Congratulations on reading my very first post.
This might not seem like a big deal to you at the time I publish it, but someday, years down the road, somebody is going to read this site from top to bottom. It’s going to take awhile, and they are going to get a chuckle out of reading this.
As that person surely knows by now, I am just a guy who was hearing accusations of racism thrown around, with what I perceived to be reckless disregard for the strength of such an accusation, so frequently, that I decided to find out what the self professed racists had to say.
It was an interesting journey, to say the least of it.
One of the problems with talking about racism is that nobody wants to admit to it if they like their job, and nobody lobbing the accusations is ever willing to provide a concrete description of what constitutes an offense.
Not that it would do very much good if they did, because by the next day, the definition would change.
Immigration was kind of a big deal in the 2016 election season. The Democrat Party bet everything on calling the other guy a racist. They lost, thank God, but they still didn’t learn their lesson. They told themselves Russia screwed them out of the election, and just ratcheted up the racial tensions, for what it looks like will end up being the entirety of his presidency.
They went from calling people racists, to calling them Neo Nazis, to calling them White Nationalists, to calling them White Supremacists.
Now, I’ve been around black people in my life. Almost all of them were good people. But they are different from White people. Biologically, genetically, behaviorally, and in their aptitudes, attitudes, and inclinations. All racial groups have differences between them, otherwise we wouldn’t be able to categorize them in the first place.
When people say race is just “skin color” they are either completely uninformed, or intentionally deceptive. Ask any qualified medical professional and they’ll confirm it. Ask any geneticist. For that matter, ask anyone who claims to understand evolution.
This reality, which is supported by abundant scientific evidence and basic common sense, found itself in recent years under the category of information deemed “racist”. From that point on, the world began to spiral out of control, and fanatics with an axe to grind started overreacting.
Few noticed this, because nobody had been educated about the subject for years, or worse, had been miseducated by propaganda. We all assumed anybody who was a racist was obviously bad, because right before they slipped in that anti-science bit, we thought it meant something quite different.
We were opposed to racism because we thought it meant hating, harming, enslaving, or killing people on the basis of their race, or passing laws which prohibit someone from participating in their own society on the basis of their race. Those are bad things, and I oppose them.
But I don’t oppose science. Nor humor. Nor merit.
I value truth, wisdom, and sound public policy formulated, executed, and adjudicated thereby.
I oppose violence, deception, and people who abuse power.
The Journey Begins
I went into this inquiry thinking I would find some kind of middle ground. Both sides were obviously nuts, it seemed,
Listening to alt right podcasts led me to some really interesting books, videos, and other blogs and shows. There is more content produced in a day than any one person could hope to read, watch, and listen to. If you really want to understand it, you have to take a break from podcasts and read some of the books to get a good foundation.
One of the things I noticed in the course of this study was the sourcing. The White Nationalists and their fellow travelers usually quote and link to the material they are critiquing, and it is often in Jewish publications like Forward.com or Haaretz.com.
Contrastingly, the people who opposed them never wanted anybody to know what they had to say, with the notable exception of some hand selected quotes devoid of context. There were riots just to keep them from speaking, repeatedly. A girl and two cops died, and the only people who did any time were the people who got their event shut down by the rioters. The people who openly bragged about violently shutting down a permitted demonstration were doing so in full view of the public on social media, while their victims got banned not only from social media, but from podcast distribution platforms like iTunes and Stitcher and Spotify, payment processors, domain registrars, web hosts, datacenters, checking accounts, credit cards, and a list of things too long and obscure to trouble you with for now.
Then, after setting the standard that this is how White Nationalists ought to be dealt with, they said the President of the United States, Tucker Carlson, and an incredible list of others which we’ll discuss in great detail going forward, were all White nationalists! If you connect the dots from “It’s okay to assault White Nationalists” to “The President is a White Nationalist”, that is a threat against the safety of the President.
I found this alarming, and more alarming was the source material.
Enter the Jews
I told you I grew up around blacks, and I always knew they were different. It didn’t bother me, it was just one of many natural things I had observed about the world.
I did not feel the same way about Jews. I just thought they were like me, and happened to have a different religion which, in the case of most Jews I knew, didn’t play a big part in their life anyway. To me, Jews were never “the other” anymore than my many friends who still identified as Christians after I drifted away from religion.
Reading Jewish publications was eye opening, because they seemed to see things very differently.
Initially I found the White Nationalist animus against Jews sort of peculiar. Their complaints about blacks were more or less about crime and violence and the characteristics they claimed blacks were genetically predisposed to, which subsequently increased the prevalence of such behaviors. Hispanics had an albeit lower but still disproportionately high representation in such statistics, and also had higher birthrates on top of it. I could understand why these things were concerning.
Jews on the other hand were intelligent, successful, and not at all likely to be robbing liquor stores for a living. Sure they were disproportionately represented in positions of power and influence, such as media and finance, but that should hardly be a problem if our system of incentives for obtaining and maintaining those positions is fair, and sees those best suited to those responsibilities carrying them out.
Part of what makes their success so noticeable is that they are such a tiny ethnic minority in the United States, and throughout the world. So they cannot really be perceived as a demographic threat. The first time I heard “Jews will not replace us” I thought the people saying it were either crazy or stating the obvious.
But as I delved deeper into the “Jewish Question” as it has been called, I found out some interesting things.
“My Fellow White People”
If you think Jewish people are your “fellow whites” you were mistaken. Don’t take my word for it, ask the Jews themselves.
“Ashkenazi Jews are not white” says Hila Hershkoviz at The Times of Israel;
“Every time I read about a Jew somewhere identifying as a white person, I cringe. As an Israeli Jew, who like most other Israeli Jews, is completely foreign to the concept of Jews being “white” I would like to address this article to my Jewish brothers and sisters in America.”
“You are Jews not because of your “religion” (are you even religious?), but because you were born into a tribe/people called the Nation of Israel. You are not “white people” with a “Jewish religion”, you are Jews – members of a people who origniated in Judea, whether you adhere to the laws of the tribe or not.”
“Don’t Deny Jewish History and Culture by Calling Us ‘White'” writes Micha Danzig at Forward.com
“This is wrong and offensive. Anyone that understands Jewish history as well as the history of the entire development of the idea or construct of the “white race” should understand how that no Jew, Ashkenazi or otherwise, is “white.” While it is certainly the case that many Ashkenazi Jews today in America (such as Ruiz-Grossman) identify as “white,” that doesn’t make it any more accurate or appropriate. It does, however, delineate a fundamental “identity” problem in the Jewish community, particularly in America; where at the time of the adoption of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 Jews were not considered “white” (see, Shaare Tefila Congregation v. Cobb, (1987) 481 U.S. 615).”
Interestingly, Jews will sort of go back and forth with this sort of thing, depending on what suits their political goals. Maybe that’s why Dave Schechter at the Atlanta Jewish Times says “It’s Complicated”. Follow some Jews on Twitter, and especially if they’re Left wing, which about 80% of them are, you’ll see humorous contrasting approaches such as these.
Usually “My Fellow White People” is followed up either by some demand that whites make further concessions to non whites, or assertions about how terrible white people are, or some combination of the two. Then, just as quickly, they tell us they aren’t white because they are Jewish, once the consequences of slandering an entire race of people come calling.
Writing at the Washington Post, Jewish Columnist Max Boot said that White people shouldn’t complain about racist attacks on them because “We’re not the victims”.
“White people can be pretty clueless. (I know, I’m one myself.) Get a grip, folks. We’re not the victims here. Thinking that we are is not just wrong. It’s dangerous. It’s a mind-set that can justify everything from a public temper tantrum to a shooting spree.”
That is quite a scary way of putting it. If somebody feeling victimized justifies that level of violence in the mind of Max Boot, then I wonder what he thinks we should do with all those Jews who can’t get over the Holocaust. If feeling like a racial victim is cause for mass shootings, then anybody who Max Boot calls a racist better watch his back. You know, like the President of the United States, the Republican Party, and the United States of America, as he told Mother Jones.
“I was in my conservative bunker, and I thought this was a gross libel against the Republican Party to claim that we were catering to racism, or that it was a libel on America to claim that America was a pervasively racist society. And then Trump came along and I realized, “Wait a second. There is a much larger constituency for racism and xenophobia than I had realized.” And it made me think, “Oh, my goodness. This is why a lot of people were voting Republican.” It wasn’t because they loved supply-side economics.”
Is Max Boot threatening the President of the United States and the people who voted for him?
Jews Lean Way Left, Except At Home
Back when I thought of Jews as a religion, I just assumed they were conservative. That was perhaps my greatest misconception.
In the United States, Jews finance half of the Democrat Party, and a quarter of the Republican Party, writes Jeremy Sharon at the Jerusalem Post.
American Jews tend to favor Democrat candidates over Republicans, according to My Jewish Virtual Library, with 71% of Jewish voters choosing Democrat candidates and only 25% choosing Republicans since 1968.
Not Only Partisan
Issue by issue, Jews support far left policies in the United States
David Rosenberg at Israel National News writes;
Jews are the most libertine religious group in America according to a new Gallup poll, and are more likely even than people with no religion to find same-sex relations and abortion to be morally acceptable.
As a group, American Jews have long leaned towards the Democratic Party, a tendency which has persisted despite rising average incomes. Milton Himmelfarb, a sociologist who specialized in American Jewry, once remarked that “Jews earn like Episcopalians, but vote like Puerto Ricans.”
While Americans as a whole voted for Barack Obama over John McCain in 2008 by a margin of 53% to 46%, Jews split even harder for the Democratic candidate, with 77% supporting Obama compared to just 22% for his Republican challenger. In 2012 those numbers changed only slightly, with Jews breaking 69% to 30% in favor of Obama, compared to 51% to 47% among Americans as a whole.
A new Gallup poll released on Thursday shed some light on American Jewry’s lopsided support for the Democrat Party.
According to the survey, American Jews were more likely than any other religious group – including those with no religion – to find abortion and gay relations morally acceptable. With few exceptions, Jews reflected strongly libertine views that deviated from those of Catholics, Protestants, and Mormons.
A whopping 76% of American Jews said they felt abortion was “morally acceptable,” compared to just 38% of Catholics, 33% of Protestants, and 18% of Mormons. Only respondents who selected “no religion” tracked closely with Jews, with 73% saying they found abortion acceptable.
While views on homosexual relationships have shifted in the United States, American Jews were again far more likely than others to find them morally acceptable, with 85% of Jews and 83% of those with no religion accepting of gay or lesbian relations. Among Mormons the figure was 28%, compared to 41% of Protestants, and 62% of Catholics.
Jews were also the most likely to accept the cloning of animals, with 50% of both Jews and those without religion saying it was morally acceptable. Only 28% of Protestants and 33% of both Mormons and Catholics found animal cloning acceptable.
Regarding physician-assisted suicide, 73% of Jews found the idea morally acceptable, compared to 77% of those without religion, 47% of Catholics, 43% of Protestants, and 30% of Mormons.
Only with regards to out-of-wedlock childbirths did Jews track closer to Christian groups than to those without religion. While 80% of those with no religion said having children outside of marriage was acceptable, only 68% of Jews, 59% of Catholics, 47% of Protestants, and 25% of Mormons agreed.
But Jews were among the most likely to say premarital sex was acceptable, with 83% of Jews and 88% of those without religion finding it morally acceptable, while only 29% of Mormons, 50% of Protestants, and 68% of Catholics responded similarly.
Even though the Old Testament was pretty clear on how God felt about homosexuality, American Jews were “among the most supportive of gay marriage” writes Haviv Rettig Gur at the Times of Israel.
According to five polls of Americans in 2012 and 2013, with the most recent conducted in March 2013, 76 percent of US Jews support legalizing same-sex marriage, while 18% oppose and 8% did not express an opinion.
The figure is remarkably high, particularly when compared to the number of Protestants (34%) and Catholics (53%) who support same-sex marriage.
Jewish support is higher than the support among Democrats (61%), self-described “liberals” (72%), and even among Americans without religious affiliation (75%).
Mind you, this is before the Obergefell v. Hodges Supreme Court decision, which forced gay marriage on the whole country against our will, a fraud perpetrated by Jewish Attorney Roberta Kaplan.
Maybe that’s why, as Amy Dean at Tikkun.org tells us “Jews Brought America to the Tipping Point” on gay “marriage”.
In a few short years, same-sex marriage went from being an untouchable political hot potato to a broadly accepted civil right in eighteen states and the District of Columbia. Jews, and their social justice organizations, helped make that happen. In fact, this magazine was a prophetic voice of marriage equality, supporting same-sex unions in the early 1990s and helping to lay the groundwork for the current wave of victories.
The story of Jews’ contributions has continuing political relevance. The campaign for marriage equality offers valuable lessons for how to break through public resistance on other issues that Jewish groups are now addressing, including economic justice initiatives like paid sick leave, rights for domestic workers, and raising the minimum wage.
A forward-thinking strategy, combined with local and regional organizing, could be key to helping Jewish activists win victories on other issues that may seem unwinnable today, either because of intransigence in Congress or because they don’t yet have popular support.
In other words, Jews are gleefully celebrating their ability to subvert the popular will of American politics. They are all about “democracy”, until they can’t get what they want. Then they want a tiny ethnic minority to dominate the other 96% of the country and force laws on them that they did not vote for. They are strategizing openly about how they can impose more unpopular social policy upon their host Nations, and if you’ve got a problem with that, they’ll call you an anti-Semite, because this is literally what it means to be Jewish, for them.
MJL At IsraPundit.com writes;
Abortion is one of the most contentious issues in American politics, and since the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion nationwide, the issue has been a top concern by activists on both sides in assessing both Supreme Court nominees and political candidates. The anti-abortion cause has been embraced by many religious Christian groups, including the Catholic church.
Most American Jews strongly support legalized abortion: A 2015 Pew Research Forum survey found that 83 percent of American Jews, more than any other religious group, say abortion “should be legal in all/most cases.”
Jewish law does not share the belief common among abortion opponents that life begins at conception, nor does it legally consider the fetus to be a full person deserving of protections equal those accorded to human beings. In Jewish law, a fetus attains the status of a full person only at birth. Sources in the Talmud indicate that prior to 40 days of gestation, the fetus has an even more limited legal status, with one Talmudic authority (Yevamot 69b) asserting that prior to 40 days the fetus is “mere water.” Elsewhere, the Talmud indicates that the ancient rabbis regarded a fetus as part of its mother throughout the pregnancy, dependent fully on her for its life — a view that echoes the position that women should be free to make decisions concerning their own bodies.
Rabbi Jonathan Biatch says that reform Judaism supports abortion “even as late as the moment before the head of a baby emerges from the birth canal.”
Writing at the Jewish Women’s Archive, Tirzah Meacham informs us that;
A few other Talmudic texts shed some light on the opinions concerning abortion. Arakhin 1:7 demands that a pregnant woman who happens to be liable to capital punishment for some transgression be executed prior to giving birth unless she has begun to give birth (yashvah al ha-mashber). This term generally refers to the pushing stage of labor, not the early stages of contractions. The mode of execution guarantees that the fetus is killed in utero before the mother, i.e. the first stone is dropped on her abdominal area. However, if she has begun to deliver the fetus, the woman is permitted to complete the birth before her execution. This text certainly demonstrates that prior to a late stage in labor the fetus is considered part of the mother. Arakhin 7ab permits Sabbath transgression in order to bring a knife to perform a post-mortem cesarean section for a woman who has died in labor. This is to be understood as transgressing one Sabbath in order that many future Sabbaths be observed, and not because the fetus has the status of nefesh. Although there are situations in which a woman could die while giving birth and a fetus could survive for a few moments after her death, it is absurd to consider that a post-mortem cesarean would be performed if the fetus had not reached a stage of viability, i.e. at least seven months.
The Commission on Social Action of Reform Judaism adopted a Resolution on the Rights of Transgender and Gender Non-Conforming People in 2015, which reads in part;
Efforts within the Reform Movement over the past decade reflect our commitment to greater inclusivity of transgender and gender non-conforming people.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Union for Reform Judaism:
Affirms its commitment to the full equality, inclusion and acceptance of people of all gender identities and gender expressions;
Affirms the right of transgender and gender non-conforming individuals to be referred to by their name, gender, and pronoun of preference in our congregations, camps, schools, and other Reform affiliated organizations;
Encourages Reform congregations, congregants, clergy, camps, institutions and affiliates, including NFTY, to continue to advocate for the rights of people of all gender identities and gender expressions;
Urges the adoption and implementation of legislation and policies that prevent discrimination based on gender identity and expression, and that require individuals to be treated equally under the law as the gender by which they identify. This includes establishing the right to change without undue burden their identification documents to reflect their gender and name and ensuring equal access to medical and social services;
Calls on the U.S. and Canadian governments at all levels to review and revise all laws and policies to ensure full equality and protections for people of all gender identities and expressions;
Writing at Forward.com, Ron Kampeas informs us that “Jewish Groups Cheer Obama’s Transgender Protections”
Amid controversy over new protections President Barack Obama has extended to transgender people, a number of Jewish groups have welcomed them.
A statement Friday from the Reform movement’s Religious Action Center praised the guidance issued the same day by the Justice and Education departments requiring that schools receiving federal funds end discrimination based on sexual identification.
“We urge all public schools to swiftly and fully comply with this directive so that transgender and gender non-conforming individuals are treated with the dignity and respect they deserve,” the RAC statement said.
The National Council for Jewish Women said the guidance “provides needed clarity and best practices for public school districts and institutions of higher learning.”
Also praising the guidance was Rabbi Jack Moline, who directs Interfaith Alliance, a coalition that includes major Jewish national groups.
“No matter whether antipathy toward transgender Americans is motivated by ignorance or a particular – misguided, I believe – theological understanding of gender, neither has a place in our public schools,” he said in a statement.
A statement from Bend the Arc praised both the guidance to schools and a new rule from the Department of Health and Human Services extending protections to those discriminated against because of their gender identity.
“Transgender? Judaism’s got a blessing for you” writes Orli Santo, at the Times of Israel;
This is an era of gender revolutions, and the Jewish community is racing to keep up.
“People tend to like having things in nice, tidy boxes, of men do this, and women do that, and challenging these notions can create anxieties,” explains Kukla. “To make room for transgender Jews round the table, we have to expand some of our notions around gender and sexuality. For starters, normalizing the fact that people can have different life-cycles and choices, ones that don’t necessarily conform to the binary reality of male/female, mother/father… to my understanding, gender is a lot more complex than that.”
In 2006, Kukla became the first openly transgender man to be ordained by the Reform movement. In 2007, he wrote the first blessing sanctifying the sex-change process to be included in Kulanu, the manual for LGBT inclusion. He is also the co-creator of Trans-Torah, a body of existing and new Jewish sources that speak to the experience of being a Trans-Jew, which includes texts for a Pre-Surgery Mikveh Ritual, Transgender and Gender-Nonconforming Wedding Services, A Blessing for Chest Binding, and more.
My Jewish Learning informs us;
Jews, particularly American ones, have a longstanding aversion to guns. According to a 2005 American Jewish Committee study, Jews have the lowest rate of gun ownership of among all religious groups, with just 13 percent of Jewish households owning firearms (compared to 41 percent for non-Jews) and only 10 percent of Jews personally owning a gun (compared to 26 percent).
The majority of American Jews, who overwhelmingly live in urban rather than rural communities (where gun ownership tends to be more widespread) support the Democratic party, whose platform calls for stricter gun control, and major Jewish organizations have repeatedly thrown their support behind gun control measures. A 2013 list of prominent anti-gun activists compiled by the National Rifle Association included several of the largest Jewish groups.
On the gun control side are a number of frequently cited rabbinic principles. Judaism mandates that one avoid unnecessary danger, and some studies show that gun ownership is risky. The Talmud in Avoda Zara prohibits selling weapons to idolaters, prompting one rabbinic authority to extend the ban even to Jewish bandits — a statement readily invoked to justify restricting gun sales to criminals and the mentally ill. Rabbinic groups from all three major Jewish denominations — Orthodox, Conservative and Reform — have all cited Jewish legal precedent in resolutions supporting gun control.
Finally, there’s the famous saying of Isaiah, who prophesied a time when nations would beat their swords into plough shares — a vision often said to reflect Judaism’s belief that the ideal society is one devoid of deadly weaponry. This dim view of weapons is cited in a Mishnah that records a disagreement over whether it is permitted to carry weapons on Shabbat. Rabbi Eliezer maintains that they are merely “ornaments,” but his colleagues, citing Isaiah, disagree, saying weapons are “indignities.”
The Orthodox Rabbinical Council of America, in its 2014 resolution in favor of restricting “American citizens’ easy and unregulated access to weapons,” cited Isaiah in support of its call for avoiding “recreational activities that desensitize participants to killing, weaponry, and violence.”
But shouldn’t Jews want guns to prevent ant-Semitic violence? Not so, says My Jewish Learning, and the Jewish Anti-Defamation League;
Some have suggested that if Jews had possessed guns in Nazi Germany, the Holocaust might not have occurred. Germany’s move to forbid Jewish gun ownership prior to launching the Final Solution is typically cited as a key support for this belief. Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson briefly made this notion a matter of public debate after including it in his 2015 book A More Perfect Union and in subsequent interviews. The Anti-Defamation League responded that it was ludicrous to suggest armed Jews could have stopped the Holocaust.
If that’s the case, maybe their constant whining about the Holocaust and anti-Semitism are not entirely honest?
Joshua Flug at Jewish Action provides more insight on the subject;
The Gemara (Avodah Zarah 15b-16a) has a lengthy discussion about laws relating to selling weapons and their accessories. The discussion involves a number of points. 1) The Gemara quotes a beraita that one may not sell weapons or their accessories (holsters, et cetera) to a non-Jew or a kuti. (A kuti, for these purposes, represents anyone who we suspect may sell the weapons to non-Jews.) One may not sharpen non-Jews’ weapons nor sell them handcuffs or similar tools. The Gemara explains that the reason for the prohibition is because non-Jews are prone to use these weapons or tools for murder, an observation that was true at the time. 2) The Gemara further states that just as it is prohibited to sell weapons to a non-Jew, it is also prohibited to sell them to a Jewish bandit. The Gemara adds that this certainly applies to a bandit who might murder, but it also applies to a mashmuta (Jewish bandit who has no history of violence). 3) The Gemara then quotes a dispute about whether one may sell shields to non-Jews. The dispute centers around one question: will the shields be used as weapons to attack others or for self-defense? 4) The Gemara further states that one may not sell iron to non-Jews because they might use it to make weapons. The Gemara notes that while one can convert any tool into a weapon, this rule relates to a type of iron primarily used for weaponry. 5) The Gemara goes on to justify selling iron to the Persians because they protected the Jews at the time. The Gemara seems to be permitting the sale of a specific type of iron. Yet many Rishonim extend the prohibition to ban the selling of all types of weaponry to non-Jews.
Jonathan Tobin at Intermountain Jewish News says;
American Jews have a long and understandable tradition of advocacy for immigrants. That’s due in part to the fact that most Jews were the children and grandchildren of immigrants as the community first began to assert itself into the political life of the country in the 20th century.
It’s also because the plight of those who were denied entry to the US and other potential sources of refuge for Jews seeking to flee Nazi Germany and occupied Europe during the Holocaust is imprinted upon the political memory of most Jews.
As you familiarize yourself with Jewish literature, you’ll come to find there is nothing the Jews do not associate with the Holocaust. That’s why Democratic candidates get away with comparing everything to the Nazis, their Jewish financiers love it.
The left-wing Jewish groups that are organizing the growing number of demonstrations against the work of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency and essentially opposing any enforcement of laws against illegal immigration think they are representing the views of most Jews these days. They might be right.
The Democratic presidential candidates were nearly unanimous during their recent debates about supporting the decriminalization of illegal entry into the US. They are similarly united behind measures like providing free government health care for illegals.
While most mainstream Jewish groups have pushed back against analogies to the plight of illegal immigrants and asylum-seekers to the Holocaust, many are continuing to do just that. Indeed, the coalition of left-wing [Jewish] organizations organizing the protests against federal law enforcement aren’t just applauding Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s labeling of detention centers as “concentration camps,” they’ve named their group “Never Again Action.”
Greg Afinogenov writes at Jewish Currents to make “The Jewish Case for Open Borders”
Prior to Donald Trump’s election, both parties agreed on the need for border enforcement, with the GOP routinely accusing Democrats of being soft on “illegals” and the Democrats responding with vigorous deportation campaigns. But the explicit racism of the Trump era, with its Muslim travel ban and the daily outrages of family separation and detention, has galvanized a large-scale protest movement. Jews have been especially active in this mobilization, driven by their social liberalism, their sense of religious duty, or both. Synagogue networks sprang up to offer aid to refugees, while groups like Jews United for Justice and Jewish Voice for Peace have been a visible presence at protest rallies.
To understand why open borders are necessary, we have to understand why center-left immigration arguments—which on the surface appear compatible with the pro-migrant politics of progressive Jews—rest on the same foundation as those made by the right. For center-leftists, wealthy countries like the US have a moral obligation to let in refugees, but that obligation is not unlimited.
Rank-and-file progressives don’t usually think of the immigration policies they support—expanding refugee quotas, easing restrictions on some classes of immigrants, and ending family separation—as an endorsement of detention, deportation, and racialized terror. Yet these proposals are organized around their own set of structural inclusions and exclusions, and necessitate their own rigorous policing.
How will Jews stop the wicked goyim from protecting their National borders with this “rigorous policing”?
We can also resuscitate the long history of Jewish anti-nationalism. In the 19th century, Jewish communities in Central and Eastern Europe faced a rising tide of nationalist mobilization, both from mass political parties and rulers in search of legitimacy. In response, Jewish activists in the anarchist and internationalist socialist tradition argued that the answer was not to build a Jewish state, but to seek Jewish emancipation as part of a broader anti-capitalist movement. The vast majority of Jews had more in common with Latvian, German, or Russian workers than they did with the few wealthy and powerful members of their own community, and Jews joined revolutionary socialist parties in the Russian Empire in disproportionate numbers. Even in a specifically Jewish socialist party like the Jewish Labor Bund, nationalism was anathema. “Cosmopolitans from head to toe, they refused to even touch upon national questions,” one skeptical Bund member recalled of the comrades who gathered at a party congress in 1899. “For them, anything that smelled of nationalism, with any relation to national problems, was treyf.” Even the less hard-line Russian Bundists of later years advocated cultural autonomy, never a territorial state.
This list could go on forever and a day, but we’ll elaborate more in future posts, and move on for now.
Except In Israel
Things are quite different where the Jews have their own homeland, of course. Jews throughout the United States and broader diaspora support abortion, homosexuality, gun control, bad economics, and soft on crime policies, because of the aforementioned “long history of Jewish anti-nationalism”. These policies are designed to weaken nations, literally.
In their own Nation, Israel, they know better.
Abortion in Israel
Writing at The Jerusalem Post Yonah Jeremy Bob informs us that;
On the conservative end, there is no “right” to an abortion in Israel as there is in the US.
The Israeli High Court has never dived into the issue to announce such a right as the US Supreme Court did in Roe v. Wade, and the Knesset law that governs the issue makes the right conditional.
In order to legally have an abortion, women must apply to abortion committees and fit one of four categories.
The Jewish Virtual Library expands further;
In 1980, a fifth criterion that allowed abortions for women living in economic hardship was abolished due to pressure from religious political parties.
A woman who seeks to terminate a pregnancy must first seek approval, appearing before one of the 41 abortion committees operating in public and private hospitals around the country. These committees include three members — a physician whose field of expertise is obstetrics and gynecology; another physician who is either a family doctor, psychiatrist, internist or gynecologist, and a social worker. At least one woman must be present on each committee. Hospital pregnancy termination committees approve the vast majority of their requests.
Six separate committees consider requests for termination when a fetus is beyond 24 weeks old. No hospitals in Jerusalem, however, will perform these abortions.
Homosexuality in Israel
Writing at Israel National News, Shlomo Pyutrikovsky informs us of a 2017 decision by the Israeli Supreme Court in which;
Supreme Court Justices Elyakim Rubinstein, Neal Handel, and Anat Baron on Thursday morning unanimously rejected the Israeli Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Association’s demand that the Jewish state recognize same-sex marriages.
According to the Association, the Basic Law of Human Dignity and Liberty should be interpreted to allow same-sex marriage. At the very least, the petitioners claimed, the law not allowing same-sex marriage should not be constitutional.
“To all intents and purposes, Israeli civil law does not recognize same-sex marriage,” the court said. “Therefore, the petitioners’ request to have the civil court rule on something under the jurisdiction of the rabbinical courts, which applies under certain conditions, is not applicable here. Instead, request is based on establishing as an essential precondition that marriage between two individuals of the same gender exists in Israeli law, and it does not,” Rubenstein wrote in his ruling.
“In essence, the petitioners are asking the court to recognize same-sex marriage via court ruling, despite the fact that Israeli law does not recognize it. Regarding the possibility of recognizing marriages which are not performed under religious auspices, including same-sex marriage, there already is a ruling that such recognition is the purview of the legislative body.”
The Times of Israel also tells us about a Supreme Court decision prohibiting gays from adopting children in Israel
The government announced on Sunday that there are no intentions to change the law and allow gay couples to adopt in Israel.
In response to a High Court petition, the state said that it was opposed to allowing same-sex couples to adopt because it would place an “additional burden” on the child.
“The professional opinion of the Child Welfare Services supports preserving the existing situation” that the adopting couple be a man and a woman, the government wrote to the court.
This “takes into account the reality of Israeli society and the difficulty it may entail with regard to the child being adopted.”
Immigration in Israel
“Open borders for Israel” is a White Supremacist slogan for a reason. Open borders constitutes a genocide against the existing population, and Jews know it better than anyone. For that reason, Israel has an explicitly racial immigration policy.
According to the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs;
1. Immigration visa
The Law of Return, 5710 – 1950 determines the right of every Jew to immigrate to the State of Israel. The law is an expression of the connection between the Jewish people and their homeland. Jews returning to Israel are considered people who were away – or whose ancestors were away – from Israel, and are now returning to their country. With regard to the law, “A Jew is a person born to a Jewish mother, or who is a convert to Judaism, and is not a member of another religion.”
The MFA lists no other sort of Immigration Visa. The rest are temporary in nature.
The Times of Israel tells us about a tweet by their Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, touting the success of their border wall in stopping unwanted immigration.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Saturday welcomed praise from Donald Trump for Israel’s security barrier, writing on Twitter that the US president “is right” about walls preventing illegal immigration.
Referring to a second barrier, the recently built fence along Israel’s border with Egypt, the prime minister said the measure had been a “great success” in keeping out migrants, who mainly came from African nations.
“President Trump is right. I built a wall along Israel’s southern border. It stopped all illegal immigration. Great success. Great idea,” Netanyahu wrote in English on Twitter, Trump’s preferred method of communication. The prime minister ended his tweet with emojis of the Israeli and American flags.
Indeed, Israel has rejected a “global migration pact” pact from the United Nations, citing the need to protect their borders, according to the Times of Israel;
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced on Tuesday that Israel would not be joining the United Nations’ global migration pact, set to be signed next month in Marrakech, Morocco, by most of the world’s governments. The US is among several other countries that have also rejected the pact.
“I instructed the Foreign Ministry to announce that Israel won’t participate [in the Marrakech gathering] and won’t sign the migration pact,” Netanyahu said in a statement to the press.
“We have a duty to protect our borders against illegal infiltrators. That’s what we’ve done, and that’s what we will continue to do,” the terse statement concluded.
Transgenderism in Israel
The Jerusalem Post gives a striking contrast between how Jews view transgenderism in the diaspora, as opposed to in their own Nation.
Dozens protested in Tel Aviv on Sunday calling on the Education Ministry to protect the rights of transgender youth to go to school without fearing for their well-being.
The demonstration was sparked by reports in the Israeli media that a 15-year-old transgender girl in Ashdod hasn’t attended school for half a year since being attacked by classmates.
The school authorities denied they ignored the special needs of the student and claimed she is provocative and dismissive towards the teachers, Haaretz reported.
Activists from the NGO Ma’avarim, devoted to to help transgender people in Israeli society, held posters giving the Ministry a failing grade in dealing with transgender people.
Jewish law usually sees gender as being determined by the biological condition people are born, which can not be changed by sex change operations as they don’t transform the entire person into another gender.
Instead, they re-construct existing organs, which Jewish law regards as a form of castration when perfumed on males.
Religious Jewish society currently tends to view transgender people as mentally ill and treats them with the same compassion the sick deserve in the sense of visiting them and offering them help.
“‘They Ask What We Have Between Our Legs’: A Third of Transgender Israelis Are Unemployed” – reads a headline by Lee Yaron at Haaretz;
This phenomenon is not a few isolated cases. 32 percent of transgender men and women in Israel are unemployed according to the statistics of the Labor Ministry department in charge of equal opportunity in the workplace – and experts say the number is actually much greater.
Transgender Israelis are still fighting for their right to equality in the workplace and against violence, while some members of the LGBT community are fighting for the right to marry and become parents by surrogacy – a “struggle for privileges,” as they call it.
Israeli identity cards are a major obstacle on the road to finding a job, especially the gender clause. In contrast to the international trend of gender self-definition and recognition of trans identity, in Israel, change of gender in the Population Registry is still based on a medical recommendation. One doesn’t have to undergo gender reassignment surgery to register a gender change, but that’s the quickest way to do it.
People who don’t want gender reassignment surgery (or can’t afford it) have to wait at least two years for a certificate from a Heath Ministry committee that will allow them to change the gender clause on their identity card. In that time, a committee of “experts” examines their gender identity. According to attorney Ido Katri, the legal adviser to the Gila Project for Trans Empowerment, “the recognition process of gender identity in Israel is not enshrined in law, but only procedures of the health and interior ministries and given to the whims of ministers and clerks.
Difficulty in finding a job is only one aspect of exclusion and rejection of trans people, especially trans women. Violence is a regular occurrence: in the 2016 Labor Ministry study, 94 percent of trans women reported experiencing violence or harassment. The suicide rate among transgender women is 40 percent, as opposed to 1 percent in the general population.
There is no upper limit to how long I could write on this subject. That is why I started this blog, as this conversation will have to take place over many posts, written over many months and years, We will be talking a lot more as time goes forward, so I hope you will subscribe to our email list, and follow us on Telegram.
What I’ve tried to illustrate here is a simple thing, supported by the words of prominent Jews. Jews are not “us”. They say so openly. They are a different people, and when they talk about us they talk about us as “they” or “goyim” or “gentiles”, not as brothers and sisters or members of the same Nation. When they make policy proposals in American or European politics, they are doing so as foreigners, and we should view them as such.
Is this “anti-Semitism”? Some will say so, and I care not. You might have noticed a lack of condemnation as I spoke of Israeli policy. My animus is not against a race, but against hypocrisy. America and Europe have the right to secure our borders, to restrict marriages, to have an ethnic identity, and I do not in the slightest hold it against the Israelis that they do these things in their Nation. My quarrel is with the people, whatever their ethnicity, who impose one standard on my people, and another standard on Jews. That is, as David Duke so aptly put it “Jewish Supremacy”.
If the President of some other country said “Fight our war” we would say no. If the President of some other country said “Give us your money” we would say no. If the President of some other country said “Undertake some other policy which would weaken your country in favor of ours” we would say no.
We ought to do the same thing with Jews, who are, for the most part, loyal to their Jewish heritage. They are not Americans, or Europeans, or members of whatever other society they happen to live in. They are Jews, and should be treated by law as current laws treat agents of foreign governments.
That does not mean we have to hurt them, hate them, defame them, and it certainly does not mean we should exterminate them.
But it does mean seeing them for what they are, foreigners, and recognizing foreigners, as distinct from ourselves.
Search Engines and Social Media Hate The Truth
Let’s Keep In Touch Through Email