Counter-Currents
Raphael, "Marriage of the Virgin," 1504
2,321 words
German translation here
“Whiteness” no longer adequately defines who we are.
Jews present the biggest challenge to the naïve concept of whiteness. Most whites cannot distinguish Jews from members of their own race even when Jews explicitly emphasize their Jewishness.
Nevertheless, Jews and whites differ radically.
The physical differences are often obvious to people who know they exist and take the trouble to look for them.
But the primary difference between Jews and whites is psychological, and hence not visible to the naked eye.
Jews sometimes describe two radically different types of “souls”—an “animal” or “animalistic” soul possessed by Jews, non-Jews, and animals, and a higher, “godly” soul possessed only by Jews. This godly soul is so distinct that it renders Jews a superior “species” or “genus.” (The terms are completely unscientific, but it’s one way some of them conceptualize the racial gulf between themselves and us.) Jews may look externally like other men, but in reality their godly “souls” render them a different, superior, “species,” while non-Jews are mere beasts.
Different Jews would express the basic idea differently, or refrain from expressing it at all, but there is little doubt that it captures the fundamental ethnic view that throbs inside the noggins of most Jews.
In essence, I subscribe to it myself, except that I reject the overweening claim to superiority or goodness. Jews are the opposite of godly.
There is an overriding genetic component to Jewishness. More than religion, more than culture, it is genes that make Jews unique. But their distinctness expresses itself most sharply in behavioral, psychological, and emotional rather than physical (phenotype, including skin color) terms.
Jews are always conscious of this sharp disparity between themselves and others; whites, indeed all Gentiles, are typically clueless about it. Properly exploited, Jewish hyper-awareness and -sensitivity could be their Achilles heel.
Jews often strive to conceal their identity from non-Jews. Because of their physiological resemblance to whites, and whites’ congenital inability to perceive the radical uniqueness of Jews, they often pass as white.
But because Jews are not white, their genes should be excluded from the white gene pool, and as a group they should be prohibited from residence and citizenship in white polities, and membership in white organizations and movements.
As an aside, I must reject the argument, which has been made, that Nordic-looking Jews should, because of their appearance, be regarded as Nordics. The logical corollary would be that Mediterranean-looking Jews should be welcomed as southern Europeans, Slavic-looking Jews as Slavs, and so forth. This is incorrect, for Jewish racial uniqueness is not primarily phenotypic.
Germany’s Nuremberg Laws remain the lodestar on this question of line drawing between Jews and whites.
The two-fold approach of the laws was to (a) sharply distinguish between Jews and Aryans, forbidding sexual intercourse and reproduction between them and (b) exclude part-Jews (quarter- and half- Jews) from the Aryan category as “Mischlinge” (hybrids). (The SS employed a far more stringent standard: in order to join, a candidate had to prove genealogically that all direct ancestors born since 1750 were non-Jewish.)
These revolutionary laws had the effect of defining and stabilizing the Aryan gene pool and halting the massive gene flow into it that had formerly occurred. By arresting the one-way Jewish to Gentile gene flow, the laws set the people upon a healthy future course.
Perhaps the Nuremberg standards should apply to all non-whites.
An American Analogy
Recall that until the mid-20th century in the US, state laws and customs against miscegenation with blacks were similarly designed to safeguard the white gene pool once geographic isolation had ceased. They defined people as Negro if they had even a small fraction of black ancestry. Most state laws specified the fraction as one-fourth or one-eighth. Nonwhites included:
Mulattos (1/2): Persons with one white parent and one Negro parent (Barack Obama, Halle Berry).
Quadroons (1/4): Persons with one Negro and three white grandparents—the offspring of a mulatto and a white.
Octoroons (1/8): Persons with one Negro and seven white great-grandparents—the offspring of a white and a quadroon.
Quintroons (1/16): Persons with one Negro and fifteen white great-great-grandparents—the offspring of an octoroon and a white.
Wikipedia states that William Pierce’s novel of white revolution The Turner Diaries (1978; 2d ed. 1980) “makes mention of forced relocation for Quadroons and Octoroons after whites prevail in a race war against the government.”
American laws regarding blacks were thus more stringent (definitionally) than the Nuremberg (but not the SS) requirements for Aryan ancestry.
This is a salutary reason why, for a long time, white-black gene flow, though relatively infrequent, was from the white gene pool into the African American gene pool rather than the other way around. Until recently, African Americans averaged 25 percent white ancestry, while white Americans’ gene pool consisted of less than 1 percent African genes.
Anyway, my purpose here is to illustrate how, if the existence of socially irreconcilable racial, behavioral, psychological, cultural, and ethical variations between Jews and whites is accepted, it is readily apparent that “whiteness” in the sense of phenotype is inadequate as a racial differentiator. The proliferation of part-Jews further complicates the issue.
A few random examples follow. I’ve employed the Nuremberg standard to determine who’s white and who’s not. Thus, half- and quarter- Jews are labeled “nonwhite.”
Bernard Baruch
Financier & Political Insider Bernard Baruch: nonwhite
Bernard Baruch was a full Jew. His father, a German (Ashkenazi) Jew, was a staff surgeon to General Robert E. Lee, and joined the Ku Klux Klan after the Civil War. In an online video clip from the 1930s, Baruch can be heard briefly alluding, with mild disparagement, to the Union forces that marched through the South.
His mother was Sephardic.
Jewish Ads
Below is an ad from a Jewish publication, not atypical, directed at Jewish audiences and seen almost exclusively by them. Such ads frequently employ models who look Aryan.
Source: Ask the Rabbi ad http://www.aish.com/jl/sp/k/48942436.html on 11-4-11
What are we to make of this attractive woman? Is she Jewish? We have no way of knowing based upon appearance.
White-looking models seem to turn up frequently in advertisements in exclusively Jewish publications whose white readership is either nonexistent or negligible.
Is this analogous to white actors cast as Jews in Hollywood films and TV shows, or are most of the white-looking models actually Jewish?
Do Jews somehow identify with Aryan-looking models and actors?
What goes through the minds of Jewish readers when they see ads such as this?
Rashida Jones and Peggy Lipton
Rashida Jones & her mother Peggy Lipton
I’m familiar with actress Rashida Jones from the TV show The Office (where she was cast as Italian-American “Karen Filippelli”). But she has also appeared on the television programs Boston Public and Parks and Recreation. She can pass as a Mediterranean white.
Yet her father is Negro musician and media mogul Quincy Jones, and her mother Peggy Lipton, the blonde actress from the 1970s TV show The Mod Squad. At Harvard Rashida was a member of the Black Students Association.
Peggy Lipton, despite being 100% Ashkenazic, easily passed as white—she looked Nordic.
Charlie Sheen and Brooke Mueller
The Charlie Sheen family
Here’s an American family (the couple has since split) that gives every appearance of being white when judged according to unsophisticated criteria.
What do we have here?
Names are cultural cues. Actor Charlie Sheen’s real name is Carlos Estévez. Assuming we know this, in a North American context, it immediately suggests Mestizo ancestry. (If we don’t know it, physical appearance and other cultural cues do not steer us in that direction.)
In reality, Charlie Sheen’s father, actor Martin Sheen (Ramón Estévez), is half Spanish and half Irish. So, in Charlie’s case, one-quarter Mediterranean European ancestry is a factor, but not Mestizo blood.
Charlie Sheen’s mother’s background remains obscure. He has stated that she is Jewish, but it is unclear whether this is so. If she is Jewish or half-Jewish, for example, Sheen would be non-white according to the Nuremberg standard. But, since we don’t know, the guide of naïve whiteness (appearance) doesn’t assist us.
It’s ironic that Sheen, if he is nonwhite, is so because of Jewish rather than hybrid Amerindian ancestry. His physical appearance provides little guidance; my uninformed guess based solely upon his looks and real name would have been part-Mestizo.
Sheen’s attractive ex-wife, Brooke Mueller, is half-Jewish (via her mother). So Mueller is not white. The twin boys are at least one-quarter Jewish (through Brooke; possibly more through Charlie), so they are not white, either.
Thus, the photo depicts a majority non-white family. It is completely nonwhite if Sheen possesses the Jewish ancestry he claims to have.
You perhaps think Jews don’t pay attention to such matters?
Wrong!
The Jewish News Weekly, a publication of the San Francisco Jewish community, parsed the ancestry of Sheen and Brooke Mueller with the enthusiasm of a race purity office in the Third Reich. No doubt the ADL and many individual Jews did the same thing.
Geert Wilders
Philo-Semitic Zionist Dutch Politician Geert Wilders: nonwhite
Wilders, a Dutch parliamentarian, is leader of the Party for Freedom (Partij voor de Vrijheid, PVV), the third-largest political party in the Netherlands, which he founded in 2004.
His undeserved reputation as a white nationalist is the result of hysterical press coverage by the international media, combined with intensely emotional efforts of anti-white governments in Holland, Great Britain, and the United States to stifle his speech and activities.
The motivation for the hatred, which has placed Wilders’ life in jeopardy, is ostensibly his unyielding opposition to Islam and perceived sympathy for Dutch European culture.
Yet Wilders appears to have no genuine commitment to white racial interests whatsoever. He has shunned leaders like Jean-Marie Le Pen of France, Jörg Haider of Austria, and others he belittles as “right-wing fascists.”
Indeed, Wilders’ ethnic commitments are apparently limited to Jews and Israel. His adoration for the little gangster state is well-known. After high school he lived on a moshav (a cooperative agricultural community, not a kibbutz) and worked for Israeli firms. This important period of his life remains shrouded in shadows.
The fear and loathing directed at Wilders from so many powerful quarters throughout the diaspora, combined with his Zionist zealotry, links to Israel, and continued ability to function in Dutch politics despite charges of racism and anti-Islamism, invites speculation that “white racism” serves as a straw man in what is really a fierce, internecine struggle over Zionism currently being waged within world Jewry. It is not inconceivable that Wilders is an Israeli intelligence asset.
The ethnicity of Wilders’ second wife, a diplomat from Hungary named Krisztina Marfai, has been conflictingly reported as Jewish or Turkish. Either way, she is evidently nonwhite. Thus, Wilders’ children would also be nonwhite, if he has any by her.
A few years ago a Dutch news outlet reported that Wilders was a Dutch-Indonesian hybrid (an “Indo” of mixed European/native Indonesian ancestry). His maternal grandparents lived in Indonesia (the Dutch East Indies), a Dutch colony until 1949: “In June [2008] a genealogist said he had found several Indonesian ancestors of the populist Dutch politician.” No further information about these alleged Indonesian ancestors was provided.
Instead, the article focused on an item from the Left-wing Dutch weekly De Groene Amsterdammer written by an anti-white anthropologist named Lizzy van Leeuwen, described as “an expert on the position of Indo-Dutch people in the post-colonial age.”
The only “Indonesian” ancestry cited in the English-language report on the article (I don’t have access to van Leeuwen’s Dutch original) was Jewish, not native Indo.
Wilders’ maternal grandmother, Johanna Ording-Meijer, came from “an old Jewish-Indonesian family”—a fact the politician “lied about in his 2008 biography.” Johanna’s husband, like Wilders’ paternal grandparents, was apparently Dutch.
Thus, on the basis of the information currently available, Wilders appears to be one-quarter Jewish (not Indo) and three-quarters Dutch.
Of course, further information would be helpful, since deception is taking place. This again underlines the limits of whiteness as a criterion.
Does Wilders’ part-Jewish ancestry explain his lifelong Jewish fanaticism?
As far as I’m concerned, Wilders is racially Jewish (non-white), no matter what views he holds. His Jewishness or non-Jewishness under Jewish law is of interest to me only academically. Jewish law does not supply the criteria I use to determine Jewishness.
But what about Jewish law? Because Wilders’ maternal grandmother was Jewish, his mother was also Jewish, even if the grandfather was Dutch. But if Wilders’ mother was Jewish, is Wilders also Jewish?
Perhaps, as one rabbi explained in a different (i.e., non-Wilders) context, Wilders was “born with a Neshamah, a Jewish soul. [This is a reference to the godly, non-animal soul possessed only by Jews as mentioned previously.] It is this Neshamah that pushes him to become a full-fledged Jew.”
Wilders conspicuously dyes his hair blond, a practice van Leeuwen took cheap shots at (as have others). This reeks of hypocrisy given that Europe is overrun by Jewish bottle blondes whose peroxide locks van Leeuwen and others have no problem with.
Friedrich Hayek
Friedrich Hayek: white
Finally, to illustrate the problematic nature of “whiteness,” here’s a photo of Austrian-born Nobel Prize-winning philosopher Friedrich Hayek in old age.
Of Central European ancestry, he was not a Jew. In his youth he was over six feet tall, had blond hair, and was not particularly Jewish-looking. His proclivity for outdoor activities such as hiking and mountain climbing, and his psychology and personal behavior, were also Aryan-like. However, he had a brother who as a young man looked so Jewish that people in Vienna—including upper class Viennese Jews—were convinced that the family was Jewish.
“Whiteness” is a complex issue in this anti- and post- European age, and lazy old guideposts as to who’s white and who’s not no longer serve.
21 comments
Interesting article. One point which I think escapes most Jews and nonJews alike is that there are multiple subgenera of Jews. Sephardic Jews are or were very distinct from Ashkenazi Jews, and even German Ashkenazi Jews differ greatly in politics and overall mentality from Eastern European Ashkenazi Jews. It was a German Jewish judge who sentenced the Rosenbergs to death, for example. Sephardic Jews, for example, were great allies of the southern cause during the Civil War, with Judah Benjamin serving as secretary of state. Many old WASP families, such as the Tiffanys have Sephardic Jewish ancestry. They seem to have a distinctly old-world state of mind, especially on racial questions.
I believe there has always been significant cross-talk among the various white and even Asian groups, and some hybridization among mutally high-IQ groups may even be desirable to spawn new advantageous brain types. The most critical issue is to prevent massive influx of low IQ southern hemispheric genes (blacks, hispanics, etc.) from entering the gene pool. The old south had a great model on this point.
Everyone in this audience is probably on page, but for those egalitarians who question racial differences in IQ, I offer a modification of Pascal’s Wager:
If whites and blacks and hispanics have similar cognitive potentials and racial mixing is prohibited, then great, we can be equal, homogenous communities glorying in our abilities with no loss to society at large. On the other hand, if blacks(or whites) are strongly inferior in terms of cognitive ability, then great damage will be done to society’s potential by allowing miscegination. So racial purity is the correct choice with no harm done to either racial group nor society as a whole!
Wilders may have Jewish blood, but this does not mean that he is not very useful. He is as philosemitic as any Neo-con: he supports Israel tremendously, and has a fierce rhetoric against Islam. But this rhetoric has opened up the debate in Holland about Dutchness and nationalism, and has had the unintended effect of at least some people pursuing this train of thought further and discovering white nationalism and the malicious Jewish influence. So for the time being, Wilders is the best we have. If Germany or England only had a party like his!
Great article! Very sound racial thinking. I’m glad that the author exposed Geert Wilders for the fraud he is.
Hayek could have had Jewish ancestry. Concealing Jewish ancestry was not unheard of. Also I believe he fled to the US around the time of WWII, which is something many Jews did.
It is very easy to verify facts like these before one comments.
Hayek was certainly at least part Jewish. He was second cousin to Ludwig Wittgenstein, who was 100% Jewish.
Oh, wait, Wittgenstein was not pure Jewish.
The original National Vanguard website once published a very informative and well researched article by Paul Westman on Friedrich Hayek and the Jews. I can’t find it in its entirety, but the second part of it (“Was Hayek Jewish?”) is available at
http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/v1/temp/delete-westman2.html
You’re right, Hrolf; Hayek was a second cousin to Wittgenstein, who was 3/4 Jewish–they were related through Wittgenstein’s one white grandparent! (I’m speaking from memory.)
There was quite a bit of information about all of this in a series of interviews with the philosopher published in book form as Hayek on Hayek.
There Hayek discusses the issue himself. Wondering whether he might be part Jewish, he researched his ancestry on both sides, going back several hundred years, primarily, it seems, to answer that specific question. (He came from a family of secular Catholics.)
Hayek said that he found no Jewish ancestry whatsoever in his lineage. He did not sound at all displeased, I have to say. I honestly had no feeling from the discussion or tone that he was lying in any way. Also, the interviews were conducted late in life, at a time when such information would not have hurt him socially in any way. Just the opposite, in fact.
Hayek also poked fun at his Jewish colleague and mentor Ludwig von Mises for contending that he couldn’t obtain a position at the University of Vienna due to “anti-Semitism.” (Years later, Mises served on the editorial advisory board of the John Birch Society’s American Opinion magazine.)
In reality, Hayek said, the individuals who blackballed Mises were all fellow Jews. But they were socialists, and rejected Mises because of his free market philosophy, which they hated.
In 2000, a Jewish academic named Melvin Reder wrote a “scholarly” article accusing three famous white economists of being anti-Semites: John Maynard Keynes, Austrian-born Joseph Schumpeter, and Hayek.
Hayek left Austria for Britain before the National Socialists came to power. However, as a classical liberal he opposed Nazism, and did not want to return to NS Germany.
He did return immediately after the war, and lectured to a large, appreciative crowd in a bombed-out city that resembled a moonscape. They had to climb over rubble and the lecture was held in a kind of hole in the ground–the lower part of a destroyed building.
Hayek also served with the Austrian armed forces during WWI. He said the Germans were the only competent soldiers; the Italians were unreliable by comparison.
I used Hayek as an example precisely because the evidence is so strong that he was not Jewish.
White phenotypes are pretty variable, which renders “whiteness” difficult in a way I didn’t directly address. But it’s another reason so many people are confused about race. I’ll try to illustrate what I mean in a future article discussing only non-Jews.
Genotyping is advancing rapidly and becoming cheaper. Crude assessments aren’t necessary anymore.
But are Jews going to offer their genetic profiles upon request? Or are they going to continue to try to blend in when it suits them? The answer is obvious.
You just need a piece of hair, swab of skin, etc. and you can genotype them yourself.
What you say is true, and at some point should prove helpful.
But as a practical matter we are stuck with the old methods for a long time. Expense being one reason.
Another is that genetic tests identifying racial background may not be readily available. I’m not sure about this, but obviously there would be enormous social prejudice against it.
The pioneering company in this area, DNAPrint Genomics, Inc., went belly up. It no longer exists.
That’s a shame, because they did some astonishing things. Perhaps the most remarkable was their use of a DNA sample to identify a serial killer in Louisiana as Negro when police were searching only for a white man. Based on DNAPrint’s test, the cops changed their strategy and eventually caught the man, who was positively identified as the source of the DNA through a different technique known as DNA fingerprinting (matching two samples to determine whether they’re the same).
Not only had DNAPrint correctly identified the supposed “white” killer as black, they had stated that he had a small amount of Amerindian ancestry–which he did.
As far as I know, police have not availed themselves of this breakthrough technology since that time, anywhere, presumably for racist/ideological reasons.
But, as I said, DNAPrint is out of business.
“You just need a piece of hair, swab of skin, etc. and you can genotype them yourself.”
I wish someone would get a sample of Hollande and Sarkozy, the two main candidates for the next presidential election in France, and send it to a lab.
It’s true that “whiteness” does not adequately describe who we are. Aryan is probably a more accurate word than white. “White” connotes bourgeois and bland, something to be ridiculed by hip comedians, or the swpl blog. “Aryan” has very different connotations, either dangerous and forbidden (the mainstream reaction to the word), or heroic and noble. In any case, it more accurately describes the movement we all want to see.
As for the jewish issue, while genes certainly are an issue, I think more and more that jewish behavior is due to culture/psychology more than genes. The jews are a uniquely destructive and subversive people in world history, and it’s hard for me to accept that this behavior is due to a particular blend of near eastern, central asian and european genes, when we don’t really see similar behavior in any of those groups.
Great article. “White” is a generic term, limited to a superficial feature of skin. “Aryan” or European” or something more specific such as “German” “English” “French” is much more accurate. A jew can be a “white” person on the surface, but they are never an “Aryan” or “European” etc. even a very small amount of jewish DNA is enough gradually transform its carrier into a jew-serving monster. This is why they try to mingle with other groups and hide amongst them-to “recruit” new members by infecting them with their DNA. The Jew is a virus, a cancer of this planet. Legally mandated separation is a key first step toward a cure, ie the Nuremberg Laws.
1) Sorry,but I can’t help seeing in the photo of Hayek the face of a typical Jew : the big curved nose,the black beady eyes and then that typical EXPRESSION on his face!(a combination of smarts,humour,melancholia and a pseudo submissive unctuous “friendliness” that is so typical of the Tribe).Surely he must have a Jewish NESHAMAH,whether by accident or by some still undiscovered Jewish admixture among his ancestors.This is the type of face you might see behind the counter of any Jewish diamond shop,whether in Jerusalem or New York.
2) The family Sheen,man,wife and children could easily pass as Spaniards (20% of whom have Berber or Jewish blood anyway).
3) It has been found that Geert Wilders has both Jewish and Indonesian blood and that his wife is an Hungarian Jewess.Wilders has not only spent time at an Israeli moshav,he has visited that country many times.The Dutch authorities grew suspicious by his regular visits to the Israeli embassy.One of the major figures on his party list appeared to be a Jewish MOSSAD AGENT and was on discovery removed.Wilders is entirely a creation of neo-con Jews in order to steer emerging WN in Europe into an anti-Islam,pro-Israel but NON-RACIALIST direction,IOW : good for Jews.
I hired help to get my ancestry done by a professional. Ask for double-documents verification of paper document relationships. Then I did my genetics at a couple of the cheaper sites. The nomenclature in genetics keeps changing, or more optimistically — evolving, and these were helpful, even inspiring, while relieving anxieties about a possible jew ancestor in the deep past. One of the positive outcomes of bothering to do all this — it can become overly engrossing, is the reflective judgement gained from recalling possible crypto-jews presenting in ‘whiteface’ in past social settings. This has led me to think and use the terminology Europid and, if necessary, Europoid — as a clear way to denote crypto-jew in whiteface.
In agreement with this article, I am not wild about the terms Aryan or merely White, except perhaps on very informal terms, as racial descriptors. Quirks aside, although they are wisely condemned, hollyrude movie characters can be useful practice fodder for recognizing a jew in whiteface; or ever more craftily, a white actor presenting Europoid behaviour. This forte-da double game is constantly flipping back and forth in cool media, and it is possible to treat it as sample source of observable traits. Periodicity in cinema more widely disguises and positions the glamorization of jews in whiteface, and Europids in negative Orientalist behaviour roles differently.
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.