In the past couple of years I began to wonder about the fact that
Jews are firmly in the middle of leftist movements centered around
socialism, communism, and feminism.
The Culture Of Critique
by Kevin MacDonald answered why they are so heavily invested in leftist
causes and how they have damaged traditional Christian ideals by
treating America as a cultural laboratory to further their own group
interests above those of gentiles (non-Jews).
Up to recently, Jews did not have a homeland, meaning they had—and
still have—to live in countries where they’re minorities. Therefore they
would historically favor societies that were open, multicultural,
pro-immigration, and left-leaning so that they would not be persecuted
by the host nation or be barred from attaining higher social and
economic status.
Jews benefit from open, individualistic societies in
which barriers to upward mobility are removed, in which people are
viewed as individuals rather than as members of groups, in which
intellectual discourse is not prescribed by institutions like the
Catholic Church that are not dominated by Jews, and in which mechanisms
of altruistic punishment may be exploited to divide the European
majority.
To accomplish such a society, Jewish intellectuals moved mountains to
promote human equality and the idea of racial equality
(the inventor of the word ‘racist’ was Russian Jewish communist Leon
Trotsky, born Lev Bronshtein). While pushing the notion of equality,
Jews were hyper-aware of their own unique race and would exclude
themselves from many of the prescriptions they offered to their host
cultures. They made sure to help their “tribe” before all others.
Below are the main arguments and highlights of The Culture Of Critique:
“Race is a myth”
Famed Jewish anthropologist Franz Boas was instrumental in pushing
the idea of nurture and culture over that of nature. We now speak of
“cultural” effects upon nations instead of more genetically determined
factors like race.
An important technique of the Boasian school was to cast
doubt on general theories of human evolution , such as those implying
developmental sequences, by emphasizing the vast diversity and chaotic
minutiae of human behavior, as well as the relativism of standards of
cultural evaluation.
[…]
By 1926 every major department of anthropology was headed by Boas’s students, the majority of whom were Jewish.
[…]
Ashley Montagu was another influential student of Boas. Montagu,
whose original name was Israel Ehrenberg, was a highly visible crusader
in the battle against the idea of racial differences in mental
capacities. He was also highly conscious of being Jewish, stating on one
occasion that “if you are brought up a Jew, you know that all non-Jews
are anti-Semitic. . . . I think it is a good working hypothesis”.
Montagu asserted that race is a socially constructed myth.
Freudian psychoanalysis as a gentile subversive movement
The book proposes that Sigmund Freud, a Jew, pushed psychoanalysis to break down traditional pair bonding in gentiles.
Many early proponents viewed psychoanalysis as a
redemptive messianic movement that would end anti-Semitism by freeing
the world of neuroses produced by sexually repressive Western
civilization.
[…]
Freud’s theory of anti-Semitism in Moses and Monotheism contains
several assertions that anti-Semitism is fundamentally a pathological
gentile reaction to Jewish ethical superiority.
[…]
Freud managed to diagnose Western culture as essentially neurotic
while apparently, on the basis of the argument in Moses and Monotheism,
holding the view that Judaism represents the epitome of mental health
and moral and intellectual superiority.
[…]
…when [Western] institutions were subjected to the radical critique
presented by psychoanalysis, they came to be seen as engendering
neurosis, and Western society itself was viewed as pathogenic. Freud’s
writings on this issue are replete with assertions on the need for
greater sexual freedom to overcome debilitating neurosis. As we shall
see, later psychoanalytic critiques of gentile culture pointed to the
repression of sexuality as leading to anti-Semitism and a host of other
modern ills.
[…]
The psychoanalysts who emigrated from Europe to the United States
during the Nazi era expected to make psychoanalysis “into the ultimate
weapon against fascism, anti-Semitism, and every other antiliberal
bias.”
Frankfurt school
The Frankfurt
school
was a research institute set up in Germany during the 1920’s. They were
instrumental in developing an intellectual base for cultural Marxism
under the “critical theory” framework.
At a deep level the work of the Frankfurt School is
addressed to altering Western societies in an attempt to make them
resistant to anti-Semitism by pathologizing gentile group affiliations.
[…]
…entire thrust of the Frankfurt School’s view of science rejects the
idea that science should attempt to understand reality in favor of the
ideology that science ought to serve moral (i.e., political) interests.
[…]
The end of anti-Semitism is thus viewed as a precondition for the
development of a utopian society and the liberation of humanity— perhaps
the closest that the Frankfurt School ever came to defining utopia. The
envisioned utopian society is one in which Judaism can continue as a
cohesive group but in which cohesive, nationalistic, corporate gentile
groups based on conformity to group norms have been abolished as
manifestations of psychopathology.
[…]
In the 1970s, the Frankfurt School intellectuals continued to draw
the fire of German conservatives who characterized them as the
“intellectual foster-parents of terrorists” and as fomenters of
“cultural revolution to destroy the Christian West”
[…]
Jewish interests are also served by the Frankfurt School ideology
that gentile concerns about losing social status and being eclipsed
economically , socially, and demographically by other groups are an
indication of psychopathology. As an exceptionally upwardly mobile
group, this ideology serves Jewish interests by defusing gentile
concerns about their downward mobility.
Jewish intellectual strategies to change culture
Judaism, because of its position as a minority group
strategy committed to its own worldview, has tended to adopt ideologies
in which the institutions and ideologies of the surrounding society are
viewed negatively.
[…]
…an important goal of Jewish intellectual effort may be understood as
attempting to undermine cohesive gentile group strategies while
continuing to engage in their own highly cohesive group strategy.
[…]
…one of the themes of post-Enlightenment Judaism has been the rapid
upward mobility of Jews and attempts by gentile power structures to
limit Jewish access to power and social status. Given this rather
conspicuous reality, practical reasons of economic and political
self-interest would result in Jews being attracted to movements that
criticized the gentile power structure or even advocated overthrowing it
entirely.
[…]
Another practical goal of Jewish political and intellectual movements
has been to combat anti-Semitism. For example, Jewish attraction to
socialism in many countries in the 1930s was motivated partly by
communist opposition to fascism and anti-Semitism. The general
association between anti-Semitism and conservative political views has
often been advanced as an explanation for Jewish involvement with the
left, including the leftist tendencies of many wealthy Jews.
[…]
In the absence of a clearly perceived conflict with Jewish interests,
it remains possible that different political choices among ethnic Jews
are only differences in tactics for how best to achieve Jewish
interests.
[…]
Silberman notes “American Jews are committed to cultural tolerance
because of their belief— one firmly rooted in history— that Jews are
safe only in a society acceptant of a wide range of attitudes and
behaviors, as well as a diversity of religious and ethnic groups. It is
this belief, for example, not approval of homosexuality, that leads an
overwhelming majority of American Jews to endorse ‘gay rights’ and to
take a liberal stance on most other so-called ‘social’ issues.”
[…]
Institutions that promote group ties among gentiles (such as
nationalism and traditional gentile religious associations) are actively
opposed and subverted, while the structural integrity of Jewish
separatism is maintained. A consistent thread of radical theorizing
since Marx has been a fear that nationalism could serve as a social
cement that would result in a compromise between the social classes and
result in a highly unified social order based on hierarchical but
harmonious relationships between existing social classes.
[…]
When an experiment in ideology and political structure fails, another
experiment is launched. Since the Enlightenment, Judaism has not been a
unified, monolithic movement.
[…]
In the promised utopian societies of the future, the category of
Jew-gentile would be of no theoretical importance , but Jews could
continue to identify as Jews and there could be continuation of Jewish
group identity while at the same time a principle source of gentile
identity— religion and its concomitant supports for high-investment
parenting— would be conceptualized as an infantile aberration.
 |
| Most of these women have admitted to being change agents under CIA direction. |
Jews in neo-conservatism
Neoconservatism evolved from those on the farthest right of Stalin’s
communist left, who eventually became anti-communist because of Soviet
persecution of Jews after World War 2. They still retain liberal ideals
like the denial of race and gender differences. Their most preached
position of “Middle East democracy” is a euphemism for “let’s hurt
Israel’s enemies.”
Jewish liberals promote domestic issues which help their interests in
the USA while neocons promote foreign policies that support Israel
under the false guise of conservatism. They don’t work together directly
but seem to cover all the bases to help Jews both in and out of Israel.
…origins of neoconservatism as a Jewish movement are thus
linked to the fact that the left, including the Soviet Union and
leftist radicals in the United States, had become anti-Zionist.
[…]
The New Left also tended to have negative attitudes toward Israel,
with the result that many Jewish radicals eventually abandoned the left.
In the late 1960s, the black Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee
described Zionism as “racist colonialism” which massacred and oppressed
Arabs.
[…]
Part of the attraction neoconservatism held for Jewish intellectuals
was its compatibility with support for Israel at a time when Third World
countries supported by most American leftists were strongly
anti-Zionist.
[…]
In alliance with virtually the entire organized American Jewish
community, neoconservatism is a vanguard Jewish movement with close ties
to the most extreme nationalistic, aggressive, racialist, and
religiously fanatical elements within Israel.
[…]
…by far the best predictor of neoconservative attitudes, on foreign
policy at least, is what the political right in Israel deems in Israel’s
best interests.
[…]
…neoconservatives have been staunch supporters of arguably the most
destructive force associated with the left in the twentieth
century—massive non-European immigration.
Jewish influence in America
Jewish groups, particularly the AJCongress, played a
leading role in drafting civil rights legislation and pursuing legal
challenges related to civil rights issues mainly benefiting blacks.
“Jewish support, legal and monetary, afforded the civil rights movement a
string of legal victories. . . . There is little exaggeration in an
American Jewish Congress lawyer’s claim that ‘many of these laws were
actually written in the offices of Jewish agencies by Jewish staff
people, introduced by Jewish legislators and pressured into being by
Jewish voters’ ”
[…]
By 1968, Jews constituted 20 percent of the faculty of elite American
colleges and universities and constituted 30 percent of the “most
liberal” faculty. At this time, Jews, representing less than 3 percent
of the population, constituted 25 percent of the social science faculty
at elite universities and 40 percent of liberal faculty who published
most.
[…]
[Jewish intellectualism] has resulted in a society increasingly split
between a disproportionately Jewish “cognitive elite” and a growing
mass of individuals who are intellectually incompetent, irresponsible as
parents, prone to requiring public assistance, and prone to criminal
behavior, psychiatric disorders, and substance abuse.
[…]
…neither communism nor fascism was good for Jews in the long run. But
democracy cannot be trusted given that Weimar ended with Hitler. A
solution is to advocate democracy and the trappings of traditional
religious culture, but managed by an elite able to manipulate the masses
via control of the media and academic discourse.
[…]
Of considerable importance to the history of U.S. immigration policy
has been the collaboration between Jewish activists and elite gentile
industrialists interested in cheap labor, at least in the period prior
to 1924.
Jewish progress in the 20th century
In the late 19th century the great bulk of the Jewish
population lived in Eastern Europe, with many Jews mired in poverty and
all surrounded by hostile populations and unsympathetic governments. A
century later, Israel is firmly established in the Middle East, and Jews
have become the wealthiest and most powerful group in the United States
and have achieved elite status in other Western countries. The critical
Jewish role in radical leftism has been sanitized, while Jewish
victimization by the Nazis has achieved the status of a moral touchstone
and is a prime weapon in the push for large-scale non-European
immigration, multi-culturalism and advancing other Jewish causes.
[…]
The victory over National Socialism set the stage for the tremendous
increase in Jewish power in the post-World War II Western world, in the
end more than compensating for the decline of Jews in the Soviet Union.
As Slezkine shows, the children of Jewish immigrants assumed an elite
position in the United States, just as they had in the Soviet Union and
throughout Eastern Europe and Germany prior to World War II. This
new-found power facilitated the establishment of Israel, the
transformation of the United States and other Western nations in the
direction of multiracial, multicultural societies via large-scale
non-white immigration, and the consequent decline in European
demographic and cultural preeminence.
[…]
While constituting approximately 2.4 percent of the population of the
United States, Jews represented half of the top one hundred Wall Street
executives and about 40 percent of admissions to Ivy League colleges.
Lipset and Raab (1995) note that Jews contribute between one-quarter and
one-third of all political contributions in the United States,
including one-half of Democratic Party contributions and one-fourth of
Republican contributions.
Predictions for the future
One may expect that as ethnic conflict continues to
escalate in the United States, increasingly desperate attempts will be
made to prop up the ideology of multiculturalism with sophisticated
theories of the psychopathology of majority group ethnocentrism, as well
as with the erection of police state controls on nonconforming thought
and behavior.
[…]
History also suggests that anti-Jewish reactions develop as Jews
increase their control over other peoples. As always, it will be
fascinating to observe the dénouement.
[…]
Presently white gentiles are the most underrepresented group at
Harvard, accounting for approximately 25 percent of the students, while
Asians and Jews constitute at least half of the student body while
constituting no more than five percent of the population. The United
States is well on the road to being dominated by an Asian technocratic
elite and a Jewish business, professional, and media elite.
Jews feel an intimate bond with each other as you may have already
noticed by their professional networking circles like I have in
Washington DC. Their actions, lives, and ideology are dominated by their
race. While I don’t have a problem with that, I do find their
subversive movements against gentiles hypocritical in that they would in
no way advise or enact those ideas for Israel. Their morality,
fairness, and justice is limited to whether they are dealing with fellow
Jews or gentiles, and they will not push any idea or notion that may
paint Jewish actions in a critical light.
The book makes clear that Jews conducted cultural undertakings that
they believed would end anti-Semitism once and for all, but like most
utopia builders, they forgot to account for the consequences,
particularly how multiculturalism, a Jewish keystone policy, is
beginning to cater to additional groups that are hostile to Jewish
interests. Also, incubating social justice and then losing control of it
has left out Jews as a victimized group and promoted Palestinian
interests instead.
Their overshot explains why the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a neocon organization, has in the past two years
begun attacking feminism,
an ideology that developed with disproportionate Jewish support.
They’re doing so because minorities are clamoring for a bigger piece of
the victim pie and introducing anti-Semitic and pro-Palestine thought.
Some Jews have calculated that at this point it’s better to introduce
some truth and realtalk in gender issues (but not race) so that
non-Jewish groups don’t gain too much power. Don’t be surprised if Jews
throw multiculturalism under the bus at some point and claim that they
are the true “white” Americans in need of protection from the
anti-Semitic minority hordes.
In turns out there is no “Jewish conspiracy” at all. The Jewish
people simply are hyper-nationalistic and ethnocentric and so live and
work in a way that their group is benefited first. Their participation
in every sociological movement is structured so that Jews are
benefited outright, or at least not hurt. This would be no different
than if your efforts to increase your income and well-being went to
benefit your direct family.
What amazes me is how methodical, patient, and determined Jews are in
promoting their group interests. Such efforts should be commended and
modeled. Why isn’t there such a group of Americans that do the same for
Christian interests? The answer lies in the fact that gentiles are less
organized, less ethnocentric, more altruistic to outgroups, and more
prone to selling out their people if presented with money and power,
while Jews would only sell out
after their ingroup needs are met.
A lot of red pill truth is concerned with dismantling myths that have
been institutionalized by intellectual Jews over the past century. Not
being able to highlight race or gender differences matches with the
Jewish imperative because doing so will inevitably lead to
“anti-Semitism” when differences between Jews and gentiles are pointed
out concerning each group’s propensity for ambition, intelligence,
ethnocentrism, identity, and socioeconomic class status. The Culture Of
Critique explains where significant parts of our current cultural
problems came from, connecting a lot of dots I had missing about
why
our culture got to where it is. The bulk of what I criticize about
Western culture was in fact ushered in by intellectual Jewish movements.
Before opening this book, I wondered if it would turn me into a
neo-Nazi, but instead it served as a historical truth bomb that has made
me skeptical of the ideas, behavioral actions, and teachings of
prominent Jews and where their true intentions and loyalties lie (i.e.
if an American Jew would die for America before Israel). I’m also having
trouble getting my head around the fact that such a small group would
embark on a massive reconstruction of reality and ideological
manipulations on the world’s people just to protect their group—
and succeed. I feel both outrage and admiration at the same time.
Ironically, my parents were allowed to emigrate to the United States
in part because of intense Jewish lobbying to loosen immigration laws. I
probably wouldn’t be here today if it wasn’t for their efforts in
creating a multicultural America. The neomasculine ideals that I believe
are correct, and the traditions that I would want to bring back, would
have likely prevented me from coming into existence and becoming an
American citizen.
That said, when I
witness the cultural destruction today and how it negatively affects
my male peers, I feel not anger for what has transpired in the past but
a deep focus on actions I can take in the present to preserve secular
masculinity for men who don’t want to turn into a effete male who prays
at the alter of a matriarchal power structure.
http://dailywesterner.com/news/2017-06-19/the-damaging-effects-of-jewish-activism-on-western-culture/
We just raised the $ 80,000 we needed to launch 
