Lightning revisited

Edward May

Seven years ago, when the West’s Darkest Hour was not hosted by WordPress but by Blogspot I wrote “A Lightning in the Middle of the Night!” It was a milestone in my awakening on the Jewish question that merits reposting:

These days of February 2010 have been the most important since I discovered the subject of the Islamization of the West in September 2008 and that there was a substantial body of literature on white nationalism a year later. Until recently, Lawrence Auster’s writings had been a lighthouse to approach these subjects. The fact that all of his great grandparents were Eastern European Jews did not bother me the least bit.

But… a single phrase that I recently discovered in a June 2009 Gates of Vienna (GoV) exchange had the effect of a lightning bolt in the middle of the night. It made me revaluate my values in a subject that I previously called “anti-Semitism.”

Take note that GoV is a philo-Semitic blogsite, with a big Star of David in its main page stating “We Support Israel.” Below I quote a comment from the 2009 exchange at GoV. Avery Bullard said:

“As I have often pointed out, socialism is by and large a disease of the intellectuals, and Jews are over-represented among intellectuals, due to a high native intelligence and a tradition of giving their children as much education as possible. Jews were also over-represented amongst musicians, physicists, and capitalist entrepreneurs. But they are never over-represented in organisations or movements that represent the interests of the ethnic majority, only those that weaken that majority [the lightning!].

“That is why they’ve been expelled from so many very different countries over so many centuries. Yet with the possible exception of Albert Lindemann (Esau’s Tears) they never want to know the reasons why they’ve been so disliked in order to prevent more tragedies in the future. Instead they dismiss all anti-Semitism as scapegoating.”

Bullard’s comment in the words I italicized above was the lightning that changed my worldview: from philo-Semitism to anti-Semitism in a single stroke! The lightning struck my mind so hard that I must say something about the Austeresque masthead I had chosen for my blog.

If by March I don’t get a convincing rebuttal of the Bullard statement by my visitors, with the accompanied relevant facts, I will add a hatnote in all of my previous entries where the Jewish question is mentioned, something like: Postscript: I no longer believe in the philo-Semitic opinions expressed herein…

The “Austeresque” masthead on Blogspot contained a sentence inspired in Auster, who became distressed after the lightning struck me.

The “lightning” post also resulted in that Edward (“Ned”) May, the editor of GoV (penname: Baron Bodissey), interrupted publication of my Return of Quetzalcoatl. Furthermore, a half-Jew who used to contribute to May’s blog under the deceiving name of Takuan Seiyo became hysterical (see the comments section of my piece at Blogspot).

The challenge of that essay (“If by March I don’t get a convincing rebuttal of the Bullard statement by my visitors…”) also marked my realization that apologists of Jewry simply don’t respond when challenged with a most serious accusation (Jews “are never over-represented in organisations or movements that represent the interests of the ethnic majority, only those that weaken that majority ”). Last year Ned May authored a short piece, “The Jewish Counterjihad” for his GoV, which contains this sentence:

In response to those who lament the over-representation of Jews in far left Multicultural organizations, I frequently point out the massive over-representation of Jews in the Counterjihad. On both sides of the Atlantic, but especially here in the USA, some of the staunchest and most dedicated activists resisting Islamization are Jews, in numbers far greater than their proportion in the general population.

Does this respond to my February 2010 challenge? Hardly. May’s argument has many holes.

First, the “West” is a euphemism for the white race. The counter-jihad movement is unrelated to the preservation of the white race, and therefore of the West. There cannot be a Western culture if all whites commit thoroughgoing mestization in the same way that, due to an almost complete mestization, New Spain died in this continent as an extension of Spain to become “Mexico.”

Second, if I remember correctly, in 2009 May once told me in one of the threaded comments of his blog that since he had a coloured member in his family I should be sensitive about posting my racist views there. More than once, in those old conversations at GoV May’s wife, Ceara Sullivan, boasted about her black neighbours that she hoped will greatly thrive in life. “Western preservation” for this very Christian couple could mean preserving Christianity versus Islam even if that means that their country will become brown.

Third, the Jews concerned about the advance of Islam in Europe are concerned about their tribe (e.g., the fate of Jews in Malmo, Sweden), not about the preservation of the Aryan race there or of Anglo-Saxons in America. Who among those Jews that May considers “staunchest activists” would accept the 14 words? Before our sacred words, wouldn’t they cringe like vampires facing a crucifix?

Fourth, take a note about the book Esau’s Tears that Bullard mentions above. When I tried to discuss with May after he expelled me from publishing in his site, I took heed of an advice by Fjordman: that only Jews or half-Jews would be able to criticize Jews objectively. I played their little game and called their attention to Esau’s Tears, an academic work published by Cambridge University and authored by the Jew Albert Lindemann. The book, that I have read, elicited good reviews from Jews and it demonstrates that the Jewish problem is not an Aryan hallucination, as Takuan Seiyo claimed in the comments section of my lighting article.

In 2010 I received no reasonable response from May, Fjordman, Seiyo, Auster and even Conservative Swede about approaching the JP according to their rules (only Jews should criticize Jews, etc). They simply ignored Esau’s Tears!

In conclusion, Jews are never overrepresented in organizations that advocate Aryan preservation. In the specific case of counter-jihad it is full of Jews, half-Jews and self-bamboozled gentiles trying to get you stuck just there. Their memes are Don’t cross the psychological Rubicon! Don’t reach the other side and realize that all’s about racial consciousness!

For instance, in the comments section of “The Jewish Counterjihad” May commented: “It’s the same error (or syndrome) as blaming all Jews for what Jewish lefties do.” But the point is that even if not all Muslims in Europe are jihadists, Muslims in general should be deported from Europe.

Exactly the same can be said about the other Semites living in the West.

For the visitor of this site who has not crossed the psychological Rubicon, or cannot get a copy of Lindemann’s book, I recommend William Pierce’s “Seeing the Forest.”

Published in: on June 14, 2017 at 5:57 pm  Comments (2)  

Esau’s Tears

Excerpted from Esau’s Tears: Modern Anti-Semitism and the Rise of the Jews (Cambridge University Press, 2009); a book that could have been subtitled “Jewish takeover (‘rise’) and Gentile reaction (‘anti-Semitism’)”.





Preface

That I have devoted many years of study to anti-Semitism underlines how important I think it has been and is.

Expressing irritation with Jews, as a number of prominent Germans did—and so did prominent figures, including Jews themselves, in nearly every country—is one thing; calling for their systematic murder is quite another. In many accounts (Goldhagen’s is the latest in a long series) such distinctions are blurred; some writers go so far as to condemn the distinctions as morally dubious, thus making any irritation with Jews or criticism of them “anti-Semitic,” a conclusion that takes on extraordinary dimensions when linked to such assertions as “all anti-Semitism is as dangerous as a little bit of cancer.”

I cannot accept such reasoning, which seems to me facile, especially insofar as it implies that Jews, unlike other human groups, cannot provoke legitimate irritation.

Indeed, the opposite position, that Jewish conduct is the main cause for hatred of Jews, has been described by Edward Alexander (disapprovingly) as “an argument of wide and enduring popularity,” which it certainly is. It was even more popular in the nineteenth century when it was almost universally assumed, by both Jews and non-Jews, that Jewish behavior was the all-too-obvious cause of the appearance of modern anti-Semitism.

Chapter 1. Anti-Semitism before the modern period: overview and definition

Esau’s tears: the deepest roots of anti-Semitism

After the fall of the Roman Empire, the Gentile rulers of Jews in Europe generally became classified as “Esau.” Anti-Semites of various stripes have drawn upon the Jacob-Esau tale, that Jacob will always hurt Esau.

The Esau-Jacob story and Jewish commentary on it, however, suggest a number of provocative points in conceptualizing the nature of anti-Semitism. In a central passage of the Hebrew Bible, Esau’s angry tears were presented as perfectly understandable; they were not the result of some mysterious fantasy about a wholly innocent Jacob.

As a reader of the Hebrew Bible must recognize, brutality was hardly an invention of the Other Nations; the biblical Jews committed, and their spokesmen afterwards glorified, unspeakable bestial acts. The inclination to picture Jews as perennially helpless victims, in no sense responsible for the ills that have affected them, has often been part of an unsophisticated and transparently defensive reflex. The popular writer Howard Fast concludes his book The Jews, The Story of a People, with this remark: “Such despair and agony as the Jewish people had to endure over the past thousand years is the result, not of what they are, but of what the Christian world has inflicted upon them.” This is by no means an isolated or unusual comment. Critics have charged that women, workers, or minorities have been portrayed one-dimensionally by some historians, as utterly helpless, uncomprehending, and pitiful victims of history, in no way responsible for their misfortunes (and to assert that they were responsible would be to commit the cardinal sin of blaming the victim).

The sheer horror of the Holocaust has made it understandably suspect or even unconscionable in the opinion of some observers to suggest that Jews themselves may have had a degree of responsibility for that catastrophe. Study of the sufferings of Jews is now advocated mostly as a way of preventing suffering in the future, largely by exposing the sinful or corrupt nature of Gentile society and its responsibility for Jewish suffering and almost never as a means by which Jews could become aware of their own sins. The following pages will provide evidence that anti-Semites were frequently less simple and occasionally less morally corrupt than they have been generally presented.

The Rise of the Jews

Arthur Koestler has stated the matter with characteristic bluntness: “The Jewish religion, unlike any other, is racially discriminatory, nationally segregative, and socially tension-creating.” The same Ruth Wisse who was earlier quoted as describing anti-Semitism as functioning “independent of its object” observes at the same time, without apparently sensing any contradiction, that “the dynamism of the Jews in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries is almost unparalleled.” The rise of the Jews, notes Paul Johnson, was above all the rise of the Jewish intellectual, whose “shattering importance to modern history” can hardly be exaggerated in nearly all realms but perhaps most strikingly in that of the left-wing and revolutionary politics.

A once despised and legally set-apart group seemed to be prospering more than others, and, more to the point, it seemed to be assuming power over non-Jews. A few scandals or frauds involving Jews, Jewish braggarts, or strutters—and there was no lack of them—set off poisonous spirals of anger, indignation, and envy.

Chapter 2. Modern Times (1700 to the 1870s)

The French Revolution and the Jews

Opponents of Jewish emancipation retorted that Judaic belief, included the belief that Jews were a separate nation, was not then merely a private affair. Jews could not serve in the army because they could not be depended upon to defend the French nation; they were potential enemies of France.

The liberal years of Midcentury

Legal restrictions concerning Jews were lifted, and many Jews became prominent politicians. This period of liberal triumph has been referred to as the “honeymoon years” of Jewish-Gentile relations. [But] honeymoons always end, sometimes with bitter reflections concerning the flawed beliefs and naive expectations upon which the union was initially conceived.

Backward Russia in Ostjuden

Russian Jews throughout the nineteenth century remained a nation most emphatically apart from the dominant Great Russians. Historians now doubt that hundreds of thousands of Jews were killed by Chmielnicki’s forces, as earlier stated.

By the end of the [18th] century Jews had sufficiently recovered economically and demographically that they represented ten percent of Poland’s population.

By the middle of the [19th] century, the Jews of Posen and Galicia were awarded Prussian and Austrian citizenship, including the right of free movement.

Russia’s “Liberal” Experiment

Jews became prosperous industrialists, merchants, bankers, doctors, and lawyers in proportionately much larger numbers than did Great Russians, Byelo-Russians, Poles, or Ukrainians. Jews also entered white-collar employment in sharply disproportionate numbers.

Eastern European Jews were also infamous in the nineteenth century for involvement in activities associated with the saloon, as pimps, or in the language of the time, on “white slavery,” but also in other illegal activities.

Anti-Semites in Russia were inclined to perceive yet another area of Jewish vice, one that emerged from the destructiveness of Jewish character, in the unusual proclivities of Jews to engage in subversive activity.

Revolutionary Agitation and Tsarist Reaction

Arrests and repression followed, and thereafter activists took a more violent and terroristic direction. When Alexander II was assassinated by revolutionary conspirators in 1881, much attention was drawn to the Jews involved in the conspiracy. Following the assassination, popular rioting against the Jews, or pogroms (the word originated in Russia), broke out in many areas.

The May Laws of 1882, not formally repelled until 1917, were designed to bring Russia’s Jews under control; control [of] what was considered the increasingly unscrupulous exploitation by Jews of peasants. Quotas on the number of Jews allowed in higher education were established to reduce and stabilize the numbers of Jews in the universities. The new goal was around ten percent, since by the 1870s the percentage of Jewish university students had grown much beyond that figure in many areas.

The 1880s marked the beginning of a massive Jewish emigration out of the Russian Empire. Now opportunities to get out of Russia opened up as never before, especially for those willing to go to the New World. Jews from eastern Europe arrived in floods.

The Concept of Race

By the middle years of the nineteenth century, the term “race” came to be commonly and unapologetically used by nearly everyone in western Europe. In stark and revealing contrast to the situation by the mid-twentieth century, few questioned that there was a Jewish race.

A Gentile child, adopted by Jews at birth, can never qualify for priestly status. His moral probity or fidelity to the beliefs and rituals of Judaism, no matter how perfect, cannot alter his lower status. Nazis, too, said that one is born a Jew and Jewishness could never be relinquished.

Blood Imagery

In the nineteenth century, the word race began to replace blood. The English politician and writer Benjamin Disraeli (prime minister, 1868), in spite of having converted to Christianity as a child, emphatically insisted that he remained a member of the Jewish race. In his novel Coningby, Disraeli depicted a vast and secret power of Jews, bent on dominating the world. His noble Jewish character, Sidonia, describes race as a supremely important determinant (“all is race; there is no other truth”). He wrote that if the “great Anglo-Saxon republic” (the United States) allowed its white population “to mingle with its negro and coloured populations” it would be the beginning of the end for the new country.

Racism and anti-Semitism

It is significant that racism in its nineteenth-century form had no single theorist whom most racists recognized, in the way that Marx was recognized by socialists or J.S. Mill was recognized by liberals. Racism did not become a movement in the way that socialism and liberalism did, nor did racists–even specific kinds of racists, such as anti-Semites–form coherent, durable parties comparable to socialist and liberal parties.

There seems little question that increasingly systematic observations about various human societies had important implications for the growth of racism in the nineteenth century.

The Evolution of the Vocabulary of Race

Johann Gottfried von Herder (1744-1803) developed the concept of Volkgeist. He presented himself as the outspoken friend [of the Jews], yet he rejected Jewish emancipation in Germany, at least in the near future, and termed Jews “parasites.” He wrote that Jews “belong to Palestine and not Europe. Since Israel and its prayers despise all other peoples from which it is set apart, how can it be otherwise than that it is itself despised by other nations?”

A number of influential European anti-Semites arrived at Zionist conclusions: The Jewish problem in Europe could be solved if the Jews would go to Palestine, where they belonged.

Racist Ideas among Jews

There were many Jewish racists in the nineteenth century. As noted, Disraeli was probably more influential in spreading certain general notions about the Jewish race than any of the theorists of race described in the preceding sections. He despised what he termed “that pernicious doctrine of modern times, the natural equality of man.”

Moses Hess (1812-1875), who had worked closely for a time with Karl Marx, later affirmed that the “race struggle is primary, the class struggle secondary.” Judaism would become the spiritual guide of humankind, whereas Christianity, “a religion of death,” would wither. He was a good friend of Graetz, who wrote him of his delight in “scourging” Germans. Graetz added that “we must above all work to shatter Christianity.”

_____________________________________

See the rest of my typed excerpts here
(and excuse me for the typos:
these texts are direct typing
from Lindemann’s book for WDH).

Mark Steyn

Steyn at the center, wearing a Kippah with Jews at Toronto



This month at Toronto, the famed author Mark Steyn said that Western society is complicit in a resurgence of anti-Semitism that may lead to a second Holocaust, for which humankind will have no excuses. “There is something profoundly wicked in the contortions that Europeans are willing to make with respect to their own complicated history with the Jewish people,” said Steyn. “We are on the verge of the biggest, most disgusting and evil event of all, in part because of the complicity of the West” (see the Jewish Tribune article where these statement and many other similar statements by Steyn on “anti-Semitism” have been recorded).

Either Steyn is playing the fool by willfully setting aside from his consciousness the vast pool of information about the role of the Jews in the ongoing Western collapse, or he has not heard this sort of info during his long career as an intellectual who presumably defends our civilization. There’s no third possibility.

Considering that Steyn said every recorded word at Toronto assuming that any anti-Semitic sentiment must be pathological, it is impossible to discuss what he said this month without basic information about the Jewish Problem.

If the Jewish Problem (1) does indeed exist, Steyn is either playing the fool or simply someone who has not heard of the Jewish Problem throughout his life, as stated above. On the other hand, if (2) the Jewish Problem is sheer white nationalist paranoia, Steyn’s recent statements make sense from the historical and ethical viewpoint. Everything has to do with these two possibilities.

The long quotation that below comprises most of this post—9,000+ words—conveys the idea that #1 is the right approach to understand Steyn’s mind.

Rather than a quotation it’s a series of excerpts that I typed directly from an academic work by Albert Lindemann, a Jewish scholar who specializes in anti-Semitism and acknowledges the reasons why Jews have been so disliked.

No ellipsis added between unquoted excerpts:


___________________________________________


Note of February 23, 2013. I have moved the long book quotation elsewhere.