body lie on the sidewalk and didn’t even notify police. Her body sat for hours until it was seen by a construction crew that was there to gut houses damaged by Katrina.

Take a minute to imagine what would happen if a black woman campaigning for Obama had been found shot in the head in a white neighborhood. THIS WOULD THE LARGEST NEWS STORY IN THE WORLD!

Update: The San Fransisco Chronicle has posted a shameless and transparently disingenuous “tribute” to the murdered girl. Even though the New Orleans police have explicitly stated “robbery does not appear to be the motive,” the San Fransisco Chronicle used the headline “activist slain in New Orleans robbery.” Then it has the audacity to say she was “on vacation” in New Orleans! Who takes a vacation in a Hurricane ravaged all-black ghetto with possibly the highest murder rate in the Western Hemisphere?
http://incogman.wordpress.com/
Photo of dead idiot and friend at link.

10/04/2008 09:55:00 PM  
Anonymous jim jones said...

Teacher-paris, I saw that article a short time ago. Talk about your Amy-Biehl type. No tears wasted on that trash, although I understand your point about the double standard. I suspect Brydum was a member of the Tribe from her associations and appearance, which if correct means there is even less cause for tears.

10/05/2008 11:39:00 PM  
Blogger teacher.paris said...

The world is run by satanists.

http://elliotlakenews.wordpress.com/2007/01/31/nwo-plans-for-us/
N.W.O. Plans For US
January 31, 2007 ·
By Paul Joseph Watson


Hollywood director and documentary film maker Aaron Russo has gone in-depth on the astounding admissions of Nick Rockefeller, who personally told him that the elite’s ultimate goal was to create a micro-chipped population and that the war on terror was a hoax, Rockefeller having predicted an “event” that would trigger the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan eleven months before 9/11.

Rockefeller also told Russo that his family’s foundation had created and bankrolled the women’s liberation movement in order to destroy the family and that population reduction was a fundamental aim of the global elite.

Read the rest at the link.

10/07/2008 11:55:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://www.spectator.co.uk/stephenpollard/2204191/jews.thtml

10/07/2008 10:47:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

That Ynet story and the ADL canard-canard to which it refers are the only two mentions I've seen in the MSM regarding the obvious disproportion of jewish involvement in this scandal.

Though this involvement is obvious it goes uncriticized in the MSM because anybody who mentions it knows they will be fired and ostracized for doing so.

Pollard's description is classic anti-anti-semitic obfuscation/arrogance:

It's all you know who's fault.

He balloons disproportion into "all", the better to ridicule and dismiss it, while simultaneously mocking the "you know who" terms most people resort to because they are too frightened to speak directly about jewish influence.

10/08/2008 12:23:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/how_allies_of_george_soros_hel.html

10/08/2008 03:29:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Thanks. From that link:

Soros, Lewis, and the Sandlers form a core group of billionaire activists and Democrat partisans who have formed a group called The Democracy Alliance.

Setting aside the R vs D blinders we notice other jewish "billionaire activists", like Sheldon Adelson:

In the past, Adelson has shown a substantial interest in Israeli politics as well as in American elections. He is a strong backer of Benjamin 'Bibi' Netanyahu, former Prime Minister of Israel and current Likud Party chair. Adelson has financed the creation of an Israeli newspaper, Israel Hayom, so outspoken and aggressive in backing Netanyahu that it has become known as "Bibi-ton".

10/08/2008 07:06:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

According to Zsidozas approximately 40-50% of America’s billionaires are jews.

10/08/2008 07:13:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

New World Order.

The first comment:

If the physical economy is destroyed by our political leaders with these massive increases in the money supply,
all for the sake of a bunch of degenerate criminals, who we could live without, i want them arrested and charged with treason.


If?

10/08/2008 09:23:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The fear and groveling during this election has been truly astonishing. I never really noticed it before.

10/08/2008 10:49:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

It was hard to miss if you watched the last debate.

Both candidates effusively expressed their support for israel, their desire to protect israel and jews in general from "another holocaust", and their willingness to send American soldiers (disproportionately White, who McCain at least could accurately describe as our "most valuable treasure") all over the world to defend other people's "freedom", and especially to prevent genocide.

Not one peep about immigration and the genocide the plutocrat-owned government these candidates seek to head has been openly perpetrating on indigenous Americans since 1965.

To both candidates and their party leadership "diversity" is among the highest values. It means doing nothing to stop a flood of mexicans from stampeding across our border. It means giving visas to as many chinese and south asians as necessary to fill our high tech jobs. It means explicitly importing the most uneducated, impoverished, violence-prone, aliens you can find and plopping them down right in the middle of the Whitest spots that remain in America. Complete with taxpayer-funded goodies.

10/09/2008 08:44:00 AM  
Blogger danielj said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

10/09/2008 06:41:00 PM  
Blogger danielj said...

The Occidental Observer on the mortgage meltdown and the economic crisis: Now Comes the Anger

10/09/2008 06:43:00 PM  
Blogger danielj said...

The article points out that Benjamin Ginsberg found that 50% of the Wall Street executives of the 90's were jewish.

10/09/2008 06:45:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tantaafl:

OK, I went away, did my research, got the drift and even agreed with some (but certainly not all) of your accusations.

However, I am still waiting to hear what your solution to the Jewish problem is and whether such solution recognizes the difference between, for example:

- George Soros and Vladimir Jabotinski;

- the Wall St. fat-cats and the tens of thousands of Israeli pensioners who lost all their (unguaranteed) savings in the recent crisis;

- Michael Hart and any Neocon essayist of your choice;

- gated community-dwelling US Jews and their poor brethren in Acre, Israel (yes – I am not making this up), terrorized by Arabs on the recent Yom-Kippur while PC police stood and did nothing; or

- such US Jews and the Visiting Israeli (last-mentioned being good enough to clean their cars or act as their bodyguard but never- never – so much as cast his beady eyes on their JAP daughters).

Best regards (honestly),

Visiting Israeli

10/12/2008 03:15:00 AM  
Blogger danielj said...

Sounds like you are nursing that Sephardic sense of resentment against your fair skinned brethren.

If we recognized the difference between different "kinds" of jews we would end up exactly where we are starting at. I have jewish friends but nationalism is a bit more important than maintaining those relationships.

10/12/2008 04:32:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Danielj,

Your assumption is incorrect: I am 1/4 Sepharadi, but not all Sepharadic jews are dark skinned with typical semitic features - nobody who meets me ever thought I was anything but European (and I live in Europe).

I am just trying to see whether you see a solution to the problem - and there is one - which involves other methods than those used by A. Hitler. Your answer appears to hint at what yours would be (although I am not sure how you can reconcile this with your friendship with Jews).

No, I am not an ADL or Mossad agent.

Best,

Visiting Israeli

10/12/2008 10:20:00 AM  
Blogger danielj said...

Twas a joke my friend! Lighten up.

What method do you believe that Hitler used and what is wrong with it? Why don't you consider it viable in our circumstance?

I have no problem with what I believe his method to be, although I would prefer attrition though legal restrictions on jewish economic activity and limitations on their professions rather than forced expulsion.

It is a simple thing to reconcile my views on the j.q. with my having jewish friends. In fact, it makes jewish and Gentile relations much easier when both parties are completely aware of their stances. When the line that is already drawn becomes important we know on which side we both must stand.

In some respects, our friendship is like having a pet dog - if it ever cames down to you or the dog, you know who is gonna get it.

Despite being forced to work out our relationship under these horrible conditions we find it particularly easy to remain friends because we both know that jews run the world and it will probably never come down to anywhere near that line - despite the unfounded jewish fear of another "holocaust" being just around the corner.

I just told you - in so many words - I consider you all Mossad agents and affiliates of the ADL/JDL and you go ahead and offer up a statement that cries out louder than a guilty soul!

10/12/2008 02:20:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Good links danielj. Thanks. And thanks for answering VI.

Visiting Israeli,

I wrote what follows in January of this year. The recent laying bare of the economic front of the war jews are waging against Whites only hardens my resolve:

These are things many Whites consider wrong, and as I have only slowly and recently come to realize, many jews consider them right. Anyone who wishes can freely discuss how inherently nativist or xenophobic or racist or prone to pogroms or just downright stupid Whites are, but nobody in "polite society" is free to make similar generalizations so flatly critical of non-Whites, including jews. In our ultra-tolerant liberal society such criticism is not tolerated, whether it's true or not. This is a double standard. It is wrong. It must end.

One unmentionable truth is that Whites are not in a position to assimilate anyone else because Whites are in fact the ones being assimilated. We are immersed in the culture of progressive-globalist universalism. It is a culture of lies and contradictions where all men are created equal, but non-Whites are more equal and jews are the most equal of all. Shit is art. Perversion is glorified. Materialism rules. The Holy Global Economy is god. Wrong is right and right is wrong. PC egalitarians inform us that the White race is a mere social construct, even while Whites are openly and consciously blamed, disenfranchised, and displaced. The obvious end, if not the intent, is liquidation. To top it off none of this may be discussed in our craven "polite society" because to do so is "politically incorrect". To those who point out that Whites are complicit in this, well yes I agree many are. There were jews complicit in the Holocaust too. We have a word for such behavior. The word is not "excuse". The word is "treason".

I favor separatism. People who don't want to assimilate or even associate with others, for any reason whatsoever, should not be forced to. I find it disturbing that so many jews infer White separatism as "deport all Diaspora jews to Israel", or worse. Why, if jews have Zion, can they not understand or tolerate the notion of a White Albion? White self-determination, whether separatism or nationalism, is about what's good for Whites, just as Zionism is about what's good for jews. The enemies of Whites will concede only the latter point, or neither, and none of them will squarely face the inconsistency.

Many people have felt compelled to uproot and flee the unhealthy consequences of the "diversity" that totalitarian liberals, including a preponderance of jews, have seen fit to force on us. I advocate a nation where force is used toward a different goal: protecting Whites. I see many practical problems with creating and maintaining such a nation, but I do not accept that it is immoral or impermissible to discuss the exclusion of anyone, for any reason, whether it's jews, latinos, muslims, blacks, asians, lepers, eskimos, or totalitarian liberals. I would move to such a nation immediately, no matter where or how small, and would have much less cause to complain. I would happily pay my taxes and urge my progeny to serve in the government and the military, all things which I will not do under the current anti-White regime.


My view would put me on the side of Jabotinski ideologically, though in favor of my own kind over either diaspora or zionist jews. I think the following quote applies just as well to Whites as it does to jews:

"Our habit of constantly and zealously answering to any rabble has already done us a lot of harm and will do much more. ... We do not have to apologize for anything. We are a people as all other peoples; we do not have any intentions to be better than the rest. As one of the first conditions for equality we demand the right to have our own villains, exactly as other people have them. ... We do not have to account to anybody, we are not to sit for anybody's examination and nobody is old enough to call on us to answer. We came before them and will leave after them. We are what we are, we are good for ourselves, we will not change, nor do we want to." (From Instead of Excessive Apology, 1911)

Thanks for visiting.

10/13/2008 12:46:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

A few weeks after I wrote White Self-Determination and Totalitarian Liberals (also linked in the comment just above) I wrote Something Unspeakable This Way Comes. There visitor "Some Israeli" expressed tentative concession (in an ambiguous and oddly arrogant, self-interested way) of harmful jewish behavior. He also seemed most eager to know what solutions I proposed.

Deja vu.

10/13/2008 01:50:00 PM  
Blogger danielj said...

Good links danielj. Thanks. And thanks for answering VI.

I suppose I stepped over the line into your territory there. Sorry for that. I'll ensure you take first stab next time.

I'm not sure I would have answered the way you would have but you actually seem to allow free speech instead of just paying lip service to the ideal like oh so many you know whos.

I would have to say that I disagree with your stance on Zionist jews. They are a liability in their current manifestation. We must denukeify them at the very least.

10/14/2008 05:33:00 PM  
Blogger danielj said...

You need to send me a junk e-mail address so I can send you stuff like this:

SNL SKIT

A different SNL SKIT just in case. They are getting pulled like crazy.

The Occidental Observer's take on it.

10/14/2008 06:14:00 PM  
Blogger danielj said...

Watch it to the end.

10/14/2008 06:14:00 PM  
Anonymous Dietrich said...

Hi, I can't find contact information for this blog, but would like to get more info and perhaps feature the author on one of our programs. Please hit the web address included in this note and send a comment via the comment button at the top-right. Thanks,

-DM
vornetwork.com

10/15/2008 03:04:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

More on Sandlers. A commenter links Forbes singing their praises in 2004:

After 41 years and many failed competitors along the way, HERB AND MARION SANDLER still run what is not just the U.S.’ best-managed thrift, but perhaps its best financial company. More surprising, they’re happily married after working side by side the entire time.

My emphasis. Thanks for the video link danielj.

10/18/2008 12:56:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tanstaafl,

When I first posted on your site, you have not explained your position as clearly as you do here. In fact, I have no problem with deporting diaspora Jews who refuse to (i) join the social contract and (ii) provide their undivided allegiance to the country in which they live, to Israel. What you do not make clear is whether you will be making allowances for the other Jews (as you can see, you have at least one here) who understand the basic issues and do not think tribally (yes, it is possible, if one sets oneself certain ground rules).

Good Jabotinski quote. I have not the slightest doubt how he would have thought of the ADL were he alive today or, for that matter, Israel’s interdependency with the US - regardless of whether it is the Jews who control Washington (as you see it) or the Jewish lobby counterbalancing Foggy Bottom/Arab interests/oil companies/the Left (as I see it). In case you ask – I am not aware of Jabotinski ever having developed a “useful idiots“ doctrine as Stalin did – the Revisionists were always big on self-help ideas.

Israel messed it up horribly for those Jews who want to have their cake and eat it – that is perhaps why ADL types like Israelis from a distance. After all, the lowliest truck driver from Bat Yam is more of a Zionist than the most influential Washington lobbyist.

Danielj

I wasn’t totally serious with the Mossad remark, you know… But as for your last comment (posted 10/14/2008 05:33:00 PM): “would have to say that I disagree with your stance on Zionist jews”. You got me here – I thought your position was there was no difference between any Jews, yet here you refer to “Zionist” Jews (e.g., certain Neo-Cons) which, in my book are nothing like Liberal Jews (e.g., Soros, Chomsky).

Again, I am not trying to start an argument – I am genuinely interested in your (and Tanstaafl’s) opinion – as I said, I totally agree the matters discussed here point to a problem, and this is the more so when I consider that neither you nor Tanstaafl fall into the wild eyed skinhead category.

One more thing - I must say the thought I have a hidden genetic program which, without pre-warning, would take control over my mind and body and would turn me into a blind follower and executioner for the Left (as described by Edmund Connelly, "The Washington Post’s Willing Executioner?" 12 Sept. 2008, the Occidental Observer) extremely unlikely…

Best,

Visiting Israeli

10/19/2008 03:39:00 AM  
Blogger danielj said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

10/19/2008 05:44:00 AM  
Blogger danielj said...

You got me here – I thought your position was there was no difference between any Jews, yet here you refer to “Zionist” Jews (e.g., certain Neo-Cons) which, in my book are nothing like Liberal Jews (e.g., Soros, Chomsky).

There are all kinds of different jews with all kinds of different motivations (just like there are all kinds of different Englishmen) but they are all jews. Ultimately, they have an ethnic loyalty which will trump any love for Gentiles they might harbor. I simply hold all of them in the same suspicion with which they hold me.

I'm not indeed, a wildeyed skinhead intent upon the physical destruction or even forced removal of a populace but it is indeed a problem that they have a harmful and looming presence over areas vital to the health and safety of my culture and peoples.

I understand that jews squabble internally, although I've never seen Chomsky actually debate Zionists I imagine he does. I think my understanding of jews and Judaism leaves me with enough vision to see nuance and shades of gray in the j.q. and I understand as a result of that, that there is a disconnect between the jew elite and that Bat Yam truck driver. (After all, one need only look at White, American politicians to discern we labor under the same unbearable burden of aloof and uncaring leadership slavishly devoted to 'scientific rule' and hyper-rationality)

The rest of your comment I will get to later. Time for some fried chicken and milk.

10/19/2008 05:57:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

VI,

This blog is concerned with the interests of Whites, not jews. It is particularly annoying when jews visit and cite their internal partisan differences. Cry me a river. White partisanship is far worse. It is literally helping to genocide us. Meanwhile more Whites would pound their chest in defense of jews and israel and preventing a hypothetical holocaust 2.0 than would openly admit to caring for their own kind.

My purpose is not to pursue partnership or alliances, even with jewish heretics. My purpose is to wake up Whites to the cold reality that we have to think and act in our own interests, in our own defense. Nobody else will do it.

Edmund Connelly's point is valid. If jews don't like it then they should ease up on constantly projecting their fear of Whites as ticking jew-hating time bombs.

I won't hold my breath.

10/19/2008 01:31:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tanstaafl,

I appreciate that and (unlike Israeli Nationalist in another context) have not come here to preach, but to understand. I hope this does not prevent me from voicing my opinion so as to get banned.

As you correctly say “You can't solve problems until the causes are well understood” (comment, “The Urge to Purge”). A solution to the JP based on the premise all Jews possess a gen which compels them to support, actively or passively, Leftist insanity, is very different from one premised on the understanding that yes, there are certain Jews with truly bad tendencies, some of which derived from their racial and cultural heritage, but that those do not represent the sum total of the Jewish being.

My position is as follows:

Whether you, me, David Duke or George Soros like it or not, we are all a part of the WEST. In West I mean the world which has been created by a fusion of philosophies and ideas going all the way back to ancient Sumer and Babylon and encompassing Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian cultures. There is no argument that in the last 2000 years the heavy lifters of the West have been what I term Europeans and you – if I understand you correctly – call Whites. However, also playing a part, like it as not, were the Jews. Now, I am not for one second going to deny Europeans and Jews did bad things to each other (forget measuring who did more harm for a moment). But all through those last 2000 years both were in this thing together and, to a larger or smaller extent, created and maintained it. In other words, my “Tribe” – and yours - is the West. It does not mean there can be no clans within that tribe and that members of these clans may not, at time try to promote the interests of their clan - provided it is done within the framework of the tribe and the collective interest of the tribe takes precedence. I have therefore no problem whatever with resisting the enemies of the West - Jews or Gentiles – all are my enemies equally; all wish to destroy my life and culture.

The bottom line is if the West falls, it’s off with all our collective heads. Hence, anybody who threatens the West must be resisted. The question is who those are, and that’s where we depart.

Regards,

VI

10/26/2008 05:29:00 AM  
Blogger danielj said...

and Judeo-Christian cultures.

When I hear that term Judeo-Christian, that's when I reach for my revolver.

Howzabout you call it Christo-Judeo? Or how about you call it what it really is: Christian.

10/26/2008 06:27:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Danielj:

OK - Christian. But it did not spring from nowhere.

VI

10/26/2008 11:07:00 AM  
Anonymous Desmond Jones said...

Joe Sobran...

"Not that the Jews are all-powerful, let alone all bad. But they are successful, and therefore powerful enough: and their power is unique in being off-limits to normal criticism even when it’s highly visible. They themselves behave as if their success were a guilty secret, and they panic, and resort to accusations, as soon as the subject is raised. Jewish control of the major media in the media age makes the enforced silence both paradoxical and paralyzing. Survival in public life requires that you know all about it, but never refer to it. A hypocritical etiquette forces us to pretend that the Jews are powerless victims; and if you don’t respect their victimhood, they’ll destroy you. It’s a phenomenal display not of wickedness, really, but of fierce ethnocentrism, a sort of furtive racial superpatriotism.1"

It's not about a gene for Leftist insanity. It's about a fierce, hyper-intense ethnic loyalty. An ethnic loyalty that does not necessarily serve the best interest of the host majority.

10/27/2008 03:50:00 PM  
Anonymous Desmond Jones said...

"But all through those last 2000 years both were in this thing together and, to a larger or smaller extent, created and maintained it."

It appears, and it may be an incorrect interpretation, that you're proposing some sort of religious cosmology, a direction or design in the evolution of the "West" that really is a function of randomness. The random clash of many ethnic groups produced an outcome that is the West. Moreover, often that evolution came in the wake of the expulsion of Jews from countries of Europe. England, France, and most of southern and eastern Europe expelled their Jewish populations, at least once and sometimes several times (expulsion followed by readmission followed by expulsion). It's rather disingenuous to suggest that the West is a sum of Jew and Gentile. If anything the West is the sum of its conflicts, a constant competition at both the group and individual levels for, in some cases, limited resources.

10/27/2008 04:05:00 PM  
Blogger danielj said...

OK - Christian. But it did not spring from nowhere.

Nothing does.

But the West was not Judaic.

Certainly is now though.

10/27/2008 04:41:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

VI,

Whether you, me, David Duke or George Soros like it or not, we are all a part of the WEST.

"Like it or not"? That's what a mugger or rapist might say.

No, I don't like it. I reject this mindless lie that we just have to accept that we are mugged, raped, murdered, displaced, disenfranchised, defrauded, and on top of all that, guilt-tripped and brain-washed into believing that WE are to blame for it all and there's nothing we can do about it.

No.

You say you want to understand. Let me help you.

Imagine you were making your argument to jews. In fact, imagine you were making it to hypothetical israelis who are dismayed and disgusted that their academia, media, and government is disproportionately controlled by a White and obviously antipathetic if not outright hostile minority. Imagine you are a White visitor to one of their forums, which might be flushed down the memory hole at any moment and the participants persecuted for "hate crimes". You tell them your main concern is what they intend for Whites. Then tell them they just have to live with David Duke buying elections in israel. Tell them it's because we're all Westerners. We're all Christian-judeos. Like it or not.

It's easy to imagine what they would say to that.

Now I have some questions for you.

What do you suppose causes jews, or at least their anti-anti-semitic warrior caste, to be incapable of performing such simple exercises in objectivity? Or their general insensitivity to charges of hypocrisy or dishonesty? Or the "fierce, hyper-intense ethnic loyalty" Desmond noted?

Is it a gene or only somewhat derived from their racial and cultural heritage?

Does it matter?

10/28/2008 12:26:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

VI,

The bottom line is if the West falls, it’s off with all our collective heads. Hence, anybody who threatens the West must be resisted. The question is who those are, and that’s where we depart.

My understanding of this is: Anyone who challenges your view of "the West" as jews+Whites thereby threatens jews and is thus your enemy.

My position is: Anyone who forces their friendship on me is no friend.

10/28/2008 12:45:00 AM  
Anonymous cooper said...

Desmond Jones said "It's not about a gene for Leftist insanity. It's about a fierce, hyper-intense ethnic loyalty."

It's not about the ethnic loyalty, it's about the ethnic difference.

10/28/2008 06:33:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tanstaafl,

I can answer your questions, I just have to think how to do it without appearing like a wordy know-it-all Jew (believe me, I'm not).

Very briefly, though:

1. It is "racial and cultural heritage" which made it, indeed, possible for the "anti-anti-semitic warrior caste" to have done to Israel what it had (together with others) done to some Western countries - only with far less effort (Israeli "academia, media, and government is disproportionately controlled" already - by the same people who (with others) control yours).

2. "Anyone who challenges your view of "the West" as jews+Whites thereby threatens jews and is thus your enemy". No, threatens _everybody_ who is a part of the West. To that extent, it can be a Jew, a Swede, a Frenchman or an Italian. Evil is evil. I detest them all equally.

I will try and provide more in the way of an explanation later.

danielj,

How is the West "Judaic"? Do you understand Judaism as some prototype Leftist ideology?

Regards

VI

11/02/2008 01:18:00 PM  
Blogger danielj said...

VI: How is the West "Judaic"? Do you understand Judaism as some prototype Leftist ideology?

No.

It was a half-hearted attempt at a comment.

The West has been overtaken by overzealous jews thus rendering it Judaic as opposed to Christian.

The Law, as one example, is now overly concerned with minutia and torts and has lost focus on any sort of "meta" principles relating to general equity.

I think that is what I'm saying.

Tired. Late. Bit drunk.

11/02/2008 05:33:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

VI,

Multiculturalism, multiracialism, anti-White anti-racism, feminism, abortion, homophilia, moral relativism, open borders, political correctness, hate laws - these are some of the larger fruits of secular/ethnic judaization.

If these were instead the fruits of swedization, frenchization, or italianization (caused for example by disproportionate secular/ethnic Swedish, French, or Italian influence in US academia, media, and politics) then maybe what you're saying would make sense.

They aren't, and you don't.

11/02/2008 09:00:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Danielj,

None of these things comes from Judaism. There is nothing in Judaic law resembling the absurd rules adopted by US tort law. In fact, and this is my point, there is nothing in classical Judaism that can be even remotely be connected with the type of ideology you seem to believe is genetically coded into any Jew.

VI

11/09/2008 09:00:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tanstaafl,

It is not through coincidence I have mentioned Sweden, France and Italy. Sweden is one of the first countries where welfare state ideology has been practiced and it is at the moment being visited by the type of multicultural hell you make reference to. And, by the way, if you think you have censorship in the US, you have really not got a clue about the _European_ type (just go to Conservative Swede’s blog). As for France, anyone who studies the history of all Leftist ideologies cannot not escape noticing the momentous role the French revolution had upon the development of all such ideologies - in fact, I’ll stick my neck out and say we would not be in the fix we’re in unless for that revolution. Lastly, Italy: birthplace to the most damageful of all Leftist ideologues, Antonio Gramsci (not, despite his looks, a Jew), and the place where he developed his theories, which have given the brutish Marxist original a boost it would have never enjoyed in the first place.

So, we have Frenchmen providing the cesspit from which all Leftist ideas sprang, Swedes providing a type of suffocating welfarist-statist example for other to pick up, and an Italian devising a scheme to infiltrate administration, academia and media with Marxist ideas in a way not available to (or thought of by) the early Communists and, yes, certain Jews promoting these ideas in the _US_, but not necessarily elsewhere else in the West. For a Westerner like me, to that extent there is no difference between all members of these ethnicities. For someone like you, who I believe can only be classified as (this is not intended as an insult) White _American_ Nationalist, things are seen in a completely different light. I can see why I don’t make sense to you.

I will stop for now as I do not want to overextend my stay.

I still have to find a way of explaining what went wrong with the West and the involvement of Jews in it without starting my own blog and/or wasting somebody else’s costly bandwidth.

Regards,

VI

11/09/2008 09:03:00 AM  
Blogger Rosie said...

None of these things comes from Judaism.

I didn't say that it came directly from Judaism.

There is nothing in Judaic law resembling the absurd rules adopted by US tort law.

The absurd rules, washings, punishments and retributions contained in Judaism are similar.

My main point was that jews have taken over every major institution in the Occident and destroyed them during their time at the helm.

In fact, and this is my point, there is nothing in classical Judaism that can be even remotely be connected with the type of ideology you seem to believe is genetically coded into any Jew.

It isn't exactly "coded." It just seems to make jews predisposed to exhibiting extremely hostile characteristics against their host populations. It probably has something to do with their culture and environment as well.

Why are you here arguing?

11/09/2008 09:21:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Listing non-jews in the mix does not negate the disproportionate contribution of jews.

I once read a transcript where Matt Drudge, who is jewish, answered a caller to his radio show who observed the disproportion of jews in media. Drudge's answer was to simply blurt "Ted Turner". He even seemed to think he had definitively countered the point.

The larger result of the French revolution was the jewish emancipation that began in its wake. The consequences of that transcendent, international development echo to this very day, across the West, every time anyone shrieks "anti-semite", "racist", "xenophobe", "discrimination", or "hate". These cries all share the same root.

In contrast the French revolution itself echoes once a year, in France, on Bastille Day.

I would not be so rash as to pin the blame for "all Leftist ideas" on any one group, and certainly not the French. Jews however deserve the bulk of the credit for creating, funding, rationalizing, and benefiting from the "hate" ideology that so characterizes the politically correct regime that governs both left and right.

11/10/2008 07:47:00 PM  
Blogger danielj said...

Not to mention Fire in the Minds of Men by James H. Billingtion traces a lot of the ideological blame for the French Revolution back to secret societies that met in the underground at the time. A prominent group in the French underground at the time of the Revolution was the Illumanati, founded by a Bavarian jew.

Obviously, the connection is extremely tenuous and there were multiple other secret societies around, but were one to research the funding of the Revolution more I would bet that one would discover a lot of evidence that jews were involved, just like they were involved in the Russo-Japanese conflict. Not that they were solely and entirely culpable, but that they were involved.

Lastly, Ted Turner plays old movies. Teddy doesn't own major news stations that generate a significant amount of content nor have prime time shows that shape culture and form ideas for consumption by the general public.

11/11/2008 04:03:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rosie,

For your last question first: I do not consider anything I’m doing as “arguing”. I came here to get some learning done. Suffice it is to say that I fully agree with Tanstaafl that we in the West have a problem, a problem for which certain Jews are fully responsible for. Where I depart from him (and you, I assume) is that I am not convinced that Jews are pre-destined to be hostile to West in the sense described by McDonald et al. If you’ll go further back in the thread, you will notice a couple of questions were posed to me, which I attempted to answer honestly, based on info I have as a member of the “Clan” so to speak.

As for the other point – I do not know where you take your information from. The kind of tort law suits so successful in the US would have been thrown out from any Orthodox rabbinic court on first hearing. Hebrew law’s (as well as the diluted Talmudic version) approach to such disputes I assume you refer to was quite brutish. The absurd rules you mention find their source in the infamous UK Donoghue v Stevenson decision, which has been adopted by the US courts and – yes, extended to an absurd level.

As for the predisposition towards hostility, this touches on Tanstaafl’s earlier question and – the best I can do without the proverbial 20,000 word essay – is to say that there was a time it was justified. I believe that once Jews were emancipated a certain hostile element amongst them was to be expected. Such an element - in a _normal_ Western society - could have been dealt with by applying proportional correction methods. Unfortunately and due to historical reasons, this is not how it was done, and everybody in the West (including Jews) have been paying the price for the excesses since, namely, allowing a very specific group of people (Jews and others) impose their insane ideology on everybody else with little, or no opposition.

I hope this provides you with an (incomplete) explanation.

Visiting Israeli

11/23/2008 03:46:00 AM  
Blogger danielj said...

VI: Sorry about posting under "Rosie." That was my wife's account and I forgot to log out.

I did not mean you were "arguing" in a sense that has a negative connotation. I'm just wondering why you find this discussion of any value? What are you learning?

Forget the tort law issue. I concede that it is unrelated. What I'm concerned with is the destruction of the practice of the law, legal philosophy, medicine, Ivy League institutions, the media and anything else these specifically guilty jews seem to get their hands on.

If you want to be part of "my" West, it will require you to abandon your jewish identity and your Judaism. It is the only way I will accept you as a valid part of the West.

Write the essay. I will read it.

The initial hostilities were initiated by the jews in their Holy War for the ersatz. That one was God's fault in my opinion. None of the subsequent hostility is justified anyway you spin it. I'm well aware that some bad things happened to the "jews" in Poland and Russia and wherever, but that was because you colluded with our own corrupt overclass as you do now.

So, when we take control, as Tan aptly puts it, we will "hang the traitors and eject the invaders."

I have a couple jewish acquaintances and one really good jewish friend VI, and I can thankfully say that they are not attracted to jewish women and are functional atheists with little or no attachment to any of their cultural traditions. I hope they represent the majority of jewish youth.

11/23/2008 05:20:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home