Does Nature Know Pluralistic Harmony?

TOO: Nature knows no pluralistic racial harmony. Nature knows only struggle for position. Even plants fight with each other for physical space and access to sunlight and to water. So it is with human demographic change. The races, just like ants and every other lower form of animal, fight and struggle for room, for sunlight, and for all the things they need to thrive. “White flight” reflects the fact that when living conditions have become unsuitable for Whites to reproduce and to live happily, they exit those conditions and seek better conditions elsewhere; that’s why 85 percent of the time, Whites move to a Whiter area. While some claim that “Whites are suicidal” or “don’t care” about being displaced, their behavior shows that a great majority of them do care. What they are missing is leadership that is willing to stand up to the forces that seek our destruction.

Posted in Evolution, Whites | Comments Off on Does Nature Know Pluralistic Harmony?

How Do Jews Feel About Non-Jews?

How about in the spirit of mutual understanding and respectful dialogue, we start surveying Jews for their attitudes towards non-Jews? Are there such surveys? Why don’t the goyim have their own anti-defamation league?

I appreciate the ADL’s survey of attitudes towards Jews in 100 countries. Why not something similar about Jews views of the goyim?

Ex-Hasid Luzer Twersky writes:

Let me answer some revealing questions about Hasidic Judaism. Does it withhold a broad education from their children in order to keep the children narrow-minded and uneducated? Yes. Does it vilify the outside world in order to keep its members from joining it? Definitely. Does it have a fear and/or doomsday element to it? Of course. Is there ex-communication for those who dare to leave? Oh yeah.

I still have not received anything past a 5th grade education. In fact, since I never attended a regular school, I don’t actually know what a 5th grade education is — I just picked a grade that seemed right. I don’t know what algebra is; I know I can Google it but I wasn’t made to care enough to do so.

For most of my life, I believed that all non-Jews hate us and want to kill us. I believed that all goyim are murderers, rapists, degenerates and dirty second-class citizens. Of course, they/we aren’t but I was taught that in order to make the secular lifestyle less appealing. I was told horrible things would happen to me in this world and the “next world” if I leave. I was told I would end up a criminal or drug addict. Many members of my family refuse to speak to me to this day.

I have had to transition both out of Hasidism and transition into mainstream culture. I have had to find a replacement for the void left by the lack of community and warmth. I had to replace my family, my friends and my moral compass. It was hard leaving everything behind but it was even harder to find something to replace it all with.

Posted in ADL | Comments Off on How Do Jews Feel About Non-Jews?

Before Muslims, Oslo was virtually a rape-free city

Youtube comment: “Before Muslims Oslo was virtually a rape-free city, inhabited by people who had been brought up on civilized notions of mutual respect and tolerance. No longer. It SICKENS AND OUTRAGES me to no end when foreign nationals import some of their Stone Age, bestial “cultural/religious ways” to impose on a host country!”

Posted in Islam, Norway | Comments Off on Before Muslims, Oslo was virtually a rape-free city

The Evolutionary Group Advantages Of Pre-Traumatic Syndrome

Kevin MacDonald writes in his book A People That Shall Dwell Alone: Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy, with Diaspora Peoples:

Altruism and internal cohesion within a strategizing group are expected to be maximized in situations of external threat. The importance of group conflict in producing powerful cohesion within groups combined with hostility toward outgroups is apparent in the writings of several 19th- and early-20th-century anthropologists, such as Spencer, Tylor, and Sumner (see van der Dennen 1987).

Among evolutionary theorists, Alexander (1979, 1987) has emphasized the importance of external threat in creating high levels of cohesion, cooperation, and self-sacrifice. In situations of external threat, individual self-interest increasingly coincides with the survival interest of the group, and since Jews have typically lived as a minority group in the midst of an often hostile gentile society, this mechanism for producing altruism and within-group solidarity may well be of considerable importance. Although statements linking altruistic behavior with external threat are difficult to verify, several historians of Judaism have concluded that external threat has indeed been an important mechanism for social cohesion and altruism among Jews (see Chapter 6). The external threats represented by the other Greek city-states and the Persian Empire may well also have been a strong influence on the extraordinary levels of social cohesion and
altruism exhibited by the Spartans.

Posted in Anti-Semitism | Comments Off on The Evolutionary Group Advantages Of Pre-Traumatic Syndrome

Anti-Semitism Before the Holocaust

I confess that in my first 20 years as a Jew, I vastly preferred books that blamed anti-Semitism 100% on the goyim.

As I have aged, however, I have come to see anti-Semitism as the natural result of conflicts of interest between groups.

I’m not a historian, but it seems to me that history suggests that the fortunes of Judaism and Christianity are usually inverse. For instance, Judaism was stronger than Judaism in the first two centuries of the Common Era, and then Christianity rose in strength and Judaism declined. The biggest discrepancy in power and influence between the two religions was probably the 17th Century in Europe.

Judaism has never dealt successfully with the Enlightenment. Christianity has had an easier time of it. Islam rejects the Enlightenment and has failed to produce a single country that is prosperous and free.

When there’s free competition, Jews (Ashkenazim have an average IQ around 110) always out-compete, out-earn and out-influence white Christians (average IQ of 100) who always out-do Muslims (average IQ around 85).

Importing religious and racial diversity is always a recipe for division, conflict and tragedy. I don’t know why any homogeneous society would want to diversify.

Albert S. Lindemann writes:

There is little question that Jewish anger and resentment were aggravated by Christian attacks, but…Jewish hatred and derision for Christians both predated and developed to an important degree independently of Christian persecution. The process was not essentially different from the way that Christian hatred for Jews developed according to its own logic and not only in reaction to Jewish provocation. Many of the most hate-filled Jewish texts date from the time when Christianity was still weak and hardly capable of mounting significant physical attacks on Jews.

When, by the high middle ages, Christians began to appreciate the extent to which, in the words of one historian, “that Jews had been mocking them for centuries” in the Talmud and other rabbinical works, they were outraged. Copies of the Talmud were burned on a number of occasions, just as copies of the Gospels had been earlier destroyed by Jewish authorities when they had the power to do so….

While a number of non-Jews spoke up for a fairer treatment of Europe’s Jews [during the Enlightenment] few had favorable comments about contemporary Judaism or about Jews in their present state. Even those who believed that legal discrimination against Jews should be abolished nonetheless considered most Jews to be of low moral character — cunning and dishonest — while Judaism was hidebound and itself bigoted. Indeed, even those Jews who spoke up to defend their people often did so in remarkable back-handed ways. They granted the Jewish population suffered from all too obvious defects, both moral and physical…

Ron Guhname writes: WASPs rule! I wrote in a recent post that I was getting the sense that Americans with Protestant European backgrounds were the best behaved. So I decided to sum all my prior post numbers that dealt with ethnicity and moral behavior to assess this idea systematically. I followed the simple strategy of assigning a rank for each behavior for each of the 8 ethnic groups with sufficiently large sample sizes. Jews were often ignored in previous posts since one must turn to the religion rather than the ethnicity variable to get estimates, but I wanted to include them, so I calculated numbers and then ranks for them.

I included all variables that I have posted on–here’s a list of them: okay to cheat on taxes; drinks too much; ethnocentric; dirty house; frequents prostitutes; promiscuous men over 30; feel that infidelity is not wrong; gay; lesbian; husbands and wives who cheat; fathers divorcing mom; women arrested; and promiscuity for men and women and under. I realized that I had not posted on drug abuse so I added that to the rest. I ranked group so high numbers indicate more bad behavior, then I simply summed the 16 rankings for each ethnic group. Here are the totals:

Bad Behavior Index

Blacks 106
Mexicans 85
American Indians 85
Italians 70
Irish 67
Jews 64
Germans 56
English/Welsh 47

My hunch was correct. This pattern coincides with that feeling that goes way back among nativists that the moral quality of the country was slipping with the mass immigration from Catholic, southern and eastern European countries, and more recently in concern over immigration from Mexico.

Posted in Anti-Semitism, Christianity | Comments Off on Anti-Semitism Before the Holocaust

‘Disparate Impact’ & Housing

Burton Roberts writes: A defendant in disparate impact litigation has never used race-based IQ research to show that racial differences rather than anything that could be called “discrimination” cause the disparity in question, and that such results are therefore entirely natural. Such an attempt would at the very least bring media attention to an area of study that is generally ignored.

Intelligence testing is used by some courts in capital punishment cases, in which lawyers claim on behalf of the defendant that he is mentally incompetent and therefore protected from execution under the “cruel and unusual punishment” clause of the Eighth Amendment. The argument commonly made elsewhere–that IQ tests are biased against non-whites and that their actual intelligence is higher than their test results–can therefore backfire. Blacks and Hispanics may have their scores boosted, which can put them above the mentally incompetent fault line and into the permissible range for execution.

Whatever its effects outside the area of housing, this new Supreme Court decision will unquestionably make it easier for non-whites to claim illegal discrimination in the face of regulations that are both reasonable and that had no discriminatory intent. It is impossible to know how fantastic or absurd the consequences will be. What will be the equivalent in housing law of throwing out the results of firefighters’ promotion tests simply because not enough blacks and Hispanics passed it? Often those who failed due to “disparate impact” are hired and given back pay. What compensation can successful housing plaintiffs expect?

One thing we can say with certainty is that last week the Supreme Court decided that poor non-whites living in subsidized housing paid for by the public nevertheless suffered illegal discrimination because they were not living in a white neighborhood. In other words, we must not only pay for non-whites (and whites) to live in housing they can’t afford, but we must pay for non-whites to live in white neighborhoods they can’t afford. Anything less would be unconstitutional.

Congress could change the law, of course, and explicitly ban suits based on “disparate impact.” And Al Sharpton could pay his back taxes.

Posted in Race | Comments Off on ‘Disparate Impact’ & Housing

Yahoo Finance Exclusive: Earl Holt started giving money to GOP pols after marrying the widow of a Jewish businessman

Yahoo: “As president of a white nationalist group linked with the murders of nine churchgoers in Charleston, S.C. on June 17, Earl P. Holt III is straddling the uneasy boundary between free speech and racial hatred.”

How can there be a boundary between free speech and racial hatred? If people speak freely, they are going to disparage out-groups.

Would Yahoo call the Bible hate speech? In it, God commands the Israelites to commit genocide against the Canaanites.

How is there any link between the Council of Conservative Citizens (CoCC) and Dylann Roof other than that Dylan read CCC’s website and cited it in his manifesto?

Once known only to watchdog groups that monitor extremist groups, Holt has suddenly become notorious for racial slurs splattered across the Internet and for writings on his group’s web site that supposedly inspired Dylann Roof, the alleged Charleston shooter, to carry out a massacre.

Earl P. Holt was known before the massacre to many of those who shared his values.

Tens of millions of Americans don’t like blacks and they tend to vote Republican.

Holt’s campaign contributions — and the apparent source of his money — are causing consternation now because of hostility he has shown toward blacks and Jews. Holt is president of a nonprofit group called the Council of Conservative Citizens, based in St. Louis. The group says it supports politically conservative causes and doesn’t encourage or condone racism. It does, however, routinely highlight crimes committed by blacks against whites, and the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks extremist groups, describes the council as “a virulently racist group whose website has referred to blacks as ‘a retrograde species of humanity.’” The Anti-Defamation League also considers the council extremist and says, “although the group claims not to be racist, its leaders traffic with other white supremacist groups.”

Notice how Yahoo won’t identify SPLC and the ADL for what they are — Jewish nationalist groups at war with other nationalist groups. If Jews can be nationalist while convincing non-Jews that nationalism for goyim is bad, then Jews have an advantage in the competition for resources and power (a cohesive group will out-compete individuals).

Jews like nationalism for themselves but don’t like it for Gentiles because it usually excludes Jews and places them in the out-group just as Jewish nationalism places goyim in the out-group.

On The Blaze (which has since taken down his posts), Holt said blacks are “the laziest, stupidest and most criminally-inclined race in the history of the world.

And that is clearly wrong how? In every country where there are large numbers of blacks and accurate crime records, blacks commit murder and other crimes at a much higher rate than whites and asians. Blacks also have the lowest labor participation rates among the major races. Blacks also have the lowest average IQs of the major races. What Holt said was not nice, but it was truthful.

How come when blacks commit murder, we don’t make inquiries into what they were reading? Isn’t that racist?

Posted in ADL, Blacks, CoCC, Crime, Nationalism, SPLC | Comments Off on Yahoo Finance Exclusive: Earl Holt started giving money to GOP pols after marrying the widow of a Jewish businessman

Steve Sailer: The Real Story Behind the Pine Bush Anti-Semitism Lawsuit

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* Jews are the most intellectually aggressive people in this earth, the big two religions (Christianity and Islam) are influenced by Judaism but with less tribalism and more universalism. Jews can also do universalism, Marxism has conquered the World, most political movements that gained traction worldwide have been created and promoted by jews.

* I paid a visit to the Museum of Modern Art in Manhattan on Monday. During the course of my 3+ hour visit I made some observations of visitor demographics that may be of interest.

It was a surprisingly young crowd, I would estimate the average age in the 25 to 30 range. Who says young people don’t appreciate culture?
As for race, my best guess is 60% white, 35% East Asian, 5% everything else. I’m counting as white some Spanish speaking people of fully European appearance. There were very few visible Hispanics and surprisingly few South Asians. The typical black visitor was a young lady in her teens or early 20′s in a group with a few white girls her age, though I also saw a few older black women by themselves. I saw some Orthodox Jewish men, identified by their yamulkes. No Hasidim, though they probably would be forbidden to view sometimes improper images (though there were a few headscarf wearing Muslim women, whom one would think would be under similar restrictions).
While there were many couples and some families (the MoMA isn’t really a place for children), among singles and people in groups of friends I would say that females outnumbered males by at least 5 to 1.
Almost all of the guards in the galleries were black men. That surprised me a bit, surely people of all races would want what’s probably a decent paying and reasonably prestigious job. It then occurred to me that perhaps management thinks that black men have a more intimidating appearance, with their mere presence discouraging visitors from trying to touch the artworks. Sort of the same concept as when nightclubs hire black bouncers. Though I noted with some amusement that the skinniest, nerdiest guard in the whole place was watching over its most famous work, Van Gogh’s Starry Night.

* I recall that you once mentioned that German Jews kept Russian Jews out of their country clubs. So modern Jews have retconned history to make it seem like Russian Jews were actually excluded from country clubs by WASPs. That had the benefit of smoothing over intragroup Jewish conflict while also maintaining Jewish solidarity against the “anti-semitic” WASP bogeyman.

* Two separate issues are being conflated. There was harassment of the small number of liberal Jewish kids by other schoolchildren and there is also resistance amongst the broader community (both Jewish and Other) to developments proposed by the Satmar. The existence of the Hasidic community at Kiras J seems to have increased tensions and its possible that the Jewish children in various Pine Bush schools bore the brunt of this. It is also possible that someone in the Satmar community fed the story to the NYT thinking it would pressure the town into treating its own claims more favorably.

* Within modern-era Jewish literature/plays/TV there is a well-mined fissure of grating & chafing in matters of divergent customs/tastes between the shtetl people and the pedigreed Mitteleuropa types (though usually from the down-punching perspective of the latter): food, clothes, manners– all the status-nitpicking staples. If they don’t seem to spend much time explaining the bit to gentiles, it’s probably less to do with “retconning” than the question of why anyone not part of such supersubtle intramural rubes-toffs rivalry would be expected to understand or care. Identifying the common outgroup enemy, by contrast, requires no such explication. At any rate the cultural narcissism of small differences runs both ways. Take Amory Blaine’s ridiculous list of Yale/Princeton distinctions in “This Side of Paradise,” over which no one not from that circle would be partisan or even have an opinion. I bet there’s some Chinese teen in San Gabriel scrutinizing it like Confucian dialectics though.

* I’m told by a Jewish resident of the neighborhood that Lamm’s buldings were built in blatant violation of the building codes, and that the Hasidim targeted Bloomingburg because it had a small, easily overwhelmed voting base and its municipal organization didn’t give it the means to fight off the tactics of Lamm and the Hasidim.

* Various kinds of Jews squabble with each other all the time, but they are very good at closing ranks and uniting over blaming outsiders before the poor dumb outsiders notice the quite good reasons for the internal divisions.

Posted in Anti-Semitism, Jews | Comments Off on Steve Sailer: The Real Story Behind the Pine Bush Anti-Semitism Lawsuit

Jews & Betrayal

I love stories of betrayal (even though from a rational perspective, there is no such thing, we use the word for when people important to us have different priorities from what we expected, e.g., if your wife commits adultery, she’s not betraying you, she’s simply acting on different priorities than what you expected).

As Robert J. Avrech wrote in the foreword to my book, Yesterday’s News Tomorrow: Inside American Jewish Journalism:

Betrayal fascinates Luke Ford. It’s his life.

Luke betrayed his father, a prominent Seventh Day Adventist minister, when Luke converted to Judaism.

Luke betrayed his second “father” when he sacrificed his friendship with Dennis Prager to work on an unauthorised biography of his hero.

Luke betrayed Judaism when he became, the preeminent journalist covering LA’s sordid, mob-infested porn industry. Luke betrayed his Orthodox synagogue when he lied about his work and told the rabbi that he was a “freelance journalist who writes about crime for a Japanese magazine.”

Damon: “What about trust? I think we should expect more from those we’re closest to. Also, what if these acts of ‘priority’ are taking place behind your back? Doesn’t that bolster the perception of betrayal?”

It’s just emotionally charged language to deal with the uncomfortable reality that different people have different interests that constantly clash. That’s why all relationships are often frustrating and painful. There’s no betrayal. All we should expect is that people will pursue their interests and those interests will always differ at times from our own. If I take your wife, am I betraying you? No, I am just pursuing my interests and those interests clash with yours.

Unless I am missing something, it seems to me obvious that if you identify as a Jew, your primarily loyalty is to other Jews, not to your Gentile home country. It’s amusing when Jews in the diaspora are accused of having dual loyalties. There’s usually nothing dual about them.

That may look like betrayal but it simply Jews being loyal to Jews, just like Muslims are loyal to Muslims and Chinese are loyal to Chinese. There’s nothing inherently perfidious about Jews, Muslims, and Chinese. They’re simply tribal. Almost every group is tribal except for Anglos, who don’t tend to make strong in-group vs out-group distinctions.

All of the American scientists who gave nuclear secrets to Stalin were Jewish. Around the same time, Stalin became paranoid that Soviet Jews had more loyalties to the Jewish state than to Mother Russia, which was a fair and rational assumption.

From the book Exploring Intelligence Archives: Enquiries Into the Secret State: “Many Jewish scientists — among them some of the greatest names in Soviet science — worked in secret scientific institutions. Targeting such would-be emigrants for recruitment promised to yield intelligence directly relevant to American defence at a time when the Reagan administration was conducting a furious arms race with the USSR. Certainly the KGB feared such recruitments. Even though he seemed to have no evidence to this effect, Yuri Andropov, when its chairman in the 1970s, steadfastly maintained to the East German foreign intelligence chief Markus Wolf that the ‘refusnik’ Anatoly Sharansky — a computer scientist in a research institute — was a CIA spy. It was owing to his work for this institute that he was denied permission to emigrate to Israel in 1973.”

I find this article in the Washington Post thrilling: “How the CIA ran a ‘billion dollar spy’ in Moscow

I immediately wonder if the spy in question, Adolf Tolkachev, was Jewish. It’s not clear.

From “Tolkachev commented a number of times to at least one of his case officers that the brutal treatment that his wife’s parents had suffered was a key factor in his motivation to work against the Soviet regime. He never shed any light on why the authorities had taken these actions against his wife’s parents, but once suggested that his wife and her parents were Jewish. Given the Stalinists’ anti-Semitism, this factor may have played a role in their persecution.”

From the book The Main Enemy: The Inside Story Of The Cia’s Final Showdown With The KGB: “…Tolkachev never told his CIA handlers whether he or his wife was Jewish.”

From the Sydney Morning Herald: JOHN GUILSHER, as the CIA field officer in Moscow, handled one of the West’s greatest espionage coups of the Cold War in the classic traditions of the spy trade.

The CIA almost blew its chance to recruit the specialist engineer Adolf Tolkachev in the late 1970s, but once he had been recruited, Guilsher’s professionalism and bravery helped build a bond that yielded military secrets of incalculable importance.

Tolkachev provided details of the research and development of the radar systems for the Soviet’s front-line fighters from the MiG-29 and MiG-31 to the Sukhoi Su-27, as well as for cruise missiles and avionics.

His secret revelations more than matched the importance of another “volunteer” spy, Colonel Oleg Penkovsky of the Soviet military intelligence service, who provided the CIA with key information in 1960.

Tolkachev’s secret treasure trove was almost stillborn: five times from January 1977 to February 1978 he approached cars with US diplomatic licence plates in Moscow, begging to speak to an American. Ironically, the first car he approached at a petrol station belonged to the CIA’s Moscow station chief, who ignored the Russian, fearing he was a KGB agent sent to entrap Americans.

But the persistent Russian – resentful of the Soviet Union’s earlier treatment of his Jewish parents – kept returning, each time revealing more about himself, indicating that he had information about Soviet weapon systems. Finally, the CIA assigned Guilsher, a Russian-speaking officer, to make contact.

Posted in Jews, Soviet Union | Comments Off on Jews & Betrayal

T.S. Eliot & The Jews

Forward: During a 1933 lecture in Virginia, published in 1934 as “After Strange Gods,” (which he later refused to reprint) Eliot, following Maurras, stressed the importance of social “unity of religious background…. Reasons of race and religion combine to make any large number of free-thinking Jews undesirable,” Eliot declared.

* “The notorious passage in After Strange Gods is capable of the interpretation that a community of orthodox Jews would be socially desirable because of the strong social bonds established by Jewish solidarity.” Roger Kojecky, T. S. Eliot’s Social Criticism (London: Faber, 1971

* James O’Meara writes:

Now the phrase in question is certainly more than enough to brand Eliot an “anti-Semite” by today’s hair-trigger standards (as the Forward article attests[12]), which amount to nothing more than what Steve Sailer calls “noticing things.”

But looked at closely, as Eliot would advise us to read any poet’s work, the phrase is rather restrictive: “any large number” and “free-thinking Jews.” Eliot seems to be insinuating that a small number of Orthodox Jews would not be a problem,[13] perhaps would lend a little color to drab London.[14]

The ideas seems to be the old saw about the role of the Jew as cultural “outsider,” providing a needed, indeed a necessary, “objective” and “critical” perspective.[15] Needless to say, it’s a popular idea . . . among Jews.[16]

To suggest what might have been in the back of Eliot’s mind, preventing him from just calling for the summary expulsion of “the Jews,” consider one of his greatest epigones, Marshall McLuhan. McLuhan, though born on the Canadian prairie,[17] developed, after attending Oxford, a loathing for the Puritan provinciality he saw all around him, even—or especially—in Canada’s grand metropolis, Toronto—then a bastion of Presbyterian righteousness known semi-ironically as “Toronto the Good.”[18]

To deal with this cultural atrophy, McLuhan proposed a simple, sweeping remedy: the immediate importation of a couple million Jews.

Posted in Anti-Semitism, Jews | Comments Off on T.S. Eliot & The Jews