Counter-Currents
A Yiddish election poster from Ukraine in 1917 which reads, in Yiddish, “Vote for the United Jewish Socialist Workers’ Party.”
5,861 words
Introduction
When approaching the Jewish Question, a beginner should keep in mind that the ultimate goal of his investigation should be the normalization of the white and Jewish populations. Normalization, in this case, means a state of affairs in which one population does not take undue advantage of the other. A utopian goal, perhaps, but one that would most likely reap tangible rewards the closer both populations come to achieving it.
How are white-Jewish relations today not normalized? If you ask Jonathan Greenblatt or any other spokesmen of diaspora Jewish interests, they would tell you that relations today are normalized. Diaspora Jews in America (or the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, France, Russia, or anywhere else you may find them) are, by and large, law-abiding, patriotic, and productive citizens whose interests perfectly meld with those of their host nations. The plethora of Jewish talent makes this an even sweeter deal for whites, who benefit tremendously from the dominant Jewish presence in a myriad of fields such as medicine, law, science, business, banking, music, and entertainment.
And there is some truth to this. Yes, it is tempting for many racially-aware whites to boil the Jewish Question down to a simple Manichean dichotomy in which manipulative and tribalistic Jews prey upon innocent and noble-minded whites for reasons ranging from material gain to sexual exploitation to world dominance. The pull of Occam’s Razor is very powerful, but one shouldn’t attempt to wield it with only half the truth. Many Jews do this when they assume that salt-of-the-earth whites are only one passion play away from picking up their pitchforks and initiating pogroms, or that racially-aware whites are only one Reichstag fire away from donning swastikas and setting up gas chambers. By the same token, whites resort to the same iffy logic when they presume that all Jewish doctors who prescribe the COVID vaccine are malicious actors in the Great Replacement or that every Jewish banker who forecloses on a white person’s home after a mortgage default is trying to eradicate the white middle class.
Yet while there are positives that diaspora Jews bring to their host nations, the Jonathan Greenblatts of the world will ignore or downplay the considerable negatives. They do this through a process of what I call “selective clustering.” When a Jew accomplishes something good or great, then his Jewishness is emphasized — as if to justify the Jewish presence in a traditionally white nation. But when a Jew does something bad or heinous, then his individuality is stressed, thereby deflecting blame from Jews as a whole. (Note that today’s Jewish elites apply selective clustering to whites as well — but conversely.) They also do this through a form of crypsis, by which they profess loyalty to their host nation when in reality they are most loyal to their own diaspora.
Such a state of affairs wouldn’t be so bad except for the glaring fact that Jews are extremely overrepresented in government and in all opinion-making fields — the mainstream media, Hollywood, journalism, and academia, mostly. They also weaponize their wealth to ensure that their interests are served, often at the expense of others. Just ask Sam Collington, the white kid who was murdered by a career-criminal black in Philadelphia who the Jewish District Attorney, Larry Krasner, had refused to charge numerous times. Krasner’s election campaign was funded to the tune of $1.7 million by his co-religionist, George Soros.
You can buy Spencer J. Quinn’s My Mirror Tells a Story here.
As a result, quite a few hostile and dishonest Jews wield disproportionate and quite destructive power over their host nations. And if you have any doubts about this, you are free to dive into the JQ rabbit hole at the end of this article.[1] There is a pot of golden carrots at the end of it, I promise.
But this is what I mean by a lack of normalization. Things cannot keep going the way they are going without white people eventually going extinct in the West. This is the White Genocide theory. It may take hundreds of years, but if current trends continue (i.e. rising miscegenation, plummeting white birthrates, mass immigration, transgenderism, anti-white propaganda, and pro-diversity mandates, to name only a few), what other outcome could there be?
This lack of normalization can be seen in the prevalence of three major racial fallacies regarding Jews:
- the Presumption of Innocence
- the Presumption of Equality
- the Presumption of Victimhood
Not only do diaspora Jewish elites push these fallacies, and not only do the majority of whites today accept them, but the majority of whites also claim the inverse of these fallacies for themselves. This part is probably the most problematic. So where the Jewish population presumes its own innocence, equality, and victimhood, the white population concomitantly presumes its own guilt, inferiority, and supremacy — if that makes any sense. Such a relationship between two populations is neither fair nor balanced, and can only lead to war or the subjugation of one over the other.
When addressing the Jewish Question, one must therefore tackle these fallacies from both the pro-white and anti-Jewish sides. Below is a list of resources that can help one do exactly that.
Debunking the Presumption of Jewish Innocence
“Stalin’s Jews,” an article by Sever Plocker of YNet News, states bluntly that “some of the greatest murderers of modern times were Jewish.” This brief article offers an easily digestible rundown of the major Jewish culprits of the early Soviet period. Genrikh Yagoda, Lazar Kaganovich, and Leonid Reichman get mentions, although Plocker states that there were many more. He also holds the reactionary position which underscores the Jewish domination of the early Soviets: Many of the gentiles who were also in charge, like Nikolai Yezhov, had Jewish wives.
This article should be copy-pasted onto every dissident’s hard drive (before it gets removed) and memorized closely.
For three meatier sources along these lines, check out Andrew Joyce’s “Lying about Judeo-Bolshevism,” Igor Shafarevich’s long essay “Russophobia” (my review here), or Kevin MacDonald’s extensive review of Yuri Slezkine’s The Jewish Century, entitled “Stalin’s Willing Executioners.”
Slezkine actually quotes Vladimir Lenin on page 224 of his book on the importance of Jews during the October Revolution. Basically, without them it would have failed:
As Lenin put it, “The fact that there were many Jewish intelligentsia members in the Russian cities was of great importance to the revolution. They put an end to the general sabotage that we were confronted with after the October Revolution. . . . The Jewish elements were mobilized . . . and thus saved the revolution at a difficult time. It was only to this pool of a rational and literate labor force that we succeeded in taking over the state apparatus.”
Anyone presuming Jewish innocence in the face of white oppression needs to be confronted with this damning passage from Slezkine.
And for full-length volumes revealing the lack of Jewish innocence during the early Soviet period, a time of unparalleled anti-white atrocity and oppression, one can do no better than Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s famous (and still not officially translated into English) 200 Years Together. I reviewed this thousand-page double volume at Counter-Currents in six parts, and it was compiled into one at The Unz Review. Gaddius Maximus recorded an excellent audio version here.
Other useful volumes include:
Jewish History, Jewish Religion by Israel Shahak (my review here). First published in 1994, this work not only covers the considerable anti-gentile aspects of the Jewish religion, it also airs a good bit of dirty Jewish laundry.
The Jewish Mafia by Hervé Ryssen (my review here and Greg Johnson’s interview with Ryssen here). As its title says, this 2016 book covers the underreported topic of Jewish organized crime, from Murder Incorporated to the Yeltsin-era Russian oligarchs, from Ponzi schemes to porn, from drug smuggling to human trafficking. It’s all there.
How the Jews Defeated Hitler by Benjamin Ginsburg (my review here). Triumphant in tone, yet inadvertently incriminating, this 2013 work underscores how effectively American Jews warmongered against Germany during the 1930s. Anyone who believes that the Third Reich acted without Jewish provocation should read this book.
Debunking the Presumption of White Guilt
This basically amounts to undoing the demonization of the Third Reich. Since any Jewish complaint about white behavior eventually regresses to the tired “Hitler Bad” meme, the best way to undo any guilt by association with the old Aryan Ethnostate is to prove that the Nazis:
- really weren’t as bad as everyone says,
- were a reaction to Bolshevism, which was far worse, and
- had good reasons to invade both Poland and the Soviet Union.
Once this is accomplished, public shaming of whites loses much of its luster.
For Point 1 above, one can start with Beau Albrecht’s illuminating review of Hans Hermann Weichardt’s 1995 memoir Under Two Flags. This is the fascinating story of a half-Jewish German who lived in Germany during the 1930s. He reports that in his several dealings with the Gestapo during this time, the Führer’s agents were at all times professional and courteous, even towards Jews.
“The German Jewish Kulturkampf in the Weimar Republic” by Peter Stuyvesant reports on how the rise of the National Socialists during the 1920s and early 1930s can be seen as a sensible reaction to the degeneracy of the largely Jewish-led Weimar Republic. Further, “How Hitler Tackled Unemployment and Revived Germany’s Economy” by Mark Weber gives us a feel for how effective Hitler’s government was at providing prosperity for its people during the Great Depression, a time when the disproportionately Jewish-controlled United States and Soviet Union were suffering economically.
Sure, there was plenty to criticize about the Nazis before the war, like there is with any people. But in 1935, without being able to predict the future and knowing full well the horrors perpetrated by Bolshevism in the east, what patriotic German wouldn’t want to support — or at least tolerate — National Socialism?
As for Point 2, Michael Kellogg published an excellent book in 2005 entitled The Russian Roots of Nazism (my review here) in which he demonstrates how the early Nazis associated closely with White Russian émigrés and were keenly aware of the atrocities committed by the disproportionately Jewish Soviets in the late 1910s and early 1920s. The Nazi Party was established in large part to prevent what happened in Russia from happening in Germany.
For evidence of how much worse Bolshevism was than Nazism, Robert Conquest’s 1986 work The Harvest of Sorrow, about the terror famines and mass starvation from 1929 to 1937 that came to be known as the Holodomor, and in which over 15 million perished, and his 1990 volume The Great Terror: A Reassessment, about Stalin’s murderous campaign against his own Party, which resulted in the murder of over two million people, are excellent resources.
We should always keep in mind that any large-scale atrocities committed by the Germans — including the ever-lamented Jewish Holocaust — happened during wartime. By contrast, the Soviets’ worst atrocities — namely, the Holodomor, the Great Terror, and the abuses of vast Gulag system — were all committed during peacetime. From these three catastrophes, one can estimate that over 81 million lost their lives during the Soviet Union’s first 42 years. This figure comes from adding Conquest’s 15 million Harvest of Sorrow figure to Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s 66 million claim as reported in The Gulag Archipelago, Book Two, Part III, Chapter 1. And since the Jews are not above citing German wartime atrocities as the worst of human sins, then we can do the same with the Soviets, adding the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of innocents killed by the Red Army during the Russian Civil War and the Second World War.
The National Socialists can be called extremists, and of course they were no strangers to atrocity during the war — but they were nothing compared to the Soviets.
For Point 3, one can go to A. J. P. Taylor’s 1961 book The Origins of the Second World War, which recounts the events and reasoning which led to Hitler’s invasion of Poland in 1939 — and it had nothing to do with irrational hatred for Jews.
Another 1961 source is David Hoggan’s The Forced War, the text of which was nearly destroyed in 1984 when Jewish terrorists blew up the Institute for Historical Review’s headquarters. Like Taylor’s work above, The Forced War focuses on the lead-up to the Second World War, but places greater emphasis on Polish and British culpability.
A final source is Victor Suvorov’s 2008 work The Chief Culprit, a reassessment of his 1990 work The Icebreaker (National Vanguard review here). These volumes propose that Stalin was preparing to invade Germany at the end of the summer of 1941, two years after the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact of 1939. Knowing this, Hitler attacked the USSR preemptively, as he had claimed at the time. Mainstream historians have long dismissed Suvorov, but a recent popular work by Sean McMeekin, Stalin’s War, largely vindicates the Icebreaker thesis (reviewed by Laurent Guyénot here).
Many of the ideas expressed above can be found in article form in Mark Weber’s “The ‘Good War’ Myth of World War Two,” Ron Unz’s “Understanding World War II,” and Paul Craig Roberts’ “The Lies about World War II.”
All these sources dispel the notion that Hitler invaded Poland and the Soviet Union because of some lunatic scheme to rule the world or subjugate free peoples. They also explode the myth of Allied moral superiority. They don’t exonerate Hitler and the Nazis of war crimes, and certainly do not serve as evidence that whites are any less guilty of past atrocities than any other group of people. But they do portray Hitler’s decisions leading up to the war as sometimes unwise, but most of the time quite reasonable — a notion that anti-white Jews will do anything to suppress.
Debunking the Presumption of Jewish Equality
In this case, “equality” refers to civic equality, the idea that Jewish citizens are just as loyal to their host nations as the nation’s ethnic majority. Just as we wouldn’t expect a white citizen to act against the state according to their racial interests, nor should we expect a Jew to do so — hence equality.
You can buy Spencer J. Quinn’s novel Charity’s Blade here.
I’m sure there are plenty of sources which debunk this notion. One in particular is Corneliu Zelea Codreanu’s 1936 memoir For My Legionaries (Ted Sallis’ review here). It was in this book where I first learned of the Kahal, which was a secret fund amassed by Jewish communities in pre-war Europe. The Kahal was used to compensate Jewish merchants so they could artificially undercut gentile ones. The objective, of course, was to run the gentiles out of business. It was a cold-blooded practice, one which the more individualistic whites deplored. Combine this with the Jewish practice of bribing or blackmailing gentile authorities, and many merchant-class whites found themselves impoverished soon after a large number of Jews moved into town.
A pair of recent works published by Antelope Hill also destroy the Jewish civic equality myth, and have taken dissident circles by storm. Scott Howard’s 2020 work The Transgender-Industrial Complex (John Q. Publius’ review here) explores quite thoroughly the distinctly Jewish underbelly of the transgender movement. These are people who masquerade as gender theorists or trans-rights activists, but in reality are trying to acquire power and influence for a movement that is inherently dysgenic. Also by Howard is his 2021 The Open Society Playbook (my review here), which uncovers the distinctly Jewish character of globalism. Much ground is covered, from George Soros and his Open Society Foundations donating large sums to Left-wing causes, to the Israel-first policies of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), to how international Jewish groups financially incentivize Third-World migration to Western nations. Both books distinguish themselves for being thoroughly researched and highly compelling.
No work, however, undercuts the presumption of Jewish civic equality more comprehensively than Kevin MacDonald’s classic 1998 work, The Culture of Critique (Stanley Hornbeck’s review here). Anyone interested in the Jewish Question should have a copy of this book on his bookshelf, with many underlined passages and copious notes scrawled into the margins. I think it is fair to say that no one had ever thought about the Jewish Question from an evolutionary standpoint so thoroughly before Kevin MacDonald.
MacDonald, in essence, describes Jewish behavior in gentile societies as competitive or adaptive — and always with the goal of enriching the Jews. This is often a zero-sum game where what is good for the Jewish diaspora must be bad for the white majority. So, through a process MacDonald calls “crypsis,” many influential Jews will pretend to be honest citizens when really they are up to something quite insidious.
Franz Boas, for example, pretended to be an anthropologist when in reality he was academic guru who preached the lie of racial egalitarianism in order to soften whites’ racial identity. Highly influential science authors Stephen Jay Gould and Richard Lewontin followed in his footsteps years later. Sigmund Freud pretended to be a psychologist, when in reality he used his preoccupation with sex and degeneracy to pathologize eugenic behavior such as monogamy and sexual restraint among white people. Wilhelm Reich and Magnus Hirschfeld were later products of this approach.
MacDonald explores the notorious Frankfurt School with a similar critical eye and concludes The Culture of Critique with damning coverage of Jewish complicity in the United States’ 1965 Immigration Act. This Act effectively opened the US up to the Third World. Nearly 60 years later, a rise in crime, corruption, and anti-whitism are the legacies of this devastating and largely Jewish action.
It took mainstream academics 20 years to address The Culture of Critique. In 2018, graduate student Nathan Cofnas waded into this debate with a critical response. MacDonald swiftly replied, and for several weeks the pair engaged a frank and long-overdue discussion of the Jewish Question.
Those interested in a rundown of this discussion can peruse my four-part MacDonald vs. Cofnas series at Counter-Currents. Andrew Joyce also has an excellent three-part series entitled “The Cofnas Problem.”
Debunking the Presumption of White Inferiority
This is more straightforward than much of the above. It seems that the very point of The Occidental Observer is to reveal how hostile Jewish elites enforce their superiority over whites. Counter-Currents and The Unz Review cover this topic as well. In all cases, Jewish clannishness and hypocrisy are on display when they police whites for wanting or needing the same racial safeguards that Jews have in the West and especially in Israel. There is absolutely no reason why whites should accept this inferior position whereby Jews ascribe rights to themselves that they do their best to deny to others. These rights include the right to ethnic nationalism and to be part of an ethnic or racial majority in perpetuity.
Articles exposing this oppressive Jewish double standard are fairly common. Good starting points include “Jews and Immigration: Time for a Change” by Marcus Alethia, “Jewish Activists Urge Aid to Refugees: Is it Good for the Jews?” by Kevin MacDonald, and “No, Dual Loyalty isn’t Okay” by Phillip Giraldi.
Debunking the Presumption of Jewish Victimhood
Here’s where we tackle the Jewish Holocaust — or, if you prefer, don’t tackle it. As we all know, the Jewish Holocaust (which we should never refer to as “The Holocaust,” as if there was only one) has taken on a life of its own. It has become a weapon in the hands of Jewish elites who wish to browbeat whites into submission, or manipulate them through a bitch’s brew of guilt and pity. Perversely, it has become a symbol of strength for diaspora Jews wherever they can erect memorials across America, Canada, the United Kingdom, France, and Australia — all countries that sent men to their deaths in order to curtail the Jewish Holocaust to begin with.
Norman Finkelstein’s 2000 work The Holocaust Industry famously made the case that Jewish elites abuse the memory of the Jewish Holocaust in order to reap financial reward or further Jewish or Israeli interests. Tobias Langdon makes similar points in his article “Holy Minority Day,” in which he distinguishes the Jewish Holocaust from “Holocaustianity.”
I understand that opinions on the Dissident Right range from the Jewish Holocaust being an utter hoax to it being exaggerated to its official narrative being more or less correct. I wasn’t there, so I don’t know exactly what happened, but the one source I trust, David Cole, insists that the Germans did perpetrate mass killings of Jewish civilians during the Second World War. Maybe he’s right, maybe he’s wrong, but in either case I don’t have a fraction of the knowledge and haven’t spent a fraction of the hours doing research that he has regarding the Jewish Holocaust, and so would not dare argue with him about it. Cole is no Jewish Holocaust denier; he defended his position fiercely during an exchange with Ron Unz in 2018, which I reported on in “The Great Unz-Cole Holocaust Debate.”
Yet, Cole questions the six million figure, which officially makes him a revisionist and a threat to the Holocaust Industry described by Finkelstein. Cole doesn’t exactly trust much of the scholarship on the Auschwitz concentration camps and so has revised the total number of Jewish Holocaust victims down to around four million. This got him in hot water with the Jewish elite in the 1990s, which culminated in 1998, when the Jewish Defense League basically put out a contract on his head. This raises a question: If the keepers of the mainstream Jewish Holocaust narrative were interested in truth, why did they react so oppressively and violently when Cole challenged them with honest research? It seems they were never interested in truth to begin with, and as a result made threats against an innocent man and sent him into hiding. Cole’s story is a quite fascinating one, and he’ll tell you all about it if you follow his writing at Taki’s Magazine.
What we can learn from Cole and Finkelstein is that Jews can make ostentatious victims. That doesn’t mean they were never victimized throughout history. Like any other people, of course they were. But do they tend to exaggerate things after the fact to their own advantage?
Quite possibly. This is the case that Andrew Joyce makes in his heavily footnoted three-part series on the Russian pogroms of the late nineteenth century. According to his sources, which include John Klier’s 2011 work Russians, Jews, and the Pogroms of 1881-2, much of the anti-Jewish violence was overblown and exaggerated by Jews in the West. These Jews had an axe to grind against Russia and wanted to drum up anti-Russian feelings among the elites in Western Europe. Joyce explores similar themes of exaggeration in his review of William Hagen’s Anti-Jewish Violence in Poland, 1914-1920.
When addressing the issue of Jewish victimhood, a healthy dose of skepticism will go a long way towards the truth.
Debunking the Presumption of White Supremacy
By “white supremacy” in this context, I don’t mean its common meaning — that of racist whites lording it over innocent non-whites because of racism — but rather an uncommon meaning: lacking any sense of racial or ethnic victimhood. White people are strangely naïve in this regard. They are perfectly willing to accede rights to other races that they themselves do not have — and allow themselves to get bullied as a result — and yet have the unshakable and entirely ahistorical belief that they themselves have never been seriously oppressed. Of course, this does not describe all whites, and especially not the Irish, for obvious reasons. Nevertheless, most whites approach the Jewish Question fully believing that whites have never been oppressed the way Jews have — and never by Jews.
While Ralph Raico’s classic 1989 article “The Taboo Against Truth” refutes this outright, no work comes close to cataloging the sheer horror of the Soviet Gulag system better than Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s 1,900-page colossus The Gulag Archipelago. Where 200 Years Together focuses on Jewish guilt, Gulag focuses on the obscene degree of white suffering during the first five decades of Soviet tyranny. Reading these pages becomes close to a harrowing experience. We need to remember that an extremely high proportion of these inmates were not criminals at all; they were either political prisoners, or they were guilty of being at the wrong place at the wrong time. And none of them received anything like what people in the West would consider a fair trial.
Yes, many non-whites, including Jews, suffered and died in this inhuman system as well, but Russians, Ukrainians, Belorussians, and Slavs in general got the worst of it. In fact, Jews did such an excellent job of networking and implementing tribal nepotism in the camps that they often formed an upper class among the inmates, a phenomenon Solzhenitsyn depicts in his play The Love-Girl and the Innocent. Not only this, but much of the Gulag leadership was Jewish as well.
You can buy Spencer J. Quinn’s Solzhenitsyn and the Right here.
As I wrote in my 2021 work Solzhenitsyn and the Right (reviewed by Kevin MacDonald here) regarding the development of the Belomor Canal near Finland, which required slave labor from the gulags:
In The Gulag Archipelago, he [Solzhenitsyn] had included photographs of five men — all Jews — who had received Order of Lenin medals for their leadership in the Belomor’s construction. These men were [Genrikh] Yagoda (head of the NKVD), Matvei Berman (head of the gulag system), Lazar Kogan (head of canal construction), Jacob Rapoport (deputy head of construction), and [Naftaly] Frenkel. Their photographs had been prominently displayed in a book about the Belomor, which was published shortly after its completion in the early 1930s. Many Jews labeled Solzhenitsyn an anti-Semite for this because he had made it seem as if Jews were disproportionately responsible for the tremendous death toll which had occurred along the banks of the Belomor.
But they were.
Here are the photos in question:
The savage injustice here should be quite plain. As a soldier in the Red Army during the Second World War, Solzhenitsyn wrote a few politically incorrect things about Stalin in a letter and got arrested for it. He was pulled away from the battlefield, where he had been risking his life to fight the people whose leaders were herding Jews into concentration camps. He was placed in a wretched prison without a fair trial and endured torture, neglect, overwork, sickness, frigid temperatures — you name it. He remained a zek for eight years. After this, and a cancer scare, he wrote a masterpiece of history, one of the greatest literary accomplishments of all time and one that exposed to the entire world the abject, uninhibited evil of the Soviet Union, chronicling quite vividly what is certainly one of the lowest points of civilized history. But because he accurately described and depicted the killers who oversaw the construction of the Belomar Canal in The Gulag Archipelago,[2] he was labeled an anti-Semite.
Am I the only one who sees how insulting this is?
It is extremely difficult to take the charge of anti-Semitism seriously when there are influential Jews who care so little for the suffering of white gentiles. If Left-wing Jewish terrorists and ideologues were instrumental in establishing gulags in Russia a century ago and mostly got away with it, then they can do that anywhere and at any time — if we let them; i.e., if a critical mass of white people forget their history and their very real potential to become victims of atrocity. The Jews have never lost that, and perhaps that helps explain their phenomenal success.
The Gulag Archipelago, if anything, should place a victimhood chip on the shoulder of every white person who reads it. Hopefully it won’t be too big; just big enough to replace the Jewish one that’s already there.
Conclusion
I hope no one will think this is the final word on the Jewish Question. There remain mountains of text I have yet to read and hope to in the next few years. It’s perhaps the greatest conundrum of our times, and so a mere 6,000 words can barely do it justice.
Certainly this essay is not — and could never be — the final word on the Jews themselves, being the marvelously creative and brilliant race of people that they are. Sometimes I wish this could be discussed more in our circles — it is a truth which I think deserves a little more air time among dissidents. Perhaps it’s because so many whites have become acquainted with the positive aspects of Jews in real life — in hospitals, classrooms, laboratories, chess clubs, concert halls, and conservatories, to name a few — that many of our arguments seem to ring hollow these days. Consider: How well will a discussion on the Presumption of Jewish Innocence fallacy go over with a white professional who has never heard of Kevin MacDonald and has worked closely and productively with a highly competent Jewish hospital director for 30 years? Not very well, I would imagine. When poring over and discussing the Jewish Question, this should always remain at the forefront of our minds.
The fact that nearly all of the above text reflects negatively on Jews does not speak to any inherent anti-Jewish bias or emotions on my part, however. It rather speaks to the lack of normalization between whites and diaspora Jews I mentioned in the introduction.
Whites today lack ethnic homelands and are losing our majorities in the countries we founded for ourselves long ago. We’re beginning to feel the poverty, corruption, and chaos of the Third World invading our once-superior nations. We’re also beginning to feel the sting of anti-whitism, which didn’t exist in the West before 1965 — except, perhaps, in the spiteful hearts of a certain number of zealous and influential Jews. But to blame the Jews for this state of affairs would be overly simplistic. It cannot be denied that many whites were complicit in our downfall, whether purposefully or not, and just because there were always Jews who were happy to assist us on our way down, we shouldn’t take ourselves entirely off the hook. Perhaps the trauma of two world wars and the bloody civil wars in America, South Africa, and Russia is one reason why this is unfortunately the case today.
You can buy Spencer Quinn’s novel White Like You here.
The final question about the Jewish Question is, of course, what we do about it. As Greg Johnson always says, “First, do no harm” — and he’s correct. This means that not only do we respect the human rights of others, but we should keep it classy as well. Oven jokes are about as funny as mocking poor whites for doing some of the same unfortunate things poor whites do. Such behavior might score points with the choir, but it also repels the very people — whites and non-whites alike — whom we should be desperately trying to persuade. Is it too much to ask that we all be of good cheer?
After this, however, what’s next?
Never forget that the greatest and most dangerous enemies of whites as a race — at least since the Mongol and Ottoman threats died down centuries ago — are Left-wing diaspora Jews. Because such Jews factor highly among those who are also either extremely wealthy or extremely fervent, it makes sense for all whites to treat Jews as outgroup members until they can prove their pro-white bona fides beyond a reasonable doubt. If a Jew cannot do this, then we should never trust him and have as little truck with him as possible — and if this includes discrimination, so be it. If this sounds harsh, we should remember that it is no different than how Jews have treated gentiles for centuries, and continue to do so in Israel. It’s called giving as good as we’re getting.
We should also remember that our enemy practices absolute ethnocentrism. Consider the following quote from Abraham Foxman, former director of the anti-white hate group known as the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which comes from his Afterword to Edwin Black’s The Transfer Agreement. Foxman can be considered one of the foremost enemies of white people today:
I was born in Poland. I was hidden in Vilna by my Polish Catholic nursemaid, who baptized me, and I was reunited with my parents only after the War. That is why I am alive today.
I have spent all of my adult life in the organized defense of Jewish rights and dignity. That is why I live today.
Thus, for Foxman it doesn’t matter that Jewish Bolsheviks were instrumental in murdering tens of millions of white people decades before his birth. In fact, he implied as much in Yoav Shamir’s great documentary Defamation, in which he told a delegation of Ukrainians that, in effect, their genocide was not as important as his. Watch.
It also does not matter to the Foxmans of the world if white people tell the truth about Jews. He would look at this article, be horrified at my lack of philo-Semitism, declare me anti-Semite, and then crush me, if I were a person worth crushing.
And the fact that I am white has everything to do with it.
Earlier this year, the ADL redefined its definition of “racism” to mean: “[T]he marginalization and/or oppression of people of color based on a socially constructed racial hierarchy that privileges white people.”
Yes, they changed it back to a slightly less offensive definition a short time later — after considerable backlash, but I see it more as them letting their anti-white mask slip for a moment rather than as a sincere change of heart. They really do hate us — and not as individuals, but as a people, which means of course that my innocent children are on the hook as well.
This is the modern equivalent of a blood libel.
Finally, not only are our enemies anti-white, they are hypocritical about it. In the above definition, replace “white people” with “Jews” and we have a good description of what goes on in Israel. And it is relatively easy not to have to marginalize non-Jews when you declare yourself a Jewish state, establish anti-miscegenation laws, and follow race-based immigration policies to keep non-Jews out to begin with.
If only white people had the right to do the same with non-whites!
I hope this essay demonstrates that today’s enemies of white people have very little truth on their side, and indeed behave like villains. Further, the demographic clock is winding down. Whites have very little time to escape the cruel fate that Left-wing diaspora Jews and their allies, both white and non-white, have prepared for us.
All we can do in the meantime is tell the truth and persevere until enough white people stand up to this injustice, cast these Left-wing diaspora Jews out of their lives, and once again claim nations we can truly call our own.
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.
- First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “Paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.
- Third, Paywall members have the ability to edit their comments.
- Fourth, Paywall members can “commission” a yearly article from Counter-Currents. Just send a question that you’d like to have discussed to [email protected]. (Obviously, the topics must be suitable to Counter-Currents and its broader project, as well as the interests and expertise of our writers.)
- Fifth, Paywall members will have access to the Counter-Currents Telegram group.
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:
Paywall Gift Subscriptions
If you are already behind the paywall and want to share the benefits, Counter-Currents also offers paywall gift subscriptions. We need just five things from you:
- your payment
- the recipient’s name
- the recipient’s email address
- your name
- your email address
To register, just fill out this form and we will walk you through the payment and registration process. There are a number of different payment options.
Notes
[1] Below is a collection of links dealing with how Jewish diaspora elites wield power in ways that harm white people’s group interests:
- Pushing for open borders
- Practicing vulture capitalism
- Waging war on free speech
- Allying themselves with Islam
- Using non-whites as weapons against whites
- Waging war on gun rights
- Promoting degeneracy through porn
- Silencing or censoring pro-white voices
- Pushing anti-white propaganda
- Promoting transgenderism
- Promoting Black Lives Matter and Antifa
- Promoting anti-white Critical Race Theory
- Engaging in radical left-wing politics
To this list I would humbly like to add my “Many Faces of the Jewish Elite” series: Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3. I hope you will find that they belong alongside the ones listed above.
[2] Part III, Chapter 3, p. 78 of the first edition US paperback of The Gulag Archipelago, Book 2.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
47 comments
Anyone who believes that the Third Reich acted without Jewish provocation should read this book.
Europe will be overrun by Muslims and Africans and still there will be people putting their efforts into slandering the Jews and exonerating the Third Reich. Mainstream whites rightly run a mile from this: it attracts only islamists and lunatics.
Nice try, Shlomo.
“Hey Rabbi, whatcha doin’?”
Quinn hardly said the book “exonerates” the Third Reich. In fact he presented a generously balanced assessment when he later avoided downplaying German atrocities committed during the war. The point was that Jews can’t claim absolute innocence given the provocations they incited against Germany in the ’30s. I didn’t realize that pointing out this sliver of Jewish complicity was so out-of-bounds.
Europeans today have no understanding for White Americans complaining about Jews just like Americans of 90 years ago didn’t understand and condemned the rise of German antisemitism. You can only afford luxury not to be antisemitic if there are very few Jews around.
That’s an interesting observation. This is certainly true in Eastern Europe, but I always thought there was a sizeable Jewish minority in at least France and UK. And that that minority wields considerably disproportionate power and influence.
Moreover, throughout all of Europe Jews enjoy special privileges and protections vis-à-vis laws against anything that even vaguely resembles anti-semitism. This must be noticeable to and resented by most thinking Europeans.
But most importantly, even though Jews are no longer visible in most European nations, their preferred policies are evident everywhere, particularly regarding immigration or the prosecution of nonagenarians who worked at prison camps during WW2. What the US government dictates, Brussels acquiesces to. So whether Jews are physically present or not, their influence is seen throughout modern European society. But maybe most Europeans fail to see this connection.
There is factual forensic evidence and valid records from intelligence agencies and bureaucratic governments which shed light on the truth of the matter of the whether Germans in WW II had a government policy to exterminate jews in homicidal gas chambers resulting in the efficient mass murder of 6 million jews in German “death-camps”
Germans were long famous for their engineering know-how and high efficiency standards in manufacturing; but not for mass murder; nor for being psychopathic, amoral in character.
David Cole is famous for his informative video tour of Auschwitz, including an interview with Dr Piper, head of the museum and tourist facilities at Auschwitz in the early 1990’s.
David Cole and the actual verifiable evidence he could provide/reference made him impressively credible. I am not familiar with his doing this for asserting, after-all, the fraud victim story is true. I am curious to know what the evidence is and when was it discovered etc. I will look for it. In the end the genuine forensic evidence, facts etc. must be freely presented & examined and without it, an opinion or assertion is akin to a fart in the breeze unless it has a huge power structure pushing it as ‘Truth not to be questioned except at risk of punishment.’
David Cole studied and was knowledgeable about the facts atendant to the [brand named] Holocaust narrative and it is the facts, forensic evidence, autopsies, International Red Cross records , aerial photos by British spy planes and etc. that absolutely do not support any gas chambers existing in German caps nor deaths from gassing in the many autopsies [more than 3000 ] performed on those who had died in the camps. The IRC had records from their visiting the camps regularly which included total number of deaths of which jews were a relatively small proportion of inmates and deaths. With the passage of a law in Germany, in the 1970’s, forbidding questioning/doubting, etc the jewish official holocaust story, the IRC went silent in the 1970’s as their major WWII records were housed in an estate owned by the IRC in Germany. The IRC could not support the official organized jewish assertion of the history because it was not true, but also probably could not participate in discussions as legal sanctions for questioning the jewish-holocaaust story were being made law in other European countrues in subsequent years after Germany’s lead. Eventually, the officials of the IRC were replaced and their records, documents made available to researchers and copies of some or all given to the US Holocaust Memorial Museum in Wash. D.C.
I like David Cole’s interviews and I wish he did more of them., The publisher of his book was taken over, I think I read, by interests in weaponizing it for propaganda.
I think Jewry’s corporate-financial elite weaponize everything against the goyim hosts if they can, and comprise fundamentally a psychopathic race- human-intra-sepcies predator/parasite entity with a compulsion to dominate/control the target/prey whether individual, groups, nation etc for ruthless exploitation to the extent possible. Yet all jews are not genetic psychopaths but have long been expertly mind programmed with narratives probably created -designed to create a race identity and a loyalty that is highly cohesive,and exclusive to outsiders. Education and intelligence are fostered for competition with host populations. It was probably not easy to create a cohesive race from psychopaths, but by having many rules, a religion designed for them alone and a created historical narrative designed to create a mindsetof their being always the victim no matter what they do, it can formulatre a victim status for itself permitting themm to do what they wilt to use, rob, scam, kill host peoples and even those among them with empathy based [goyim] character , function as and in suppposrt of brethren poaychopaths without being toucched by any capacity for guilt, remorse, shame etc. Or such is my evolving understanding of the jewish power entity,which includes a high percent of psychopath [deficit of emotional capacity that renders them incapable of Feeling shame, fear, remorse, guilt,pity, love,compassion, empathy,etc. which happens to also manifest an absence of conscience. No natural Golden Rule manifests fom the amoral psychopath sub-race p[poised for world dominion, and instead as it’s moral guide star is pure self interest, and “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.”
For jewry all goyim are antisemites in waiting and they are ever alert for signs of individuals becoming aware of the significance and actions of jewry on an din their societies and once a goy awakens, he is deemed forever so and an enemy of jewish interests.
Also, I would mention something of great significance which is the article: “How Jews took over China and created Chinese Communism” by one Thomas Fitzpatrick of the Fitzpatrick Informer at fitzinfo.net that makes a convincing case that the Chinese Communist Party and government are the creation of and controlled by Chinese crypto jews descendants primarily of the thriving powerful jewish community in Kaifeng since at least the 9th century.
At some point Chinese Jews, in large part, went into crypsis due to political situations,
and awaited their opportunity to re-emerge with a plan. And now they control the vast Chinese population with a degree of total control Western jews praise endlessly and are eager to deploy in this USA and the West overall’; and are on the move with the covid19, great reset, apparent depopulation agendas, with the plandemic and death jabs and maybe endless medical modes; plus digital currency as the grand slam to end resistance to the psychopath race which seems to have everything planned out and organized. Also, another thought on this topic, is there a possibility the Neanderthall genes most of us are said to carry might not be just for hirsuitism or low foreheads but that Neanderthals may have been the progenators of the genetic-psychopath character, the defining differeence of the Neanderthal race from us; they being a human intra-species predator/parasite race that did not disappear but infiltrated via copulation into homosaps and are now in sight of total dominion over the entire planet.?
I’d like actual data on the percentage of people that care about supposed Jewish victimhood, most people who aren’t racialist like me that I know fully support a stop of immigration and repatriation and know how corrupt the system and media are, awareness of the holocaust is irrelevant to them (“I basically agree with Hitler, apart from the Holocaust” – My Mom). I barely knew what a Jew was until I had massive exposure in one go because I was into NS aesthetics, yet I was a nationalist, I supported deporting and stopping immigration, the Jewish question I just don’t see as key as so many other racialists seem to, at best you are appealing to the very Manichaeism that is criticised early in the article.
All thats required is pointing out Jews, at the very least the ones with power committed to anti-White actions, don’t consider themselves White and care most about their own ethnic interests at the expense and harm of Whites. Point out their key involvement in opening our nations to mass non-white immigration, and the disastrous effects of this, then depending on the persons values show them the Jewish involvment of their corruption, basically give them cliff notes version of Culture of Critique.
People are becoming more positively racially aware day by day, we can tell just by the amount of Jews now placing their bets and siding against the anti-white system, hoping to come out on top over their co-ethnics on the other side in the next few decades, retaining Jewish power and influence.
Again, I’d like the data of people who care about Jewish victimhood. I know every few years ADL and the like will kvetch about less people being aware of the holocaust or whatever, but from less biased sources, percentage of white people that are willing to let themselves fade into oblivion cause some Jews had bad experiences (Whites are getting more tired of the blacks whining day by day and thats more relevant than Jewish suffering in culture). Whites don’t even know about the threat of extinction facing them, the Jewish question is the most overrated theme in White Nationalism, its an important one sure, but its later stage initiation imo when a White person starts identifying as White in a positive way and is aware of the threats to all of our nations and race.
And what policy prescriptions follow from this?
He provided a few prescriptions in the conclusion:
1) Don’t be crude. Discuss the JQ, but do it with enough respect that it doesn’t repel normies.
2) All whites should treat Jews as an outgroup unless they prove themselves allies beyond a shadow of a doubt.
3) We must practice the same white-hot ethnocentrism that Jews themselves have practiced for centuries and continue to practice today.
Okay, David Cole isn’t a Holocaust Denier, but that and a tenner will get you an overpriced cup of coffee at a Starbucks.
Holocaust Denial is a thought-terminating-cliché devised by Jewish theologian Deborah Lipstadt (circa 1994) and should be irrelevant for those serious about History and WWII scholarship.
David Cole did some interesting Revisionism almost thirty years ago, but today he accepts uncritically that the Germans gassed millions at the so-called Reinhardt Camps using steam, diesel engine exhaust, gasoline engine exhaust, pesticides, or magic moon dust. And there is not even a tooth or a bone shard to bear witness to this industrial mass-murder process.
The actual documentation is not so impressive either.
However, no amount of evidence or lack thereof will convince Mr. Cole differently ─ and he is understandably desperate to maintain his status as a non-Denier.
If this were to change, Mr. Cole likely would not be writing for Taki’s any longer ─ and even as it is, he cannot even find a publisher for a second edition of his amusing autobiography, let alone a sequel.
The problem with the Holocaust is that it is not a monolith but its exponents demand it to be ─ and the goalposts get moved so often that it is hard to pin down who is a Holocaust Survivor and what this even means.
In 2003, Israeli demographers determined that there were still a million Holocaust Survivors alive worldwide. Well, if that were true then ─ to paraphrase Norman Finkelstein’s mother ─ “Who did Hitler kill?”
What is a “Survivor” and what (exactly) did they survive?
The late Holocaust Revisionist Fritz Berg summed it up with one simple phrase:
“Nazi Gassings Never Happened!”
If we stick to examining Berg’s proposition, we can avoid being distracted by other considerations such as whether the SS Security Service shot some nasty or nice Jews, or the Wehrmacht Feldgendarmerie (military police) also shot some nasty or nice Jews.
War is War.
Hitler noted in Mein Kampf that if you are going to condemn Germans for their actions and conduct in World War I, then you must apply the same lens and context of standards to the also terrible conduct of their enemies. If the belligerents are both fighting for keeps, it is not so clear who are the Good Guys with the napalm and the poison gas, and who are the Bad Guys with the napalm and the poison gas.
It is not very convincing when David Irving distances himself from Revisionism. Although I don’t consider Irving to be either a Revisionist or a Denier, Irving truthfully said that there was no Hitler Order to exterminate the Jews ─ and all of the scholarship has supported this.
But Irving made the mistake of helping Holocaust Denier Ernst Zündel in one of his trials for Thoughtcrime in Canada, and suggesting that the Leuchter Report was at least worth a look.
Unlike Irving, David Cole can distance himself from the Denier canard because he is a Jew ─ and the Jewish thugs who beat him and threatened to kill him, Irv Rubin and Earl Krugel, died or were killed in prison long ago.
I definitely like David Cole and will certainly buy his next book, which I am sure will be worthwhile, if he can ever find a publisher. I even make it a point to watch Mr. Cole’s long and sometimes amusing shirtless You-Tube videos.
But I was not very impressed with the Cole vs. Unz debate ─ and one is hardly a serious historian if some of that History cannot be “denied” or critically examined.
History is not Theology, and what we have come to call the Holocaust is not a stone Monolith. Truth does not need to be protected by Thugs or by Thoughtcrimes Laws.
Almost four-score years after the war, and with trillions of dollars spent on WWII atrocity-propaganda and Holocaust memorials across the globe, the need for some serious debate and frank discussion on this subject screams to the heavens.
Really, is Ken Burns speaking honestly for White people and their interests?
🙂
I wasn’t there, so I don’t know exactly what happened, but the one source I trust, David Cole, insists that the Germans did perpetrate mass killings of Jewish civilians during the Second World War.
I think nobody denies, that the Germans did perpetrate mass killings of Jewish civilians during the Second World War. The questions are: how many Jews were actually killed and was it a planned policy, approved from very high top, or more or less local iniciative and improvisation. And I would add here that:
a) the Germans have killed not only Jews.
b) the Jews were killed not only by Germans.
The Germans killed many non-Jewish civilians. And the locals, i.e. Ukrainians, Belarussians, Russians, Lituanians and others, on the occupied lands, had killed very many Jews. Sometimes they did it under German orders, sometimes on their own iniciative – because of the eternal hostilities. That was not restricted to Jews. Very many Belorussian villages were burnt and destroyed during the War not by Germans, but by Russian collaborant units, which generally are known as Vlasovtsi (and this is incorrect name), and some were burnt by Communist partizans. And some repressalies of Germans were provoked by the Communist partizans. We see here guerrilla and counterguerrilla, insurgency and counter-insurgency, and this kind of warfare is most brutal, antihuman and “unlawful” of all.
So if we speak about the genocide of Jews, we maybe should add, that this was only one of genocides/mass murders during the WW2, and that it was not unique in those War, and of course not unique in the World History at the whole. People kill people, it was so, it is so, and it always will be so. Sad, but true.
The Jews have all reasons for mourning for their victims, but other peoples have other sad events in their history and have to mourn for their OWN victims much more than for the Jewish ones. I feel sorry for murdered Jews, and I absoulutely disapprove the actions of Germans, but… But the victims in the history of MY OWN PEOPLE are much more important for me, and I would better mourn for them (and will not dictate the other people to or not to mourn for them). Every nation has its own history and also has to think about it.
Their are no notes at the end of this article (I believe their should be 2), even though they are hyperlinked they don’t go anywhere.
I’m seeing some notes. Look between the “how to donate” section and the related features. Could be the hyperlinks don’t work.
Hi Bob, The footnotes are there, right above all the related links. If the links don’t work it might be because of your browser, not sure. Thank you for reading.
What’s interesting is how effective this inter-generational propaganda is on both gentiles and Jews. It’s clear how most whites have so completely swallowed the Jewish victimhood and innocence narrative. But I think the same can be said of most average Jews, at least in my experience. They truly believe that they are uniquely sinless and the most aggrieved victims the world has ever known.
When I hear Jews talk of their involvement in the civil rights movement or their advocacy for immigrants, for example, they do so in a holier-than-thou way. As if to indicate that their role in these social movements is purely driven by their moral superiority and compassion for the less fortunate. They authentically believe in their self-righteousness, which makes it all the more difficult to convince normies of their less than noble intentions.
“As if to indicate that their role in these social movements is purely driven by their moral superiority and compassion for the less fortunate.”
That, and the cultural memory of a time when whites were more erhnocentric and excluded Jews from mainstream society. They resent this and these days recruit non-white “victims” in their battle to get back at whitey.
This is true. The Jews I have spoken with over the years would often cite some mournful story about the Jews that were turned away from America during WWII, which is why we must now support all immigrants. Or how their great-bubby was discriminated when she arrived on these shores, so the blacks deserve our advocacy.
Whether they consciously admit it or not, it all boils down to cultural payback: now it’s my turn to stick it to whitey.
But the stark truth is both their Jewish ancestors and the blacks and other non-Whites did not deserve to be allowed into White countries for their subversive, destructive, pernicious or parasitical natures, and they should not have been allowed in. Admitting them into US and other White nations was a grave, colossal, and unacceptable historical mistake, to be regretted and hopefully corrected in the future by all possible means, and not to be praised or celebrated. Just stick these blunt words to their faces!
The way to go about this is not being explicit, which is incredibly difficult because it is so irresistibly tempting to start naming them in virtually any conversation. But even Our Uncle had to tone it down during his failed 1932 election campaign. He only started to crank it up to six million kelvin after the Enabling Act made it impossible to reproach him or it, which we clearly have today in the opposite direction.
So the TRS approach is dead on arrival. The Daily Stormer recently admitted that this type of hyperbolic, sardonic and profitable expression was an anachronism that existed from roughly 2012-2017 because the info on the internet was shoddy prior to and now censored into oblivion since.
It is true that Americans love conspiracy theories. After all, it is built into our preamble and Bill of Rights that a tyrant, foreign and domestic, is perennially within our midst to take away our rights. But Holocaust revisionism is literally so counterproductive that it makes you wonder if the ADL is behind it since its central premise is ‘Never Forget,’ which means ‘never stop talking about it or else people will forget it ever happened.’ But Americans especially love stupid conspiracy theories like Qanon and white privilege.
It is breathtaking just how fast propaganda from only a few years ago is lost to history. A Zoomer informed me on 9/11 that ‘ISIS flew planes into the World Trade Center.’ So all of these seemingly outrageous polls about how young people have never heard of the Holocaust appear to be true. That’s why they brought back Ken Burns to uncharacteristically make a daisy chain in his previously masterful documentaries between the alleged six million and Trump supporters.
Notice how Zionism has all but disappeared from American discourse since 2015? All those chickenhawk and jarhead Boomers have simply forgotten about it, which has been so consequential that it has made American militarism itself a dead letter since then. This is how it is accomplished.
It is not a matter of optics but rather of not being profane or fatalistic. Polite society stopped saying a unique word for blacks because it was vulgar, and stopped mentioning blacks entirely because it is too negative.
A quiet exodus has been underway in Russia of its remnant Israelites making Aliyah since this latest war. To paraphrase Mitt Romney, the pogrom will be self-deportation. Remember a few years ago with the triple parentheses meme? We didn’t have to name them – they named themselves.
Good point about 2015. I think that was systematic. A new leftist paradigm, and also the alt right, were coalescing in opposition to middle eastern wars and neoconservatism, and also around Occupy Wallstreet, which were in some sense horns of the same bull. Opposition was breaking into mainstream with scholarship like the mearsheimer and Walt book.
To defang this, I think the oligarchy created this neo civil rights movement, with Black Lives Matter, antifa and the entire corporate apparatus as a manufactured diversion from years of neocon hegemony(if they ever really ended), in order to divide the American proles(black and white) against one another. Blacks are very susceptible to this manipulation bc they want to bellyache for more.
It’s amazing to what extent even pro-White scholars like Dr. MacDonald go to prove these fairly obvious truths. I bet he never felt he needs to prove that some Muslims or even some Chinese act in organized fashion against White interests.
All we need to know is that those of them with strong Jewish identity see themselves as different from other White gentiles and therefore should not be in positions of power in our societies. Again, this would be self-evident with Muslims or Chinese, but for some reason when it comes to Jews, Whites lose all critical thinking.
McDonald’s impeccable research provides DATA to help educate those 6 zillion+ dense Americans who don’t see or understand how “obvious” Jews have lead the war to replace Whites, even in our homelands, leading to our extinction.
The JQ is the lynchpin to all of our problems. For anyone to toss it off as unimportant is sorely missing the reason for our problems which “obviously” began with Western Civilization.
It’s unfortunate that so much time and reading is dedicated to these issues, but the you ultimately defer to a Jew in your assessment of the Holocaust. Why not dedicate serious time to studying this issue, like reading Revisionist literature, rather than deferring to Cole?
Cole has the most heterodox position of anyone: that the Holocaust did not happen in Auschwitz but it happened in the so-called “Reinhardt camps.” Cole may be satisfied staking his position in a way that almost nobody else holds, but you would do well to study the issue rather than trust what Cole has to say about the topic.
Let’s say the Revisionists are correct (which they are). Imagine the damage you would be doing by basically endorsing the Holocaust story with your appeal to Cole. You have greater responsibility to understand this issue because of the credibility you have on these matters. If you ultimately defer to an opportunistic Jew on the question, you have not learned enough from all those other books you have cited in this article. David Cole is wrong.
This is an important question. It’s the sacred foundational myth that orients the post-war moral landscape and the position of Jews within it. If you are wrong on this issue, which I can say you are, then you are leading people in the wrong direction and seriously undermining your own project with false conclusions.
David Irving and Mark Weber basically arrived at the same conclusion that Cole did.
Cole, Irving, and Weber are all wrong. Who cares if these people ‘came to the same conclusion’.
[ … ]
This is the second name you have used on this thread. I am banning you from further comments. I am also deleting other attempts by revisionists who wish to hijack this thread. Save your efforts for other corners of the web.
Is it OK to discuss what happened with David Cole? I’d rather not cross any lines.
Write an article about it.
I’d like to see that article.
instead of indefinite banning I think people should get a second chance. Ban them for the number of months equivalent to the number of years in prison they would have gotten for like comment in Germany or Canada.
I politely disagree with that characterization, as I’ve never understood Cole’s position to be the same as that of Irving or Weber. If I’m not mistaken, Weber’s position is that there was no systematized mass killing of Jews because they were Jews. No one seriously denies that Jews were not killed, rather that Jews were not killed in a systematic program of extermination. To the original commenter’s point, I agree: David Cole should not be considered the arbiter or even the starting point of Revisionist research. In any case, I’m not a fan of Cole or his writing in general. Castle Hill’s Holocaust Handbooks series is a treasure trove of information. Thomas Dalton’s “The Holocaust Debate: A New Look at Both Sides” is the best starting point for someone who is unsure of their position, and even for someone who already leans one way or the other. Personally, I don’t believe that any such event as that known as “the Holocaust” happened. But I also know that this is not the mission of Counter-Currents, so I will leave it at that.
I am a fan of David Cole’s political analysis. He’s not anti-White but he’s not one of us, either, so he sees things differently. And that difference is often refreshing and challenging. So, I read past the obnoxiousness to tease out the truffles.
There is no better introduction to the Jewish question than David Duke’s book, “Jewish Supremacism.”
It’s contemporary, well researched and opens a window into how Jews control, whether directly or indirectly, every major lever of power in America today.
Hi Don,
I do need to check that one out. Thanks for the reminder. I believe I might have unjustly left Duke out of this discussion.
Spencer: I contacted David Duke. He will send you a free copy of “Jewish Supremacism” if you contact him.
https://davidduke.com/
Thank you, Don. I will be in touch with him.
This is a great essay and Spencer is to be applauded for doing yeoman’s work so elegantly. Huzzah!
But….
‘But to blame the Jews for this state of affairs would be overly simplistic.’
The question isn’t whether such a claim is ‘simplistic’ or not.
The question is how much and how often ‘It’s the Jews’!’ will accurately capture the underlying facts of some given piece of new outrage or degeneracy or attack against Whites.
In my entire life dealing with Jews, I have never encountered in real life a Jew whose politics started with the premise that Whites should rule themselves in the countries of their ancestors.
Never.
For the Jew, the instant they set their foot inside a polity, that polity must submit to Jewish needs.
Comb through archives of error, mendacity and vindictiveness that make up all the White violations of racial solidarity. Take out the Jewish influence over those Whites and what do you have? Not much.
Before the Jews came along, the major struggles in White life in lower North America were rural vs industrial (mirroring the same struggle in the English and German homelands of so many settlers and immigrants) and labor versus capital (ditto). Without the Jews to exploit these fractures, these would have been very hard to fix, but not impossible (as the post-WWII collaboration between labor and capital that came out of the New Deal War Machine exemplifies).
The Jews exploited these fractures to give them power in the labor movement (they already had power in finance). The Jewish self-dealing edged out the owner-operator and each successive ‘crash’ of wave of ‘the business cycle’ allowed them to consolidate more and more. The Jews in the labor movement made sure the Jews in finance were never consistently targeted the way White businesses were.
Pick some outrage against Whites or White values of common sense and common decency. You take the bet that it’s not possible to find Jews significantly involved and I’ll take the other side of that bet. We do that for a year.
Whose pile of shekels you think will be higher.
Do you support the normalization between Whites and Blacks in America ?
History shows that for some 4oo+ years the Whites have been having undue influence over them.
What do you suggest be done to correct this ?
@ Jeff – As this is a public forum, I will make a suggestion. I suggest that Blacks take advantage of the openly anti-White political reality we are living under and use this opportunity to remove themselves, completely, from each and every White country, refuse all aid and association with White societies, and build their own damn thing! Given the implied and explicit superiority of Blacks that is rubbed in my face every single day, I am quite certain that the Black race will absolutely thrive without White interference of any kind. Any attempts by White people to offer any form of help whatsoever should be rebuffed by Blacks as “White supremacy”. Best regards to you.
Excellent introduction, well done! I will be sure to archive this
“[Nazis] really weren’t as bad as everyone says.” “The National Socialists can be called extremists, and of course they were no strangers to atrocity during the war”
You sort of lost me with these gems here. Other than that, I thought this to be an informative essay, particularly your thesis/antithesis of “So where the Jewish population presumes its own innocence, equality, and victimhood, the white population concomitantly presumes its own guilt, inferiority, and supremacy.” And of course all the various plugs.
I feel that more often than not that calling something “anti-Semitic” is a combination of artifice, subterfuge, and stratagem. It’s a sort of Kafka trap where you’re the one at fault for having the audacity to notice that many Jews are leftists who support subversive causes. It puts you on the defense. Criticism of any wealthy Jew, George Soros, is an example of this. Woe to any upper-middle class goy who is in a political race against a billionaire Jew and pointing out his Elohim-tier wealth status. That’s anti-Semitic! Basically Jews are simply beyond reproach. Recently there was a big kerfuffle about, I forget if it was the ACLU, but some liberal organization was arguing that the government money going to Hasidic schools where kids are failing could be going to students of color. That of course got a chorus of Jews kvetching about how Jews aren’t white, who the Hasids are a marginalized community, and of course… ANTI-SEMITISM!
I feel that MacDonald does a good job going about this theories from the lens of the humanities but other than that he has no hard numeric or statistical data to back up his claims.
I think the ultimate reason why leftist Jews who are Zionist Jewish nationalists don’t like wignats and vice-versa, why wignats don’t like Israel and Jews is because they are mirror images of each other. Israel, is everything white nationalists want, a hyper-ethnocentric ethnostate.
“By “white supremacy” in this context, I don’t mean its common meaning — that of racist whites lording it over innocent non-whites because of racism”
Why are you giving energy to and legitimising “racism” which is an anti-White slur?
Hi Devon,
I’m not. By using variations on the anti-white term “racist” twice in the above passage, I was undermining it with redundancy. Sorry if I did not make this clear enough. Thanks.
People must act with wisdom. If everyone acted with wisdom, then crime, poverty, and war would disappear.
That’s a beautiful statement!
If everyone acted with wisdom, then crime, poverty, and war would disappear.
And then would the rulers do? Crime, poverty and war are the tools of their power. How could they rule peoples without such tools?
@Kok Bori – (Apologies for the lack of an umlaut)
“And then would the rulers do? Crime, poverty and war are the tools of their power. How could they rule peoples without such tools?”
^^ Now, that is a very true statement!
Even if the term “Jewish Question” long preceded WW2, is seems permanently associated with nazi-ism nowadays. Calling it JQ also similarly gives critics permission to immediately disregard any points being raised. Better to pose simple questions such as, does this particular group have a double standard on this point and exhibit the evidence.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber 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
Lost your password?Edit your comment