Counter-Currents
1,392 words
So, did you hear the one about the Jewish comedian?
The joke I am about to tell is probably the most sophisticated joke I have ever heard. It is so breathtakingly multifaceted, that it may even lose some of its humor as its punch line keeps bouncing in the squash court of your mind after it’s told. And that’s okay. It’s not the funniest Jewish joke in the world, but it may just be the greatest — and for more than one reason.
Often, a joke requires an inversion of some kind in which the listener is expecting one thing from one aspect of life and receives something else entirely from a different aspect of life. Further, the joke must maintain a superficial continuity throughout, despite the obvious dissonance produced by its inversion. In sticking with the theme of Jewish humor, here is a fairly mediocre example:
Did you hear about the new Jewish Car? Not only does it stop on a dime, but it picks it up!
The double meaning of the word “dime” (i.e., something small vs. unit of money) keeps the continuity, while we all know the joke moves from something innocent (cars) to something not so innocent (making fun of Jews). The joke, of course, is not very clever since it relies on a hackneyed expression and a hackneyed stereotype for its punchline, which a fairly knowledgeable person can see coming. Funny if you’re in fourth grade and your Jewish friend just snubbed you.
A better example would be this, which might be the funniest Jewish joke of all time:
A Jew is lugging a big suitcase on a train. He approaches a man and says, “Excuse me, sir, are you anti-Semitic?”
The man responds, “Of course not! I have tremendous respect for the Jewish people.”
The Jew then thanks him and moves to the next car where he finds a woman. He asks her, “Excuse me, Ma’am, are you anti-Semitic?”
The woman responds, “Of course not! Some of my dearest friends are Jews.”
The Jew then thanks her and moves from car to car asking the same question of people and receiving essentially the same answer until he reaches the caboose. Thereupon, he finds an old, grizzled, poorly-dressed man who appears to be in foul humor. He asks, “Excuse me, sir, are anti-Semitic?”
The old man glares at him with a jaundiced eye and declares, “Hell, yeah, I’m anti-Semitic! I hate those damn kikes!”
The Jew responds, “Ah, finally, an honest man. Listen, would you mind keeping an eye on my suitcase while I go use the toilet?”
You can buy It’s Okay to Be White: The Best of Greg Johnson here.
So the inversion here is quite clever — and it is multifaceted. The Jew seems to be interested in something important (i.e., anti-Semitism) when all he really wants to do is take a leak. Further, the joke props up anti-Semitism as something bad, only to redeem it in the end though its honesty. And the suitcase is the maguffin that binds it all together. The joke isn’t even mean-spirited. Anyone with a little experience in life can enjoy it. Brilliant.
But that’s not the joke I wanted to share with you today. The joke I want to share with you today — that is, the Jewish comedian joke — is stratospherically more sophisticated than the Jew-on-a-Train joke. It is probably more sophisticated than Jew-on-a-Train by the same order that the Jew-on-a-Train is to the Jewish car joke. That is, whoever wrote this joke has mastered the quantum physics of comedy. His Jew-fu is off the charts. He’s like a circumcised Bruce Lee in the Matrix with eyes in the back of his head shooting lasers through his yarmulke. But more than for technical reasons, this joke I am about to tell, resonates. I don’t mean (((resonates))). I mean, like all great jokes, it really does resonate meaning. It underscores a profound truth about Western Civilization. In fact, it is so profound that every self-identifying white person should know this joke.
Here it is:
A Jewish comedian gets up on stage and announces that he is going to tell three gentile jokes.
“First gentile joke!” he says. “A young gentile man is getting ready to visit his mother for dinner. But at the last minute, he remembers that he had made other plans and couldn’t go. So he calls her up and says, ‘Mom, I’m sorry. I know you’ve been cooking all day, and you haven’t seen me in a long time, but I can’t see you for dinner tonight.’
“And the gentile mom cheerfully says. . . ‘Okay.’”
“Second gentile joke!” he says. “A gentile man walks into a clothing store and finds a suit he likes. He asks the salesman how much it costs and the salesman says, ‘$200.’
The gentile man smiles and says, ‘I’ll take it!’
“Third gentile joke! A gentile businessman is walking down the street and sees a friend who asks, ‘Hey, how’s business?’ And the gentile businessman says, ‘Great! Thanks for asking!’”
Now, if you don’t get the joke, that’s okay. Norm MacDonald didn’t get it either when Jerry Seinfeld told it to him. Far be it for me to instruct Seinfeld on how to tell jokes, but he really botched this one. He told only the third part of it, which relies on the least-known Jewish stereotype of the three, and he didn’t realize that the joke only works when told explicitly by a Jew, or, more specifically, a Jewish comedian — and to a presumably Jewish audience. Yes, Jerry Seinfeld is a Jewish comedian, but he wasn’t calling attention to that fact when telling the joke, which is crucial.
I did say the joke was sophisticated, didn’t I?
Here is the joke performed onstage by Rabbi Bob Alper. He may be the author of the joke, I don’t know.
Now, for those who still don’t get it, allow me to explain. In this joke, we are transported to a world in which Jews are the majority and can afford to make fun of gentiles (whom we know are really whites). Jews do this for the same reason whites make fun of Jews in the real world — they violate our sense of normalcy. Only, in this inverted world of the Jewish comedian, it’s Jewish normalcy which gets violated. And what Jewish norms are we talking about? Jewish mothers who pour on the guilt with their children and Jewish men who haggle over petty amounts of money and constantly gripe and kvetch regarding their affairs — three stereotypes that most Jews will happily cop to. In the inverted Jew world, this is all perfectly normal behavior. So when someone (i.e., a white person) violates these norms by behaving in what we know to be a perfectly reasonable manner, Jews will laugh at him for being abnormal.
But not really. In reality, we are laughing at the Jews who are laughing at the whites who are behaving abnormally when they are really behaving normally because it is really the Jews who are abnormal and don’t have the self-awareness to realize it. Only, because it’s a Jew who’s telling the joke in the first place (Alper and Seinfeld), they kind of do. Get it?
Anyway, the takeaway here is not merely how sophisticated a joke can be and still crack a smile. The takeaway is also that white people own what’s normal. We are the sane people in the room. We set the standard for what is reasonable, polite, and proper behavior. Others may violate these norms and laugh at themselves while doing so, but the fact remains that without a white benchmark, Jews and other non-whites would have a much lower norm to deviate from: their own.
This is one reason non-whites are so desperate to come to and stay in traditionally white nations. Whites may not be the funniest people in the world, but at least we’re normal.
If you want to support Counter-Currents, please send us a donation by going to our Entropy page and selecting “send paid chat.” Entropy allows you to donate any amount from $3 and up. All comments will be read and discussed in the next episode of Counter-Currents Radio, which airs every weekend on DLive.
Don’t forget to sign up for the twice-monthly email Counter-Currents Newsletter for exclusive content, offers, and news.
28 comments
my fav is circa 80’s. told to me by a jewish acquaintance in NC, who loved decorating Christmas trees (the WH once) and yearly in his home, and was a rabid fan of Smithfield ham………..
What’s ‘jewish’ for trust me?…. FU.
What’s ‘jewish’ for FU?… trust me.
There is a very nice discovery about how whiteness is a social construct that enforces the idea of normalcy by rejecting other cultures, but you had to go and make it anti-semitic. Racist fuck.
Shut up, Yeshua.
And of course whites who embrace other cultures rather than reject them are accused of cultural appropriation by p.c. lefties like yourself.
oyyyy gewalt! the truth hurts, doesn’t it, schlomo
My favorite is something like: “different religions have different metaphysical rules for when a human being is conceived. For example in Catholicism it’s when the sperm meets the egg. Then bam! a human life is formed, hence Catholics take abortion very seriously. In other religions a foetus becomes a human later, for instance, in Judaism it’s when they achieve their medical or legal degree…”
The humor comes from understanding how competitive and status conscious Jewish families can be.
Jackie Mason’s whole spiel is ‘The Jew does this, the Gentile does that” … I must confess a guilty pleasure. Perhaps it is the way he tells them.
As a lady of German and Anglo-Saxon ancestry and heritage, I have always stopped to pick up a dime off the pavement when I see one. It is an intelligent trait of people who are ‘close’ with their money — some would say ‘close-fisted’ — and I am convinced that Jewish people picked up the trait from savvy Germans and Scots when they moved northward in their wanderings, and observed the White people of Northern Europe. They have us to thank for their many millions.: me and Benjamin Franklin — “A Penny Saved is a Penny Earned”. I have no explanation as to why we have poor White people — they must have been engrossed in their cell-phones when their parents presented the lecture on “Work Hard and Save Your Money”. I heard it so many times that I couldn’t ignore it, and there were no cell-phones in my youth.
While whites set standards for civilizational success and, in some respects, behavior, the phrase white people are normal doesn’t feel right. At least not the white people who have dominated our culture for the last several generations. They are the weirdest human beings the world has ever seen.
Yes, whites are uniquely weird, and this has now been fully established by Joseph Henrich in his book, The WEIRDest People of the World, about which I will be writing a series of commentaries very soon.
I will check it out. I recently bought a copy of The Uniqueness of Western Civilization but haven’t started it yet. Still working through Kevin MacDonald’s book.
I will listen to anyone who attempts to diagnose this weirdness because we have to understand it before we can fix it. And if we don’t fix it the future is bleak.
I suspect it has the same origin as whites’ astronomically superior creativity in all areas of life. Flip sides of the same genetic coin: whites are unusual in creating imaginative works of art, philosophical theories, inventions – and so we also get stuck with a lot of real weirdoes. I’ve heard something like this from a female Asian friend who has dated many white men: “There are so many more interesting white guys than Chinese, who are so boring and alike.”
Whites, alas, are possibly too individualistic for our own racial survival.
“Flip sides of the same genetic coin: whites are unusual in creating imaginative works of art, philosophical theories, inventions – and so we also get stuck with a lot of real weirdoes.” I think that’s right.
“Individualism” is an issue, as it suggests a neutrality, or intellectual rejection, regarding racial interests. And it seems unique to whites. But some whites aren’t just individualistic. They actively denigrate themselves and their race in favor of other races. That ethnomasochism is the really weird part.
Legend has it that copper wire was conceived when a Jew and a Scot were fighting over a penny
That’s not just funny but quite revealing. It’s a common jest about both Jews and Scots that they are niggardly but whereas a joke about a Jew being parsimonious could see you lose your job it’s still (just about) acceptable to target Caledonians.
Here’s a good ‘un . . .
What did the Jewish pedo say to the little girl? “Wanna buy some candy?”
Let’s not gloss over the fact that Norm Mcdonald is about a trillion times funnier off the cuff than Seinfeld will ever be. Case in point, this exchange:
JS: how much do you make doing this?
NM: zero
JS: cmon, you gotta make SOMETHING!…no comedian shows up for nothing.
NM: uhhhh…Gentile
If you didn’t bust a gut on that one, (and one or two more earlier in the exchange), your funny bone is broken.
The occasional binge of Norm videos is a habit worth cultivating.
“I say six-million, he says six thousand, you probably say somewhere in between.”
1. The Jew on the train joke is hilarious.
2. Normalcy is very relative. Whites are normal in White societies but everyone else thinks Whites are bizarre. Even within some White nations there’s big variations on what is normal. As for Jews, they are are outcasts everywhere they live and that plays a huge part in their humor.
Also, I doubt many non-Whites really want to live in White countries. For the most part they are here because we bring them here.
What’s up with Muslims naming their kids Mohammed? Christians don’t name their kids Jesus. Buddhists don’t name their kids Buddha. Jews don’t name their kids Satan.
The Holy Prophet has said:
“It is the responsibility of every father to choose a good name for his child.”
And the best of the best name is Mohammed.
That’s why Mohammed is the most common name for boys in Norway and other European countries – it happens when the Muslim population are approx 10%. So even if our government’s with many means statistically hide the numbers of muslims – the yearly statistic about the most popular names among newborns can give a clue.
Hear about the time Mohammed’s wife called him a pedophile?
Mohammed responded “Pedophile is a pretty big word for a 9 year old!”
Spencer Quinn is implicitly making two crucial points in this post. The first is that whites are “normal”, more precisely, the “norm” of human existence, and second, that this status is objective and not contingent. That is, not only are we the standard against which others define themselves, but universal and immutable standards actually exist, and we whites are closer to those standards than are other peoples. This is a very bold claim, but a true one, I think. I’m not sure why this should be so, but it seems very important if it is. It means that whites are closer to ultimate reality than other peoples, that we are not only the human benchmark in a relativistic sense, one arising from the vagaries of historical development, with whites having taken the civilizational-evolutionary lead for so long that our status as humanity’s “first” has come to seem ‘natural’ instead of historically accidental, but that we are the ideal human type absolutely and ontologically.
Consider the word “man”. What, or whom, does that word conjure up? For me, I would think of a white man. Why wouldn’t I think of an Asian or African? Is it because a) I’m white; or b) that so much of the world’s intellectual and cultural production – and sheer history-making dynamism – has come from whites that I/we are conditioned to assume that the modal human is white, as when we hear “NBA player” we naturally envision a black man (and thus that if most of the world’s progress had come from Orientals, they would take psychological pride of place as the “default humans”); or c) that a Platonic ideal type called “Man” in some way exists, and whites collectively really are closer to it than are other races?
I sense there are some very deep philosophical issues lurking about here.
It may have something to do with beauty. There may be a universal ideal: straight noses, deep-set eyes in men and larger eyes in women, lips a certain shape, luxurious hair on women, and of course the overall body shape and color and texture of the skin. The ancient Greeks were probably on to something.
That would not make Whites the norm. That would make Whites the ideal.
Not a huge fan of most traditional Jewish comedians (think Jackie Mason, Billy Crystal, Gilda Radner). A few were/are pretty good (Rodney Dangerfield, David Brenner, Richard Klein). Woody Allen might be the best of them in my opinion. His early stand-up was quite good and he is just such a stereotypical “nebbish” in his films that I have to laugh.
Of course, Gilbert Gottfried doing Holocaust jokes on the Howard Stern show in the late 90s might be the best. I’m sure both would rather these segments not be brought to light. An indignant Jewish lady called in to say Gottfried does this in real life. At a dinner party she said Gilbert would say things like “Oh, this soup is really good. I bet your parents didnt eat this good in Auschwitz.”
Not sure if it’s a California joke or a Jewish joke. It’s not even a joke, more a witticism. It was tossed off as part of a comment on something else by the esteemed commenter/blogger Porter: “…California, which has only two Jewish senators…”
An old Bernard Manning classic:
Two Jews are walking down the street and a gang of skindheads suddenly appear from around a corner. They are too close to cross the street.
“Oy vey! I think we’re in trouble!” says one.
“I think you’re right!” says the other before producing a wad of cash from his jacket pocket and handing it to his companion.
“Here’s that $500 I owe you”.
Two jews walk past a church. On the marquis reads” $10 paid for converting” The Jew on the left tells the one on the right” let’s go in and get $10 each” the jew on the left declines but reluctantly agreed to wait outside if it doesn’t take too long. When the jew who went in returns, the outside jew ask him how it went.” Okay I guess” is his reply.
Did you get the money? Says the outside jew?
Is that all you people think about?replies his companion
“In this joke, we are transported to a world in which Jews are the majority and can afford to make fun of gentiles (whom we know are really whites). Jews do this for the same reason whites make fun of Jews in the real world — they violate our sense of normalcy. Only, in this inverted world of the Jewish comedian, it’s Jewish normalcy which gets violated. And what Jewish norms are we talking about?
…In reality, we are laughing at the Jews who are laughing at the whites who are behaving abnormally when they are really behaving normally because it is really the Jews who are abnormal and don’t have the self-awareness to realize it. Only, because it’s a Jew who’s telling the joke in the first place (Alper and Seinfeld), they kind of do. Get it? Anyway, the takeaway here is not merely how sophisticated a joke can be and still crack a smile. The takeaway is also that white people own what’s normal. We are the sane people in the room. ”
This is an interesting article with a good deal of truth. But Spencer Quinn isn’t getting the complete joke. He surmises that The Joke assumes that Jews are in the MAJORITY, but that misses the essence of Jewish Power. Jews don’t need to be in the majority to gain power and influence over others. After all, Jews have always been a small minority in the US, but they still managed to invert the value system of mainstream society. Take ‘gay marriage’ and globo-homo madness. Consider all the post-Christian churches flying the ‘gay’ flag, not least due to Jewish influence. Consider all those seeming strait-laced middle class people turning out in huge crowds to cheer for ‘gay pride’ parades as if sodomy is next to godliness. Consider all the ‘normal’ white middle class people in the suburbs who kneel down to BLM and weep about the Magic Negro(a trope spread by Jewish Hollywood). So, The Joke doesn’t necessarily transport us to a world where Jews are the majority because Jews don’t need great numerical strength to gain great influence over goyim, especially whites of Northern European lineage. Mitt Romney is a very normal kind of guy — Mormonism is a strange kind of Christian cult, but its prescribed lifestyle is of the 1950s FATHER KNOWS BEST variety — , but he assents to whatever crazy scheme cooked up by Jews. And all those firebrand Evangelicals have little to say but ‘Muh Israel’ and seem to be warming up to ‘gay marriage’.
Another thing. Jewish Jokes were most likely created by Jews themselves and, in that sense, were not really about whites laughing at Jews. The cultural fingerprints on Jewish Jokes are similar to those on ‘Polack Jokes’, nearly all of which were concocted by Jews. Also, Jews found it therapeutic to laugh at themselves. Woody Allen and Mel Brooks were masters of comedy that poked fun at Jews. Still, Jews laughed along because the jokes mocked goyim(more) along with the Jews. At any rate, as long as Jews were the entertainers and making others laugh, they were in control. Don Rickles made fun of Jews along with everyone else, but the fact is he was the commander on stage whereas the audience were mere passive participants. So, even when whites are laughing at Jews via Jewish Jokes, the chances are the jokes were created by Jews, and that means, even when whites find Jews to be ridiculous, it is on Jewish terms because Jews have the superior wit to come up with jokes that produce belly-laughs among stiffy & stuffy, dimwit and/or thick-skulled goyim.
Spencer Quinn seems to believe that The Joke betrays Jewish Neurosis in contrast to healthy White Normalcy. Thus, contrary to Jewish conceits, The Joke is really on them because, if anything, it reveals that whites are sane, sound, and normal whereas Jews are gross, obnoxious, and thorny. That is surely true to some extent, but he is overlooking the finer points of The Joke. It suggests at the unique source of Jewish Power, a combination of egotism and ethnic unity. Generally, the assumption is that a people must surrender or suppress their egos in order to work well with others in a Trust Society. They must prioritize the common good over individual pride. Consider Italians vs Nordics. Italians are more emotional and brash in their egotism, thereby lacking in trust and unity. In contrast, Nordics are less expressive and more conscientious. Less egotism means more trust and greater social order. Japanese lack egotism but maintain an orderly society where people are mindful of one another.
But Jews are strange. On the one hand, they are emotional, expressive, and pushy like Italians or Greeks. They are full of egotism. And yet, they are also extremely talented at cooperation and networking over great distances. Jewish Power wouldn’t be what it is without the aptitude to work together. Yet, egotism usually works against group cooperation. So, how come Jews are so egotistical and yet so collectively effective in amassing power, wealth, and influence?
It seems Jews came upon an odd formula of egotism that translated into ethnic trust among Jews. This probably owes to the Covenant, the spiritual pact that informed every Jew regardless of wealth or station that he is equally dear in the eyes of God. Thus, every Jew, rich or poor, feels special as the chosen child of God. On one level, it is an egotistic view of life: God chose Me. And yet, it is an egotism rounded and smoothed by humility and sense of togetherness. After all, even though one may feel individual pride in being one of the Chosen, he is nevertheless a servant of God, the Lord of All. Furthermore, each and every Jew is Chosen, and that means each Jew shares in the egotism. So, Jewish egotism is both individual and shared. This perhaps makes Jews a unique people. Thus, unlike most peoples who must choose between egotism and unity, Jews can have egotism and unity. Jews don’t have to surrender egotism to have unity and trust among Jews. Jews don’t have to surrender unity in order to have pride of ego. Jews can have both.
Now, Northern Europeans are another unique people in a way. Southern Italians and Greeks are peoples who’ve chosen egotism over unity. They are often loud, brash, and aggressive, but this means they hardly trust one another in any meaningful fashion. In contrast, Japanese have been known for order, trust, and cooperation, but it also means they are weak in individualism and egotism.
In contrast, Northern European types, especially the Anglos, found a way to be both individualistic and cooperative. Traditional British Society was known for manners and liberty. One was mindful of the social good and niceties but also stood on his own two feet and believed in individuality, privacy, and property. And yet, in order to create this balance, the Anglos crafted an individualism without egotism and cooperation without collectivism. So, even as one’s individuality was held precious, it had to be ever mindful not to trample on other individualities. And even though social cooperation was key, there wasn’t a powerful passion for tribal unity. The result is a mild individualism and moderate cooperation. It was a pretty good formula for modernity. But it also exposed fatal chinks-in-the-armor to Jews who are about egotistical individualism and collective tribal passion.
So, even though The Joke, on the one hand, presents white people as normal and balanced, it also hints as to why they lost out to Jews even though far larger in number. Whites have no real fight in them. A big animal without fighting spirit can retreat from or even lose to a smaller animal with fighting spirit. In The Joke, every white person comes across as yielding or detached. So, when the son tells the mother that he won’t come for dinner, she doesn’t complain. She’d rather keep things calm and cool between them then press her case and demand he keep his promise. Or, maybe, despite familial ties, she is actually relieved that her son won’t visit because she prefers individual space than personal ties, i.e. she prefers it dry than wet. It’s an individuality without insistence. In contrast, Jews are nothing without insistence and persistence. Nothing comes to those who are yielding and assume “you can’t fight city hall.” One must fight city hall to the end and then even take over.
Furthermore, the Jewish Way is one of memory whereas the white way of ‘normalcy’ is one of amnesia. Jews have long remembered history as a non-stop struggle for survival, success, power, and domination. So, even when things go well for them, they don’t become like the hare(vis-a-vis the tortoise). They don’t take things for granted or rest on their laurels. They know their fortunes can vanish. History is a story of struggle. It hasn’t been ‘normal’ but nightmarish. And whites who are into the conceit of ‘normalcy’ have forgotten the lessons of history. After all, how was the US created? It was created through violent struggle and ruthless competition. It’s not like some ‘normal’ manna from heaven fell from the sky to provide for everyone. White people had to toil in the fields and factories to create a new nation. US was engaged in bloody wars to expand territory. Like other nations, US committed mass atrocities in war. For most of American History(and Western History), most people couldn’t take much for granted. Consider the millions that starved in Ireland. Consider the bloody wars that led to the rise of unified nation-states in Europe. Indeed, what we consider to be ‘normal'(aka middle class values and standards) took hold for the majority of people only after World War II when prosperity greatly expanded, and all of sudden, people in the West never had it so good. But it was something NEW, not something that Western Man had taken for granted across the eons. Indeed, postwar prosperity was ABNORMAL in the annals of history. And yet, so many white people became amnesiac and adopted modernity + prosperity as the end-all of history and life. La Dolce Vita. In earlier times, people felt compelled to see life as a struggle and obligation, like with George Bailey in IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE. He has family and there are needy people in Bedford Falls. So, he can’t just run off to do his thing. People relied on one another. It was with greatly expanded productivity and the rise of the welfare state(with Social Security perhaps being the most important) that people could be freer as individuals to pursue their own lifestyles. People became less reliant on one another. Retired people had social security and a host of government benefits. And with TV in every home, people felt less lonely as they could follow fantasy narratives on the Tube. There was nothing like this in the history of mankind. What we take for ‘normal’ is really a historical anomaly. So many people can live pretty well without struggle, without insistence. It made them complacent, apathetic, too ‘nice, even a bit decadent. They forgot that history has mostly been about struggle. Like in Charles Dickens. Even the so-called middle class back in those days often just scraped by. And as there were no safety nets, an affluent family could end up in the streets by a sudden twist of fate. In our world, Jews are the richest and most affluent. So, one would think they should take it easy and just be ‘nice’. But many of them are still in semi-paranoid mode. This makes them seem neurotic and extreme(and indeed many Jews are insufferable), but, on the positive side, Jews have not forgotten. They know the order and prosperity today can vanish, and History with a capital ‘H’ can return again. Also, didn’t the Wasps lose out to Jews precisely because they forgot about the nature of struggle and began to take their privilege and affluence for granted as ‘the normals’? They developed a country club mentality, and even though their children were raised to succeed, they weren’t instilled with hunger that drove their ancestors to power and greatness. America wasn’t created by people being ‘nice’ and ‘normal’. Rather, the white man was filled with hatred and wiped out the Red Man. And for most of US history, farmers and factory workers toiled from sunup to sundown. They were hard men driven by hunger and haunted by fears. It was about God, country, community, family, customs, and mutual reliance. Back then, family really mattered. If your mother spent hours cooking a meal, you better have a GOOD reason for skipping out. Blowing off your mother who stood over a hot stove all day would be no easy matter. It would not be ‘normal’. Things are different today because it’s so much more convenient than ever to buy and cook food. Indeed, many meals come pre-cooked. So, in our time, far less work goes into preparing a meal. And food is plentiful. But through most of history, food was never taken for granted. And a woman spent the whole day procuring the necessary ingredients for the family meal. That was the normal way for most of history. What we consider to be ‘normal’ in our time is abnormal in historical context.
As for the man who buys the suit with trust and without complaint, that also owes to social change under modern rules and regulation. For much of history, there was little trust because all you had to go on was the word of the seller. Before there was government regulation and enforcement of rule of law, there were so many snake oil salesmen who peddled poison as panacea all across America. P.T. Barnum said there’s a sucker born every minute. And before there was food inspection, one couldn’t be sure how something was processed. Many people got sick from eating bad food. It was with the rise of the regulatory state that most people became more trusting of products and services. The consumer came to be protected. Therefore, it’s not natural or normal to just trust people. Oftentimes, people do the right thing mainly due to the threat of fine and penalty, even imprisonment.
So, what does The Joke tell us? It offers a glimpse as to why Jews gained power over whites. Whites forgot history. In good times of peace and prosperity, they took the New Order as a kind of Ur-Normality when it was a rather unnatural and abnormal product of postwar prosperity. Against a people grown complacent and amnesiac, a people who’ve remained contentious and memory-based will win. Indeed, the best way for Jews to lose their power is to go the way of White Americans and just become ‘nice’ and ‘trusting’, or ‘normal’. Of course, whites wouldn’t be in the state they’re in IF they lived in an all-white world where everyone is ‘nice’. It’s like tortoises on an island have nothing to fear as long as egg-destroying rats don’t appear on the island. But the story of life, or evolution, teaches us that the survival or well-being of any organism can never be taken for granted. You never know when an invasive organism might pose a threat or when the environment might suddenly change. As long as white Americans opened the immigration gates to the wider world, they should have been more vigilant. And to be sure, white Americans once were, at least far more than today. They had fears of the strong savage Negro. They had anxieties about the Yellow Rise of Color. And during the westward expansion, whites had few illusions about the Red Man who could be savage and cruel. But whites were triumphant over a vast territory, the best and most fertile and resource-rich in the world. They forgot that they attained this triumph with much blood and toil, through much stiff competition(not least among whites themselves). Once things got well, they became ‘nice’ and assumed that the New Normal of Peace and Prosperity was here to stay forever as a given.
Jews were less likely to harbor such illusions. The concept of the Covenant made them feel special and Chosen through the ages. Their evolution as merchants and rabbis led to a feisty and radical personality. And their status as a minority in foreign lands always reminded them that nothing is forever. Things could be great one day, but tomorrow it could be exile or worse. In the movie EXCALIBUR, why does Merlin worry so much? Because he remembers, and the lessons of the past fill him with dark portents of the future. Meanwhile, most humans easily forget and take things merrily when times are good.
There are three kinds of animals. Wild ones with aggressive and difficult natures. Shaped by brutal nature, they are extremely anxious, fearful, and aggressive. Then, there are domesticated animals who make good companions or livestock for mankind. Whether dogs or cats in the home OR cows or pigs on the farm, they are easily manageable. While domesticated animals are easier to handle for man, this very quality makes them easily exploited by man. Even when mankind intends to kill millions of cows and pigs, they just go along without anxiety and suspicion to their slaughter. Both kinds of animals have advantages and disadvantages. Wild animals are well-suited for nature, but nature is brutal and dangerous. Due to their wild nature, they live apart from man, and that means they don’t enjoy the easier and more pleasant lives of cats and dogs. On the other hand, they aren’t exploited like cows and pigs, raised only to be slaughtered by the millions.
The third kind of animal is domesticated but bred to possess special traits that makes them, in certain respects, more formidable than man. Jews are like this third kind of animal. They are a civilized people, unlike black Africans or Australian Aborigines. They evolved to live in civilization. However, they were selected for special traits of high intelligence, egotism, and duality(& duplicity). Jews were bred for constructive contradiction. A tribal people who must wander around the world as ‘cosmopolitans’. But this contradiction goes back to the heart of Judaism: A religion with the universal God who chose one tribe over all others. Jews are the most adaptive and assimilationist people but also the most resilient and separate. Jews developed the most moralistic religion but mastered the art of radical immorality in dealing with goyim. Jews are extremely distrustful of goyim, but this shared distrust among Jews makes for trust among them. Even a capitalist Jew and communist Jew trust one another more than either trusts the goy ideological counterpart. In current America, blacks are like wild animals that are nearly impossible to domesticate. 200 yrs of slavery did little to weed out the savage gene. Whites are like domesticated dogs that are predictable and reliable. In the past, white dogs had to struggle and had some ‘hunt’ in them, but most of them are now complacent. Jews are like domesticated weasels or owls whose special traits were, if anything, magnified for maximum efficiency. They weren’t bred to be nice but to hunt, kill, and dominate.
Also, Spencer Quinn is wrong to see this as a white vs non-white(Jews included) thing. He writes:
“This is one reason non-whites are so desperate to come to and stay in traditionally white nations. Whites may not be the funniest people in the world, but at least we’re normal.”
It’s true enough that whites, especially those of Northern European stock, created the most livable societies, and it goes a long way to explain immigration patterns. But the more important lesson is that most non-whites are like whites in their tendency to forget and settle into the Norm of Niceness. Is it any wonder why deracination has spread so far and wide? Most Asians and Latin Americans in the US and Canada are just as clueless, faceless, and rootless as the whites. They lead the life of the Modern Consumer. Also, most non-whites are far less funny than whites. Mexico and China aren’t exactly comedy centrals, whereas the British and Italians have been among the funniest people in history. What most goyim have in common is the tendency to fall into the Normality Trap and grow complacent. (Blacks are the exception because they are so naturally savage and crazy. They belong in a category all their own.) Does this mean that we should be as neurotic and nasty as the Jews? No, but there is something to learn from their culture of critique and anxiety as there is no End of History. History goes on, and it’s an endless struggle. Francis Fukuyama, upon the end of the Cold War, envisioned a future of eternal normality with the triumph of individualism, democracy, and free markets. Apparently, the good and right ideas won, and rest of history would be about the spread and implementation of those ideas. But in fact, power doesn’t work that way. The complacent will always lose to the contentious.
Another lesson to take from The Joke is that the Normal lack the fire. They range from lukewarm to cool. They would rather be part of the norm and not ruffle any feathers than boldly envision and insist on something new and different, hopefully better. In The Joke, the whites are yielding and mainly want to get along without stirring up contention or controversy. It makes for a nice and calm order among their own kind but no great personality to re-imagine society. It explains why so many whites fell under the sway of Jewish Influence. For good or ill, Jews with stronger personalities think bigger. They think beyond the normal and staid. Thus, whites are impressed by such power of vision. After all, it was abnormal Stanley Kubrick who impressed normal Ron Howard, not the other way around. So, while it makes for a pleasant society when most people are nice-and-normal, the people who change the trajectory of history will always be a people-apart. If whites don’t want to fall under the sway of Jews, they must create powerful personalities of their own, the ones with goy-chutzpah. (Jews feared Germans up to World War I and hate Donald Trump because, unlike most other Northern European types, the Germans up to Hitler and the Don have big personalities to rival those of Jews.) Why did so many ‘normal’ whites fall under the sway of not only Jews but of homo and Negroes? Homos are nuts but audacious in their vanity and self-celebration and Negroes break down normal boundaries and excite white folks.
Those smug with ‘normalcy’ will lose to those who smuggle the secrets of power.
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.
Paywall Access
Edit your comment