RSS

Don’t Blame “The Jews”

03 Nov

Look, people, we’re in a rapid and accelerating cultural collapse here in the West, in the USA in particular. One thing Alt-Right writers do often enough is point to the prominence of one particular group in the vanguard of cultural Marxism, as evidence that this group planned and caused cultural decline. That Jews were disproportionately represented amongst the Bolsheviks does not imply that Bolshevism was a Jewish movement, a National Socialist canard cited by Hannah Arendt. The political and cultural collapse of the Tsarist regime was brought about by that regime (and modernity), not the Jews.

In this light, we examine this recent comment left over at Heartiste.

Knowledgeable students of the enemy will not be surprised to learn that the Troll Hunter is (((Robert Aschberg))), grandson of (((Olaf Aschberg))) who was a key figure in 20th century history. A ‘Swedish’ financier, he became ‘Banker to the Bolsheviks.’ This was a critical step in cementing those Western ties to the Soviet Union … (((Eskimos)))
Every fuckin’ time.

Tanstaafl is right, CH. This suicide of the West has been egged on.

“Eskimos,” like Scots-Irish, are often used as code for Jews. That the Aschbergs are prominent financiers in the political/media structure of the Swedish government is indeniable. That they are Jews is also undeniable. That the actions of some Jews, like George Soros, have poured acid on community relations is further undeniable. Those Jews, having joined the cultural mainstream, are assisting in the suicide of the West.

We at Patriactionary have admired, by contrast, reactionary Jews showing the way to restore a Patriachal society. We once had a Catholic, Patriarchal culture in the USA, and it was destroyed… not by Jews, but by Mainline Protestants, allied to a messianic Progressive state.

A comparison is in order. Since the Germ Theory of Disease (Discovered by a German Lutheran, although there was a prominent Jew involved as well), we have seen germs (bacteria, viruses) as the cause of many a disease. Certainly, persons infected with cholera bacteria are the ones who show symptoms of cholera. However, there is a profound counter to the idea that cholera CAUSES disease.

In The Biology of Belief, pp. 95-96, we read the following:

My favorite example of scientific denial of the reality of mind-body interactions relates to an article that appeared in Science about nineteenth-century German physician, Robert Koch, who along with Pasteur founded the Germ Theory. The Germ Theory holds that bacteria and viruses are the cause of disease. That theory is widely accepted now, but in Koch’s day it was more controversial. One of Koch’s critics was so convinced that the Germ Theory was wrong that he brazenly wolfed down a glass of water laced with vibrio cholerae, the bacterium Koch believed caused cholera. To everyone’s astonishment, the man was completely unaffected by the virulent pathogen. The Science article published in 2000 describing the incident stated: “For unexplained reasons he remained symptom free, but nevertheless incorrect.” (DiRita 2000)

The man survived and Science, reflecting the unanimity of opinion on the Germ Theory, had the audacity to say his criticism was incorrect? If it is claimed that this bacterium is the cause of cholera and the man demonstrates that he is unaffected by the germs … how can he be “incorrect”? Instead of trying to figure out how the man avoided the dreaded disease, scientists blithely dismiss this and other embarrassing “messy” exceptions that spoil their theories.

Now, no one would deny that people who do suffer from cholera are infected with vibrio cholerae. The point of this anecdote, however, is that Vc does not CAUSE disease, it takes advantage of a diseased or malfunctioning system, opportunistically. The scientist with full confidence in his conviction about cholera likely fended off infection with the deadly bacterium, where others with weaker immune systems of mind-body connections would not.

We now visit the memoir of Stefan Zweig, talking of fin-de-siecle Vienna, and the wondrous world it was, in his book The World of Yesterday. Zweig, from an Austrian Jewish family, is describing the cultural milieu that was that place and time, and the Jewish relationship to it. First, he talks specifically about Jewish assimilation:

Adapting themselves to the milieu of the people or country where they live is not only an external protective measure for Jews, but a deep internal desire. Their longing for a homeland, for rest, for security, for friendliness, urges them to attach themselves passionately to the culture of the world around them. And never was such an attachment more effective-except in Spain in the fifteenth century-or happier and more fruitful than in Austria. Having resided for more than two hundred years in the Imperial city, the Jews encountered there an easygoing people, inclined to conciliation, and under whose apparent laxity of form lay buried the identical deep instinct for cultural and aesthetic values which was so important to the Jews themselves.

An upwardly-mobile Jewish burgher class, in other words, admired and wanted to join the cultured world of the Austrian elite. He continues:

(I)n Vienna… they found there a personal task. In the last century the pursuit of art in Austria had lost its old traditional defenders and protectors, the Imperial house and the aristocracy. Whereas in the eighteenth century …Josef II ably discussed his operas with Mozart, and Leopold III himself composed music, the later emperors, Franz II and Ferdinand, had no interest whatever in artistic things; and our Emperor Franz Josef, who in his eighty years had never read a book other than the Army Register, or even taken one in his hand, evidenced moreover a definite antipathy to music.

It wasn’t just the Hapsburgs who dropped out of cultural leadership. He continues:

The nobility as well had relinquished its erstwhile protector’s role; gone were the glorious days when the Esterhazys harbored a Haydn, the Lobkowitzes and the Kinskys and Waldsteins competed to have a premiere of Beethoven in their palaces, where a Countess Thun threw herself on her knees before the great demigod begging him not to withdraw Fidelio from the Opera. But now Wagner, Brahms, Johann Strauss, and Hugo Wolf had not received the slightest support from them.

Of course, Viennese culture and music did not collapse in the 19th century. Zweig:

To maintain the Philharmonic on its accustomed level, to enable the painters and sculptors to make a living, it was necessary for the people to jump into the breach, and it was the pride and ambition of the Jewish people to co-operate in the front ranks to carry on the former glory of the fame of Viennese culture. …

(W)ithout the ceaseless stimulating interest of the Jewish bourgeoisie, Vienna, thanks to the indolence of the court, the aristocracy, and the Christian millionaires, who preferred to maintain racing stables and hunts to fostering art, would have remained behind Berlin in the realm of art as Austria remained behind the German Reich in political matters. (emphasis added)

When a culture begins to go downhill, panem et circenses becomes the interest of the people, but they are merely following the predatory elite at the top of society, who have shirked the responsibilities that come with the rights and privileges of God’s gifts. This denial of Truth at the top is the cause of the collapse; an elite that will not bend the knee in a Godly direction will now believe and do anything. Nietzsche said it first, but society after society has proved it.

I see too much alt-right writing that parallels (National) Socialist propaganda, and compares Jews to vermin and pestilence. I viscerally disagree with this characterization. Those who believe in the “eternal” perfidy of the Jews, however, must answer the question: how and why did the elite of Christian societies so abandon its leadership role that Jews could take over?

Advertisements
 
30 Comments

Posted by on November 3, 2015 in Uncategorized

 

30 responses to “Don’t Blame “The Jews”

  1. weak stream

    November 4, 2015 at 6:24 am

    The idea that the Jews were behind any kind of collectivism whether it be fascism, communism or otherwise (and they all have the same mechanisms under the hood) is ridiculous as it works directly against their interest. Common, uneducated, low and middle class riff raff/scumbags are behind collectivism. Hitler created a ‘financial miracle’ in the ’30’s in Germany which bought the masses out lock, stock and barrel. Bolshevism promised the same but delivered less but not because it had any essential differences but because Russia was less industrialized and thus less wealthy at the time. Judaism is an exclusive, introverted society with a great deal of cultural drive that tends to make commoners envious. I’m Catholic and some of the people I admire the most in this world are Jews. And Jesus, of course.

     
  2. Marc Bahn

    November 4, 2015 at 12:43 pm

    Don’t be ridiculous. Where do American politicians go to have their pictures taken kissing the ring? The wailing wall. What middle east bandit state gets more fawning reverence than does the United States, in US politicians’ speeches? Who controls 90% of western media? Who are the major campaign donors? Who do we fight wars for?

    Sure, Gentiles set up a very corruptible system that has been taken advantage of but it’s out of their hands now. Ask any retired-with-not-much-time-left politician.

     
  3. weak stream

    November 4, 2015 at 1:52 pm

    I believe the question was whether or not we’re, in our right mind blaming Jews for Bolshevism and Nazism. Whether ambitious Jews have risen to prominence is also not in question. And who cares what the Jews control? You mean they’re so much smarter than the rest of Western Civ that they just fucked us out of everything without us noticing? Collectivists have a long history of exterminating and stripping the Jews. Study your history…nothing is ever ‘out of anyone’s hands’ for long.

     
  4. Will S.

    November 5, 2015 at 2:15 am

    Jews, like everyone else, come in different kinds, with differences of opinion on various matters. I don’t think it’s wrong to notice the prevalence of Jews in late 19th century / early 20th century Eastern European labour and socialist / communist movements / parties, or in Hollywood (which they started), or among ’60s feminists, or modern-day neo-cons, or amongst the editors and writers of the New Republic magazine, etc. (You can look up lists of Jewish feminists and neo-cons at Wikipedia, if you’re interested; you can also look up the background of Trotsky and others, if you wish.)

    At the same time, there indeed have been Jews who have rejected and continue to reject prog dogma, at least within their own communities, and they are worthy of respect and admiration, IMO.

    It strikes me that anyone who goes searching for one sole cause for the ills of modernity – whether they wish to blame it on Protestants, Catholics, or Jews, or whoever – is too simplistic, when matters are always more complex than we might like them to be.

     
  5. Eric

    November 5, 2015 at 6:12 am

    I think that the dynamics going on here are two things: 1) Nature abhors a vacuum; and 2) survival of the fittest applies to cultures too. The Anglosphere today is effete and weakened, so it’s not surprising that various groups are vying for the spoils. Zionist Jews, like the Russians, Chinese, and Moslems are looking out for their interests. Same domestically. It’s a power vacuum and everyone’s rushing in to fill it.

    [EA: Precisement!]

     
  6. Mark Citadel

    November 5, 2015 at 10:59 am

    I’ll admit at first I was rather ambivalent towards the Jews, but through my own academic study of the history of Bolshevism (something very close to home for me) and reading the filth of Tim Wise, I am resolute in saying all Jews should be deported from Occidental lands to Palestine.

    Those guilty of crimes against Tradition are to be tried alongside their white co-Modernists, but the others are just to be exiled. They do not belong among us.

     
  7. weak stream

    November 5, 2015 at 1:41 pm

    Clarification: When I said collectivism doesn’t serve Jewish interest, I was speaking generally, not specifically about individuals. And it doesn’t. Hard money and free market principles do. This is like saying we should get rid of men because they are involved in all of the gun violence. True enough, but close to 100% of men are not involved in gun violence. And BTW Mark, you are that scared of Jews?
    …really?

     
  8. Peter Blood

    November 5, 2015 at 3:39 pm

    To a people that worships Mammon, Jews are a Master Race.

    [EA: That’s brilliant.]

     
  9. webtrafficblogger

    November 5, 2015 at 4:44 pm

    Most of these people are not real ‘jews’ by the definition of the 12 lost tribes. But at some point adopted the identity nonetheless. (Example Israel is mostly made up of Cannonites/Philistines.)

    Do these people work as a cabal for only their own interest? Yes (Hollywood, Fed, Soros, European Banks)
    Did they have a hand in the wars of the 20th century? Yes (Too long to list)
    Was Hitler and the Nazis a jewish creation? Yes (Nazi comes from the Jewish group Ashkenazi)

    There are many more facts to display here. One good resource is Henry Makow, a Jew himself, who displays most of the doings of this secret sect. http://www.savethemales.ca/

    Bonus: Here is what the Babylonian Talmud says about non jews:
    Quotes from the Jewish Talmud:
    Baba Necia 114, 6: “The Jews are human beings, but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts.”

     
  10. weak stream

    November 5, 2015 at 8:01 pm

    Working for one’s own interest or the interest of your people it completely legit. As long as you don’t violate the individual rights of others, have at it. It’s called competition. The banks and the rest of the financial system is one big violation, however, and the central banks are at the very center of it. So the Dutch and the English started it?

     
  11. oogenhand

    November 8, 2015 at 7:43 am

    Methinks there are a few false oppositions. Emulating Jews while being aware of their animosity is perfectly reasonable.

    Also, their family values and their economic values are connected. Usury helps a lot to fund that 11th child. Zippy is wrong if he thinks usury is inherently immoral. It is explicitly condoned in the OT. It is more a case of Kto, kogo? (Who, whom?).

     
  12. ErisGuy

    November 8, 2015 at 11:25 am

    “I see too much alt-right writing that parallels (National) Socialist propaganda, and compares Jews to vermin and pestilence. I viscerally disagree with this characterization.”

    Good. It’s not only the alt-right though. The characterization of some or all of humanity is tightly linked to several political movements: international socialism (kulak, wrecker, bad element, ox ghost, etc.) and environmentalism (aids of the planet, garbage, vermin, cancer of the planet).

     
  13. electricangel

    November 8, 2015 at 4:14 pm

    @Weak Stream,

    “The idea that the Jews were behind any kind of collectivism whether it be fascism, communism or otherwise (and they all have the same mechanisms under the hood) is ridiculous as it works directly against their interest.”

    Well, of course, Marx did spring from the Ashkenazim. But your point remains: wealthy German Jews had a lot to lose from National Socialism, being largely burghers. We note the following, from Page 33 of Human Smoke:

    Edgar and Lillian Mowrer were guests of a German banker. It was late in 1932.

    ”After dinner,” Edgar later wrote, “while the men, all Jews but me, sat over coffee, several boasted of giving money to the Nazi party at the request of Aryans like Schacht and Thyssen.”

    Mowrer was silent. The banker, whom Mowrer identified as “Arnholt” — possibly Hans or Heinrich Arnhold –asked him what he was thinking. “Merely wondering,” said Mowrer, “how the people of Israel have managed to survive so many thousands of years when they obviously have a strong suicidal urge.”

    The banker scoffed at Hitler’s rhetoric. “Just talk,” he said

    One doubts that those Jewish bankers wanted to fund the SS.

     
  14. electricangel

    November 8, 2015 at 4:25 pm

    @Marc Bahn:

    “What middle east bandit state gets more fawning reverence than does the United States, in US politicians’ speeches? Who controls 90% of western media?”
    Well, the following six companies: GE, Viacom, Time/Warner, Disney, News Corp, and CBS control 90% of the media in the USA. There’s quite a bit of economic and political concentration there. Of course, we can cut off most of their power by TURNING THE DAMNED TV OFF.

    Sumner Redstone did found Viacom, so there is one of the six. The others, if they are now controlled by Jews, did not start out that way (excepting Warner, but Time, no), so they reflect again the fundamental issue: intelligent agents taking over. They’ve grown these companies, albeit not in a way conducive to Patriarchy. I’d blame the corporate creators first.

    “Gentiles set up a very corruptible system that has been taken advantage of but it’s out of their hands now.”
    That’s a cop-out. Want to collapse the value of Time-Warner? Get every Christian to unplug their cable. Same with Viacom, CBS, and a few others. Jews did not create that sense of inability to act for group interests.

     
  15. electricangel

    November 8, 2015 at 4:29 pm

    @Will,

    It strikes me that anyone who goes searching for one sole cause for the ills of modernity – whether they wish to blame it on Protestants, Catholics, or Jews, or whoever – is too simplistic, when matters are always more complex than we might like them to be.
    Yes. We over-simplify. We create an economic system focused entirely on numbers and money and then complain when selectively bred numbers people take it over.

     
  16. electricangel

    November 8, 2015 at 4:31 pm

    @Mark,

    That would be a decision for a post-collapse government to make. I understand why people thinking of Tim Wise would advocate it. I’d hate to lose a Murray Rothbard in the bargain, though.

     
  17. electricangel

    November 8, 2015 at 4:39 pm

    @Weak Strem,

    Hard money and free market principles do.
    Question for you: Social order protects more assets for the rich man than the poor man. Functioning police, law, courts: all allow a millionaire to hold onto more wealth than your average Joe. Should a rich man pay the same percentage of assets as a poor man to provide the goods of social order, should he pay more, or should he pay less? I’ve long admired free-market principles, but now wonder if there isn’t an implicit subsidy in the way we tax things in the USA. We tax labor at egregiously high rates, and capital need not be taxed at all if it is locked up inside of a foundation (or a church).

    I think it a free-market principle that each person pay the same percentage of assets to supply goods of social order. What do you think? (Note: getting to Rothbard’s anarchic insurance-scheme society is a thought experiment, but wouldn’t hold here.)

     
  18. electricangel

    November 8, 2015 at 4:44 pm

    @Webtrafficblogger:

    Was (sic) Hitler and the Nazis a jewish creation? Yes (Nazi comes from the Jewish group Ashkenazi)
    Unless I’m wrong, Nazi originates with “Naht-see-oh-nahl So-tsee-ah-list,” the phonetic pronunciation of NSDAP, the full name of the Nazi party. Did some Jews back the Nazis? Sure, see comment above. But any “cabal” that was able to “create” (your term) the Nazis, and then so utterly lose control of them is not a cabal I need to fear that much.

     
  19. electricangel

    November 8, 2015 at 4:52 pm

    @oogenhand,

    Also, their family values and their economic values are connected. Usury helps a lot to fund that 11th child. Zippy is wrong if he thinks usury is inherently immoral. It is explicitly condoned in the OT. It is more a case of Kto, kogo? (Who, whom?).
    Zippy sold me, Oogenhand. Usury is immoral, and we have been in violation for hundreds of years. Marx warned that a usury-based system would require more and more debt. That debt now binds a larger and larger share of the population, and there is no getting rid of it (the 2005 Bankruptcy Revision act will go down as the thing that sealed the pressure-cooker of society shut, and caused the subsequent explosion, which we have yet to see). If not issued against assets, but instead against a person, it makes a slave of the debtor.

    It was permitted to Ancient Jews because they were permitted to own slaves. It’s not coincidental that “Christian” nations restored slavery in the New World at the same time they were embracing a usurious form of finance. I don’t recall that Jews set up the Federal Reserve system, or passed the income tax, or created Greenbacks during the US Civil War, but they’ve certainly done well in the system that uses those features. Paying for the 11th child, as you say.

     
  20. electricangel

    November 8, 2015 at 4:54 pm

    @ErisGuy:

    Good. It’s not only the alt-right though. The characterization of some or all of humanity is tightly linked to several political movements: international socialism (kulak, wrecker, bad element, ox ghost, etc.) and environmentalism (aids of the planet, garbage, vermin, cancer of the planet).

    Bravo. Look out when the left starts demonizing; those guys are pretty good at mass murdering. My favorite word of derision is one used all the time: “consumer.” Reminds me of the phrase “useless eaters.” Eliminate it from your own thought process.

     
  21. weak stream

    November 8, 2015 at 10:55 pm

    Electricangel. Lots of good points but I would first point out that the existence of a central bank generally and, in the current arrangements, several large and very activist central banks negate free market functions. The big four central banks push so much influence into markets (and by this I mean all markets that all various demographics participate in) that Smith’s ‘invisible hand’ of the free market becomes a very visible government one. You’re right that labor is taxed egregiously. The middle class is too stupid/indifferent to notice. The rich ride the tits off of such a system. But the middle class has consumed so much borrowed money that their bankruptcy as a class is baked into the cake at this point. When the realization of this occurs many will be upset. When the shit hits the fan, Jews usually get screwed as they are a convenient target and various myths about the mass of them being freeloaders on the system never die. Rothbard and Von Mises were very close to getting the right answer. Anything resembling real anarchy can’t work any more than pacifism would help to maintain the civilized world. This is primarily what’s wrong with contemporary Libertarianism. The correct answer IMO: No central bank, balanced budget/zero deficit, (provisions made for extreme circumstances) nobody gets taxed for the first 50 grand, flat rate above on all income. However small the govt must become to achieve this…TFB.

     
  22. electricangel

    November 8, 2015 at 11:44 pm

    @Weak Stream,

    You’re right that labor is taxed egregiously. The middle class is too stupid/indifferent to notice.
    I think it’s more likely to be learned helplessness. That, and they didn’t mind when the vivisection was applied to black families and uneducated whites.

    No central bank, balanced budget/zero deficit, (provisions made for extreme circumstances) nobody gets taxed for the first 50 grand, flat rate above on all income.
    Not a bad program. I don’t worry too much about the budget deficit, since unlike state governments, the FedGov doesn’t have a capital and an operating budget. Presumably, some of the debt that Ronald Reagan ran up in the 80s was productive investment as it helped bring down the Evil Empire. Hate to admit that, but I think it’s true.

    On income: I’ve moved from allowing ANY tax on income to preferring to see taxes applied in one of two economies. Any time you extract something from the earth (oil, ore, rock) you pay a tax to counter the effects on God’s creation; any time you engage in a financial transaction, you pay a tax. What you don’t tax: any amount of labor that transforms basic goods from God or nature into useable human goods, and of course any use of recycled materials. In this way, you leave the efforts of human ingenuity untaxed and grow a useful secondary economy (see E F Schumacher, Small is Beautiful, for more), while allowing but lessening the consumption of the earth over which we are to be stewards. A good overview is here.

    Barring that, flat rate on ASSETS (which can NEVER include one’s self; that’s slavery) above a certain amount and you eliminate the whole subsidizing of the wealthy. As I read once, one reason Texas is booming and California has deficits is that Texas lack an income tax, and so heavily taxes land. There is no way to avoid a land-based tax, but if you’re wealthy enough, you can pay lawyers to reduce your “income” to very low, and let the suckers in the middle class pay income taxes.

    Allow only states to tax property, and allow the Feds to only collect taxes either as tariffs or as assessments to the states (i.e. flip the script on state dependency on DC) and you’ll fix a lot of what ails the USA. We can dream.

     
  23. weak stream

    November 9, 2015 at 12:17 am

    Electricangel. All great ideas but sometimes sales taxes are difficult to collect and they will argue the value of depletion until the cows come home but I completely agree that taxing income is wrong philosophically as well as from a utilitarian viewpoint. It’s certainly true that expanding money supply (example of Reagan’s military spending) for something of high and enduring value actually creates system capital rather than consuming it. It’s a point that few understand. And it’s also why the opposite (expanding money supply) to feed consumption economies reduces total system capital. The masses have been sold the fiction that the so called ‘consumption economy’ expands the wealth of the nation. It doesn’t. But they’ll cling to it until the trucks stop running. Another idea: I’m from Texas and I think Texas gets by without income tax ( and still running big govt) because we have big natural resources. Other states may have to shrink govt significantly to afford this. Good. And if Texas shrunk its govt commensurately, property taxes would go way down.

     
  24. oogenhand

    November 9, 2015 at 12:36 pm

    @electricangel
    So Jews shouldn’t just have the right to use usury against Christians, but also the right to enslave them conventionally? After all, St. Augustine defended their freedom of religion (for no good reason, as they do not only guard the prophecies but also the arguments to refute them).

    That said Will S. is right that without the right Faith, you do not stand a chance against any “conspiracy” whatsoever. Hell is eternal.

     
  25. weak stream

    November 9, 2015 at 3:20 pm

    Oogenhand, usury can only be used as a weapon when the credit market is rigged by anticompetitive practices. In other words, I can’t get away with charging you 5 bucks for an apple either. You’ll just by from the next guy. The assumption that the markets are free is the grand illusion.

     
  26. oogenhand

    November 12, 2015 at 9:41 am

    @weak stream

    Anticompetitive practices like forbidding usury to Christians, but allowing it to Jews?
    Consider the case of forbidding Christians to run a brothel, but allowing it to Jews. Whose daughters would end up prostituted?

     
  27. weak stream

    November 12, 2015 at 3:27 pm

    oogenhand… Usury (noun) – The illegal action or practice of lending money at unreasonably high rates of interest. What do hookers have to do with it? Maybe I’m dense. Examples?

     
  28. oogenhand

    November 13, 2015 at 6:08 am

    Prostitution is comparable to usury in that respect that both practices are morally questionable, somehow unavoidable, but very profitable. And that many moral systems place them under an ingroup/outgroup duality.

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s