The Jewish question
Dec 19th, 2011 by Unamused
Hello there. I’m still on vacation, but we’ve had such an interesting weekend at Unamusement Park, I felt compelled to drop by and issue two clarifications, one explanation, and one pronouncement.
First clarification
I will begin by emphasizing that the quoted statements from Friday’s post, “Why? (A question for the reader),” do not represent my views on Jewish people, but rather the views of a small but vocal minority of visitors to this website.
So why did I put them there? Two reasons:
- to explain why some race realist writers — Jewish or not — have “burned out” and quit, at least temporarily
- to demonstrate that some people who are nominally on our side will defend, or at least not oppose, even the most hateful, irrational, counterproductive, racist* garbage, as long as it is directed at Jewish people
The first reason was clear to most commenters. Many of them — believing that I, too, was burning out — went so far as to offer their support and encouragement. I appreciate that very much, but do not despair: I will be around for a long time (he said, moments before the meteor struck…).
The second reason was super sneaky and occurred to me only after I had compiled the quotes, which you may recall expressed sentiments such as these:
- there is nothing irrational about hating Jewish people
- 99 percent of Jewish people are Zionists and Communists
- Jewish people should be excluded from all pro-white activism
- I, Unamused, am secretly Jewish, and my true purpose here is to direct white people’s righteous anger away from Jewish people, who deserve it
- Hitler was right when he tried to exterminate Jewish people
- Hitler never tried to exterminate Jewish people
Once again, these do not represent my views. In fact, they represent more or less the opposite of my views.
In light of the list above, it is worth noting that the very first reply began:
I think its pretty obvious that Jews are disproportionately represented within counter-productive political movements.
And it ended:
… it would seem rather petty to complain about others being insensitive towards the Jews.
I don’t mean to pick on that commenter, but I feel very strongly that one’s first reaction to even one suggestion like “There is no other solution other than the final solution,” let alone a long list of such suggestions, ought to read more like this:
Well, obviously I don’t think we should exterminate the Jews.
One might add:
After all, they’re not all bad, and I am willing to accept the help of Jews who want to pitch in.
Of course, I wouldn’t mind one bit if one also remarked:
However, it is important not to dismiss all criticism of Jews just because some of their critics are obviously crazy and evil.
That’s just my opinion, though. I leave it to the reader to decide if race realists are too tolerant of genocidal anti-Semitism. (Incidentally, as another example of this peculiar tolerance, you cannot call what is clearly, by definition, genocidal anti-Semitism “genocidal anti-Semitism” without a backlash.)
Second clarification
Besides today’s post and Friday’s post, I have only one post related to Jewishness/Judaism, the infamous “Oh, Stormfront” — one of my favorite posts, because it makes its point so elegantly. However, it occurs to me that few, if any, of its intended targets really understood it.
Subtlety is wasted on the Hitler Youth.
Here are a few things the point is not:
- “Boo hoo, Stormfront does not like me.” I’m sure they don’t, but neither does the SPLC, and if I can survive one racist* group’s opprobrium, I’m equally sure I can survive another’s.
- “Waaah, Stormfront will not let me post there for its discerning audience of neo-Nazis.” Not to worry! I have my own website with which to disseminate Jewish propaganda and ensure Jewish world domination via misdirection, controlled dissent, flash mobs, FEMA, mind-controlled honeybees — but I’ve said too much.
- “Oh noes, I cannot join this burgeoning Internet community of Hitler-obsessed, Holocaust-denying conspiracy theorists (no offense), arguably the least effective American political movement since the short-lived Human Sacrifice Reform Party of Tennessee (HSRPT), which was staffed exclusively by worshipers of the Moon-Mistress Hekate, funded largely by the sale of human glands, and nominally led by the skeletal remains of a stillborn two-headed calf.”
I have to admit, this one does sting a little, coming so soon after my expulsion from the now-defunct HSRPT for “failure to daily satiate the blood lust of the moon-monsters, refusal to participate in sodomy-based teamwork-building exercises/exorcisms, and unwanted spamming of the psionic communication network with thought-pictures of silly kittens,” but I think I’ll live.
- “I, Unamused, am a big ol’ Jew.” This one is ridiculous enough on its own.
Here, then (now), is the actual two-point point of “Oh, Stormfront” — not to be confused with “Oh! Stormfront!,” Sofia’s upcoming, semi-autobiographical anthology of Nazi-themed inter-racial erotic short stories (March 2012, pre-order yours today!).
- When they don’t know that one of my parents is a (non-practicing, apolitical, white/European) Jew, Stormfronters seem to believe, on the basis of my ideas, as expressed in my writings, that I could not possibly be a “Jew” (according to whatever blood-libelous definition they use, which apparently includes me), because I am too truthful and pro-white and clever and good looking.
This proves even “Jews” can be pro-white, and a valuable addition to any pro-white activist group.
- When they find out that my family tree is lousy with “Jew” parasites (is that a mixed metaphor?), my ideas and writings are suddenly revealed as “Jew” propaganda.
This proves Stormfronters can be kind of crazy.
I hope that clears up the confusion.
*Explanation
A question for the reader — yes, another one: who am I, Unamused, most critical of? Which group of people does this website most consistently bash?
It’s not a trick question.
Yes, that’s correct! It’s black people. And yet…
- I don’t hate all black people.
- I hate many black people, but not (strictly speaking) because they are black, but rather because they’re criminals and racists (see below).
- I don’t want to exterminate black people. No, really.
Stop laughing!
- I don’t want to exclude black people from race realism or pro-white activism. If they want to help, that’s just great. If they first need me to clarify that some of the things I write about their race are satirical, and to acknowledge that I don’t always clearly distinguish between some black people and all black people — well, I hate to ruin a joke by explaining it, but okay.
- I spend exactly 0.0% of my day worrying about whether someone who disagrees with me (i.e., refuses to accept reality if it fails to sufficiently flatter minorities/denigrate white people) might be black.
Does anyone see my point? Are you sure? Then allow me to define racism:
- racism (noun): anything a white person does
Wait, no, that’s not right.
- racism (noun): failure on the part of white people to hate themselves and everyone who looks like them
Hang on, I’ll get it…
- racism (noun): discrimination or hatred toward all members of a population, based solely on their membership in that population
It’s not perfect, but it will have to do.
Now, you might not think my definition would be controversial, but opposition has been fierce. I think some examples of racism and not-racism might help.
- Hating non-white people because they’re non-white is racist.
- Similarly, hating white people because they’re white is racist.
- Hating violent thugs because they’re violent thugs isn’t racist; it’s quite sensible. This is true even though black, Hispanic, and American Indian people are much more likely than white or Asian people to be violent thugs.
- Saying (and believing) that black, Hispanic, and American Indian people are much more likely than white or Asian people to be violent thugs isn’t racist; it’s a fact.
- Rounding up and arresting every black, Hispanic, and American Indian person because they are much more likely than white or Asian people to be violent thugs is racist.
- Being more concerned about a black, Hispanic, or American Indian person mugging you because they are much more likely than white or Asian people to be violent thugs isn’t racist; it’s rational discrimination, and you should do it. You should also discriminate on the basis of sex and age.
- An event called “Beat Whitey Night” is racist.
- An event called “Black Inventor Day” or “White Inventor Day” or “Eskimo Inventor Day” isn’t racist; they are all benign expressions of racial identity. The main problem is turning up at least one black inventor…
- Excluding Jews from joining the chess club because they’re Jewish is racist.
- Excluding Jews from joining the Non-Jewish Club isn’t racist; it’s freedom of association and an expression of racial identity (although it could very well be motivated by racism). I believe Rand Paul said something along those lines once.
- Exterminating the Jews because they’re Jews is racist.
- Exterminating the Jews because they have all become infected by a species of alien virus that turns them into mindless flesh-eating zombies and to which Jewish genomes are uniquely susceptible is… well, not racist; it’s just highly unlikely.
- An immigration policy designed to keep an historically Japanese nation majority-Japanese forever is not racist; it’s another expression of racial identity.
- Similarly, an immigration policy designed to keep an historically Jewish nation majority-Jewish forever is not racist.
- Similarly, an immigration policy designed to keep an historically white nation majority-white forever is not racist.
Does that make sense? I admit it’s complicated. I look forward to your feedback.
Pronouncement
If you are stupid enough to believe that all Jews, because of their Jewishness, are bad people, or racists, or supremacists (pot/kettle situations, all), then you are (a) stupid, but I think I covered that, and (b) a racist, not a race realist. You should also find another blog, because I’m not interested in your opinions.
No, don’t lecture me on free speech. I have always moderated comments. Consult the comments policy.
Unamusement Park is not an open forum where anything goes. If you want to say whatever you please, go make your own blog. This one is a place for constructive debate on certain controversial subjects (plus whatever random silliness I throw in on a whim).
I usually delete comments because they celebrate the supposed extinction of white people. Anti-white racism is not acceptable here.
On the other hand, I have been spectacularly patient with commenters who try to stir up unjustified hatred — mind the adjective there — toward all Jewish people. Never mind why I have been so patient; the point is, my patience has finally run out:
Jewish conspiracy theories and anti-Jewish racism (basically, any time you make a claim about all Jews) are no longer permitted on Unamusement Park.
I admit I went overboard in the comments section of Friday’s post, deleting several comments and parts of comments that were only borderline or ambiguously racist against Jewish people. That was to make sure everyone got the point: err on the side of caution, because your fellow “Jewish questioners” have thoroughly poisoned the well.
Unamusement Park has always welcomed, and will always welcome, contributions to race realism, the study of human biodiversity, white rights, and positive white identity from people of all races, creeds, religions — whatever. I don’t give a fuck who you are; if you want to help stop mobs of black people from attacking us, then please, for the love of Odin, do so. In particular, Jews are fine by me, except insofar as they actually say and do things that are not fine by me.
I firmly believe that Jewish conspiracy theories and irrational hatred of Jewish people have already done more damage to the aforementioned four causes — but especially white rights and positive white identity — than every Holocaust memorial combined. I cannot in good conscience allow my website to become part of the problem.
Thanks for reading. Once again, Merry Christmas (and/or Happy Holidays) to everyone. Please enjoy the spectacle of a Jewish comedian, who represents something called “Jews Against Anti-Christian Defamation,” riding down 5th Avenue in New York City to protest the War on Christmas.
The organized Jewish communities in the United States, Canada and Europe aggressively work for the following:
1) diminished free speech
2) war (Jewish over-representation in all things doesn’t equate to military dead but way equates to war mongers)
3) usury
4) mass immigration
5) PC/hate crime categories etc.
6) free trade
7) cultural degeneracy
8) a general and total prohibition on positive expressions of Whiteness.
Now, I see all of the above as destroying traditional (whatever is left) Western society. Does this mean that I “hate all Jews”? No. I absolutely loath the activism of Big Jews and how this activism is impacting my future. We Whites have allowed ourselves to be pushed around and our universalism is our weakness.
When this filters down to internet commenting – something I seldom do – it manifests itself in belligerent rage against Jews.
What does this have to do with you and your site? Nothing. Any and every blog with significant readership will have a crew of hecklers. You’ve gotta police the comment section and keep a thick skin.
It’d be best if you didn’t bring them up either.
For fuck’s sake Unamused, would you stop quoting me and not referring to the post that dealt with the subject? Here it is -> The Rationality of Racism vs Bigotry.
If you have a problem with it, then argue with it. I didn’t come up with the argument, a great man, vastly superior in intellect to either you or I, came up with it.
Ok, breathe out, back to reading the rest of your post.
That’s an interesting post. I’ve never seen it before.
David Stove is about the only philosopher I like.
Mate, I linked that when I wrote the comment in the first place. Hating can be rational and it can be irrational. Observing stereotypical behaviour from Jews and reacting to it is not hate.
I exhibit stereotypical behaviour but don’t conclude that you want to exterminate me. There are very good reasons for Jews to be in fear of White people, Christianity in particular. The same for Islam.
Equally so for Christians and Muslims to fear each other, and Jews! Yes Jews.
I don’t want to go into your psychological disposition on the subject of your racial identity but, it is quite obvious that you are reacting from *fears*, real, rational and *irrational*. You need to work out which is which is all I would suggest.
It’s possible I read it and forgot. I see now that you did link it in the comment right after the comment I quoted.
Ok, well and good. Now, let’s deal with the fact that Jews have ethnic interests — good, natural and right — and that Whites have ethnic interests — good, natural and right.
It’s not that never the twain shall meet but rather respecting that we are entitled to pursue each, and recognise that we have the equal right to do so.
Those were some very fine and practical definitions of what racism is. I read this blog, and those similar because I agree with its mission. I like things simple, what can I say?
I may have a narrow view of the world—I don’t look for the Jew behind the curtain—but my view is one of practicality. I don’t fear going into a convenience store or a state fair or a Fourth of July celebration and being exposed to a “wailing wall of Jews” out to kick my ass for being white. I don’t fear sitting in my living room and having a “mazal tov cocktail” being hurled through my windows because of some perceived slight on my part towards a black person. (Cute, right? No?..oh well).
I do like to learn but am too lazy most times so, as far as The Jew is concerned, I’d rather read comments like Pat Hannagan’s or JJ’s than contend with the likes of Stormfront to “learn.” After all, I once posted on some satellite white supremacist site that “The Andy Griffith show,” along with “Matlock,” were just big Jewish conspiracies. Want to know how I did it? I said they were Jewish conspiracies. Simple and stupid. (Guess I was on an Andy Griffith kick that day.)
Merry Christmas!
[Unamused: lol, mazal tov cocktail]
Unamused said:
I don’t mean to pick on that commenter, but I feel very strongly that one’s first reaction to even one suggestion like “There is no other solution other than the final solution,” let alone a long list of such suggestions, ought to read more like this
Like I said, such posts sounded like juvenile Internet trolls. Granted, I can’t read their minds so I cannot say with certainty that they weren’t all written by people trying merely to provoke, instead of actual “genocidal anti-Semites”, but that seemed like a more parsimonious explanation to me anyway.
Please people, I beseech thee, don’t listen to the underlying message.
Racism is good. It is right. It is natural.
If you think that I should prefer my own children over other people’s children then we agree, and we are racist. Because race is an extension of ethnicity, and ethnicity is an extension of family.
If you’re not a racist then you’re an idiot and deserve to die, because you have been selected to do so. As Darwin himself said of natural selection; “any variation in the least degree injurious would be rigidly destroyed.”
[Unamused: My list of examples should make it clear that I believe racial preferences are not necessarily racist. For example, wanting to live with white people is not racist if it’s based on anything about white people besides their being white, such as you getting along better with them, etc.]
Well said – “2.to demonstrate that some people who are nominally on our side will defend, or at least not oppose, even the most hateful, irrational, counterproductive, racist* garbage, as long as it is directed at Jewish people.”
You’ve obviously got the requisite thick skin needed to endure the “counterproductive, racist garbage”.
I stand with you.
CW
Unamused, you are contradicting yourself.
When you say that “discrimination” against people based on their ethnicity is racist, you are certainly correct, however you discriminate when you choose your home, your place of work, your spouse, etc.
When you refuse to marry a full-blooded negro girl because you think that your children might become dumb, lazy and/or criminal, then you discriminate. When you don’t want to live in a black city, you are discriminating. When you don’t want to work under a black boss, you are discriminating.
So you are a racist. Everybody is. And there is nothing bad about it.
[Unamused: I don’t believe you read my list of examples. If you had, you would know that I believe wanting to live among white people because, say, you get along with them better is not racist. Neither is choosing to marry a white person because, say, you want your children to look like you.]
“I usually delete comments because they celebrate the supposed extinction of white people. Anti-white racism is not acceptable here.”
It’s your site, but I think it’s always valuable to see the way some people think, and often entertaining or amusing too. For both reasons, I didn’t like seeing you censor the anti-white black awhile back.
On the question of whether Kevin MacDonald is like Stephen Jay Gould: I can’t (living as I do in a Big Brother state) say all I’d like to say, but I don’t agree with the comparison. Gould, like Lysenko, did extremely well out of his pseudo-science. If MacDonald is peddling pseudo-science, he certainly isn’t doing his career any favors. But I’d say MacDonald is more like Galileo than Gould. Eppur si muove. Whatever the SPLC, ADL et al might insist to the contrary.
I for one certainly don’t hate all jews any more than you hate all blacks. The problem with “jews” is the massively negative influence of their massively disproportionate influence. They are steering the ship of the West into the rocks. Of course, they and their wealthy non-jew friends all have life rafts. The rest of us and our children will just have to live with the results. And there’s also the hypocrisy of jews who support israel’s explicitly racist immigration, anti-miscegenation policy, as well as the theological restrictions in its Constitution all the while supporting unlimited third-world immigration and multiculturalism into the West. How the fuck can you not note that inconsistency and not ask why?
I think the modern definition of “racism” must be: “the hidden cause(s) of black failure”.
Good comments, Pat. Unamused, I still think you’re being hypersensitive, but as I said before, it’s your blog and your rules. Your definitions and standards do come dangerously close to Auster’s dictum (Jews may be criticized as liberals only, never as Jews) and his contortions to rationalize the heavy, historical connection between Jews and radical movements throughout the centuries and nations.
As I also noted previously, I’m well aware there are a few blacks who don’t generally exhibit typical feral behavior, but the preponderance of those who do has led me to an intense anger at all of them (being a rather clever guy, I’m sure you see my parallel point a la Jews). Allen West may be a fine man, but given racial realities and natural and understandable ethnic interests (as Pat noted), I have chosen not to vote for a black. Ever. Full stop. Someone like Walter Williams or Thomas Sowell may write well and share some of my views, but I still don’t want my children marrying their children and resulting in grandchildren I have almost nothing in common with genetically. This is racial reality. You may choose to call it irrational and/or racism. I strongly object.
Great, I’m glad you’ve finally put your foot down.
As for your definition of racism, I do have a minor quibble:
“racism (noun): discrimination or hatred toward all members of a population, based solely on their membership in that population”
Discrimination based solely on a person’s membership in a given population is often good, when it comes to immigration for instance or marriage. If we didn’t discriminate on the sole basis of race/ethnicity in such decisions, it wouldn’t be long before there weren’t any more races/ethnicities to discriminate among, which incidentally, is precisely the idea, I think.
Finally, I’m not convinced “racism” is a valid concept. If we agree that racial/ethnic discrimination is sometimes necessary, then that leaves only the racial/ethnic hatred part of your definition (and I think your definition is pretty close to the one most white people would agree with).
Hatred is bad, check. But, then, why single out racial/ethnic hatred? Why not just plain old hatred? Why couldn’t we, instead of calling the SF’ers racists, just say they are full of hatred? Isn’t that just as true? I suppose racist tells us with precision what kind of hatred they are full of, but the problem is that it tends to obscure the other kinds of hatred people can be full of.
People like this guy (http://moonbattery.com/occupy-denver-moonbat.jpg), for example. Calling him a “hater” wouldn’t quite stick. When we think of “haters”, we think of, well, racists and homophobes, not anti-capitalists. But he’s literally threatening to eat his enemies; how much more hateful can a guy get?! I don’t think even the SF’ers have threatened to do that.
This is the problem with using a word like “racist”. It obscures and overtakes the real sin that we’re talking about–which is malice or hatred–and acts as a kind of smokescreen for hateful and malicious people whose vile and evil words would never otherwise be tolerated.
[Unamused: These are very good points, although I think discrimination in immigration is justified by wanting to preserve national character, and discrimination in marriage is justified by personal preferences for traits associated with races (e.g., I like blondes), and by wanting your children to look like you, among other things.]
@Unamused
I’ve got a “Jewish question” too.
There are dozens of white ethnic groups. Some of them have rivalries and grudges going back hundreds of years. Only 70 years ago the Germans and Russians were raping and killing each other en masse. And, yet, they’ve all managed to find a place among WN except Jews. Why is that?
[Unamused: Really? You’re still not getting this? From Friday’s post:
“Why would we want to ‘attract’ jews to the WN movement in the first place?”
“I see no reason to invlove jews in anything White. Just look at the vile filth comeing out of jew controlled hollywood.”
“I’m not interested in letting a non-White group becoming the ‘vanguard’ of ANY White movement.”
“See, this is why it’s important to never allow Jews to be associated with White Nationalism.”
“The simple fact is, scratching Ashkenazis off the ‘White’ list is a huge time saver vs. judging all Ashkenazis as individuals.”
“those pro-White Ashkenazis can spare themselves, if they wish, by simply keeping their ancestry to themselves”
“LMAO @ Jews trying to be White. If you let them in your movement, you might as well let Obama and Haile Berry in.”
And now you’re shocked, shocked, to find: “There’s a disproportionately low amount of Jews in WN groups.” Do tell.
This particular conspiracy theory — there aren’t “enough” white nationalist Jews, therefore something something Jews are bad — is now banned.]
What is this nonsense?
“Jews are fine by me, except insofar as they actually say and do things that are not fine by me.”
Uh huh. So are blacks, yes? Except the whole premise of this site is that blacks are predisposed to habitually say and do things that are not fine by you.
That’s your contradiction if you can keep it!
[Unamused: Wow, still not getting it. It’s what they say and do that makes them fine or not-fine by me, not their racial identity per se.]
Unamused, you would have save yourself some typing and/or copy & pasting if you had simply replied to destructure that generalizing about WNs is fine, doing so about Jews is not.
Regarding ‘racism,’ it is not ‘racist’ to want my children to look like me (have the same skin color) but it is ‘racist’ to want to live among white people just becuase they are white, right? I have to actually like white people or have some other specific reason(s) beyond their skin tone to want to live among them and not be ‘racist.’ Yes?
It might continue to be fun to see you chase your own tail and square various circles over the coming months on this issue.
[Unamused: I think you’re just having trouble keeping up with the argument.]
The obsessive Jew haters are one of the biggest internal drags on the effort to defend whites and their societies. The outlandish conspiracy touting loons are another. How frustrating it is, to have research, facts, basic logic and fairness on your side of an argument(the pro-white position) and to constantly find that position being advanced by clowns you’ll have to distance yourself from to be taken seriously.
[deleted: conspiracy theory]
more faierie sluts!!
silly kittens OK but less airtime
I admire your attempt at defining racism, but it seems to me :
a) you’ve left a huge issue unanswered,
b) your own definitions contradict themselves.
The unaddressed elephant in the room is the following : is racism (whatever it is) good or bad ? You never say.
However, your cumulative definitions suggest that you consider racism a bad thing, and that your whole exercise is an attempt at explaining why your opinions are not racist, and therefore, are palatable.
But, by your own rules, you’re… a racist ! You say :
(9) “Excluding Jews from joining the chess club because they’re Jewish is racist.”
But you go on saying :
(13) “An immigration policy designed to keep an historically Japanese nation majority-Japanese forever is not racist; it’s another expression of racial identity.”
Wait ! If it’s racist to exclude Jews from joining a chess club because they are Jews, then surely it’s racist to exclude the non-Japanese from immigrating massively into Japan… for the sole reason they’re not Japanese !
You do say :
(10) “Excluding Jews from joining the Non-Jewish Club isn’t racist; it’s freedom of association and an expression of racial identity…”
But this goes against statement (9) ! If your Non-Jewish Club (which might very well also be a chess club) is Non-Jewish, it means you’ve decided to exclude Jews from joining your club ! So we’re back to case (9) ! Case (9) and case (10), in fact, reflect the same situation ; however you call the former racist, and the latter non-racist. You realised there was a contradiction here, since you added :
“…although it could very well be motivated by racism”.
Let me tell you something : you can’t wriggle your way out of this.
Either you adopt Gates of Vienna’s policy on the subject, and you say : “racism” is a loaded word, it’s but an epithet whose aim is to libel political opponents out of the debate, therefore I refuse to even use the term, or respond to accusations on those grounds.
Would you try to prove you’re not a witch ? You can’t. Being accused of racism is being accused of witchcraft. No difference.
You could elaborate : “you’re a racist” actually means : you’re white, white is bad, and white people should surrender to non-white people. “Anti-racist” means in fact anti-white.
Or, alternatively, you say… (drumbeats…) racism is a GOOD thing ! Yes ! It’s legitimate ! Everybody does it ! Being racist only means discriminating in favor of your own, which is a natural, healthy and wise thing to do. In fact, that’s the reason why you can call people your own, why there are different peoples, nations and… races.
Man is a social animal and lives in groups (whatever you call them). If you want to survive, it’s safer to discriminate against people from other groups, and support your own, because members of your own group have a vested interest in your survival, your spouse’s and your children’s. You know they share your past, therefore you know that they will share your future.
It’s that simple.
Now, how far should you go with this discrimination ? Should you, for instance, exterminate all Jews from planet Earth just because they are Jews ? Well… now, come on, we’re are reasonable people, we’re only MODERATE racists, not blood-thirsty psychopaths.
Look : racism is not different from sex drive. Actually, both are closely connected. Would you say that sex drive is a bad thing ? Hell, no ! If it weren’t for it, we wouldn’t be here, debating racism ! So sex drive must be a good thing, right ?
But, wait ! Sex drive can produce heinous rape and murder, endless misery through divorce, out-of-wedlock pregnancies, prostitution, veneral disease, wife-beating, acid-throwing, stoning of adulteresses and whatnot. So sex drive must be a bad thing ?
No ! Any good thing can become bad if indulged in excess and without restraint or moral compass.
All peoples have the right to ensure their own survival, including Whites. Discriminating in order to reach that goal is a perfectly legitimate thing to do. Actually, there must be dozens of UN charters, bills of rights or whatever stating just as much.
The “racism” slander is just a racket to deny white people the right of survival. Anti-racism is white genocide. Trying to prove you’re not “racist” is just as impossible as trying to prove you’re devoid of sex drive. It’s trying to convince someone you’ll never commit rape because you’re not attracted to women. It’s surrendering to the enemy by agreeing to use his own words.
It’s better to expose the fraud, rather than dancing to the tune of the crooks.
[Unamused: Regarding your first point and your conclusion, I consider racism, by my definition, irrational, and therefore harmful or at least dangerous. I generally use the term to denounce anti-white racism, such as affirmative action and most inter-racial crime. You may be right about just scrapping the word altogether. In fact, I lean toward that idea — not because I think my definition is contradictory (see below), but because, as you point out, it’s so loaded a term.
That said, I don’t see the contradiction. Now watch me wriggle:
Excluding Jews from joining the chess club because they’re Jewish is racist, because the chess club has nothing to do with Jewishness or non-Jewishness. The only apparent reason to exclude Jews is because they’re Jewish.
An immigration policy designed to keep an historically Japanese nation majority-Japanese forever is not racist, because all people deserve to have a homeland to preserve their unique culture and so on. The Japanese aren’t keeping out non-Japanese people because they’re non-Japanese; they’re keeping them out because they would ultimately alter that culture… because they’re non-Japanese.
It’s the difference between “I hate black people because they’re black” and “I hate black people who are thugs because they are thugs, and yes, they may all be thugs, and they may even be thugs because they’re black, i.e., because of their genes, but I don’t just leap from ‘black’ to ‘hate’ in a single bound.” I’m not yet convinced that there is no difference.]
If you had quit talking about it and ignored the trolls they would have forgotten about it and eventually gone away. These last couple posts have guaranteed that as long as you allow comments, every single comment thread is going to become about Jews.
[unamused: yeah, probably]
The people who blame Jews for all of our ills sound like blacks and mexicans who blame all of their problems on white racism.
Regarding the acceptance of Jews as White nationalists, it ought be remembered that a few Jewish ex(?) leftists invented neo-conservatism and then took over the respectable right. Once they had the whip hand, they excommunicated all those who questioned the value of our “ally” in the Middle East. Given this history, mistrust is in order.
[Unamused: Another conspiracy theory. Jewish neoconservatives (how many can you name? what percent of the Jewish population is that?) “took over” by convincing people to join their idiotic crusade. Therefore Jews will attempt to take over white nationalism by tricking all the white nationalists into… doing what, exactly? And couldn’t a non-Jew also attempt to trick them as well? (Neo-Nazi groups have been infiltrated by the FBI many times already.) Why aren’t the WNs opposed to, say, all people who join up and then attempt to change how the WNs do things in a way that works against white interests?]
You’re putting the cart before the horse in that last comment, unamused.
As far as I can tell, all of those comments are made with the realization in mind that Jews are not presently part of the WN movement, and seem to demonstrate little desire to join in.
Obviously, there must have, at some point in time, have existed a WN movement that did not feature an instinctive hatred of TEH JOOZ. So why didn’t Jews join in then?
[Unamused: Mmm… I don’t think that’s obvious. I submit that white nationalism as a movement has only existed since the middle of the twentieth century, because before that, pretty much everybody was already on board with it. I do not see any evidence that white nationalist movements have welcomed the participation of Jews since the time that white nationalist movements became necessary (with the rise of multiculturalism, etc.). I see plenty of evidence that they have excluded Jews. Hence: “Jews are not presently part of the WN movement, and seem to demonstrate little desire to join in.”]
I myself am a Jew. I have a very stereotypical Jewish appearance – including but not limited to the large hook nose.
Today I walked by a car with two black yoofs in them. I saw them looking at me and made a slight smile and a friendly gesture in their direction. Stupid, I know.
They got out of the car and threatened to kick my ass. There’s our fine American black youth today.
I feel sorry for white nationalists who can’t stand in solidarity with me. We’re all in this together.
[Unamused: I don’t believe you read my list of examples. If you had, you would know that I believe wanting to live among white people because, say, you get along with them better is not racist. Neither is choosing to marry a white person because, say, you want your children to look like you.]
I read it very well, that’s why I said you are contradicting yourself.
First you say “discrimination” is evil, then you cite cases of discrimination where it’s OK and fine.
This doesn’t work.
Wanting to live among your people is racist – it is discrimination based on race. Wanting to marry one of your people is racist – it is discrimination based on race.
You cannot say that discrimination based on race is bad and then turn around and say “wanting to live among white people because, say, you get along with them better is not racist”. Why is that not racist?
[Unamused: Looks like you haven’t been paying attention. Try reading the definition of “racism” again: “discrimination or hatred toward all members of a population, based solely on their membership in that population.”
Got it? Now look again at my explanation of how wanting to live among white people might not be racist, and neither might wanting to marry a white person.
Subtle, I know.]
[Unamused: These are very good points, although I think discrimination in immigration is justified by wanting to preserve national character, and discrimination in marriage is justified by personal preferences for traits associated with races (e.g., I like blondes), and by wanting your children to look like you, among other things.]
So discrimination is evil except when it isn’t.
[Unamused: See my response to your previous comment.]
Your blog is becoming less rational. And you are pursuing a sectarian strategy, which causes lefty groups to fail all the time even when they have full state backing. We are up against the whole establishment, and can’t afford it.
Racism means believing races are different. That’s all. You are a racist. Criticising racism is counter productive for you. Making racists feel welcome would help you.
[Unamused: Not sure what is irrational or “less rational” about opposing racism. Racism, by my definition, is clearly irrational. If you want to redefine “racism” to mean something completely different, and then conclude that I am a “racist” and must therefore embrace “racism” — well, you’re just playing games with definitions.]
[Unamused: Really? You’re still not getting this? From Friday’s post:
No, I get it. But you don’t. What do those quotes mean? That gentiles are all naziswhowantokillsixmillionjews? Oh yeah? Have you EVER met anyone like that offline? Because I sure as hell haven’t. What it means is that when you blow the whistle the internet warriors all come running. Who would’a thunk it? LOL! But they’re a minority even among WN and you know it. They’re not keeping Jews from being pro white.
It’s pretty simple. The members of other ethnic groups have an identity that is more pro white than pro ethnic. That’s why they’re white nationalists rather than ethnic nationalists. But many Jews have an identity that’s more pro Jewish than pro White. And that’s why they’re not white nationalists. They don’t want to be white nationalists because they’re already happy being implicit jewish nationalists. The ones who wrote the comments you quoted see that and want to chase them away.
If Jews were more pro white that would eventually fade away. After all, they’re the only ones who really seem to be having this problem. There are a couple of others who have critics to a lesser degree. But that actually supports what I’m saying because resistance to them is generally proportional to how ethnocentric they are as well. In fact, pretty much every white ethnic group had this problem when they first immigrated en masse. As their ethnic identity faded into a racial identity resistance to them faded as well. It’s simply group psychology. It’s just that Jews have resisted assimilation the longest. At this point, their whole identity is pretty much built around non assimilation.
I realize its asking a lot of someone to hold their nose and jump in anyway. Which is why we’re locked into a battle of which came first, the chicken or the egg. Yeah, well, the Jewish egg has been around a lot longer than the nazi chickens have. But it would still fade if so many Jews weren’t putting all their eggs in the Jewish basket. But I don’t think the Jewish leadership wants it to go away. A lot of the Jewish rank and file don’t either. They’re too committed to non assimilation. And there’s just nothing like a little fringe antisemitism to keep other jews from assimilating.
No doubt you’ll accuse me of pushing a “conspiracy theory” for saying Jews oppose assimilation. But was that really a secret? I mean, it’s not exactly like I’m claiming to have seen big foot or the lock ness monster. Jewish assimilation fears are pretty well-known. We both know what Jews are really scared of and it sure as hell isn’t “nazis”. It’s assimilation.
[Unamused: You see “internet warriors,” I see clear evidence that (guess what?) people who associate with Holocaust deniers and ZOG experts do not welcome Jews; in fact, they exclude them. No, I haven’t met anyone like that offline, probably because I avoid them, because I get the distinct impression they are, in fact, naziswhowanttokillsixmillionjews.
And yeah, I’m gonna go ahead and say the theory that all Jews fear and oppose assimilation is conspiratorial in nature. I, for one, won’t claim to know “what Jews are really scared of.”]
[deleted: racism]
yo dudes, please focus on black crime, black IQ, black fecundity, affirmative action & how it impacts us whites, how black run society eliminates meritocracy, how everything we do, we do for blacks – how “helping” them does NOT help (viz., education does NOT make anyone smarter)
when you help, this happens: http://goo.gl/FBYcL
(white family triple stabbing b/c they tried to help black teen) blacks (in general) act like animals – jews do NOT act like animals. those who have problems with jews, try a different website – this 1’s for us with problems with blacks!
Unamused,
Why not try being a little more concise? I’m sympathetic to your positions in general, but saying the same thing a dozen times in different ways (I’m talking about the original post for this thread) comes across as defensive. You aren’t going to convince anyone by sheer volume of words. That said, thanks for your work here.
Moi: What is this nonsense?
“Jews are fine by me, except insofar as they actually say and do things that are not fine by me.”
Uh huh. So are blacks, yes? Except the whole premise of this site is that blacks are predisposed to habitually say and do things that are not fine by you.
That’s your contradiction if you can keep it!
Unamused: Wow, still not getting it. It’s what they say and do that makes them fine or not-fine by me, not their racial identity per se.
Yikes dude. You might as well just start posting your experiences with acute cognitive dissonance because you seem to be really trained up in that respect. How are you able to hermetically separate your thoughts on Jews from your entire oeuvre on race and biodiversity?
Of course it’s plausible to say, as far as it goes, that you’re not interested in direct attacks on racial identity. But–let’s highlight it again!–one of the major emphases of your writing is the obvious, well-documented link between racial identity and genetics on the one hand and behavior on the other.
I have no idea how you’ll keep this going after this post–promoting race-realism in relation to one group and insistently condemning is in relation to another–but it will be interesting to observe at least.
[Unamused: Nope. Good try though. Keep trying to grasp the concept: hating Jews because they’re Jews is irrational; hating Jews because they all have a gene complex that compels them to put LSD in the water supply would be rational, assuming that gene complex existed, which it doesn’t.
An “obvious, well-documented link” does not, in general, justify excluding every BLANK from participating in your BLANK. Yes, there are blacks who aren’t criminals. No, they shouldn’t go to jail for being black. Links… correlations… expectations… probabilities… rational discrimination… and yet at no point do I say that we should do BLANK to blacks because they’re black. Maybe we should do BLANK to specific blacks who BLANK because of what they do, and maybe that behavior is caused by their genetic makeup, but those are two slightly different things.
You can either try to understand it, or try to create contradictions where none exist.]
I think that’s enough feedback on this post as well.
Reasonable criticism of Jews, or any other sort of people, will always be welcome here.
You’ve said that this is enough feedback on this post; but I felt compelled to leave a comment. (I should mention, by the way, that I’m in the same situation as you––half-Jewish HBDer.) I’m sorry that people were leaving comments like those, but I am a lot more forgiving towards “anti-Semitism” than you. No, I don’t defend the kind of idiocy you quoted, but I think it should be put in some context.
First: As you’ve said, you’re okay with reasonable criticism of Jews. I’ve written this comment in that spirit.
Second: Suppose that there were some black HBD blogger whose writing was widely known within HBD circles. Almost certainly, this blogger would pretty frequently receive viciously racist comments (as you’ve defined racist)––easily as bad as the stuff you’ve posted. And, although it’s terrible that people have such intense hatred toward blacks as a whole, it would be odd for this person to exhibit great surprise in response to these comments. A black HBD blogger ought to anticipate vicious racism, and (unfortunately) so should a Jewish HBD blogger. In fact, some of the websites on your blogroll contain hatred of blacks that is easily worse than any of those comments you posted.
The underlying cause of racism toward blacks and Jews (at least, when HBDers cross the line from HBD to racism as you’ve defined it) is essentially the same––generalizing from averages about a group to the hatred of every member of that group. What I think exacerbates the problem, though, is that members of the group in question feel compelled to deny that the group, as a whole, has done anything blameworthy. I truly think that, if several prominent black intellectuals published a statement arguing that blacks’ low IQ and violent behavior is principally genetic, it would do wonders for the public acceptance of HBD––and it might reduce racism, too. Likewise, I believe that Jewish HBDers really ought to explicitly take responsibility for Boas, Gould, Lewontin, etc. Jews truly are overrepresented (even when you take into account their generally huge overrepresentation in academia) among those who have prevented HBD from reaching public acceptance, and they truly are underrepresented among the psychometricians who have rediscovered HBD. (I’m NOT pulling out the “underrepresentation in WN” card here––psychometrics is not the same as WN!) You ought to do this as well.
Just as people have a right to feel pride in the accomplishments of their race, they have an obligation to acknowledge the flaws or mistakes of their race.
Thirdly: Racism, as you’ve defined it, is by definition never justified. But you are apparently willing to accept (not advocate, but not condemn too strongly either) racism towards blacks. You at least ought to be consistent. If you turn a bind eye to racism towards blacks, you ought to do the same thing with regard to racism towards Jews. If you criticize racism towards Jews, you ought to criticize racism towards blacks too.
You might respond that blacks’ effect has been vastly more bad than good, whereas Jews’ situation is more ambiguous. This is true. Still, I think you would agree with the following statement: “Blacks have done harm, and they ought to be called out on the harm they’ve done; but we ought to ensure not to drive away helpful blacks or to cross the line into racism. Nevertheless, we should anticipate some degree of racism among HBDers.” Isn’t that still valid when applied to Jews? If not, why not? The exact degree of harm is irrelevant, as is the degree of racism. In fact, if anything, HBDers’ racism toward blacks is far worse than their racism toward Jews.