AMINTIRI DESPRE VIITOR-ROMÂNIA DE MÂINE , RrOMANIKA BABANA
Doriți să reacționați la acest mesaj? Creați un cont în câteva clickuri sau conectați-vă pentru a continua.

Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.”

In jos

Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Empty Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.”

Mesaj Scris de Admin Joi Noi 10, 2016 7:24 am

Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Xdonald_trump_-_make_america_great_again-600x330.jpg.pagespeed.ic.OYO-KfwVkz

This is an amazing victory. The stars were aligned. First, the very long shot of Trump being nominated. Then he gets to run against the most corrupt, least charismatic candidate in history (I think Joe Biden would have beaten Trump, and maybe even Bernie Sanders) at a time when Americans naturally want change after 8 years of Obama.
Fundamentally, it is a victory of White Americans over the oligarchic, hostile elites what have run this country for decades. Trump accomplished a hostile takeover of the Republican Party and won without the support or with only lukewarm and vacillating support from much of the GOP elite.
In May of 2015 I was very despondent about our prospects. It just didn’t seem like we could break through the elite consensus dominating all the high ground—and all the moral high ground—of the U.S., including the media (print, television, and the Hollywood movie industry), the academic world, politics, Wall St., and the CEOs of major corporations. We were systematically shut out and it was obvious that the powers that be were not going to let the Alt Right get a seat at the table. Then Trump announced, it was hard to take it seriously, but his comments on immigration, American nationalism, political correctness and trade certainly struck a chord. My immediate reaction (July 10, 2015), however, was that he had two things going for him that were absolutely unique — he is a celebrity and he is very, very rich (“How it could happen“). Such a person is in a position to be heard; he can’t be shut out of the media, and he doesn’t need the money of the corrupt donor class. In fact, the media, eager for ratings, gave him countless opportunities to get his message out. Anyone on the Alt Right could have said the exact same things, but we would be speaking into our closets.
Even back in July of 2015, it was obvious Trump was not your usual GOP candidate:
[Trump] certainly did not fall in my estimation when he attacked two prominent operatives of the Republican Party/Israel Lobby nexus hostile to his candidacy, Charles Krauthammer and Jonah Goldberg. Then there’s the Twitter incident: “I promise you that I’m much smarter than Jonathan Leibowitz — I mean Jon Stewart @TheDailyShow,” tweeted Trump, adding, “Who, by the way, is totally overrated.” It is, of course, considered “anti-Semitic” to ever call attention to the fact that someone is Jewish because of the absolutely outrageous suggestion that the Jewish identity of someone like Stewart/Leibowitz might influence his opinions. As we all know, Jews are just like everybody else.
And it quickly turned out that he understood the anger in White America far better than anyone else and he was willing to say what they wanted to hear — most of all the White working class (72-23!), but also White women(53-43), and his deficit among White educated women was only 51-45 (CBS exit polls). Looks like quite a few college-educated women ignored what they heard in their gender studies courses and those mandatory credits in Black Studies.
While obviously a lot of work needs to be done, this is a glorious day.


The following is an expanded version of my article in Radix Journal’s series on the meaning of Trump.
The Alt Right has gravitated to Trump’s candidacy, and for good reason. Much of what the Alt Right wants will be difficult or impossible to bring about even with a president who is entirely on board with the idea that America should start thinking about the interests of its traditional White majority. But win or lose, Trump has already had a huge effect on American politics in a way that benefits the Alt Right, and his victory will be even more so:

  • Trump has made statements on immigration that have been banned from polite society for 50 years — deport illegals, seal the border, end birthright citizenship, place a moratorium on Muslim immigration, and make immigration serve actual labor needs rather than a moral imperative (ideally with guest workers not given citizenship). He has deplored Angela Merkel’s policies in Germany and has made statements indicating he opposes the transformation of Western societies via immigration and multiculturalism (“Paris isn’t Paris anymore.”)
  • Trump’s victory will encourage and energize the right in Europe. It is Brexit on steroids — a scream by voters to stop the way things are going. To stop the destruction of their traditional ways of life. If nothing else, it is throwing a monkey wrench into the system. Tear it down! We can’t keep going on like this! Voters want an end to meaningless wars, an end to importing people who hate us and will never assimilate to our way of life.
  • Trump has unmasked the neocons. The neocons have dominated the intellectual and foreign policy establishment of the Republican Party since the 1980s. From the beginning of Trump’s candidacy, neocons have been leading the #NeverTrump movement, despite the catastrophic effects of a Hillary Clinton presidency on the GOP. A Clinton presidency would ensure a liberal/left voting majority into the foreseeable future given that she would amnesty millions of illegals and dramatically raise total numbers of immigrants and refugees. Clinton Supreme Court appointments would likely gut the First Amendment by enabling “hate speech” laws and they would gut the Second Amendment as well. No one on the right, from traditional “limited government” conservatives to the Alt Right, would want this, and it’s difficult to believe that the Jewish identities and pro-Israel commitments of the most important neocons are lost on non-Jewish Republicans. The treason of the neocons will be long remembered in GOP circles and will compromise their influence in the future.

I notice on Twitter that Bill Kristol says that the #NeverTrumpers should be magnanimous in losing, but I would be shocked if neocons were given any role in the GOP. This is Trump’s party now. It is incredibly heartening that he wants a good relationship with Russia at a time when neocons and NATO have been clamoring for confrontation and aggression. It is incredibly heartening that he supports the legitimate Assad government in Syria. I have no doubt that he will act in concert with Russia to end the rebellion and bring peace and stability to the region.

  • Trump has highlighted the chasm between the overwhelmingly White Republican voting base and the GOP donor class intent on globalist policies of mass immigration, free trade, and a bellicose pro-Israel, anti-Russian foreign policy. The pre-Trump GOP was dominated by a neocon foreign policy establishment and a pro-Chamber of Commerce, pro-big business economic policy. This party did not represent the interests of GOP voters and can’t be resurrected. Even if Trump had lost, his energized supporters would be a new and important force within the GOP. His victory will ensure that the GOP will be a populist party for the foreseeable future.
  • Trump has unmasked the media. The media have always been liberal, but this time around, even much of the usual pro-Republican media has been hostile to Trump, and a survey by the Media Research Center found an astounding 91% of media coverage hostile to his candidacy. Who can forget the hostility from mainstream conservative media like National ReviewThe Weekly Standard, and other neocon outlets? 
  • This feeds into the narrative that there has been a unified establishment from the far left to the neoconservative right that has opposed Trump’s populist policies favoring the middle class and the traditional White majority.

The media is a pillar of the establishment, and it is heartening indeed that people ignored the deluge of talk of Trump being a racist, a bigot, and a misogynist. The media is a huge loser in As we have commented many times, the media is under very powerful Jewish influence. Trump’s victory is a blow to the entire Jewish power structure. I have written 6 articles on Jewish hostility toward Trump, much of this hostility bordering on the clinically paranoid. Jews understand that they do indeed have a great deal of power in the U.S. and throughout the West and that they have used that power to destroy the traditional homogeneity of these societies and to do all they can to make Whites minorities in societies they have dominated for hundreds and, in the case of Europe, many thousands of years. We are a long way from really putting a dent in that power structure, but Trump’s victory is a great first step.

  • Trump has put the Alt Right on the map. There have been numerous articles and commentary on the Alt Right because of Trump’s candidacy. The Alt Right has been the only identifiable intellectual perspective supporting Trump, although we understand that he is not one of us and would not attempt to do much what we would like to see in our ideal world. We are the only intellectual perspective that takes race seriously and accepts the social science research not only on race but on the disastrous costs of imposed multiculturalism for White majorities and the horrifying future awaiting Whites if indeed they do become hated, despised minorities. Traditional conservative intellectuals simply cannot explain what is happening with their usual intellectual toolkit. They can’t explain the anger and the very legitimate fears of the White majority. They can’t understand the racialization of politics. We understand it and are able to analyze it in very sophisticated ways that are entirely within the scientific mainstream.

Much of the media coverage of the Alt Right was motivated by attempting to tar Trump as a “racist,” and after the election, win or lose, the media will likely attempt to put the toothpaste back in the tube by ceasing coverage. However, a Trump victory makes that all but impossible. Our increased visibility has meant a very large surge in support for the Alt Right. Meeting attendance is way up, and readership on Alt Right sites is skyrocketing. The future is bright, and a very large amount of the credit for that has to go to Donald Trump.
We are the future.
Admin
Admin
Admin

Mesaje : 10753
Data de înscriere : 05/11/2012

https://amintiridespreviitor.forumgratuit.ro

Sus In jos

Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Empty Why So Much Jewish Fear And Loathing Of Donald Trump?

Mesaj Scris de Admin Joi Noi 10, 2016 7:44 am

There has been extraordinary, almost unhinged anxiety among some Jews about Donald Trump’s campaign for the GOP Presidential nomination. It has no solid basis, but unfortunately it does speak to their profound neurosis and alienation from the historic American nation.
It’s worth asking how, from the general Jewish point of view, Trump departs from the ideal presidential candidate. This ideal candidate is (1) predictably and fanatically pro-Israel; (2) predictably liberal/Left on social issues, particularly anything related to immigration and multiculturalism; and (3) in need of big campaign money contingent on satisfying (1) and (2). Jeb Bush, who was the early favorite of Sheldon Adelson and the Republican Jewish Coalition, filled the bill quite well. But Bush now seems to be fading, with Adelson leaning towardMarco Rubio—he of the Gang of Eight Amnesty/Immigration Surge bill and saying all the right things about Israel and the Middle East.
Trump could hardly be more acceptable on Israel, given his statement that “We love Israel. We will fight for Israel 100 percent, 1,000 percent. It will be there forever.” [When it comes to Jewish ties, no GOP candidate trumps Trumpby Uri Heilman, Times of Israel, August 8, 2015]On the other hand, he does not come across as an ideal neoconservative candidate, having stated that he would not have invaded Iraq (strongly promoted by Israel, the neocons, and the Israel Lobby), opposes using US force for “nation-building,” another favorite neocon policy and one of the rationales for the Iraq invasion, and for his recent statements on Syria—that Putin’s support for Assad makes more sense than the US policy (“we don’t even know who we’re backing”)[Trump on Putin Controlling Syria: ‘OK, Fine,’ Him Fighting ISIS ‘Wonderful Thing,’ ‘Very Little Downside’,Breitbart.com, September 29, 2015
Additionally, of course, Trump has long-term business connections with Jews, Jews have highly visible positions in his campaign, his daughter has converted to Judaism and his grandchildren are being raised Jewish.
Nevertheless, despite all that, there have been many instances of well-connected, high-profile Jews expressing extreme anxiety about Trump. It seems to me that the common denominator here is nothing less than that they see Trump as undermining the elite consensus on immigration—even though his debate performance last night raised questions about how much—and, implicitly, on the moral imperative of euthanizing White America.
Or to put it less delicately, they see Trump as potentially leading to a fascist counter-revolution that would spell the end of the project, very much promoted by the Jewish community, of creating a multi-cultural, non-White America completely cut off from its pre-1965 moorings.
As often noted here, mainstream Jewish political attitudes and behavior in the US, from the far Left to the neoconservative right, has always been directed at lessening the demographic, political, and cultural power of White America. This is exemplified by the successful campaign to enact the 1965 immigration law and, even more significant, the continued support for high levels of immigration by the entire organized Jewish community.
There are two main reasons for this: a concern that a homogeneous White America could ultimately rise up against Jews, as occurred in Hitler’s Germany (see here for discussion of a recent American example involving economist Bryan Caplan); and historic antipathy toward Christian Europeans, an outgroup seen exclusively in the context of the Jewish preoccupation with anti-Semitism.
Obviously, these attitudes are not shared by all American Jews. But they do represent the thrust of Jewish power in the U.S. And we know this is not a principled stance, but rather is a form of ethnic strategizing in the diaspora, because the organized Jewish community also supports Israel as a Jewish state that restricts immigration of non-Jews and is actively involved in the dispossession of the Palestinians.
One example:
“There are a lot of folks who are, to be charitable, into white identity politics, and to be uncharitable are outright racists, who are supporting Trump,” said Nathan Wurtzel, a Republican political consultant and principal at The Catalyst Group, who is Jewish. “It’s very off-putting and disturbing.”
[Donald Trump’s Rise Sparks Widespread Angst Among Jewish Republicans, by Josh Nathan-Kazis, Forward, September 10, 2015]
The concern that “white racists” support Trump has been the focus of many articles, including Evan Osnos’ The fearful and the frustrated| Donald Trump’s nationalist coalition takes shape—for now (The New Yorker, August 31, 2015—the headline is yet another example of psychoanalyzing away legitimate White interests).
But why be concerned that Trump is supported by the tiny part of the electorate that explicitly voices White identities and interests? His policies may be supported by White advocates, but they also supported by most Americans. And, after all, there’s no parallel concern that Democratic candidates are regularly supported by Communists.
The reason in my opinion: a real fear that Trump might actually do something on immigration, legal and illegal, that would slow White dispossession, and that this could perhaps snowball into something far greater, with unknown consequences.
This is a huge concern for these Jewish activists. The fact is that Trump’s statements on immigration have tapped into a groundswell of popular sentiment, propelling his remarkable performance in the polls. As VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow has noted: “Objectively, Trump’s historical function is clearly to break the Washington Cartel and to bring the immigration issue into politics.”
Until Trump came along, there really was no mainstream politician and almost no Main Stream Media voices (Ann Coulter and Pat Buchanan are exceptions) that were mentioning birthright citizenship, immigrant crime, or the effects of legal immigration on the labor market. White Americans are a sleeping giant, lulled to sleep by the MSM, by cuckservative politicians, and by the creation an atmosphere of fear where dissident opinions are severely punished by job loss,ostracism, etc., and there are huge rewards for going along with the status quo.
Jewish academic and media activists have spent the last century promoting the idea that White racial/ethnic interests do not exist. But they still appear to be well aware that a pro-white conflagration can be sparked quite easily. Even with all the propaganda, all the punishments for deviation, and all the incentives for going along with the system, politics are increasingly racialized in the U.S.—racial identity rather than social class is now critical for explaining voting behavior. There is clearly a significant segment of the White electorate that is disaffected with the Republican Establishment—and certainly does not see salvation with the Democrats.
When neocon Ben Wattenberg famously asserted in his book The Good News Is The Bad News Is Wrong] that “The non-Europeanization of America is heartening news of an almost transcendental quality”, he was speaking for very many American Jews and certainly for the organized Jewish community. But America has not yet been non-Europeanized—at least not completely and not irreversibly. The possibility that Donald Trump could begin the process of re-Europeanizing America is horrifying to these (n.b. Republican) Jewish activists.
[Support for Trump is] a disorienting experience for longtime Republican Jewish donors and activists, who have made inroads into the party’s establishment over the last two decades, and who have been at the forefront of advocacy for tolerance and pluralism within the party.
“The tone of what they’re saying, we get painted as a party of intolerance,” said [fundraiser Fred] Zeidman, who practices law in the Houston area and backs Bush’s candidacy. …
[Op-Ed editor of the New York Post Seth] Mandel said online that white supremacist backing for Trump—who has suggested immigrants from Mexico are predominantly criminals—has been unsettling. “That will always make Jews uncomfortable, that’s why there’s so much pushback” among some Jewish conservatives against the Trump candidacy. [Link in original]
For the last 35 years or so, the neocons have been pushing the GOP to the Left on social issues—and yes, neoconservatism is a Jewish movement. But notice that, as is so often the case, Kampeas’ article presents Jewish interests in a non-European America as fulfilling the loftiest of moral sentiments. It’s all about “pluralism” and “tolerance”—virtues that the great majority of Americans agree with (but of course are completely absent from Jewish rhetoric on Israeli policies). Whites are told they have a moral imperative to become a minority.
This is a rhetoric that is uniquely effective in the West, with devastating results. I believe we must understand such claims for what they are: expressions of Jewish ethnic interests that conflict with the legitimate ethnic interests of Whites in preserving their demographic and cultural dominance in societies they created and have dominated for hundreds and, in the case of Europe, thousands of years.
Given this deep concern that Trump may imperil the project of dispossessing White America, it is not surprising that for some Jewish activists, even the most benign statements by Trump conjure up images of Hitler and National Socialism. For example, this statement by Ross Kaminsky writing in American Spectator that again focuses on Trump’s immigration plan:
His plan to require businesses to “hire American workers first” has the stench of xenophobia backed up by the fist of government. Perhaps as a Jew I’m overly sensitive, but when I hear Trump speak I can’t help but think of “Germany for the Germans.”
This is outrageous on its face—isn’t it obvious that US immigration policy should be about the interests of Americans? But actually, it’s not obvious at all. Indeed, it reflects a deep reality—that Jewish attitudes on immigration have a long history of being explicitly unconcerned with the interests of America or its traditional majority population. Rather, the Jewish view is that immigration policy should be based on moral principles, not the interests of Americans. Immigration of all races is a sacred value, far more important than the qualities of the immigrants or what they can contribute to America.
Thus in 1948, at a time when the 1924 immigration law favoring immigration from Northwest Europe was still in force, the American Jewish Committee submitted to a Senate subcommittee a statement simultaneously denying the importance of the material interests of the United States and affirming its commitment to immigration of all races:
Americanism is not to be measured by conformity to law, or zeal for education, or literacy, or any of these qualities in which immigrants may excel the native born. Americanism is the spirit behind the welcome that America has traditionally extended to people of all races, all religions, all nationalities.
Again reflecting the extraordinarily low threshold for linking Trump with National Socialism, Bethany Mandel, also writing in The Forward finds that for her, as with Kaminsky, Trump conjures up images of Germany in the 1930s:
Since his campaign has taken off, Trump has spent a good deal of energy playing dumb when it comes to the overwhelming nature of the support for his candidacy from white nationalists and neo-Nazis. Worse than Trump’s willful blindness is the rhetoric he uses to stoke racial unrest with a slogan—“Make America Great Again”—reminiscent of the Nazi Party of the 1930s.
Finally, at the most hyperbolic end of the spectrum: Donald Perlstein’s article Donald Trump, American hustler: The frightening fascist tendencies of his GOP rise, originally posted at the Washington Spectator but deemed so important that it was re-posted by Salon [October 7, 2015].
Perlstein’s intellectual roots can be seen in his quoting Philip Rahv, “a founding editor of the marquee intellectual journal Partisan Review.” PR was the flagship journal of the New York Intellectuals, an influential Jewish intellectual movement that was an early proponent of the idea that American democracy required a commitment, as Sidney Hook phrased it, to “a maximum of cultural [and ethnic] diversity.” This is a good example of Jewish intellectuals promoting the transcendent value of ethnic and cultural diversity as far more important than any material interests of the United States, much less the ethnic interests of White Americans.
(Likewise, Evan Osnos [Email him] in his New Yorker article on Trump and the White nationalists which was mentioned above, cites another famous New York Intellectual who pathologized legitimate White interests: “The crude tribalism that Richard Hofstadter named “the paranoid style”—and, over the summer, it replicated like a runaway mutation.” Note how Jewish media figures can easily and confidently plug into Jewish intellectual traditions that are fundamentally hostile to the legitimate interests of the traditional American majority.)
Perlstein all but accuses Trump of being the second coming of Hitler:
Donald Trump is not a fascist––probably.
His ex-wife Ivana once claimed he kept a volume of Hitler’s collected speeches in a cabinet by his bed, and read from time to time the fuhrer’s vision of human life as a pitiless war of all against all. “If I had these speeches, and I am not saying that I do, I would never read them,” he told Vanity Fair in 1990. But consider something the architect of Trump Tower, Der Scutt, once said on how to evaluate the truth value of Donald Trump claims: “divide by two, then divide by four, and you’re closer to the answer.”
Again, the crux of the issue is Trump’s immigration plan:
Trump has now provided more “specifics” about his immigration plan: a forced population transfer greater than any attempted in history, greater than the French and Spanish expulsions of the Jews in 1308 and 1492; greater than the Nabka of approximately 700,000 Palestinian Arabs from British-mandate Palestine; greater than the 1.5 million Stalin consigned to Siberia and the Central Asian republics; greater than Pol Pot’s exile of 2.5 million city-dwellers to the Cambodian countryside, or the scattering of Turkey’s Assyrian Christians, which the scholar Mordechai Zaken says numbers in the millions and required 180 years to complete. Trump has promised to move 12 million Mexicans in under two years––“so fast your head will spin.”
Interestingly, Perlstein omits the expulsion of 12 million Germans from Eastern Europe after World War II—by some estimates, the same as the number of illegals in the US now. I suspect that Perlstein sees the German expulsions as just fine even if they resulted minimally in the deaths of hundreds of thousands. No need complicate his simple narrative of moral righteousness with the horrorof what actually happened to German civilians during and after the war. In fact, I don’t recall any Jews or Jewish organizations complaining about these expulsions.
Other signs of incipient American fascism noted by Perlstein:
Last fall, the Public Religion Research Institute found that a majority of whites believe “discrimination against whites has become as big a problem as discrimination against blacks and other minorities.”
Link in original. But shouldn’t Perlstein at least link to a discussion of why this belief is wrongheaded, given the hostile attitudes towards Whites pursuing their legitimate interests that are so apparent among the Donald Perlsteins of the world?
And:
A brand new Washington Post/ABC poll finds 57 percent of Republicans support the most massive ethnic cleansing in the annals of humanity (or, what The Washington Post blandly calls “Trump’s tough positions on immigration”).
Actually, not just “Republicans” but most Americans support Trump’s immigration plan. But for Perlstein, Trump and most Americans are incipient fascists for wanting an immigration policy that serves their interests.
Personally, I doubt that Donald Trump would actually attempt, much less succeed, in rolling back the last 50 years. I see these expressions of Jewish angst more as a sign of Jewish political neurosis than anything rooted in reality. These writers and political operatives have an incredibly low threshold for denouncing incipient fascism. But make no mistake, this political neurosis is having and will continue to have very real effects on the 2016 race.
We can only imagine the deluge of propaganda if Trump is seen as having a real chance of winning. By comparison, the 1964 ads predicting nuclear Armageddonif Barry Goldwater was elected will be small potatoes.
Kevin MacDonald [[email=%20kmacd@csulb.edu]email him[/email]] is professor of psychology at California State University–Long Beach. His research has focused on developing evolutionary perspectives in developmental psychology, personality theory, Western culture, and ethnic relations (group evolutionary strategies). He edits and is a frequent contributor to The Occidental Observer and The Occidental Quarterly. For his website, click here.
Admin
Admin
Admin

Mesaje : 10753
Data de înscriere : 05/11/2012

https://amintiridespreviitor.forumgratuit.ro

Sus In jos

Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Empty Jewish Fear And Loathing Of Donald Trump [2]: “New York Values” vs. Muslim Immigration

Mesaj Scris de Admin Joi Noi 10, 2016 7:55 am






The uproar over Sen. Ted Cruz’s jibe that Donald Trump reflected “New York Values” said a lot about contemporary American political debate.
Given New York is the deepest of blue states, Cruz was quite obviously insinuating liberalism. But commentators seized on it as veiled anti-Semitism e.g. By ‘New York values’ did Ted Cruz mean ‘Jewish’? by Mark Silk, Religion News Service, January 15, 2015.
As a child of the Heartland, I can testify that this interpretation simply didn’t occur to most Americans. And it’s particularly fantastic given that Cruz has assiduously courted the Israel Lobby, famously saying “those who hate Israel also hate America, that those who hate Jews also hate Christians, and that anyone who hates Israel and the Jewish people is not following the teachings of Christ” [Ted Cruz speech to Christian group cut short by boos after Israel comments, by Sean Sullivan, Washington Post, September 11, 2014].
But there’s a very low threshold for accusing someone of anti-Semitism.
Fortunately for Cruz, the anti-anti-Semites still have The Donald to kick around.
Indeed, we now have the anomalous situation where Trump is condemned by Jewish organizations for implicit anti-Semitism while also condemned for having the values of a typical New Yorker—liberal, and typical of the great majority of US Jews, wherever they live.
In my first report on Jewish reactions to the Trump phenomenon, I said:
The common denominator here is nothing less than that they see Trump as undermining the elite consensus on immigration … and, implicitly, on the moral imperative of euthanizing White America.
Well, even though that was only two months ago, events since then have only provided more support for the nexus between Jewish loathing of Trump and concern about Trump’s attitudes on immigration and multiculturalism—combined with a bit of neocon angst that he is insufficiently hostile to Russiaand not on board with bombing Iran and deposing Assad in Syria.
The latest impetus for Trump terror: his statement “calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.” This created a deluge of apoplectic outrage, complete with comparisons to Hitler—typically without the “until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on” qualification. [Media Push Trump As Hitler Meme, Breitbart.com, December 8, 2015]
The common denominator in many of the comments of Jewish organizations: hysteria about the singling out of a group. For example, Jeffrey Greenblatt of the ADL wailed “A plan that singles out Muslims and denies them entry to the U.S. based on their religion is deeply offensive and runs contrary to our nation’s deepest values” [What Jewish groups have (and haven’t) said about Donald Trumpby Uriel Hellman, Jewish Telegraphic Agency, December 13, 2015]
And it’s not just the US whose “deepest values” are violated. Israel, that “Light Unto the Nations” and pillar of multiculturalism, also repudiated Trump’s proposal. Israeli PM Netanyahu’s office released this statement:
Prime Minister Netanyahu rejects Donald Trump’s recent remarks about Muslims. … The State of Israel respects all religion and strictly adheres to the rights of all its citizens.
Trump was fairly nonplussed about this, noting only that Netanyahu’s comments were “inappropriate.” But he seemed to be quite aware of the hypocrisy involved:









Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” DJT_Headshot_V2_normal



[ltr]Hillary Clinton said that it is O.K. to ban Muslims from Israel by building a WALL, but not O.K. to do so in the U.S. We must be vigilant![/ltr]











Of course, given that Israel is an avowedly Jewish state, Muslims are by definition second-class citizens, with very different rights under law, including especially immigration policy, which, of course, is (energetically) restricted to Jews.
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” AYELET_SHAKED-212x300
Amazingly, even Dan Shapiro, the US Ambassador to Israel, recently acknowledged the differing legal practices vis-à-vis Palestinians and settlers on the West Bank (and was robustly denounced by Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked, right.)[]Shaked demands Shapiro recant comments about ‘2 standards’ in West Bank,By Yonah Jeremy Bob, Jerusalem Post,January 19, 2016
So in unsurprising fact, Netanyahu and the Israeli government go far beyond Trump by discriminating against all groups except Jews. Nevertheless, and weirdly, an Israeli NGO is actively involved in recruiting invaders to Europe—needless to say, casting its motives as entirely idealistic and humanitarian.
But I can see why Jewish organizations are upset. Singling out a group because members of the group are more likely to commit terrorist acts immediately reminds Jews that anti-Jewish attitudes have often resulted from Jews actually being likely to have attitudes or behaviors that the majority finds objectionable.
Thus ADL CEO Greenblatt continued his statement on Trump:
In the Jewish community, we know all too well what can happen when a particular religious group is singled out for stereotyping and scapegoating.
This is likely a veiled reference to the common perception among Jews (which I think is correct) that, although the 1924 Immigration Restriction Act did not refer specifically to Jews, it was motivated in part by the perception that Jewish immigrants were far more likely to be politically radical and sympathetic to Communism—at a time when the horrors of Bolshevism loomed large in public perception.
This perception was firmly rooted in reality, and commonly acknowledged by Jews and non-Jews alike. Political radicalism was then entirely mainstream in the Jewish community. Jews often made up high percentages of members in the Communist Party USA (e.g. in Philadelphia were nearly three-fourths of the membership was composed the children of Jewish immigrants who had come to the United States in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century—here, p. 271).
In response, Jewish organizations went to great lengths to alter the public stereotype of Jewish disloyalty. Jewish publications warned that the Leftism of Jewish immigrants would lead to anti-Semitism. As often occurs now among American Muslim organizations, Jewish organizations in the 1920s engaged in what Sheldon Neuringer calls “a near-desperation . . . effort to portray the Jew as one hundred per cent American” by organizing highly visible patriotic pageants on national holidays and urging the immigrants to learn English.
Nevertheless, in the 1920s, the fact that Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe were viewed as “infected with Bolshevism . . . unpatriotic, alien, unassimilable,” contributed to restrictive immigration legislation. [American Jewry and United States immigration policy, 1881-1953, By Sheldon Neuringer, 1971, p.165].
In my view, it is entirely rational and legitimate for a country to be concerned about the personal characteristics of its immigrants, including those that, as with Muslims currently, might predispose them to terrorism—but also to hostility toward the White, Christian majority, low ability for academic achievement, proneness to crime, welfare use, or even voting Democrat.
And in the case of Jewish radical immigrants in the early 20th century, this is especially relevant in light of the subsequent rise to intellectual dominance of the intellectual Left as an elite hostile to the White, Christian majority—the Jewish role in which was fundamental, and forms the subject of my book The Culture of Critique.
Notice that the 1924 law did not explicitly prohibit Jewish immigration. They continued to emigrate from Western Europe—for example, all-American luminaries like Nightline’s Ted Koppel and his friend Henry Kissinger. But the law severely restricted immigration from Eastern Europe, where the bulk of the Jewish population lived.
Nevertheless, let’s “interrogate” (to use a word that’s fashionable on the left) the idea that denying entry to the U.S. to a particular ethnic or religious group “runs contrary to our nation’s deepest values,” as the ADL’s Greenblatt put it.
Baloney! These “deepest values” only became enshrined in law and elite attitudes with the passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. That legislation repealed the national origins provisions of the 1924 law, which had attempted to create an ethnic status quo as of 1890 by placing quotas on immigration based on the representation in the U.S. population at that time.
Before the 1965 law, there were strong strains in U.S. immigration law that were entirely congruent with Israel’s current practice of fashioning immigration policy to benefit the majority—at times by excluding particular groups.
For example, the Naturalization Act of 1790 restricted immigration to “free white persons of good character.” Almost a century later, there was the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 that prohibited immigration of Chinese (and unanimously condemned by the Jewish press, as Sheldon Neuringer reports in American Jewry and United States Immigration Policy, p.165—also the case with later attempts to restrict immigration).
Then came the Gentlemen’s Agreement, an informal agreement with Japan in 1907 limiting immigration of Japanese workers, and finally the 1924 Immigration Restriction Act that favored northwest Europe, severely restricted the immigration of Africans and banned outright the immigration of Arabs and all Asians. The 1924 law was essentially reaffirmed in the 1952 immigration law, passed over President Truman’s veto.
And it should be remembered that the 1965 law was passed only because of the pretense that, as then freshman Senator Ted Kennedy famously promised, it would not change the ethnic balance of the country.
The 1965 law therefore cannot be read as an endorsement by the traditional American majority for a demographic transformation that will, if unchecked, soon make Whites a minority in the country that they established.
In fact, the “deepest values” attributed to the U.S. by ADL’s Greenblatt are recent creations, stemming entirely from the cultural revolution of the 1960sthat reshaped elite culture in America. The 1965 law was fundamentally a project of the organized American Jewish community( here, here, [url=https://books.google.ca/books?id=32hULuTl-ZMC&pg=PA56&lpg=PA56&dq="most+important+for+the+content+of+immigration+reform"&source=bl&ots=F9Y9Romazg&sig=Q5Aw8AZE6VSlMPCiK91qJQRRpck&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q="most important for the content of immigration]here[/url] )And these “deepest values” are still not held by non-elite White America—given that Trump’s proposals on immigration are actually majority viewpoints in the U.S. [Are Trump’s immigration views out of the mainstream?,  by Byron York, Washington Examiner, August 16, 2015
Conservatism Inc. may argue that Trump is not a conservative.” But the reality is that Trump voters are focusing on his big issues—immigration first and foremost.
Unless we win the immigration battle, none of the other battles can possibly be won.
As Ann Coulter put it after Trump released his remarkable, Jeff Sessions-oriented, immigration plan:








Kevin MacDonald [[email=%20kmacd@csulb.edu]email him[/email]] is professor of psychology at California State University–Long Beach. His research has focused on developing evolutionary perspectives in developmental psychology, personality theory, Western culture, and ethnic relations (group evolutionary strategies). He edits and is a frequent contributor to The Occidental Observer and The Occidental Quarterly. For his website, click here.


Ultima editare efectuata de catre Admin in Joi Noi 10, 2016 8:24 am, editata de 1 ori
Admin
Admin
Admin

Mesaje : 10753
Data de înscriere : 05/11/2012

https://amintiridespreviitor.forumgratuit.ro

Sus In jos

Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Empty Jewish Fear And Loathing Of Donald Trump [3]: Hitler Comparisons Rampant—But Also, Weirdly, Signs Of Second Thoughts

Mesaj Scris de Admin Joi Noi 10, 2016 8:01 am

Donald J. Trump’s speech last week to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee [AIPAC] went astonishingly well. Once again Trump showed excellent political instincts, effectively attacking Obama and Clinton as insufficiently pro-Israel. [11 times Donald Trump won the AIPAC conference, by Ron Kampeas, JTA.org, March 21 2016] As a Trump supporter critical of the role of Israel in U.S. politics, I wrote off his pandering (softening his position on “neutrality” in brokering Israeli-Palestinian peace and on Jerusalem as Israel’s capital) as a marker of Jewish power and kept reminding myself that Trump—uniquely among the candidates—has made many sensible comments on Middle East policy, including especially condemning the Iraq war and US policy in Syria.
But the controversy over Donald Trump among American Jews rages on. (In fact the walkout at Breitbart over Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski’s alleged rough handling of reporter Michelle Fields—for which he has now, rather remarkably, been charged—seems to be driven at least in partby a Jewish anti-Trump faction).
It’s at the point now where the Hitler comparisons and over-the-top Op-Eds are literally too numerous list. As The Daily Beast’s Matt Wilstein wrote March 11, “this was the week that it became utterly acceptable to compare Donald Trump to Hitler.” [Sarah Silverman’s Adolf Hitler Rejects Trump Comparisons on ‘Conan’].
 
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Dailynewsishitler-241x300
Front page of Mort Zuckerman’s New York Daily News, March 6, 2016
But of course, that’s how the Main Stream Media has always worked: repetition, repetition, repetition—the hoped-for result being the creation of “Trump = Hitler,” “Trump = racist,” psychological reflexes that will engender guilt in enough voters to sway the election.
Abe Foxman, although no longer head of the Anti-Defamation League, continues to show the hair-trigger anti-Trump reflexes of the activist Jewish community. Thus at a rally in Florida, Trump simply asked the crowd to raise their hands if they intended to vote for him. So lots of people raised their hands in all sorts of ways, some outstretched, some with crooked elbow—the latter including Trump himself.
Obviously, if Trump really wanted to channel Hitler, he could have come up with a much better imitation. But all this was too much for Foxman:
“As a Jew who survived the Holocaust, to see an audience of thousands of people raising their hands in what looks like the ‘Heil Hitler’ salute is about as offensive, obnoxious and disgusting as anything I thought I would ever witness in the United States of America,” he told The Times of Israel.
“We’ve seen this sort of thing at rallies of neo-Nazis. We’ve seen it at rallies of white supremacists. But to see it at a rally for a legitimate candidate for the presidency of the United States is outrageous.”


Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Raisehands-300x169
Foxman is absolutely positive that Trump was well aware that he was tapping into the latent Nazism of the crowd, because, as every American knows, raising your hand in a big crowd can only mean only one thing:
“It is a fascist gesture,” Foxman said. “He is smart enough—he always tells us how smart he is—to know the images that this evokes. Instead of asking his audience to pledge allegiance to the United States of America, which in itself would be a little bizarre, he’s asking them to swear allegiance to him.”
By Eric Cortellessa, Times Of Israel, March 7, 2016
Right. Like every candidate ever, Trump wants people to vote for him, and getting them to commit to it by raising their hands is a smart move psychologically because it makes the hand-raiser feel a subtle sense of obligation to carry through with the pledge, which Trump reinforced by saying right after the pledge: “Don’t forget you all raised your hand, you swore. Bad things happen if you don’t live up to what you just did.”
Of course, there was a bit of humor here, but also an attempt to inoculate the crowd against the very well-funded ad campaign Trump was enduring. Trump was well aware that, when the crowd went home, they would be deluged with millions of dollars’ worth of anti-Trump ads—ads portraying him, as noted by the New York Times, as a “a liberal, a huckster, and a draft dodger.”[ Money Pours In as Move to Stop Donald Trump Expands, By Matt Flegenheimer and Maggie Haberman, March 6, 2016]
Trump, after labeling the accusation “ridiculous,” said “he would look into ending [the practice]” Maybe a good move, but it certainly won’t stop the “Trump-as-fascist” industry. What really scares activists like Foxman is that they sense that their power to shape public discourse is waning:
“What scares me is he’s broken all these taboos and it’s helped him. … That frightens me. It frightens me that there are all these things that we’ve worked so hard on, but one after another he breaks these taboos and the people applaud him and come back for more.”
And sure enough, Trump won Florida easily, despite Foxman playing the Holocaust victimization card.
New York Times columnist David Brooks, who is usually considered a neoconservative, saw Trump’s tactic the same way on Meet the Press (March 6):
If we’re going to get Trump, we might as well get the Nuremberg rallies to go with it. The number one trait that associates or correlates with Trump’s support is authoritarianism, a belief in authoritarian leadership style. [Nazi Card: David Brooks Suggests Trump Staging ‘Nuremberg Rallies’ By Mark Finkelstein, Media Research Center, March 6, 2016
(Brooks’ comment on authoritarianism have been called into question by a poll described by two political scientists, Wendy Rahn and Eric Oliver.  They found that Trump voters are actually populists whose main characteristics are distrust of elites, like Brooks and his employer, and American nationalism—attitudes that make a lot of sense given the themes of Trump’s campaign. [Trump’s voters aren’t authoritarians, new research says. So what are they? Washington Post, March 6, 2016]
Besides the reactions of Jewish organizations, many prominent Jews who have used their media access to assault Trump. In my first article on Trump and the Jews, I noted “We can only imagine the deluge of propaganda if Trump is seen as having a real chance of winning. By comparison, the 1964 ads predicting nuclear Armageddon if Barry Goldwater was elected will be small potatoes.”
And indeed, media critic Howard Kurtz subsequently wrote Media warnings against Trump shift from aggressive to apocalyptic”.  [Fox News, March 8, 2016]
Speaking of apocalyptic, David Brooks, although not representing an official Jewish organization, is certainly a strongly identified Jew with a lofty perch in the elite media. His attack on Trump gave the impression that he searched a thesaurus for every possible negative adjective he could find:
Donald Trump is an affront to basic standards of honesty, virtue and citizenship. He pollutes the atmosphere in which our children are raised. He has already shredded the unspoken rules of political civility that make conversation possible. …
As the founders would have understood, he is a threat to the long and glorious experiment of American self-government.  He is precisely the kind of scapegoating, promise-making, fear-driving and deceiving demagogue they feared.[ No, Not Trump, Not Ever,  NYT,  March 29, 2016]
These last comments clearly refer to Trump’s comments on immigration—the common denominator of Jewish angst.
The theme, over and over again, is that Trump represents opposition to the post-1965 ideology that America should be open to immigration of all peoples and cultures as a moral imperative (often invoking “American values”) without regard to American interests—often with reminders that the immigration restriction enacted in the 1920s opposed Jewish interests because of the refugee crisis of the 1930s.
Similarly, the Anti-Defamation League’s new National Director   Jonathan Greenblatt, made it clear that immigration/diversity issues are their main problem with Trump’s candidacy:
In light of Trump’s penchant to slander minoritiesslur refugees, dismiss First Amendment protections and cheer on violence, some in the Jewish community have said that Trump should not be invited to speak or that attendees should walk out during his remarks in protest. This is not surprising, as the Jewish community has long placed a premium on promoting values of tolerance and building a pluralistic and more diverse society—values that seem at odds with Trump’s message on the campaign trail. …
We have decided to redirect the amount of funds that Trump contributed to ADL over the years [$56,000] specifically into anti-bias education programs that address exactly the kind of stereotyping and scapegoating he has injected into this political season.
To me as a connoisseur, the most interesting anti-Trump article was James Kirchick’s Why Donald Trump is turning me liberal. [The Tablet March  14, 2016] Again, Kirchick’s main problem is Trump’s violation of immigration orthodoxy, but here framed oddly as somehow violating the US Constitution:
I find Trump’s contempt for the basic functions of democracy—in particular the First Amendment to the United States Constitution—absolutely appalling. His call to ban all Muslims from entering the country is fundamentally evil. Naturally, Trump has also said he’s unsure whether President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II was wrong, despite official condemnations by later American presidents.
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” TrumpwatchRight, the Tablet’s Trump Watch Button—not too subtle invocation of the Trump=Hitler theme
Kirchick even has fantasies of a Trump-inspired military coup:
If Trump doesn’t get his way at the Republican National Convention this summer, that he will deploy some sort of organized paramilitary force—transforming Cleveland into a far-right phantasmagoria of Chicago 1968—is hardly idle speculation.
And of course the Hitler/Nazi comparisons:
Trump’s Nuremberg-esque rallies, where entranced audiences obliviously raise their right hands in impromptu loyalty oaths, evince a frisson of seething aggression. His unapologetic mockery of the physically disabled—one of the Nazis’ earliest victims—resembles a CliffsNotes’ Nietzchean will to power.
Kirchick rejects the idea that Trump is anathema to neocons because of his foreign policy.
I have a simpler, not to mention more charitable, explanation for why so many Jewish conservatives—er, “neocons”—viscerally oppose Trump: He’s a fascist demagogue.
I would split the difference on this one. The reality is that if Trump is elected, neocon hegemony in the Republican Party foreign policy Establishment and its commitment to endless wars in the Middle East would be finished—yet another reason to welcome a Trump administration. But Kirchick is doubtless correct that neocons also oppose Trump because support for liberal immigration policy and other liberal policy positions has been a staple of neocon thinking for decades.
But then Kirchick says what I thought was pretty much unmentionable in Jewish circles: that Jews have actively promoted policies on immigration and race that benefit them at the expense of the Historical American Nation:
A staple of anti-Semitic complaint from the Nazis to Donald Trump’s newfound friends in the Klan is that Jews are always and everywhere the devious orchestrators of racial integration. Rootless cosmopolitans, Jews allegedly promote immigration and miscegenation so as to bring about a more diverse society in which they can sublimate their own ethnic difference. Through this “mongrelization,” Jews will precipitate the demise of white, Christian communities, thereby destroying the last vestige of resistance to their assertion of pernicious control.
Unlike other anti-Semitic memes, there is truth in this observation, though not of course for the reasons that Nazis and white supremacists think. Jews have indeed played disproportionate roles in struggles for racial equality, from the movement against South African apartheid to the cause of civil rights in the United States. And while Jews felt called to these movements by faith, universalistic political commitments, or an innate sense of justice, doing so was also in their communal self-interest. A country that is politically pluralistic, open to new ideas and new people, ethnically diverse, and respectful of religious difference, is a country that will naturally be safer for Jews than a country that is none of these things. This, I believe, is why so many Jews, foreign policy hawks or not, innately fear Donald Trump. …
The fate of Jewish life in the West is inextricably bound to democracy, pluralism, religious tolerance and ethnic harmony. If there’s a silver lining to the resistible rise of Donald Trump, it’s that it has forced us to realize this truth. [Emphases added.]
Notice that Kirchick is saying that Trump is bad for Jews in the West where pluralism suits Jewish interests. Of course, Trump has not questioned pluralism—only the idea that immigration policy should be determined by a moral imperative rather than the interests of Americans. I suspect that Trump would also agree with me that US immigration policy should not be determined by Jewish communal interests.
Kirchick easily and unabashedly asserts Jewish interests in shaping American immigration policy, but implicitly rejects the idea that anyone else’s interests are important. This is a classic example of ethnic blindness—Kirchick is quick to condemn White Americans who reject the ethnic and cultural transformations of their countries, while ignoring the very different interests that Jews pursue in Israel which limits immigration to Jews and where 48% of Israeli Jews want Arabs out of Israel. [48% of Israeli Jews Back ‘Expulsion’ or ‘Transfer’ of Arabs, New Pew Survey Says, by Naomi Zeveloff, Forward.com, March 8, 2016].
Israeli immigration policy and attitudes toward the Arabs under its control shows there is nothing in Judaism that implies that Jews will be drawn to pro-immigration attitudes or pluralism as a result of what Kirchick claims are “faith, universalistic political commitments, or an innate sense of justice.”
Rather than the phony universalism advertised by Jewish apologists, real Jewish communal interests have always been central to my argument that Jews have been instrumental (a necessary condition) for the 1965 immigration law and the other cultural and demographic changes that have come in its wake. What makes Kirchick’s essay remarkable is that he is willing to acknowledge Jewish interests in these changes and at least hint at a major Jewish role in bringing them about.
I suspect that, from Kirchick’s point of view, Donald Trump as president is a nightmare not only because he would reassert American interests rather than Jewish interests in immigration policy, but also because Kirchick fears honest discussion of the Jewish role in shaping US immigration policy might be dangerous for Jews.
We are only beginning to see the profound changes inaugurated by this immigration revolution—especially the racialization of politics (as indicated by racially lopsided voting patterns), increases in ethnic stratification (resulting from differences in education and IQ of different immigrant groups), and social conflict (as shown by the violent, multiethnic, pro-immigration protests greeting Trump rallies, not to mention acts of terrorism).
Trump’s populist appeal is terrifying to many Jews because it threatens what has been a top-down revolution in which the moral and intellectual high ground has been seized by people hostile to the traditional peoples and cultures of the West. Strongly self-identified Jews have been and are at the heart of this revolution.
There was never a demand by a majority, or even something close to a majority, from any Western country for a complete transformation, to the point that White people will soon be minorities in societies they had dominated for hundreds and, in the case of Europe, thousands of years.
The fact that Trump has continued to thrive despite the unrelenting hostility of the MSM and so many intellectuals is deeply worrying to the Jewish community because it identifies so profoundly with this revolution. If the MSM loses its effectiveness, it would be a major blow to the current status quo and to Jewish power generally. Jews are famously overrepresented in the elite media, and the elite media in turn has been a critical asset in the battle over the demographic future of the US. Because this has been a top-down revolution opposing fundamental interests of the majority of the population, the MSM strategy has been to keep immigration policy out of public consciousness.
But I want to close this survey by pointing out that this Jewish fear and loathing of Trump is now not unanimous—likely because, if in fact Trump does win, it is important for Jews not to be completely without influence. For any activist group operating in the US political system, it’s important to retain influence among all the players.
Even the ADL’s Jonathan Greenblatt has said No, Donald Trump is not Adolf Hitler (New York Daily News, March 16, 2016). And Trump represents an especial problem for Republican Jews—including the notorious www.vdare.com&gws_rd=ssl" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Sheldon Adelson:
There are signs that Trump may be getting a grudging second look from Republican Jews dedicated to the proposition of keeping a Democrat out of the White House. Israel Hayom, the Israeli newspaper owned by Sheldon Adelson, the Las Vegas casino magnate and kingmaker in GOP politics, plastered its Wednesday front page with a photo of Trump and the headline “Within Reach.” The newspaper is known to generally reflect Adelson’s political preferences in Israel and the United States.
Make no mistake about it, we are in for some very exciting times indeed.
Kevin MacDonald [[email=%20kmacd@csulb.edu]email him[/email]] is professor of psychology at California State University–Long Beach. His research has focused on developing evolutionary perspectives in developmental psychology, personality theory, Western culture, and ethnic relations (group evolutionary strategies). He edits and is a frequent contributor to The Occidental Observer and The Occidental Quarterly. For his website, click here.


Ultima editare efectuata de catre Admin in Joi Noi 10, 2016 8:24 am, editata de 1 ori
Admin
Admin
Admin

Mesaje : 10753
Data de înscriere : 05/11/2012

https://amintiridespreviitor.forumgratuit.ro

Sus In jos

Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Empty Jewish Fear and Loathing of Donald Trump (4): Neocon Angst About A Fascist America

Mesaj Scris de Admin Joi Noi 10, 2016 8:09 am

The reactions of anonymous people on Twitter criticizing Jews are now fodder for news stories by both “right wing” Jews like Ben Shapiro and more liberal journalists like Jonathan Weisman.  [Trump’s supporters unleash anti-Semitic attack on New York Times editorby Sophia Tesfaye, Salon, May 20, 2016] Somehow, all the [url=http://www.vdare.com/articles/the-fulford-file-by-james-fulford-91?content=But the]death threats[/url],  vulgar criticism, and actual violence  conservatives have received over the years never become  a source of sympathy from the Main Stream Media!
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Kristol
One of the more spectacular examples of an MSM frenzy over supposed anti-Semitism: the reaction to the attack by David Horowitz against his fellow Jew Bill Kristolleader of a campaign to destroy Donald Trump [Bill Kristol: Republican Spoiler, Renegade JewMay 15, 2016] The headline, written by Horowitz, alluded to Kristol being Jewish.
As Jonathan S. Tobin [[email=%20jtobin@commentarymagazine.com]Email him[/email]] notes in Commentary,
[T]he real offense here is … his attempt to wrap him in the Star of David and to somehow brand his opponents as traitors to the pro-Israel cause. …
[H]is invocation of “America First” and the use of a term like “renegade Jew” in the headline (though not in the text of the article) seems to echo the smears of the pro-Trump alt right racists who have attacked conservative critics of the candidate with an avalanche of anti-Semitic invective.
Horowitz’s offense was not simply criticizing Kristol’s campaign against Trump. Lots of people have done that without incurring the wrath of Commentary. And even saying that Kristol’s views are not good for Jews and Israel is commonplace:  MondoweissJ Street, and Mearsheimer and Walt in The Israel Lobby argue that neoconservatives and the Israel Lobby have a tragically mistaken view of Jewish and Israeli interests—also discussed in Charles Bloch’s and Steve Sailer’s VDARE posts.
The unforgivable offense: implying Kristol’s being a Jew had something to do with his opposition to Trump. After all, there would have been exactly zero upset if instead the headline was “Bill Kristol: Republican Spoiler, Renegade Republican.”
But putting ‘Jew’ in the headline was guaranteed to bring out immediate charges of anti-Semitism by the likes of Michelle Goldberg [Email her] in Slate :
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” MichellegoldbergTo define someone as a ‘Renegade Jew’ in a column about scheming elites written for an audience full of white nationalists is to signal to the sewers. … A narrative is taking shape, an American Dolchstoßlegende that will blame a potential Trump loss on conniving Semites.
Of course, we are supposed to engage in the fiction that the opinions of Bill Kristol et al. have nothing to do with being Jewish or what is good for Israel, but everything to do with their perception of what is good for America.
And of course, this goes well beyond neocons to include Jews in the media generally. For example, the [url=http://www.vdare.com/articles/thoughts-on-americas-jewish-ruling-class-and-noblesse-oblige?content=But is that]ADL [/url]condemns the idea Jews have an outsized influence in Hollywood by claiming that Hollywood Jews just “happen to be Jews”—that their Jewish identity does not affect the [url=http://www.vdare.com/articles/the-fulford-file-from-animal-farm-to-american-sniper-cultural-marxist-capitalists-leave-billions-on-the-table-but-theres-hope-for-american-culture-yet?content=Take Mel Gibson]content [/url]of movies or television. [Alleged Jewish ‘Control’ of the American Motion Picture Industry,September 1999] As I’ve painstakingly documented over the course of my career, this is patently absurd. In fact, the Jewish identities and sense of Jewish interests of the neocons are obvious from a close reading of their careers [Understanding Jewish Influence III: Neoconservatism as a Jewish Movement,by Kevin MacDonald, The Occidental Quarterly, August 2004].
While it’s obviously true that Trump has support among some Jews linked to the GOP, there is one Jewish faction that is all but apoplectic he might win [Where Jewish conservatives stand on Donald Trump: A running tallyby Ron Kampeas, Jewish Telegraph Agency, May 6, 2016]. And there can be little doubt that their opposition is fueled by their Jewish identity.
This mystifying to some. For example, Bill O’Reilly seemed genuinely bewildered when he interviewed (at 3:00) Charles Krauthammer—another ardent neocon opponent of Trump— about a Bret Stephens article in the Wall Street Journal.
Stephens was triggered by Trump’s use of the phrase “America First” and decried  “the Republican descent into populism” [The GOP Gets What It DeservesMay 2, 2016]. O’Reilly couldn’t help but observe, “he’s really teed off, he’s really angry.”
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Maxbootcfr-300x169Stephens’ outburst was nothing compared to the anti-Trump invective spewed by neocon stalwart Max Boot [email him]
Boot said:
I would vote for a conservative third-party candidate or for Hillary Clinton. I regard Donald Trump as an ignorant demagogue who is one of the most dangerous candidates ever to run for the American presidency and one of the least qualified. … He has shown that he doesn’t understand the basics of policy, he has shown that he is erratic, he is xenophobic, he is guilty of sexist and racist comments …
Let’s remember, this is the guy who wants to ban all Muslims from the country, he wants to send the police breaking into American homes to round up 11 million undocumented migrants; … He has hijacked the party. … He is not remotely conservative. He is a populist demagogue, xenophobic…[BBC NewsNight (YouTube) May 9, 2016]
This sort of anger is hardly likely to come from Trump’s supposed lack of concern about “limited government,” or “commitment to the Constitution,” “true conservatism,” or even his personal qualities.
In unpacking these talking points, it’s useful to separate the red herrings from more fundamental concerns. For real conservatives, such as Mike Huckabee, Rick Perry, and Newt Gingrich, this election is a simple choice between someone who would be far better than Hillary Clinton on fundamental issues conservatives claim to hold dear. There is in fact a long list of Trump policies and proposals that are conservative by any reckoning—promising Scalia-like Supreme Court appointments, securing the border and deporting illegals, supporting the police against the Black Lives Matter movement, promising to end Obamacare, doing away with Common Core, taking strong pro-life and pro-Second Amendment stands, and supporting the military and veterans. [Trump unveils his potential Supreme Court nomineesby Jeremy Diamond, CNN, May 28, 2016]
Neocons never threatened to run a third-party candidate against “compassionate conservative” George W. Bush even though he was far more liberal than Trump—proposing Amnesty for illegals, expanding Medicare entitlements, signing No Child Left Behind, and racking up huge budget deficits—what some have called “Big Government Conservatism” [The liberal leanings of George W. Bushby John Ibbitson, The Globe and Mail, April 3, 2009]. Nor was Mitt Romney a small-government candidate. [Back to Bush’s Big-Government Conservatismby Michael Tanner, National Review, November 30, 2011]
For neocons, the huge expansion of entitlements, promotion of culture-destroying immigration, and rampaging budget deficits were not offenses against “conservatism.” These policies didn’t even register as a problem. It was more important that Bush carried out their (disastrous) neoconservative foreign policy.
It’s impossible to take the dedication of self-styled “conservatives” like Stephens and Kristol to conservative principles seriously. After all, they refuse to acknowledge that unless we deal with the problem of importing millions of Third Worlders who both vote for and utilize welfare and “big government,” any kind of “limited government” will be impossible.
Another very basic principle actual conservatives support is freedom of speech. Immigration threatens this as well. Universities throughout the West are under siege by the intolerant Left, and one more liberal appointment to the Supreme Court could well be the end of the First Amendment. Intellectual rationales for curtailing First Amendment freedoms, and in particular speech critical of the multicultural ideal, are already common in liberal academic circles [Why we should ban “hate speech,” by Jared Taylor, American Renaissance, August 24, 2012]. Continuing to import millions from intolerant Third World cultures does not bode well.
Yet Stephens and Kristol soft-pedal the effect the catastrophic impact of a President Hillary Clinton. Indeed, Kristol [Email him] is given to Pollyannaish  tweets that a Third-Party candidate would actually win.








This is presumably to avoid the charge that he is really quite happy with Clinton and her pro-Israel donors, notably Haim Saban [Jane Harmon, Haim Saban, and AIPAC: The Disloyalty Issue in Multicultural Americaby Kevin MacDonald, The Occidental Observer, April 25, 2009].
Indeed, it’s hard to see why Kristol would disapprove of Hillary’s neocon foreign policy advisers like Robert Kagan,  [Email him]who advocates military intervention and democracy creation throughout the Middle East as a moral imperative [Neocon Kagan Endorses Hillary Clinton, ConsortiumNews, February 25, 2016]. Needless to say, this doesn’t stop Kagan from portraying Trump as a fascist [This is how fascism comes to America, Washington Post, May 18, 2016].
So why are neocons so upset? Two reasons:
1.) Trump has rejected basic neocon foreign policy positions on the Middle East. Trump opposed the Iraq war which was promoted by the neocons, calling it a “complete disaster.” Amazingly, he stated:
“They lied. They said there were weapons of mass destruction and there were none. And they knew there were none. There were no weapons of mass destruction.”
Trump has also supported friendly relations with Vladimir Putin’s Russia and supported an effort to achieve stability in the Middle East by propping up the Assad government in Syria. Assad and Putin are very high on the neocon hate list.
And Trump has given mixed signals on Israel, speaking about neutrality in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and avoiding money from the Republican Jewish Coalition. His most recent speech on the topic, at AIPAC, was intended to quell Jewish fears and mend fences, but the Washington Post’s token (neo)conservative Jennifer Rubin [email her]emphasized that this speech was recited from a teleprompter, implying that it didn’t reflect his real views [Trumpkins and the Jews, Washington Post, May 16, 2016]
Of course, Trump has received promises of support from Sheldon Adelson. He also hired ex-AIPAC official Michael Glassner and other prominent Jews to high positions in his campaign [Trump names Jewish financier, fixer to major campaign positionsby Nathan Guttman, Forward, May 7, 2016]
But Trump has given no indication that he would appoint any neocons to his administration. And, unlike George W. Bush, Trump is not a babe in the woods, ready to be dominated by a coterie of neocons. This would mean that the neocons would be deprived of their primary power base, with no choice but to defect to the Democrats (from whence they came).
2.) Trump represents the undoing of elite consensus on immigration, multiculturalism, and the moral imperative that white Americans become a minority in a country they created.
All of these radically Leftist positions have now been subsumed into “conservative” dogma.
The fact is neocons have never been true conservatives. They adopted conservative positions of convenience in order to appeal to the GOP base. The problem for them now: the base, energized by Trump, is finally ignoring the moral pronouncements coming from on high and voting on the issues that really matter to them, trade, jobs, and immigration. And yes, they also love Trump’s disdain for Political Correctness.
Bret Stephens of the Wall Street Journal is well aware that what he calls “modern conservatism” is a departure from older conservative traditions, which have been the prime target of Jewish intellectuals throughout the twentieth century, including the neoconservatives (labeled as “modern conservatives” by Stephens).
Stephens [Email him] wrote
[Trumpism] is a regression to the conservatism of blood and soil, of ethnic polarization and bullying nationalism. Modern conservatives sought to bury this rubbish with a politics that strikes a balance between respect for tradition and faith in the dynamic and culture-shifting possibilities of open markets. When that balance collapses—under a Republican president, no less—it may never again be restored, at least in our lifetimes. [Emphases added throughout]
Or Jennifer Rubin, cited above:
Trump’s nativism and xenophobia make him toxic with a good deal of the American Jewish community for whom such sentiments have invariably been associated with governments hostile to Jews.
Or Robert Kagan, cited above:
[Trump’s] public discourse consists of attacking or ridiculing a wide range of “others”—Muslims, Hispanics, women, Chinese, Mexicans, Europeans, Arabs, immigrants, refugees—whom he depicts either as threats or as objects of derision. His program, such as it is, consists chiefly of promises to get tough with foreigners and people of nonwhite complexion. He will deport them, bar them, get them to knuckle under, make them pay up or make them shut up.
Contra Stephens, the neocons never respected tradition and gave only lip service to faith. Their only outreach was recruiting Evangelical Christians to the cause of a rabidly pro-Israel foreign policy.
Stephens is correct in that there was an older tradition of conservatism based on the ethno-national interests of the traditional American majority. This was purged by the neocons. They are now afraid it is returning, perhaps in the form of the Alt Right—the only recognizable intellectual constituency that supports Trump.
In fact, the intellectual antecedents of the Alt Right go back much further than the conservatives of the 1980s who were purged by the neocons. Their roots go back to Madison Grant, Lothrop Stoddard, Henry Pratt Fairchild, William Ripley, Gustave Le Bon, Charles Davenport, and William McDougall, and an updated version of the intellectual milieu of the early twentieth century when America was self-consciously a European, Christian nation and proud of it [Enemies of my enemyby Kevin MacDonald, KevinMacDonald.com, Accessed May 20, 2016]. They go back to Charles Lindbergh and the America First movement that has received so much attention since Trump began using the phrase. Significantly, the ADL was among those urging Trump to abandon the phrase [ADL urges Donald Trump to Reconsider “America First” in Foreign Policy Approach, ADL, April 28, 2016]
This early conservative tradition was eradicated by the rise of Franz Boas and the other Jewish-dominated intellectual movements of the left discussed in The Culture of Critiquean intellectual framework that has been embraced by the neocons.
As Robert Kagan writes of Trump:
If he wins the election, his legions will comprise a majority of the nation. Imagine the power he would wield then. In addition to all that comes from being the leader of a mass following, he would also have the immense powers of the American presidency at his command: the Justice Department, the FBI, the intelligence services, the military. Who would dare to oppose him then? Certainly not a Republican Party that laid down before him even when he was comparatively weak. And is a man like Trump, with infinitely greater power in his hands, likely to become more humble, more judicious, more generous, less vengeful than he is today, than he has been his whole life? Does vast power un-corrupt?
This is how fascism comes to America.
But perhaps fascism is in the eye of the beholder. After all, it’s in the West of today that certain ideas are illegal, certain political parties are banned, and the majority populations of white nations are openly despised, dispossessed, and have their public policy views dismissed by unelected judges.
How is resisting such tyrannical and genocidal policies “fascist?
It’s not that Trump is bringing “fascism,” it’s that there’s a chance he might be bringing freedom for European-Americans. And for all their talk of tolerance, that’s one thing the Culture of Critique will never allow.

Kevin MacDonald [[email=%20kmacd@csulb.edu]email him[/email]] is emeritus professor of psychology at California State University–Long Beach. His research has focused on developing evolutionary perspectives in developmental psychology, personality theory, Western culture, and ethnic relations (group evolutionary strategies). He edits and is a frequent contributor to The Occidental Observer and The Occidental Quarterly. For his website, click here.


Ultima editare efectuata de catre Admin in Joi Noi 10, 2016 8:25 am, editata de 1 ori
Admin
Admin
Admin

Mesaje : 10753
Data de înscriere : 05/11/2012

https://amintiridespreviitor.forumgratuit.ro

Sus In jos

Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Empty Jewish Fear and Loathing of Donald Trump (5): Would Trump’s Defeat Be Blamed On Jews?

Mesaj Scris de Admin Joi Noi 10, 2016 8:14 am


Almost exactly a year ago, VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow raised the question of whether America’s Jewish groups would turn on Donald Trump (who after all has Jewish grandchildren and a lifetime of Jewish business associates) with the hysteria they employed against Patrick J. Buchanan. I have been tracking the matter ever since and the answer is now in: yes—clearly triggered by visceral reaction against Trump’s nationalist acceptance speech in Cleveland and outright panic at his subsequent poll lead (July 25-29 according to the Real Clear Politics average). I suspect, however, that we have crossed a watershed and that, regardless of the results of this election, this will not end well for them.
Before the convention, Wall Street Journal Deputy Editorial Page Editor Bret Stephens [[email=Bret.Stephens@wsj.com.]Email him[/email]] said with astonishing arrogance: “It’s important that Donald Trump and what he represents—this kind of ethnic quote, ‘conservatism,’ or populism be so decisively rebuked that the Republican Party, the Republican voters will forever learn their lesson…” WSJs Bret Stephens: Trump Must Lose So Badly That the GOP Voters ‘Learn Their Lesson’, by Sam Reisman, Mediaite, May 29 2016.
Just on Friday, Paul Krugman [[url=http://www.vdare.com/articles/Paul Krugman,]Email him[/url]] writing in the New York Timescontinued the now-widespread theme: any expression of ethnic identity by America’s whites, no matter how implicit, was “bigoted” and “white nationalist”:
Recently Avik Roy, a leading Republican health-policy expert, had the personal and moral courage to admit what liberals (and political scientists) have been saying for years: “In reality, the gravitational center of the Republican Party is white nationalism.”
Just to be clear, I’m not saying that top Republicans were or are personally bigoted—but that doesn’t matter. What does matter is that they were willing to curry favor with bigots in the service of tax cuts for the rich and financial deregulation. Remember, Mitt Romney eagerly accepted a Trump endorsement in 2012, knowing full well that he was welcoming a racist conspiracy theorist into his camp.
All that has happened this year is a move of those white nationalists from part of the supporting cast to a starring role.
Pieces of Silver, August 12, 2016 (links in original)
Trump has been hit with a deafening crescendo of hostility from the Main Stream Media, as well as blatantly-orchestrated defections and denunciations from prominent Republicans. [Which Republicans Oppose Donald Trump? A Cheat Sheetby David A. Graham, The Atlantic, August 11, 2016.]
These tend to come down to moralizing about Trump’s character and temperament. This is not surprising given that the elite consensus favoring mass immigration and multiculturalism is usually justified as a moral imperative—far too many respectable, intelligent white people desperately want to be in sync with the moral pronouncements of NPR and the New York Times editorial page to look out for their own interests. And to make it worse, Trump has not backed down or pivoted from his statements on a moratorium on Muslims,deporting illegals and making immigration policy work for America since winning the nomination.
At this time, there is not one MSM outlet on board with Trump, and the coverage given to manufactured crises about Trump vastly outstrips coverage given to the very real Clinton corruption:
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Mrc2Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Mrc1
This for a candidate who received more votes than any other Republican candidate in history.
It’s obvious, of course that not all Jews are in the #nevertrump bandwagon. Jews who support Trump—likely a dwindling number—claim to do so for the same reasons many non-Jews do: the domination of US politics by lobbyists and big money, as well as honesty and willingness to be unconventional [To understand American Jews who support Trump, read thisBy Uriel Heilman,Jewish Telegraphic Agencey, March 8, 2016] But it is also obvious that, if only because of historical patterns, the vast majority of Jews will not vote for any Republican candidate—let alone Trump.
And, as always, what’s really important in thinking about Jewish issues is to focus on media power and financial donations, as well as tracking what the major Jewish organizations are up to. All three of the major networks mentioned in the above charts are managed by Jews (CBS: Leslie Moonves; NBC: Bob Greenblatt; ABC: Ben Sherwood) and that CBS (Sumner Redstone’s Viacom) and NBC (the Roberts family’s Comcast) are controlled by Jewish corporations. CNN is managed by Jeff Zucker.
Quite simply, Jews have far more power in the media than any other identifiable group. And yes, Jewish identity makes a difference in content (See Culture Of Critique, Preface to the Paperback Edition , xlvi–lvi).
The issues that have particularly triggered the broad Jewish community have had specific Jewish overtones—the  alleged delay in disavowing the support of David Duke, the ridiculous claim of a “Roman salute” at a rally in Florida, Trump’s use of the “America First” slogan (reminiscent of the pre-World War II movement that explicitly noted Jewish influence in promoting a war with Hitler), and the “Star of David” incident in which a picture of Hillary appeared with a 6-sided star over a mass of cash with the caption “Most Corrupt Politician Ever.”
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Hillarystar
I have to admit that when I saw this (which was before all the fuss), I knew it was going to be trouble. I figured that the imagery would be way over the head of most people but would definitely provoke outrage among Jews. And indeed, a Washington Post article claimed it was decisive for many Jews:
The concern expressed by many Jews is that Trump, who earlier this year was slow to condemn former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke and has on several occasions retweeted messages from white supremacists, is bringing into the mainstream a sentiment that has largely been relegated to the dark underworld of the Internet.
Trump’s vigorous defense of anti-Semitic image a ‘turning point’ for many Jews, By Jose A. DelReal and Julie Zauzmer, Washington Post,  July 8, 2016
The image was quickly removed and replaced with a circle. But Trump, as is his style, did not apologize or back down, arguing that the image was generic (seen also in a poster for Walt Disney’s Frozen and resembling a sheriff’s badge).
Not being as confrontational as Trump, I would have advised him to simply apologize and move on, given that this is really a no-win situation for Trump and because the financial corruption implied by the image goes far beyond any Jewish angle.
(Nevertheless, there is no question that Clinton’s key financial contributors are wealthy Jewish Democrats and hedge fund operators, including Jews like Seth Klarman who donated to Romney in 2012; other members of the Republican Jewish Coalition are not contributing to Trump, although some, most prominently, Sheldon Adelson have promised to do so.)
But no matter. Such attempts at exoneration by the Trump campaign are framed by activists as nothing more than implausibly deniable dog whistles to his “white supremacist” base.
New York Times article linked the star symbolism to a pattern in which Trump is supposedly appealing to white identity politics. It quoted ADL leader Jonathan Greenblatt:
“I think what we really find troubling is the mainstreaming of these really offensive ideas,” said Jonathan Greenblatt, the national director of the Anti-Defamation League, which tracks hate groups. “It’s allowed some of the worst ideas into the public conversation in ways we haven’t seen anything like in recent memory.”
In fact, I agree that Trump’s candidacy is an implicitly White revolt motivated by fears about what being a white minority in a majority black and brown America would mean for the future for their families and our institutions— entirely reasonable concerns. But the point here is that the organized Jewish community is consciously determined that this issue be kept out of public debate.
The ADL is unusual among Jewish organizations in directly condemning Trump,likely because of IRS rules on political involvement by non-profits. But a long list of Jewish organizations have skirted the taxation issue by criticizing particular Trump pronouncements, especially his comments on Muslims and other issues related to immigration and multiculturalism. For example,
The Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism has … taken tangible steps to address bigotry and xenophobia raised by the Trump campaign. The organization, said director Rabbi Jonah Dov Pesner, launched a community-wide effort to welcome refugees and reach out to immigrant communities.
[Why Is the Anti-Defamation League Calling Out Donald Trump by Name? , by Nathan Guttman, Forward, May 20, 2016]
Again, the main problem the Jewish community has with Trump is that he has challenged the elite consensus on immigration and multiculturalism.
Another interesting angle is that one might think that Jews who fund “Islamophobic” organizations, such as the abovementioned Seth Klarman, or are known as “Islamophobic” critics of the Muslim community, like Daniel Pipes,are not supporting Trump. This may seem surprising because one of Trump’s signature proposals has been a moratorium on Muslim immigration, while Hillary wants to ramp up the number of refugees and other immigrants from Muslim countries. Pipes is particularly interesting given his status as a pro-Israel activist (Klarman is also a major contributor to pro-Israel groups). Why would these “Islamophobes” not support the candidate who will actually do something about Muslim immigration?
Actually, it should not be surprising that Pipes is anti-Trump given that he favors a “house-broken Islam” in Western countries. What neocons like Pipes want is continued immigration of Muslims and the creation of Muslim communities that do not threaten the status quo on Israel. They are quite content with the demographic decline of White populations, whether in Europe or the US.
Indeed, Pipes just quit the GOP over this issue, complaining about Trump’s “pro-fascistic tendencies”:
The United States, the world’s oldest democratic republic, faces an internal danger unlike any in the past 1½ centuries, one with the potential to degrade domestic life and reduce the country’s standing in the world. Nothing is as important as resisting and defeating Donald J. Trump and the neo-fascist virus he wishes to bring to the White House.
Needless to say, this is especially bizarre given that Trump’s proposals unmistakably parallel the policies of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Israel.
Jewish publications like the Tablet continue hyperbolic denunciations of Trump. Thus an article by Eric D. Weitz [Email him] drew an explicit analogy between the rise of Hitler and the possibility of a Trump presidency, arguing that mainstream conservatives were crucial to Hitler’s ultimate success as well as Trump’s. As is typical of such writing, there is no attempt to appreciate the very real interests that Trump voters have in supporting their candidate—interests that should be obvious to Jews supporting the moral imperative of Israel as a Jewish state, a Tablet staple:
Today’s Republicans and similarly-minded figures in Europe are like the conservatives who put Adolf Hitler in power: delusional about their influence, playing dangerously with the structures of our democracy. Few Republicans in the United States are willing to follow Sen. [Lindsay] Graham on the “exit ramp,” as he termed it, from the Trump highway. And much of the reason lies in the fact that Trump’s political language is only more blatant than what many Republicans have been saying for decades.
That is the lesson from the right-wing populist upsurge in Weimar Germany, which culminated in the Nazi assumption of power. The political language of fear and hostility directed at “foreign” elements (never mind the fact that many and even most of those so-called foreigners had been residents and citizens for generations) enables moderate and radical conservatives to come together. The moderates make the radicals salonfähig, acceptable in polite society. That is the real and pressing danger of the current moment.
Other recent articles explicitly assert the importance of Jewish identity in opposing Trump: e.g., Jews have a special responsibility this US election to fight back against Donald Trump by Matthew Rozsa, Quartz, July 09, 2016
And a writer at the Forward, Rabbi Michael Rothbaum, linked Trump to Rep. Steve King (R-IA) who responded to a jeer on MSNBC that “soon there won’t be enough white people to elect Republicans to national office” by saying the unsayable:
I’d ask you to go back through history and figure out where are these contributions that have been made by these other categories of people that you are talking about? Where did any other subgroup of people contribute more to civilization?
And then he doubled down by linking the contributions of whites to Christianity. Horrors!
Of course, this argument actually has respectable academic support e.g. Oxford University professor Sir Larry Siedentop’s Inventing the Individual: The Origins of Western Liberalism. But Rothman looks at Christianity exclusively from a narrow Jewish perspective, seeing only persecution of Jews, and dragging in Trump:
Let’s recognize that Donald Trump, by openly demonizing Mexicans, Muslims and many other groups, has emboldened people like King to directly engage in racism. And then let’s realize that King’s racist comments on MSNBC serve to reinforce one of the truly important lessons of this election cycle: If nothing else, the rise of Trump has proven that white supremacy almost always lives next-door to Christian hegemony—and that one form of bigotry will always bolster another.
For every racist meme that Trump tweets about African-American criminals, there’s an anti-Semitic meme that Trump culls from a white supremacist forum. For every unctuous remark Trump makes about “my African-American,” there’s another one labeling a room full of Jews “negotiators.”
(In fact, of course, King supported Ted Cruz in the GOP primaries and like other orthodox conservatives has been noticeably slow to endorse Trump. But maybe Trump’s rhetoric has been a breath of fresh air—for example, college students stood up to a hyper-feminist demonstration at a Milo Yiannopoulos lecture by chanting “Trump, Trump, Trump!”).
The lesson for Rabbi Rothman: Jews should form alliances with all the other groups:
All of us “subgroups” who stand outside of “Western civilization” are in danger. If we’re going to stand against this rising tide of hate, we’ve got to stand together. So let’s keep building bridges. Surely that’s something even we lowly “subgroups” can contribute.
But building bridges with various subgroups in American society has been the Jewish strategy for decades, beginning at least by the early twentieth century—making alliances with blacks (the NAACP) and any other group whose interests could be construed as opposing the traditional power structure of America. See my essay Jews, Blacks, And Racefrom Samuel Francis’s Race And The American Prospect, 2006.
Since World War II and especially since the sea change in immigration policy of 1965, the big shift has been away from attempts to make alliances with the white working class in favor of making alliances with non-White ethnic groups as well as with sexual non-conformists.
The white working class has responded by becoming by far the most enthusiastic Trump supporters.
While Jewish identity has often been in the forefront of Trump denunciations, the #NeverTrump neoconservatives are a special case. Obviously concerned that a Trump administration might fail to provide foreign policy jobs for the usual pro-Israel and anti-Russia suspects, the neocon assault on Trump is typically carried on with assertions of US patriotism, their Jewish identity submerged under thick layers of professed allegiance to American interests. Jewish #NeverTrump neocons with access to the elite media, notably Jennifer Rubin [email herMax Boot, Bill Kristol and the aforementioned Bret Stephens, all of whom were featured in Part 4 of this series, have continued their onslaught against Trump, often with complaints about Trump’s supposed racism and fascist tendencies.
Recently Stephens complained that Trump was appealing to the “privileges of a white ethnic bloc.” He has also attacked Sean Hannity who is perhaps the most prominent MSM figure who is firmly in the Trump camp, complaining that Trump was departing from “genuine Reaganites: pro-trade, pro-immigration, pro-NATO, pro-entitlement reform.” [Sean Hannity’s Veneration of IgnoranceWSJ, Aug. 8, 2016]
Who would have thought that socially and demographically transformative immigration was a conservative value?










Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Proxy



Hannity to GOP leaders: ‘I’m getting a little sick and tired of all of you’





Fox News host Sean Hannity says Republican leaders will be to blame if Donald Trump loses the presidential election. The conservative pundit told listeners of his talk radio show on Wednesday that he...
yahoo.com



















The exchange shows that any MSM figure who dares to show wholehearted support for Trump should expect nothing but wall-to-wall hostility from the neocon wing of the GOP.
But of course, neocons are not really conservatives and would be more than happy with a Democrat party committed to Leftist domestic policies (particularly massive non-white immigration) and a staunchly pro-Israel, anti-Russia foreign policy (which is near and dear to Hillary Clinton’s donor base as described above). They will most likely end up going back to the Democrats whence they came.
The Stephens-Hannity exchange also raises the real possibility that if Trump loses in November, neocons and other #neverTrump Republicans will be blamed. And given the role of Jewish neocons in the GOP and its mouthpieces like The Weekly Standard and National Review, to say nothing of the Jewish organizations’ reckless commitment to mass immigration and multiculturalismat the expense of the historic American nation, it is hard to see how the issue of Jewish power can be kept out of public debate.
But the good news: the pre-Trump GOP which was dependent on a neocon media and foreign policy establishment and with a big business, pro-Israel donor base, is dead—and, in my view, it can’t be resuscitated.
That GOP got completely out of touch with the interests of its white middle and working class voters. These voters will not go back to the pro-immigration globalism of the Republican elites. But without this base, the GOP cannot win.
Conservatism Inc. is finished. Its operatives who dream of reclaiming the Republican Party after a Trump disaster will inherit a corpse.

Kevin MacDonald [[email=%20kmacd@csulb.edu]email him[/email]] is emeritus professor of psychology at California State University–Long Beach. His research has focused on developing evolutionary perspectives in developmental psychology, personality theory, Western culture, and ethnic relations (group evolutionary strategies). He edits and is a frequent contributor to The Occidental Observer and The Occidental Quarterly. For his website, click here.


Ultima editare efectuata de catre Admin in Joi Noi 10, 2016 8:26 am, editata de 1 ori
Admin
Admin
Admin

Mesaje : 10753
Data de înscriere : 05/11/2012

https://amintiridespreviitor.forumgratuit.ro

Sus In jos

Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Empty Yes, Virginia (Dare), There ARE Righteous Jews For Trump.

Mesaj Scris de Admin Joi Noi 10, 2016 8:17 am

Forget the Clinton emails—the BIG story (89,800 results on Google News as of 11:00 tonight) is that one (1) Trump supporter of the thousands attending his Phoenix rally on Saturday night took the opportunity of the crowd’s chanting “USA! USA!” to yell “Jew-S-A” at the press pen, who seem to have been upset. My own less excited reaction is well expressed by my fellow Jew Joel B. Pollakwriting on Breitbart.com: Media Finally Find One Antisemite at a Trump Rally[October 30, 2016]
On my recent visit to the post office in our rural village in Central Pennsylvania,the postal worker, who is a Trump supporter, engaged me in conversation about the American Left. Without any idea of my Jewish background, he expressed wonder that Jews, who in other ways are so accomplished, are so “weird” in their political and social attitudes.
At first, I thought I would make my usual remarks about how Jews harbor obsolete negative attitudes about Christians and. more generally, about white people. But as I figured out that my acquaintance wouldn’t be able to catch the drift, I responded that the Jews he was referring to may be clever on tests, but they’re also unfortunately nuts.
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Mccarthy-768x634
Although I usually read Kevin MacDonald on Jewish attitudes with a sense that he may be overstating his case, his analyses of Jewish support for Hillary’s campaign against Donald Trump cannot do justice to the utter lunacy on display. This madness may indeed defy any attempt to describe it. Whether I’m reading the Forward about the terror that overcomes a self-identified Jewish woman with a Mexican-American baby when her “Trump Nazi nightmare” comes to mind [How Do I Explain My Trump Nazi Nightmare to My Mexican American Daughter?, By Anna Keller, Forward, October 21, 2016 ], a Jewish website deploring the rising tide of anti-Semitism in our universities caused by the Donald’s nomination [Antisemitism and the College Campus] or Bret Stephens[Email him] in the (onetime) conservative Wall Street Journal ranting against Trump for (entirely in Stephens paranoid imagination) reviving the idea of an international Jewish banking conspiracy [The Plot Against America, WSJ,October 17, 2016] I feel I’ve stumbled into the looney bin.
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Pulitzer
This doesn’t even get us into the subject of the hundreds of millions of dollars that identifiably Jewish donors have raised for “Crooked Hillary.” One particularly munificent donor, Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman Sachs, has explicitly forbidden his employees to give anything to the Republican nominee for president. [Goldman Sachs Bans Employees from Donating to Trumpby Lucinda Shen, Fortune, September 6, 2016] Trump apparently terrifies Blankfein, no less than he does Mark ZuckerbergBarbra Streisand, and the Anti-Defamation League’s Abe Foxman. Foxman, who is no stranger to Leftist hysteria, even insists that when Trump asked supporters raise their right hands and pledge to support him, it was a “fascist gesture” which looked like the ‘Heil Hitler’ salute. (It didn’t.) Maybe Trump should tie his arm down? [Ex-ADL director: Trump pledge ‘is a fascist gesture’, By Eliza Collins, Politico, March 7, 2016]
I’ve literally no idea how Jewish celebrities and multi-millionaires can view Trump as a dangerous anti-Semite. His daughter Ivanka, who is now herself an observant Jew, is married to Jared Kushner, an Orthodox Jew, and one of Trump’s closest advisers. Among Trump’s other advisors and his frequent TV surrogates are other Jews, like investment banker Boris Epshteyn and Trump’s lawyer Mickey Cohen. Perhaps no other American presidential candidate has been so surrounded by Jews—and yet the attacks on him from Jewish quarters as a second Hitler (for some of the neocons he may be the hundredth) just won’t let up.
Nevertheless, let the record show that there are some what we might call “Righteous Jews”—besides me! Two of the three conveners of a Scholars for Trump declaration that has just reached sixty names, are Jewish, Walter Blockand myself. (Walter is defending the motion “Libertarians Should Vote For Donald Trump In the Presidential Election” against the appallingly unreasonableReason Editor Nick Gillespie [Email him] at New York’s SohoForum on November 1). (Anyone wishing to sign our Scholars For Trump Declaration should email me). And a declaration for Trump that was posted on the American Greatness website, included such Jewish public figures as Michael Ledeen, David Goldman [Spengler] and Robert Weissberg.
Indeed, even the neoconservative icon www.vdare.com" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Norman Podhoretz (unlike his Hillary-leaning son) is openly supporting Trump. Norman explained in a July interview with the New York Post that “Say what you will about Trump, she’s worse.” [Trump is plainly the best bet for the Jews, by Seth Lipsky, July 20, 2016.
Some of Trump’s Jewish supporters are far from friends with each other. The American Greatness webmasters specifically excluded the names of the conveners of our declaration from their listing. Yet there are Jews on both declarations, who obviously don’t regard Trump in the manner of Bret Stephens or Anna Keller of Forward, as a threat to the survival of American Jews.
Although only 19 percent of likely Jewish voters support Trump (roughly the same percentage that went to George W. Bush in 2000), a plurality of Orthodox Jews do. In a poll recently taken at Yeshiva University, 37% of the students declared for Trump, but only 27% for Clinton. [The Orthodox Vote for Trump,by Armin Rosen, Tablet, September 27, 2016]
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” 41ZzIBnCXbL
Let me also note that a group of contrarians, all of whom are probably supporting Trump, meet each month in the basement of an Irish pub in Midtown Manhattan. Peter BrimelowJohn DerbyshireEdwin S. Rubenstein and I have all addressed this coterie that seems equally divided between Jews and Irish. All the attendees however express roughly the same Old Rightviews, which bring pleasure to my ears. Were my parents still alive, I’ve no doubt they’d be sporting a Trump sign on their lawn in Bridgeport, Connecticut even larger than the one on mine in Elizabethtown, PA.
It may run in families. My brother, who is a prominent physician in Litchfield County, CT (near Peter Brimelow’s residence) and my sister-in-law who is descended from Manhattan’s old German Jewish elite, will likewise be pulling the lever for Trump on November 8. And so will most of my cousins—although not, alas, their children, who are now in their forties and who sound politically (alas) like www.vdare.com" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Jennifer Rubin ,[email her] Max Boot, etc. This may reflect their Jewish and non-Jewish peer groups in their elite universities.
What Jewish and other critics of Trump find the scariest is his determination to deal decisively with illegal immigrants. Although Trump may have toned down his initial stand to deport all illegals, he has promised that if elected he’d deport illegals who’ve committed crimes. He would then defer any decision about other illegals until he’s deported the criminal ones and built a wall to protect our Southern border.
This has obviously upset Jewish civic and organizational leaders who would like the next president to put illegals on an instant path to citizenship. Motivating these scaremongers, as MacDonald correctly observes, “a concern that a homogeneous White America could ultimately rise up against Jews, as occurred in Hitler’s Germany; and historic antipathy toward Christian Europeans, an outgroup seen exclusively in the context of the Jewish preoccupation with anti-Semitism.”
MacDonald is entirely correct, on the basis of my personal observations, about why Jews remain radicalized on the (cultural but no longer economic) Left. What seems less obvious to me than it may be to MacDonald: whether this political response reflects real Jewish group interests. To me, it shows no rationality—it’s the perpetuation of phobia that no longer in any way corresponds to everyday reality. The fears and antipathies that Jewish leaders exploit arise from a determination to identify as a group enemy those who are objectively on the same side as American Jews, namely traditional white Christians.
Focusing on an invented enemy, as I have argued—see my autobiography Encounters, p. 22-26—may enhance Jewish solidarity in the face of an imaginary threat. But it is also a flight into what for want of a better name is collective psychosis.
Remember that in the 1990s, the present imagined savior of the Jews—a.k.a. the anti-Christian, anti-white presidential candidate—along with hubby Bill, were calling for sterner measures against illegals than those that had been taken under the Bush administration. [1996 Flashback: Bill Clinton Talks Like Trump On Immigration: “We Are A Nation Of Laws” , By Ian Schwartz, RealClearPolitics, May 17, 2016 ]Then Jewish voters who are now fearfully awaiting a second Holocaust if Trump is elected were drooling over the Clintons, despite the fact that Bill was calling for deporting illegals in his State of the Union address in 1996. Jewish voters didn’t seem to mind this view back then when the person who expressed it was characterized in the Main Stream Media as a left-of-center Democrat.
Were the criterion for a threat to Jewish survival then set higher by American Jewish spokesmen and journalists? Has Jewish antipathy for what is perceived as the dominant group actually increased? Or is this merely part of overall intensifying Cultural Marxist totalitarianism as the goal of Electing A New Peoplecomes in sight?
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” 61shjpWUoyL
Paul Gottfried [ email him ] is a retired Professor of Humanities at Elizabethtown College, PA. He is the author of After LiberalismMulticulturalism and the Politics of Guilt and The Strange Death of Marxism His most recent book is Leo Strauss and the Conservative Movement in America.


Ultima editare efectuata de catre Admin in Joi Noi 10, 2016 8:27 am, editata de 1 ori
Admin
Admin
Admin

Mesaje : 10753
Data de înscriere : 05/11/2012

https://amintiridespreviitor.forumgratuit.ro

Sus In jos

Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Empty Trump and the Jews, #6: Ramping up the hate (and paranoia) as we approach the finish line

Mesaj Scris de Admin Joi Noi 10, 2016 8:21 am

With precious little time left to go in the election, it seems like Jewish angst is ramping up, although of course, not all Jews see Donald Trump as a disaster (see previous articles in this series). Here’s a typical Trump rally as imagined by New York magazine writer Jonathan Chait.
[ltr]
View image on Twitter
[/ltr]
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Cwg3cAIWIAQCvDS



 Follow
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Whg1NSeK_normal



[ltr]Another huge Trump rally last night that isn't going to be reported by Shillary's crooked media[/ltr]




  •  


  •  315
    315 Retweets
    [url][/url]
     


  •  695
  • 695 likes
    [url][/url]





Much of the recent furor concerns Trump’s final ad, a 2-minute masterpiece of populist rhetoric that depicts a “global power structure” that is “bleeding America dry” with horrible trade deals that enrich elites and open the gates to mass immigration. Activist Jews watching it focused on the people depicted as behind this globalist takeover: George Soros, Janet Yellen, Chair of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, and Lloyd Blankfein, Chairman of Goldman Sachs, with the implication that Clinton is their minion. As he noted in his famous West Palm Beach speech which also triggered activist Jews and cucks like Rick Wilson:
The Clinton machine is at the center of this power structure. We’ve seen this first hand in the WikiLeaks documents, in which Hillary Clinton meets in secret with international banks to plot the destruction of U.S. sovereignty in order to enrich these global financial powers, her special interest friends and her donors.

This was enormously triggering for the ADL which tweeted:
[ltr]
[/ltr]
View image on Twitter
[size][ltr][url][/url]
[/ltr][/size]
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Cwlz1y_WEAAf_J1



 Follow
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” SmrA_EYd_normal



This #Trump ad touches on images and rhetoric that anti-Semites have used for ages 
[ltr]
http://
[/ltr][ltr]
 [/ltr]




  •  


  •  816
    816 Retweets
    [url][/url]
     


  •  602
  • 602 likes
    [url][/url]






Advertisement - Time to SUBSCRIBE now!






But of course, this is an egregiously stupid tactic for Jews and cuckservatives to take. Why call attention to Jewish involvement in international banking when their involvement and their general commitment to a globalist model for Western countries is well-known? As Jonathan Taylor  noted in Counterpunch:
For our tiny size, we are by far the most politically influential. The worlds of finance, media, journalism and law are home to extremely disproportionately high numbers of Jews. Leading globalist institutions like the World Bank, IMF, and WTO have high numbers of Jewish executives and staffers, as do organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relations, which one informal estimate claims is around 50% Jewish. Half of the US’s billionaires are Jewish. Jewish donors play an enormous role in funding Hillary Clinton’s campaign. The normally Republican and predominantly Jewish neoconservatives have thrown their support behind Hillary. … Bringing up anti-Semitism then just reminds people of how much influence and power Jews have.
A November 7 article at JTA focuses on Jewish responses to these statements by Trump as tapping into a wellspring of anti-Semitism that will unleash another holocaust (“Anti-Semitism unleashed by Trump followers chills Jewish voters“). It begins ominously: “Pieties? Out. Passports? In. Paranoia? On its way.”
I’d have to say that paranoia is already here if this is any indication. Another sample:
“My sister and her son didn’t have passports, but I pushed her to get them this summer,” said Suzanne Reisman, 40, a New York City-based writer who has been harassed by anti-Semites on Twitter. “My grandparents were Holocaust survivors. I hope it won’t come to it, but if we have to flee, we are ready.”
At the extreme (psychiatric case) end of this paranoia is an article in the Forward (“How Do I Explain My Trump Nazi Nightmare to My Mexican American Daughter?”) that begins by recounting the author’s nightmare of a naked Trump appearing with a swastika headband and saying things like “I’m deporting your daughter even though she was born in New York.” For her, it’s the 1930’s all over again, and we all know what that means:
I watch the news. Here is what I see: On a recent interview with CNN Trump says that he is for a ban on Muslims coming into the United States. I check the date to see if it’s still 2016 and I’m living in New York City or if it’s 1936 and I’m living in Nazi Germany, because for one to say, “Muslims shouldn’t be allowed into the United States,” to me is the same thing as saying “Jews should wear a yellow star when they walk down the street.”
This paranoia is an integral part of Judaism’s bunker mentality — a marker of strong ingroup identification and central to Judaism as a group evolutionary strategy. As I noted in Chapter 7 of A People That Shall Dwell Alone (pp. 218-219):
A permanent sense of imminent threat appears to be common among Jews. Writing on the clinical profile of Jewish families, Herz and Rosen (1982) note that for Jewish families a “sense of persecution (or its imminence) is part of a cultural heritage and is usually assumed with pride. Suffering is even a form of sharing with one’s fellow-Jews. It binds Jews with their heritage–with the suffering of Jews throughout history.” Zborowski and Herzog (1952, 153) note that the homes of wealthy Jews in traditional Eastern European shtetl communities sometimes had secret passages for use in times of anti-Semitic pogroms, and that their existence was “part of the imagery of the children who played around them, just as the half-effaced memory was part of every Jew’s mental equipment.” …
Woocher (1986) shows that Jewish survival in a threatening world is a fundamental theme of Judaism as a civil religion in contemporary America. Within this world view, the gentile world is conceptualized as fundamentally hostile, with Jewish life always on the verge of ceasing to exist entirely. “Like many other generations of Jews who have felt similarly, the leaders of the polity who fear that the end may be near have transformed this concern into a survivalist weapon” (Woocher 1986, 73). Thus, for example, Woocher (1986) notes that there has been a major effort since the 1960s to have American Jews visit Israel in an effort to strengthen Jewish identification, with a prominent aspect of the visit being a trip to a border outpost “where the ongoing threat to Israel’s security is palpable” (p. 150).
Self-deception is another important aspect of Judaism as a group evolutionary strategy and the focus of Chapter 8 of Separation and Its Discontents. Perhaps the most self-deceptive comment comes from Julia Ioffe, a journalist who was offended by Twitter comments after her hit pieceon Melania Trump appeared in GQ. Ioffe, who writes for Foreign Affairs and Politicosaid she was “personally glad to see the outpouring of antisemitism” because it restored Jews’ status as a persecuted minority.
For a long time I was very frustrated by the discussion on kind of the liberal side of the political spectrum, where Jews, like Israel, were no longer seen as the underdog, no longer seen as the persecuted minority, in fact, this kind of scurrying line of anti-Semitic stereotype of us as the establishment, and people who run and control everything.
This was too much even for Jeffrey Goldberg, who, as a leading pro-Israel journalist (who, as editor-in-chief of Atlantic, also has a perch in the elite media) is quite aware of Jewish power:  “Two things can be true at once,” implying that Jews could be a persecuted minority and yet a dominant part of the establishment. Indeed, one might say that in general Jews as an elite with different interests and attitudes than other sectors of society, are the main cause of historical anti-Semitism.  Without going into a laundry list of Jewish power in America (Jonathan Taylor’s comments above are a good start), let’s just say that writing for elite publications and being attacked by a bunch of mainly anonymous Twitter trolls (some of whom are doubtless on the payroll of the ADL) is not exactly a sign that you are on the outside looking in.


 Follow
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” NisNAeJf_normal
Now the polls are no longer rigged? Bet that changes when Orange Hitler loses. #GoHillary 




  •  


  •  23
    23 Retweets
    [url][/url]
     


  •  46
  • 46 likes
    [url][/url]





Also in the running for most self-deceptive pre-election comment is the above-mentioned Jonathan Chait, writing in New York magazine (“The GOP’s age of authoritarianism has only just begun.”). For Chait, Trump is a reincarnation of a decades-old Jewish bogeyman in American politics: right wing populism.
The party has grown increasingly reliant upon White identity politics to supply its votes, which has left an indelible imprint on not only the Republican Party’s function but also its form.
Right-wing populism has had the same character for decades — in 1950, Theodor Adorno described the fear of outsiders, and the veneration of law and order, as “the authoritarian personality”; in 1964, Richard Hofstadter described a similar tendency as “the paranoid style” — but until recently, those movements lived outside both political parties.
The work of Adorno and Hofstadter remains central to Jewish intellectuals’ understanding of American politics. Chait’s comments are a good example of how Jewish intellectuals are able to plug into influential pseudoscientific movements led by strongly identified Jews who were pursuing Jewish interests (Adorno and Hofstadter are covered in Chapter 5 of The Culture of Critique).  For these Jewish intellectuals, a particularly noxious aspect of populism is distrust of elites and “experts” such as those vetted by the American university system — a view that obviously dovetails with Jewish interests as an elite. Hofstadter’s view that departures from liberal thinking derive from “status anxiety” may seem relevant. However, Hofstadter framed status anxiety as nothing more than psychopathology, while the anxieties of Trump voters are not at all a psychopathology. In fact Trump voters have very real fears about their future in non-White America (hereherehere and here), and for good reason (see comments on David Brooks, below).
In making such statements, Chait ignores research that Trump voters are not actually more authoritarian than non-Trump voters. They are actually populists whose main characteristics are support for American nationalism and distrust of elites — people like Chait and Brooks and their employers. [Trump’s voters aren’t authoritarians, new research says. So what are they?Washington Post, March 6, 2016]
What Chait fails to mention, of course, is that authoritarianism is rampant on the left, most notably in universities where [url=https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=suppression of free speech in universities]free speech is a distant memory[/url]and we even see threats of physical assault.
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Thiel-150x150
Then there’s Marissa Robbins in Newsweek
Over the past 16 months, Trump’s campaign has openly and unabashedly stirred up hatred against women, people of color, Muslims and immigrants. He has refused to condemn some of his explicitly White-supremacist alt-right supporters and has even promoted images and tweets created by these individuals on his own Twitter feed.
Trump has also recently incorporated the anti-Semitic trope of an international banker/media/elite conspiracy into his rhetoric, dog-whistling to the White-supremacist, neo-Nazi portion of his base.
It’s pointless to go into what’s wrong here—pretty much everything. But the point I want to make is that there are indeed people on the Alt Right who make statements that are, shall we say, less than refined (I have proposed that people with IQ’s less than 120 and who haven’t read much about Jews should not comment on Jewish issues; all it does is give Jews easy targets to parade in the mainstream media.) However, what is invariably missing in these rants is whether the Alt Right critique of Jewish power has any basis in fact. Context is never provided.
For example, from her statements on the Melania Trump article fallout discussed above, Ms. Ioffe clearly has a very strong Jewish identity, and her article, by all accounts was hostile toward Melania (who said that the article “provoked” the attacks). As I have documented, there has been an outpouring of hostility toward Trump by strongly identified Jews who clearly are motivated by their sense that Trump will be bad for Jewish interests. It is not much of a stretch to assume that Ms. Ioffe was motivated to write her negative portrayal of Melania because of her Jewish identity and sense of Jewish interests. But journalists like Ioffe expect that they will be able to write such things without anyone calling attention to their Jewish identity. Sorry, but those days are over.
And underneath the hostility from many on the Alt Right is the general view that Jews are indeed a critical linchpin of the establishment that is hostile to the entirely legitimate interests of Whites in retaining political and cultural control, particularly on immigration and refugee policy, multiculturalism, and globalism generally.
Again, I won’t rehearse the mountain of data that show how the organized Jewish community and many activist Jews in the media, politics, and academia have been a necessary condition for the present power of the anti-White movement, but Ioffe’s idea that Twitter harassment proves that Jews are not the establishment is ludicrous. If Trump wins it will be in the teeth of a unified establishment, from the far left that dominates academia and much of the mainstream media to the neoconservative right that has dominated conservative media and foreign policy. It would be a yuge defeat for the entire elite class that dominate the US, as Haaretz columnist Chemi Shalev (an Israeli who is horrified by Trump’s statements on immigration) notes:
Trump’s election as president wouldn’t only sully America’s image in foreign eyes, it would crush it in the eyes of many Americans, including the overwhelming majority of its elites. The leaders of America’s cultural, intellectual, academic and financial sectors would immediately be plunged into shock and depression. They would look in the mirror and be hard put to convince themselves that America, with Trump as president, can still be considered great. They won’t leave the country in droves, as some have threatened, but their country would certainly be diminished forever in their eyes.
Ah the weeping and gnashing of teeth in all the elite enclaves, from the Hamptons to Beverly Hills.
Finally, I want to make a point about how the fact that Trump is supported by working class Whites is used against him. In general, the people who run this unified, oligarchic establishment are more educated than average. But this education gap is used as a self-reinforcing weapon against Trump by writers like David Brooks, another writer who, like Ioffe, is a member of the barred-from-the-establishment persecuted minority. Brooks writes for the New York Times and appears regularly on PBS. As summarized by RealClearPolitics,Brooks noted on PBS that
the less educated and non-college educated Whites are going to vote for Donald Trump no matter what. He added, “people are just going with their gene pool.” Brooks said demographics is the reason why Clinton is making a campaign stop in the state of Michigan, normally a Democratic stronghold, because “there are a lot of White people.”
“Basically, less educated or high school-educated Whites are going to Trump,” Brooks told host Judy Woodruff. “It doesn’t matter what the guy does. And college-educated going to Clinton.”
“Sometimes, you get the sense that the campaign barely matters,” a dejected Brooks said. “People are just going with their gene pool and whatever it is. And that is one of the more depressing aspects of this race for me.” …
“It’s a campaign of hate,” he said of Trump. “Obama is a campaign of at least hope. At least his first campaign was. This is just a campaign of hate. And, you know, people who don’t like Trump really don’t like Trump. And I guess I’m among them.”
Three points:

  • Brooks is being interviewed on PBS, a media outlet with an educated viewership. He is basically telling his educated audience that people like them are voting for Clinton. There is a sense of superiority and the implication that only the unwashed would vote for Trump.


The domination of elite media by people hostile to the traditional White majority remains a problem for those of us in opposition to the establishment. The problem is that intellectually insecure White people look to the elite media for their ideas. Most people are quite insecure about their intellectual ability. But they know that the professors at Harvard, the editorial pages of the New York Times and the Washington Post, and PBS are all on page when it comes to immigration and the benefits of diversity. This is a formidable array, to the point that you almost have to be a crank to dissent from this consensus.
Brooks, then, is appealing to these intellectually insecure Whites, hoping that educated Whites will cast enough votes for Clinton to keep this corrupt establishment going a while longer before it inevitably goes down in flames.

If you’d like to continue the destruction of our manufacturing base, and the jobs that went with it. If you like the uncontrollable immigration, if you like the string of stupid wars from Iraq to Libya to Syria. If you want to say yes to all of that, if you want to keep this all the way it is, fine, then vote for Hillary Clinton.

  • Brooks is clearly saying that White identity politics is driving the Trump campaign (“going with their gene pool”), and I (along with Jonathan Chait, as quoted above) wholeheartedly agree. The problem for Jews is that the forces unleashed by Jewish activism in favor of immigration and multiculturalism have inevitably unleashed a rise in White identity politics, either implicitly, as among most Trump supporters, or explicitly, as among the Alt Right (which has been the only intellectual movement supporting Trump). And once this process starts gaining momentum, it’s only a matter of time before there is a critical mass of Whites who are dialed into the Jewish role in White dispossession.  Psychologically, we expect that racial identity and a sense of racial interests will be increasingly important as Whites become a minority.


This is especially the case given that Whites are routinely subjected to hostility in the media and the educational system. An article in The Federalist by a Jewish writer, David Marcus (no fan of the Alt Right) notes:
Until recently I would have been unlikely to use the term [“anti-White’]. Not because I didn’t believe some people harbored animosity towards Whites, but because that was a fringe attitude removed from power, which represented little real threat. That is no longer the case. Progressive rhetoric on race has turned an ugly corner and the existence of “anti-White” attitudes can no longer be ignored….What started as irony turned into an actual belief that White people, specifically White men, are more dangerous and immoral than any other people.
And a student, “College Republican,” comments on an article in The American Conservative by Scott McConnell, also critical of the Alt Right:
I am in college and nearly all of my conservative friends are at least sympathetic to the alt-right. Even if they don’t openly talk about it, they’re regularly browsing 8chan’s /pol/, The Right Stuff, Radix, VDare, Occidental Observer, AmRen, etc.
How did this come about? It’s harder for older people to understand, but we younger Whites have been vilified all our lives. Throughout elementary school high school, I was regularly demonized for being White. (I attended public and Christian schools and it was even worse at the latter.) And now it’s even more extreme in college. Our entire White race is regularly trashed on a daily basis. … We have the right to oppose our own dispossession and extinction — just as every other race does. It’s time for younger Whites to pick up the gauntlet because we’re the future.

The anti-White hatred originating from the highest moral ground of our culture is palpable, and it is only going to get worse — much worse — if our future is indeed a non-White America.
Admin
Admin
Admin

Mesaje : 10753
Data de înscriere : 05/11/2012

https://amintiridespreviitor.forumgratuit.ro

Sus In jos

Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Empty Trump and the Jews, #6: Ramping up the hate (and paranoia) as we approach the finish line

Mesaj Scris de Admin Joi Noi 10, 2016 8:39 am



With precious little time left to go in the election, it seems like Jewish angst is ramping up, although of course, not all Jews see Donald Trump as a disaster (see previous articles in this series). Here’s a typical Trump rally as imagined by New York magazine writer Jonathan Chait.
[ltr]
[/ltr]
View image on Twitter
[ltr][url][/url]
[/ltr]
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Cwg3cAIWIAQCvDS



 Follow
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Whg1NSeK_normal



[ltr]Another huge Trump rally last night that isn't going to be reported by Shillary's crooked media[/ltr]





  •  


  •  315
    315 Retweets
    [url][/url]
     


  •  695
  • 695 likes
    [url][/url]






Much of the recent furor concerns Trump’s final ad, a 2-minute masterpiece of populist rhetoric that depicts a “global power structure” that is “bleeding America dry” with horrible trade deals that enrich elites and open the gates to mass immigration. Activist Jews watching it focused on the people depicted as behind this globalist takeover: George Soros, Janet Yellen, Chair of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, and Lloyd Blankfein, Chairman of Goldman Sachs, with the implication that Clinton is their minion. As he noted in his famous West Palm Beach speech which also triggered activist Jews and cucks like Rick Wilson:
The Clinton machine is at the center of this power structure. We’ve seen this first hand in the WikiLeaks documents, in which Hillary Clinton meets in secret with international banks to plot the destruction of U.S. sovereignty in order to enrich these global financial powers, her special interest friends and her donors.

This was enormously triggering for the ADL which tweeted:
[ltr]
[/ltr]
View image on Twitter
[ltr][url][/url]
[/ltr]
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Cwlz1y_WEAAf_J1



 Follow
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” SmrA_EYd_normal



This #Trump ad touches on images and rhetoric that anti-Semites have used for ages 
[ltr]
http://
[/ltr][ltr]
 [/ltr]





  •  


  •  816
    816 Retweets
    [url][/url]
     


  •  602
  • 602 likes
    [url][/url]








Advertisement - Time to SUBSCRIBE now!





But of course, this is an egregiously stupid tactic for Jews and cuckservatives to take. Why call attention to Jewish involvement in international banking when their involvement and their general commitment to a globalist model for Western countries is well-known? As Jonathan Taylor  noted in Counterpunch:
For our tiny size, we are by far the most politically influential. The worlds of finance, media, journalism and law are home to extremely disproportionately high numbers of Jews. Leading globalist institutions like the World Bank, IMF, and WTO have high numbers of Jewish executives and staffers, as do organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relations, which one informal estimate claims is around 50% Jewish. Half of the US’s billionaires are Jewish. Jewish donors play an enormous role in funding Hillary Clinton’s campaign. The normally Republican and predominantly Jewish neoconservatives have thrown their support behind Hillary. … Bringing up anti-Semitism then just reminds people of how much influence and power Jews have.
A November 7 article at JTA focuses on Jewish responses to these statements by Trump as tapping into a wellspring of anti-Semitism that will unleash another holocaust (“Anti-Semitism unleashed by Trump followers chills Jewish voters“). It begins ominously: “Pieties? Out. Passports? In. Paranoia? On its way.”
I’d have to say that paranoia is already here if this is any indication. Another sample:
“My sister and her son didn’t have passports, but I pushed her to get them this summer,” said Suzanne Reisman, 40, a New York City-based writer who has been harassed by anti-Semites on Twitter. “My grandparents were Holocaust survivors. I hope it won’t come to it, but if we have to flee, we are ready.”
At the extreme (psychiatric case) end of this paranoia is an article in the Forward (“How Do I Explain My Trump Nazi Nightmare to My Mexican American Daughter?”) that begins by recounting the author’s nightmare of a naked Trump appearing with a swastika headband and saying things like “I’m deporting your daughter even though she was born in New York.” For her, it’s the 1930’s all over again, and we all know what that means:
I watch the news. Here is what I see: On a recent interview with CNN Trump says that he is for a ban on Muslims coming into the United States. I check the date to see if it’s still 2016 and I’m living in New York City or if it’s 1936 and I’m living in Nazi Germany, because for one to say, “Muslims shouldn’t be allowed into the United States,” to me is the same thing as saying “Jews should wear a yellow star when they walk down the street.”
This paranoia is an integral part of Judaism’s bunker mentality — a marker of strong ingroup identification and central to Judaism as a group evolutionary strategy. As I noted in Chapter 7 of A People That Shall Dwell Alone (pp. 218-219):
A permanent sense of imminent threat appears to be common among Jews. Writing on the clinical profile of Jewish families, Herz and Rosen (1982) note that for Jewish families a “sense of persecution (or its imminence) is part of a cultural heritage and is usually assumed with pride. Suffering is even a form of sharing with one’s fellow-Jews. It binds Jews with their heritage–with the suffering of Jews throughout history.” Zborowski and Herzog (1952, 153) note that the homes of wealthy Jews in traditional Eastern European shtetl communities sometimes had secret passages for use in times of anti-Semitic pogroms, and that their existence was “part of the imagery of the children who played around them, just as the half-effaced memory was part of every Jew’s mental equipment.” …
Woocher (1986) shows that Jewish survival in a threatening world is a fundamental theme of Judaism as a civil religion in contemporary America. Within this world view, the gentile world is conceptualized as fundamentally hostile, with Jewish life always on the verge of ceasing to exist entirely. “Like many other generations of Jews who have felt similarly, the leaders of the polity who fear that the end may be near have transformed this concern into a survivalist weapon” (Woocher 1986, 73). Thus, for example, Woocher (1986) notes that there has been a major effort since the 1960s to have American Jews visit Israel in an effort to strengthen Jewish identification, with a prominent aspect of the visit being a trip to a border outpost “where the ongoing threat to Israel’s security is palpable” (p. 150).
Self-deception is another important aspect of Judaism as a group evolutionary strategy and the focus of Chapter 8 of Separation and Its Discontents. Perhaps the most self-deceptive comment comes from Julia Ioffe, a journalist who was offended by Twitter comments after her hit pieceon Melania Trump appeared in GQ. Ioffe, who writes for Foreign Affairs and Politicosaid she was “personally glad to see the outpouring of antisemitism” because it restored Jews’ status as a persecuted minority.
For a long time I was very frustrated by the discussion on kind of the liberal side of the political spectrum, where Jews, like Israel, were no longer seen as the underdog, no longer seen as the persecuted minority, in fact, this kind of scurrying line of anti-Semitic stereotype of us as the establishment, and people who run and control everything.
This was too much even for Jeffrey Goldberg, who, as a leading pro-Israel journalist (who, as editor-in-chief of Atlantic, also has a perch in the elite media) is quite aware of Jewish power:  “Two things can be true at once,” implying that Jews could be a persecuted minority and yet a dominant part of the establishment. Indeed, one might say that in general Jews as an elite with different interests and attitudes than other sectors of society, are the main cause of historical anti-Semitism.  Without going into a laundry list of Jewish power in America (Jonathan Taylor’s comments above are a good start), let’s just say that writing for elite publications and being attacked by a bunch of mainly anonymous Twitter trolls (some of whom are doubtless on the payroll of the ADL) is not exactly a sign that you are on the outside looking in.


 Follow
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” NisNAeJf_normal
Now the polls are no longer rigged? Bet that changes when Orange Hitler loses. #GoHillary 





  •  


  •  23
    23 Retweets
    [url][/url]
     


  •  46
  • 46 likes
    [url][/url]






Also in the running for most self-deceptive pre-election comment is the above-mentioned Jonathan Chait, writing in New York magazine (“The GOP’s age of authoritarianism has only just begun.”). For Chait, Trump is a reincarnation of a decades-old Jewish bogeyman in American politics: right wing populism.
The party has grown increasingly reliant upon White identity politics to supply its votes, which has left an indelible imprint on not only the Republican Party’s function but also its form.
Right-wing populism has had the same character for decades — in 1950, Theodor Adorno described the fear of outsiders, and the veneration of law and order, as “the authoritarian personality”; in 1964, Richard Hofstadter described a similar tendency as “the paranoid style” — but until recently, those movements lived outside both political parties.
The work of Adorno and Hofstadter remains central to Jewish intellectuals’ understanding of American politics. Chait’s comments are a good example of how Jewish intellectuals are able to plug into influential pseudoscientific movements led by strongly identified Jews who were pursuing Jewish interests (Adorno and Hofstadter are covered in Chapter 5 of The Culture of Critique).  For these Jewish intellectuals, a particularly noxious aspect of populism is distrust of elites and “experts” such as those vetted by the American university system — a view that obviously dovetails with Jewish interests as an elite. Hofstadter’s view that departures from liberal thinking derive from “status anxiety” may seem relevant. However, Hofstadter framed status anxiety as nothing more than psychopathology, while the anxieties of Trump voters are not at all a psychopathology. In fact Trump voters have very real fears about their future in non-White America (hereherehere and here), and for good reason (see comments on David Brooks, below).
In making such statements, Chait ignores research that Trump voters are not actually more authoritarian than non-Trump voters. They are actually populists whose main characteristics are support for American nationalism and distrust of elites — people like Chait and Brooks and their employers. [Trump’s voters aren’t authoritarians, new research says. So what are they?Washington Post, March 6, 2016]
What Chait fails to mention, of course, is that authoritarianism is rampant on the left, most notably in universities where [url=https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=suppression of free speech in universities]free speech is a distant memory[/url]and we even see threats of physical assault.
Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Thiel-150x150
Then there’s Marissa Robbins in Newsweek
Over the past 16 months, Trump’s campaign has openly and unabashedly stirred up hatred against women, people of color, Muslims and immigrants. He has refused to condemn some of his explicitly White-supremacist alt-right supporters and has even promoted images and tweets created by these individuals on his own Twitter feed.
Trump has also recently incorporated the anti-Semitic trope of an international banker/media/elite conspiracy into his rhetoric, dog-whistling to the White-supremacist, neo-Nazi portion of his base.
It’s pointless to go into what’s wrong here—pretty much everything. But the point I want to make is that there are indeed people on the Alt Right who make statements that are, shall we say, less than refined (I have proposed that people with IQ’s less than 120 and who haven’t read much about Jews should not comment on Jewish issues; all it does is give Jews easy targets to parade in the mainstream media.) However, what is invariably missing in these rants is whether the Alt Right critique of Jewish power has any basis in fact. Context is never provided.
For example, from her statements on the Melania Trump article fallout discussed above, Ms. Ioffe clearly has a very strong Jewish identity, and her article, by all accounts was hostile toward Melania (who said that the article “provoked” the attacks). As I have documented, there has been an outpouring of hostility toward Trump by strongly identified Jews who clearly are motivated by their sense that Trump will be bad for Jewish interests. It is not much of a stretch to assume that Ms. Ioffe was motivated to write her negative portrayal of Melania because of her Jewish identity and sense of Jewish interests. But journalists like Ioffe expect that they will be able to write such things without anyone calling attention to their Jewish identity. Sorry, but those days are over.
And underneath the hostility from many on the Alt Right is the general view that Jews are indeed a critical linchpin of the establishment that is hostile to the entirely legitimate interests of Whites in retaining political and cultural control, particularly on immigration and refugee policy, multiculturalism, and globalism generally.
Again, I won’t rehearse the mountain of data that show how the organized Jewish community and many activist Jews in the media, politics, and academia have been a necessary condition for the present power of the anti-White movement, but Ioffe’s idea that Twitter harassment proves that Jews are not the establishment is ludicrous. If Trump wins it will be in the teeth of a unified establishment, from the far left that dominates academia and much of the mainstream media to the neoconservative right that has dominated conservative media and foreign policy. It would be a yuge defeat for the entire elite class that dominate the US, as Haaretz columnist Chemi Shalev (an Israeli who is horrified by Trump’s statements on immigration) notes:
Trump’s election as president wouldn’t only sully America’s image in foreign eyes, it would crush it in the eyes of many Americans, including the overwhelming majority of its elites. The leaders of America’s cultural, intellectual, academic and financial sectors would immediately be plunged into shock and depression. They would look in the mirror and be hard put to convince themselves that America, with Trump as president, can still be considered great. They won’t leave the country in droves, as some have threatened, but their country would certainly be diminished forever in their eyes.
Ah the weeping and gnashing of teeth in all the elite enclaves, from the Hamptons to Beverly Hills.
Finally, I want to make a point about how the fact that Trump is supported by working class Whites is used against him. In general, the people who run this unified, oligarchic establishment are more educated than average. But this education gap is used as a self-reinforcing weapon against Trump by writers like David Brooks, another writer who, like Ioffe, is a member of the barred-from-the-establishment persecuted minority. Brooks writes for the New York Times and appears regularly on PBS. As summarized by RealClearPolitics,Brooks noted on PBS that
the less educated and non-college educated Whites are going to vote for Donald Trump no matter what. He added, “people are just going with their gene pool.” Brooks said demographics is the reason why Clinton is making a campaign stop in the state of Michigan, normally a Democratic stronghold, because “there are a lot of White people.”
“Basically, less educated or high school-educated Whites are going to Trump,” Brooks told host Judy Woodruff. “It doesn’t matter what the guy does. And college-educated going to Clinton.”
“Sometimes, you get the sense that the campaign barely matters,” a dejected Brooks said. “People are just going with their gene pool and whatever it is. And that is one of the more depressing aspects of this race for me.” …
“It’s a campaign of hate,” he said of Trump. “Obama is a campaign of at least hope. At least his first campaign was. This is just a campaign of hate. And, you know, people who don’t like Trump really don’t like Trump. And I guess I’m among them.”
Three points:

  • Brooks is being interviewed on PBS, a media outlet with an educated viewership. He is basically telling his educated audience that people like them are voting for Clinton. There is a sense of superiority and the implication that only the unwashed would vote for Trump.


The domination of elite media by people hostile to the traditional White majority remains a problem for those of us in opposition to the establishment. The problem is that intellectually insecure White people look to the elite media for their ideas. Most people are quite insecure about their intellectual ability. But they know that the professors at Harvard, the editorial pages of the New York Times and the Washington Post, and PBS are all on page when it comes to immigration and the benefits of diversity. This is a formidable array, to the point that you almost have to be a crank to dissent from this consensus.
Brooks, then, is appealing to these intellectually insecure Whites, hoping that educated Whites will cast enough votes for Clinton to keep this corrupt establishment going a while longer before it inevitably goes down in flames.

If you’d like to continue the destruction of our manufacturing base, and the jobs that went with it. If you like the uncontrollable immigration, if you like the string of stupid wars from Iraq to Libya to Syria. If you want to say yes to all of that, if you want to keep this all the way it is, fine, then vote for Hillary Clinton.

  • Brooks is clearly saying that White identity politics is driving the Trump campaign (“going with their gene pool”), and I (along with Jonathan Chait, as quoted above) wholeheartedly agree. The problem for Jews is that the forces unleashed by Jewish activism in favor of immigration and multiculturalism have inevitably unleashed a rise in White identity politics, either implicitly, as among most Trump supporters, or explicitly, as among the Alt Right (which has been the only intellectual movement supporting Trump). And once this process starts gaining momentum, it’s only a matter of time before there is a critical mass of Whites who are dialed into the Jewish role in White dispossession.  Psychologically, we expect that racial identity and a sense of racial interests will be increasingly important as Whites become a minority.


This is especially the case given that Whites are routinely subjected to hostility in the media and the educational system. An article in The Federalist by a Jewish writer, David Marcus (no fan of the Alt Right) notes:
Until recently I would have been unlikely to use the term [“anti-White’]. Not because I didn’t believe some people harbored animosity towards Whites, but because that was a fringe attitude removed from power, which represented little real threat. That is no longer the case. Progressive rhetoric on race has turned an ugly corner and the existence of “anti-White” attitudes can no longer be ignored….What started as irony turned into an actual belief that White people, specifically White men, are more dangerous and immoral than any other people.
And a student, “College Republican,” comments on an article in The American Conservative by Scott McConnell, also critical of the Alt Right:
I am in college and nearly all of my conservative friends are at least sympathetic to the alt-right. Even if they don’t openly talk about it, they’re regularly browsing 8chan’s /pol/, The Right Stuff, Radix, VDare, Occidental Observer, AmRen, etc.
How did this come about? It’s harder for older people to understand, but we younger Whites have been vilified all our lives. Throughout elementary school high school, I was regularly demonized for being White. (I attended public and Christian schools and it was even worse at the latter.) And now it’s even more extreme in college. Our entire White race is regularly trashed on a daily basis. … We have the right to oppose our own dispossession and extinction — just as every other race does. It’s time for younger Whites to pick up the gauntlet because we’re the future.
The anti-White hatred originating from the highest moral ground of our culture is palpable, and it is only going to get worse — much worse — if our future is indeed a non-White America.
Admin
Admin
Admin

Mesaje : 10753
Data de înscriere : 05/11/2012

https://amintiridespreviitor.forumgratuit.ro

Sus In jos

Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.” Empty Re: Donald Ratoiul , cel ce bea J.Daniels cu țoiul : “WE ARE THE FUTURE.”

Mesaj Scris de Continut sponsorizat


Continut sponsorizat


Sus In jos

Sus

- Subiecte similare

 
Permisiunile acestui forum:
Nu puteti raspunde la subiectele acestui forum