On Heisman’s (((book)))

I will not read beyond page 500 of Heisman’s book. Although what I reproduced in my extracts is very interesting, it is irritating that, throughout his book, Heisman hides the obvious: that all this universalism and love of the neighbour of other tribes he writes about is not practiced by his own tribe!

Throughout what I’ve read of his book, Heisman does not even mention that the Bible reduced to a nutshell means ‘ethnocentrism for me’ (OT) ‘but universalism for thee’ (NT).

The omission is not innocent, as the thesis of Suicide Note is that Judaism will lead technological humanity to the creation of Artificial Intelligence. After detecting its main omission—that Judaism does not impose miscegenation on the Jews—it is easy to see that all the sci-fi theodicy of his book is a big smokescreen.

That the philosophy of Heisman is self-serving from the Jewish point of view is also noted in the fact that he puts monotheism as high as if it were the forerunner of A.I., thanks to capitalism. It is so false that analogy that it is enough to remember a sci-fi film that I saw as a teenager: in which two countries separately created their own A.I. If something resembles the artificial intelligences that supposedly capitalism will create, it is polytheism, not monotheism.

Heisman is not only a sophist. There is poison for the Aryans in his book, even though we can use his Suicide Note here and there, which I have been quoting this month. Consider his words:

Auschwitz and the Singularity [his futuristic Golem-A.I.] are two diametrically opposite final solutions to the paradox at the core of Judaism. [page 99]

When I read it in due context, it suggested to me that his philosophy is a prophylactic trick to prevent a second Auschwitz. And by the way, from what little he says about racists, it is clear that Heisman had not read the most substantial white nationalism that could be seen on the Internet before his suicide in 2010.

Heisman was not an honest author. All his book looks like a psyop. The advantage of printing a text, as I did with the first 500 pages (which I did not read all of), instead of reading online, is that at the bottom of the pages one can fill the paper with critical notes: what I did. I could easily write a five-thousand-word book-review but will not; I prefer to say only the essentials.

On page 322 Heisman confesses: ‘Speaking as a Jew, I believe that…’ It is significant that in his book of almost two thousand pages, he does not mention the Golem except in a non-Jewish context when referring, on page 1278, to the restoration of 1660 by William the Conqueror. (A golem is, in Jewish mythology, an animate being made from inanimate matter.) My chosen extracts do not denote the poison hidden in Suicide Note. In my opinion, Heisman was a champion of evil. Like the medieval folkloric tale, he wants to create a sort of Yahweh in the real world: a Golem with the technology of our century.

The funny thing is that from the first pages of his book, Heisman explained very well the meaning of the star of Israel. He says that the normal triangle represents the Egyptian pyramid; the inverted triangle, the Jewish subversion in that society, and that if we interpose the two triangles, we have:

The Star of David, the symbol of Judaism:

▲ + ▼ = ✡

This conceptual inversion of Egyptian social order is at the very heart of Judaism’s monotheistic revolution.

The objective of the priests of the 14 words is to put the pyramid back on its solid base, instead of putting the niggers up, which is what the Judeo-Christian inversion of values did.

Published in: on June 19, 2018 at 2:51 pm  Comments (2)  


  1. In the “Speaking as a Jew…” passage, in context, it seems to me that he is saying that transhumanism and the Singularity will extinguish the Jews along with all other races by making race irrelevant. Hence he continues “The idea that Jews have some kind of inherently privileged relationship to the Singularity is an utter delusion and should be treated as such.” As he sees it, AI would be a sort of Golem that destroys the Jewish people instead of saving them.

    I also wonder if Heisman is only a half-Jew, like he claims Jesus was. His suicide points to a martyr complex, and identification with Jesus, the central character of his book, would fit with his painfully obvious narcissism. Unlike the original, this latter-day Weininger doesn’t look particularly Jewish. Being a helf-Jew would explain that, and also could cause him to want to be “more Jewish” than a full Jew, just to prove himself and establish his credentials. Maybe he envisions himself as a kind of savior to the Jews, and his self-sacrificing suicide was a warning to them? Just a guess.

    I think he’s also giving the Jews too much “credit” for AI. Although their involvement is heavy, it’s hardly an exclusively Jewish “accomplishment”; certainly no more than Christianity itself is a Jewish “accomplishment”..

    • This passage of his book throws light as to why he committed suicide:

      A well-known rabbi once explained the Jewish-humanist condition with a joke:

      If we Jews are five percent better than the rest of the world, we can be a ‘light unto the nations’. If we are twenty-five percent better than the rest of the world, we can bring the Messiah. If we’re fifty percent better than the rest of the world, we’ll all be dead.47

      There is only one way to most fully approach moral self- consistency without hypocrisy and that way is suicide. This is the ultimate logic of Jewish morality. The greatest proof that Judaism has never been consistently egalitarian is the survival of the Jews.

      The proto-egalitarian aspects of Judaism’s social ethics were adaptive for Jews during their normative historical condition as an oppressed people. However, when Jews achieve power themselves, to be self-consistent in the sense of wishing the relatively powerless (i.e. Palestinians or Nazis) to gain power and triumph over Jewish power amounts to a death wish. From this experience comes Jewish self-consciousness of the relativity of Jewish ethics. To fully persist with these ethics in conditions of political power is the definition of political suicide. [pages 93-94]

      But I stand for my negative review of the whole book, in spite of the fact that my excerpts in the ten instalments are extremely interesting, and in isolation look like authored by a priest of the 14 words!

      Reason of my negative overall review: Heisman’s book seems addressed to the gentiles, and therefore it looks like a psyop to me. If it was not addressed to us, why he fails to mention that, independently of his sci-fi theodicy, Jews de facto behave not as out-group altruists, but as an in-group altruistic tribe?

      When he barely mentions it he sinks this enlightenment with hundreds of pages putting Jews as altruists in the Christian sense of the word. Hiding the in-group proclivities of his tribe from his goyim audience is like hiding the elephant in the room.

      But you’re right: Heisman does not look like a Jew physically. He even committed suicide in a most sacred Jewish holyday.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: