Page 2
Four Blind Men
BACK Our
comprehension of the world starts at juxtaposing observations. Four
blind men describe an animal they encountered: it is like a column;
no, a snake, no, a barrel, no, a tooth. Their impressions would be
of little value unless there were a man of vision to integrate them
and draw a picture of an elephant.
Various
manifestations of Jewish spirit produced a cascade of differing
impressions almost defying an integration attempt. Zionist Jews in
Palestine created a many-tiered rigid caste society, where natives
are excluded, imported 'guest' workers have no rights, army and
security apparatus controls everything and a call for equality
disqualifies the caller from holding a public office. Globalist
financiers of George Soros kind, followers of Karl Popper's Open
Society offered and created other systems. There are impressions of
activity by Jewish media moguls, Hollywood producers, museum
curators, art dealers, human rights activists, New York bankers and
Washington neo-conservative ideologists.
The
observations are valid and important; now they should be collected
and systematised until the ground is ripe for a man of vision who
would draw a picture of the elephant. It is not an easy task, for it
is an article of faith in our world, 'thou shalt not draw an
elephant'. This commandment is enforced by the fierce Jewish
opposition to such endeavour.
This forbidden and
mammoth task was undertaken by the Anonymous (and possibly
collective) author of WHEN VICTIMS RULE: A Critique of Jewish
Pre-eminence in America, (further called The Critique),
two-thousand-pages-long collection of observations of various Jewish
activities. This work in progress is posted on
www.jewishtribalreview.org
and probably will remain there for quite a while. Its sheer
size is just one of the reasons why it is not likely to emerge as a
printed book. While describing the challenge that moved him, the
Author writes:
In "free
societies", anyone who wants may write, and publish, works that
attack Christianity; assail the "historical revisionism" of
Afro-centrism; deconstruct the myths of Hinduism; defame the Pope;
disdain Republican, Democratic, communist, or any other ideology;
emblazon the whole of Islam as a hotbed for irrational mania and
terrorism; write entire volumes about the alleged worldwide
Japanese economic "conspiracy"; and vilify the entirety of the
nebulous entity known as the "white establishment" and anyone
dictated by skin colour to be within it. But, curiously, in the
vast expanse of deconstructive engines of all and everything, one
cannot criticize the sacrosanct domain of Jewish history,
politics, and identity, unless the critic is willing to be
systematically marginalized in all walks of life, prepared to be
tarnished and branded as a contemptible hate-filled "anti-Semite",
risk losing her or her job, and be categorically lumped into
mainstream society's moral and intellectual garbage dump reserved
for the likes of the Nazis and Ku Klux Klan.
TOP
The
biased discourse so aptly described by the Author causes much mental
anguish to Americans of Jewish origin, separates them from their
Gentile compatriots and even more regrettably contributes to the
loss of life in Palestine. That is why a good new deconstruction of
Jewish history, politics, identity, religion and tradition is
certainly needed, especially as the critical works of 1920s and
1930s became outdated. The Author has followed the trail blazed by
Professors Albert Lindemann of the University of California, Kevin
MacDonald of California State University, Israel Shahak of the
Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Elliot Horowitz and other
researchers.
The
Author collected immense amount of data, sometimes trivial,
sometimes relevant facts and opinions. The bibliography is colossal,
as if the book was produced by a Jewish Studies department of a
well-endowed American University. It could be a companion volume to
Encyclopaedia Judaica. Severely abridged, it would be readable and
still impressive. In the full form, it will be used whenever there
is a discussion on the Jewish influence in American politics or
media. For instance, recent debate Neumann-Blankfort would be easily
substantiated by referring to this book.
However,
this interesting book is regrettably short of insight. While noting
and criticising 'Jewish pre-eminence', it does not offer an answer
to the paramount questions: What does it mean? How it was achieved?
Why it is achieved? Without an attempt to answer, the book remains
but an important database.
TOP
The
Author is worried that he will be considered 'anti-Semitic', but my
main objection is quite an opposite one, namely, The Critique is too
'Jewish' by its outlook, and not only because some pages appear as a
Jewish vanity publication, listing prominent and successful Jews. It
is true, there are lists of Jews in unorthodox business of robbery
and murder, but even this thing is not unusual. Isaac Babel happily
described Jewish gangsters of Odessa, while the stories of
Jewish-American gangsters were published many times and are quite
popular with Jewish readers.
Probably
the word 'tribal' is the key to its 'Jewish-ness' and to the
relative failure. The view of Jews as a tribe is a very Jewish view,
promoted nowadays by Adin Steinzaltz, the chief Talmudic authority
in Israel. He called the Jews: 'family'. But this view does not
furnish us with a good explanation of the Rise of the Jews and of
its consequences. If the Jews are 'a tribe', sort of extended
family, what is the secret of their magic attraction and strange
successes? There are many 'families', from Sicilian Mafia to Hong
Kong Triads, but can they measure up to the Jewish influence, nay,
centrality in the Western world? By adhering to this Jewish
'clannish' view the Author overlooked the ideology behind the Jews.
For instance, he quotes:
Raphael
Patai, a Jewish scholar, claims that, for all the knottiness
surrounding the modern day issue, being Jewish can best be
described as nothing more than "a state of mind"
And
smugly adds:
This
kind of "state", of course, won't afford you citizenship in
today's state of Israel, nor acceptance into any Jewish community
anywhere.
True?
Not really. This state of mind is shared by Conrad Black, a Gentile
who became a Jewish media mogul without undergoing circumcision. He
is an accepted and valued member of the Jewish community and a
potential citizen of Israel. Technically, by virtue of his marriage
to his Jewish wife, but much more so by his state of mind. Plenty of
Gentile Americans share this state of mind. On the other hand, a
factory worker or a peasant born of Jewish parents technically
entitled to the place in the community and to the Israeli passport
but lacks this state of mind and would be out of place in the Jewish
community. In Israel there are many immigrants of Jewish origin who
were thoroughly de-Jewified but decided to come to Israel. They do
not fit into the Jewish society and form its outcast fringe.
While
rejecting insightful remark of Patai, the Author accepts some
misleading Jewish declarations for their face value. He writes:
TOP
Yet
modern Jewry's deep animosity towards Christianity stems from the
accusation that institutional Christianity was seminal to
anti-Semitism in the Middle Ages.
It
is the traditional Jewish point of view, deeply un-historical and
anachronistic. In the same vein, the Author could say,
Yet modern Jewry's deep animosity
towards Palestinians stems from the accusation that Palestinians
were seminal to anti-SemitismÖ
In
both cases, Jewry was on the offensive, not a defensive side. The
Jews attacked Christians from the days of the Apostles, just as they
attacked Palestinians by depriving them of their livelihood from the
very beginning of Zionist immigration. The Author probably noticed
his mistake and tried to correct it without harmonising with his
preceding statement:
Judaism had, of course, antipathy for Christianity from the
latter's very inception.
So,
the reader has a choice of two contradicting statements: the Jewish
animosity is a reaction to Christian anti-Semitism, or it is a
primary attitude of Jews. The Author goes on, getting deeper into
the bog of anachronistic contradictions:
Christianity evolved out of Judaism; it was founded and propagated
by Jews dissatisfied with the direction of the seminal faith as
guided by its leaders. "Popular hatred of the Temple priests and
the rich", says Lenni Brenner, "became the basis of Christianity,
and the New Testament must be seen as the last major production of
the Jewish religious genre".
TOP
Again,
it is a traditional Jewish point of view, debunked by Professor
Israel Joseph Yuval of the Hebrew University. Yuval proved that
while Christianity 'evolved' from the Biblical Judaism, the Rabbinic
Judaism came to existence AFTER Christianity appeared as a
reactionary response to it. Lenni Brenner can be forgiven for his
weak grasp of ancient history, but the Author should know that
Christianity rose and won the day when there were no Temple priests
neither 'filthy rich' anymore, after AD 70.
No
study or deconstruction of Jewishness is meaningful, unless one
understands that Jewry was born in order to fight Christ and
Christianity. It found other uses: to make money and share
influence. Likewise, an army can be used for many purposes, to
harvest potatoes or extinguish fires, but it is created to fight
wars. The Author collected much evidence of Jewish hostility to
Christianity, but he failed to comprehend its key role in Jewish
attitudes.
He
failed for he adopted basically Jewish materialistic 'export vision'
of history, world and self. He quotes:
As even Mark
Twain noted, "With most people, of a necessity, bread and meat
take first rank, religion second. I am convinced that the
persecution of the Jews is not due in any large degree to
religious prejudice".
It
is an erroneous observation of a myopic Yankee. In the course of
history, people gave up their bread and meat, wives and children,
died and killed for the sake of their faith. While persecution of
the Jews was not due to religious commandment, the relentless Jewish
assault on Christendom can't be comprehended without this framework.
TOP
The
Jews promote the Tribe vision, as it sounds quite harmless and stops
potential escapees: why indeed should one escape one's own tribe
that one belongs to by virtue of birth? Again, if it is just a
tribe, it really makes no difference what sort of positions its
members occupy. The Tribe vision allows the Jews to claim for their
own - the Apostles and Karl Marx, and many wonderful people of
Jewish origin. This vision proclaims: once a Jew, always a Jew.
However, reality is different: two thousand years ago there were
millions of Jews, while by 8th century they disappeared almost
completely. Spain succeeded to undo its Jews. If descendents of Jews
were Jews, there would be hundreds of millions Jews nowadays.
The
non-tribal character of Jews is well illustrated by the fate of the
Jews of China. This community was successfully assimilated, and all
efforts of Israeli and American Jews to bring them back to 'Jewish
conscience' failed, for it makes no sense to be a Jew outside of
Christ's ecumene.
Indeed,
what is a Jew? Everyone has a small part of his personality that
stops him from embracing (=being together with, or identical to)
Christ. It is excessive care for one's property, anti-collectivism,
godlessness and fight against God = Christ, dishonesty, elitism,
some sorts of creativity, disregard for others. That is a small Jew
inside us. The fiery catharsis of Christ's incarnation, mission,
passion and resurrection expelled this slag from the body of Church.
Presence of slag is to remind us of the catharsis, and to help us to
contemplate of God. Provided there is no God but God, rebels against
God take the side of the Prince of the World, and he takes their
side.
That
is why great theologians and mystics from St John to Martin Luther,
from Muhammad to Fr Serge Bulgakov contemplated on the Jews. For
them, the Jews were a visible proof of God's attention to Man, a
living memory of Incarnation and a negative example of what can go
wrong. A Jew who understood it and acted correspondingly ceased to
be a Jew. A Gentile who accepted the Jewish mode of behaviour turns
into a Jew. The 'pre-eminence of Jews in America' is another form of
re-stating words of Marx: America has been Jewified and accepted the
Jewish values.
The
Author failed to understand this spiritual meaning of Jews and
Jewish influence. Not a tribe, but ideology, that is the essence of
the problem. Pre-eminence of Jewish ideology and Jewish values in
America is the true problem of America and the world. The Author
quotes words of a Jewish commentator, Robert Kamenetz:
TOP
I
began to suspect that Jewish identity, as it has evolved in the
West today, could be a real barrier to encountering the depths of
Judaism. In other words, being Jewish could keep you from being a
Jew.
And
exclaims:
What on
earth is one to make of this observation!
However,
Marx proposed an answer: Judaism is sordid form of Christianity,
while Christianity is sublime Judaism. Kamenetz (like many good and
spiritual Jews) felt that immersion into the depths of Judaism
(=Christianity) leads to rejection of Jewish identity. Such people
should be supported and assisted to leave the Jewish fold. The
leaders of the Jews are aware of the danger and that is why they
fight the church and derail its efforts to save the Jews from Judaic
tendency. In my opinion, the greatest Jewish achievement in the US
was the Boston proclamation by Bishops of the Catholic Church that
Jews do not need salvation, effectively reducing Christianity to the
level of 'faith for goyim'.
Judaic
spirit is a real danger to the tripartite ecumene of
West-Russia-Islamic world. But biological approach proposed by the
Author does not help. One of modern ideologists of European
Traditionalism, Horst Mahler, a great adversary of Jewish supremacy,
stressed the spiritual element of the struggle:
Hitler
failed for he attended to biological (racist, tribal) aspect of
Jews, while it is the spiritual aspect that had to be fought. Only
in April 1945 he recognised that the Jews represent certain Spirit
that can't be defeated but by spirit. The belief that there is no
God, that Man is self-sufficient (Humanism), that the World is
realizable without recourse to the concept of the Absolute Spirit
(God), is the triumph of Judaism over other peoples. On this basis
alone these peoples are delivered to Globalism and ordained to
destruction.
Without spiritual background, the tribe-based research of the Author
offers no solution but copying of the Jewish strategy.
TOP
II
Offensive
or Defensive?
(Second Part of
discussion with www.jewishtribalreview.org.
Chad Powers' response to the first part can be found on that site.)
It is good we agree on many points, and it is equally good we differ
on others. Probably the greatest difference in our reading emerges
from your words:
"Being Jewish" Ö
manifests itself as primarily a defensive allegiance against the
non-Jewish Other.
In my opinion, it is an OFFENSIVE
allegiance, and it is not hair-splitting on my side. The same error
of confusing offensive with defensive repeats itself in the two
chapters on anti-Semitism in WVR. The Author brings numerous
examples of 'Jewish extreme sensitivity' to what they consider
'anti-Semitism', and it includes such unlikely culprits as
vegetarianism and lack of reference to Jews. For the Author, it
implies extreme defensiveness of the Jews. But let us apply some
basics of psychology.
If
a person is dead certain that he is hated, he probably knows of a
very good reason to be hated. Jews in Israel have no doubt the
Palestinians hate them, for they would hate Palestinians if the
situation would be reversed. If you steal, rob and kill you are sure
you should be hated. If you install yourself as a Master Folk over
subservient population, if you eradicate their culture, demean their
traditions, make fun of their faith and emasculate them, you KNOW
you should be hated. The Palestinians are not Jews and they do not
hate the Jews, but many Jews do not understand it, as they
extrapolate their own feelings to their enemies.
TOP
The
anti-Semitism fighters within the Jewish community are the Jews
actively engaged in warfare against the host society. They consider
themselves the Herrenvolk and the Gentile Americans are their flock
to be controlled and shepherded. For them, all protestations of
Gentile innocence are of no avail: the Jewish anti-Semitism-fighters
KNOW the goyim have a very good reason to hate them.
Holocaust
supplies an easy external explanation for their fears, but in 1920s
it was supplied by 'Russian pogroms' and in the 19th century by
'Inquisition'. In case one runs out of reason there is a very good
explanation of Elie Wiesel, that of totally irrational
anti-Semitism. Still, these explanations are just a cover for the
real reason: these people took over America's discourse, and they
expect their successes to be met with hatred of the subjugated
people.
Search
for anti-Semitism is an active offensive search for the remaining
pockets of resistance within American psyche. It is akin to the
search-and-destroy operation carried out by soldiers in the
conquered city. In their eyes, palpable absence of anti-Semitism in
the US is a clear proof of total surrender of the Americans to their
new elite. While discussing 'anti-Semitism', the Author could
consider the search for anti-Semitism as a sterling proof of the
searchers' guilt. An innocent sane person has no reason to believe
he is hated, and there is no reason to commit them to psychiatric
asylum. NEXT
|
