Jews and Aryans—indeed, Jews and Gentiles—do not think alike. Psychologically and morally, Jews are radically different from other peoples. Jews are correct in recognizing that the first and most important division between human groups is not black and white or any other racial category, but Jew versus Gentile. Everything else is secondary. There is a profound sense in which all Gentiles are human beings, while Jews are not. Or, to state the matter from an ultra-Orthodox perspective: Gentiles of every race, including even the most obsequious philo-Semites, are beasts, while Jews are semi-divine beings animated by a soul.
Virtually all Jews are acutely conscious of the huge gulf that separates them from the rest of mankind, placing them outside its circle. Hardly any non-Jews are. The keen realization of this difference and its implications for racial survival is restricted to a tiny Gentile minority—a de facto elite.
Fritz Lenz, a German geneticist and anthropologist before, during, and after the Nazi era, possessed such awareness. He maintained that although Jews are unique in physical appearance, it is their mental characteristics that really set them apart.
Citing examples to support his thesis, he said it was possible “to recognize the literary work of a Jew (scientific work included) by the way in which the thoughts are developed and by the method of expression.” (Thorleif Boman’s Hebrew Thought Compared with Greek appears to embody a similar outlook in its title.)
In an attack upon psychologist Kevin MacDonald, an American critic of Jewish power, the Jewish Studies Department at California State University, Long Beach quoted Lenz as writing in 1941:
[A]s important as the external features for their evaluation is the lineage of individuals. A blond Jew is also a Jew. Yes, there are Jews who have most of the external features of the Nordic race, but who nevertheless display Jewish mental tendencies. The legislation of the National Socialist state therefore properly defines a Jew not by external race characteristics, but by descent.
Hopefully the quotation and translation are accurate. Note that Lenz’s assertion was deployed to tar MacDonald even though he had referred to an entirely different point made by Lenz.
The use of the unrelated quote was purely polemical and propagandistic. Jews use this technique all the time. The purpose is to dishonestly incorporate by reference everything Lenz ever wrote (and, in all probability, some things he never wrote, but which were ascribed to him by Allied/Communist intelligence agents, prosecutors, propagandists, Jewish polemicists, post-War academics, and journalists) and then slyly cherry-pick and indirectly attribute to MacDonald any “damaging” statements the authors choose.
Such behavior is itself an attribute of Jewish thinking. It is dishonest and unprincipled because the technique is never applied to Jews and others on the Left, as it easily could be with devastating effect.
It is informative that Jews assume—correctly, it appears—that high-IQ Gentiles will unquestioningly swallow the ploy without critical evaluation. Probably the gullible target audience, no matter its “intelligence,” is entirely unaware of the manipulation. As a consequence, Lenz’s unrelated statement is subtly transmuted into MacDonald’s position in the minds of readers—along with Hitler’s “eugenic” elimination of the unfit and Nazi resettlement policy in the East for good measure! It is a sophisticated psychological deception. Such people aren’t objective scholars. “Scholarship” for them is just another arena for racial warfare.
Years ago I read the following statement, attributed to an anonymous criminal defense attorney not otherwise identified, and immediately thought: “Jewish.”
I don’t feel bad that a black person who couldn’t possibly get a decent job, who couldn’t possibly earn a decent living—I feel bad that somebody got murdered, yea, but I think it’s separable—what happened to the victim and what you do with the defendant because of it. I think those are mutually exclusive. . . . I feel that [the black killer] was probably justified. He was robbing a store, you know. If he had a job, he wouldn’t have had to rob a store. If he had been a businessman, he could have embezzled, you know, and you don’t have to shoot people while you’re embezzling, you know. No, I don’t feel bad, even if he got out on the street. (Quoted in Thomas Marvell, Appellate Courts and Lawyers, 1978, p. 58)
To this day I don’t know whether the speaker was Jewish, yet am virtually certain he was. The thought structure fairly shouts it.
Do you think I’m wrong?
Compare the speaker’s subtle, unusual, immoral reasoning with that of a known Jewish attorney in Germany c. 1986, whose anti-white animus is even more explicit:
I have an inexplicable sympathy for German criminals. I’ve never been analyzed, but I’m sure a psychiatrist would have a field day with me. What I like best of all is defending real criminals, all those thieves, murderers, swindlers, the worse the better. I like these types and their perversions. The nastier the better. Everything that does not spell decent German I find appealing, and I’d do anything in my power to defend these types. I certainly don’t lack clients. Word has gotten around in certain circles that I’m a good defense lawyer. . . .
I would defend the worst crooks, regardless of whether they were able to pay me or not. My parents also approve of what I’m doing, especially my father. . . . They’re members of the Jewish Community but they’re not very religious. Still, all their friends are Jews, including many who don’t belong to the Community. (Peter Sichrovsky, Strangers in Their Own Land: Young Jews in Germany and Austria Today , 1986, pp. 14–15.)
Sichrovsky, a journalist and former member of the European Parliament from Austria who conducted the interview, is Jewish.
The depth of the hatred Jews harbor for whites, and the extent of their social power, is impossible for most Aryans to comprehend in the absence of honest information. Anyway, they’d rather not think about it.
As previously noted, Jews are acutely aware of the facts Lenz drew attention to. Writing about what she called “the ‘hidden language’ of Diaspora culture,” Glenda Abramson, editor of The Blackwell Companion to Jewish Culture: From the Eighteenth Century to the Present  (1989), wrote in the book’s preface:
The Jewish artist, writer, or scholar . . . represents concerns and convictions which are not overtly Judaic but which have come to be most closely associated with Judaism or Jewishness . . . More than 200 contributors [to the Companion] have written thousands of words on the evidence of Jewishness even in the least candidly Jewish works, and have demonstrated that Jewishness does not necessarily rest in obvious iconography or imagery, but in patterns of thinking and seeing, in certain distinct and repeated themes and topics [emphasis added], and even in an aggressive absence of acknowledgement of Jewishness. Diaspora creativity conceals the reality of Jewish communication in a kind of code which can be deciphered by those with the appropriate historical and cultural tools. The code incorporates the internal Jewish attitudes to non-Jewish society, to non-Jews, to social systems, to religion, to Jews themselves, which are rarely explicitly articulated, but are displaced into other themes and ideologies. (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, pp. x–xi.)
Note that Abramson explicitly acknowledges the existence of coded Jewish communications: “the ‘hidden language’ of Diaspora culture,” “Jewish communication in a kind of code which can be deciphered by those with the appropriate historical and cultural tools.” This code exists, and can be cracked by Aryans with the fortitude to do so.
In 1988 filmmaker John Carpenter wrote and directed a low-budget sci-fi film called They Live that many racialist viewers correctly perceived as an allegory of Jewish power and Gentile collaboration. This was not Carpenter’s intent. In his muddled vision he was attacking Reaganite conservatives. The most charitable thing that can be said is that he badly missed his mark and hit the Jews instead.
As an aside, I have to mention Carpenter’s hilarious but suspenseful first film, Dark Star (1974), about four young spaced-out astronauts whose mission is to blow up unstable planets with nuclear bombs. Carpenter produced, wrote, and directed the film, and composed the musical score. It was shot on a shoestring budget, as evidenced by the fact that the space alien was a painted beach ball with plastic feet. A malevolent little monster it was, too.
In They Live, malicious space aliens have taken over Earth, whose clueless inhabitants are secretly exploited with the collaboration of conscienceless human elites who profit handsomely from their partnership with the alien overlords. These are the Warren Buffets, FDRs, LBJs, Edward Kennedys, and Quentin Tarantinos. The aliens are disguised as human beings, and can only be seen in their true form with the aid of special sunglasses (analogous to the “tools” necessary to decipher Abramson’s “code”). With the sunglasses on, the aliens are rendered completely and hideously visible, and bear no resemblance to humans—even the selfish collaborators—whatsoever. The everyday world becomes an unsettlingly different place. An interesting feature of the glasses is that they can only be worn for short periods of time because they induce terrific headaches, as if reality were too painful to contemplate for long.
Lev Kopelev—who, being Jewish rather than German or Slavic, and Communist rather than Nazi, was never prosecuted for his crimes—died in Cologne, Germany at the ripe age of 85 in 1997. He played an active role in the starvation of millions of families in the Ukraine in 1932–33. “I took part in this myself,” he later wrote, “scouring the countryside, searching for the hidden grain . . . I emptied the old folks’ storage chests.” (While the death of millions was being accurately reported by Malcolm Muggeridge in London’s Guardian, the Jewish New York Times lied to its elite audience: “Russians Hungry, But Not Starving,” p. 13 headline, March 31, 1933.)
In the terrible spring of 1933 I saw people dying from hunger. . . . And corpses . . . I saw all of this and did not go out of mind [sic] or commit suicide. Nor did I curse those who had sent me out to take away the peasants’ grain in the winter . . . Nor did I lose my faith.
With the rest of my generation I firmly believed that the ends justified the means. Our great goal was the universal triumph of Communism, and for the sake of that goal everything was permissible—to lie, to steal, to destroy hundreds of thousands and even millions of people, all those who were hindering our work or could hinder it, everyone who stood in the way. . . . I believed because I wanted to believe. (The Education of a True Believer [New York: Harper & Row, 1980], pp. 11–12, 235, quoted in Robert Conquest, The Harvest of Sorrow: Soviet Collectivization and the Terror-Famine [New York: Oxford University Press, 1986], p. 233)
Now their crusade is to physically extinguish our people, to bash “the dead white males, and the live ones, and the females, too, until the social construct known as ‘the white race’ is destroyed—not ‘deconstructed,’ but destroyed” (“eliminating the kulaks as a class” meant killing them). Why? Because we’re “the cancer of human history.”
As with the handful of embattled rebels in They Live who alone see the aliens for what they are, only a minority of whites today see the Jews for what they are. An inchoate minority possessing this rare capability must be reached and motivated to act before positive social change and racial survival can become genuine possibilities, because the Jewish role is the key role in the destructive process.
Some people reading this are prospective members of this de facto elite. You were chosen by the vast gallery of your ancestors stretching backward in time. You know, deep down, that it is man’s job to understand, to face the truth, to shoulder responsibility.
You can read the hidden code of Jewish power, assume the mantle of responsibility, and help guide your people to safety—if you so choose. Do not waste precious time on comfortable but irrelevant hobbyhorses like so many others do.
You will eventually discover that life is extremely short. Even when it’s “long” it’s short. And long includes a period of decline. Average life expectancy matters as well. Wikipedia frequently provides subjects’ age at death; when not given it can easily be calculated. Habitually make a mental note of it. The same with obituaries. Observe how many people check out sooner than you’d think—whose tour of duty is comparatively short. The Trickster fools us all.
Make your life count.
 Appendix to CSULB Jewish Studies Program’s Statement on Kevin MacDonald: Evidentiary Support , p. 4. The Lenz statement has apparently been translated from the German by someone associated with the Jewish group. The quotation and its German citation have been inserted verbatim into Wikipedia‘s entry on Lenz without attribution to the partisan Jewish Studies report from which it was presumably drawn. (The department wouldn’t copy it from Wikipedia, would it?) I would prefer a more objective source for the quotation and translation, but in the present social climate one is not available.