Dr. Goldenstein’s Monster

2,491 words

Mary Shelley’s 1818 novel Frankenstein tells the story of a young scientist, Dr. Victor Frankenstein, who embarks on a twisted scientific experiment to reanimate a reconstructed human corpse, creating new life. When his experiment succeeds, he is horrified by the monster he has created. The creature escapes into the world but is rejected by humanity, which sees him as an abomination. Having been condemned to such a wretched existence, the monster enacts his revenge against the man he blames for his misery, Dr. Frankenstein himself, causing the deaths of everyone his creator loves. Frankenstein and his creature meet their demise in a vicious, hate-fueled struggle against one another: the creator verses the creation. The two end up the bitterest of enemies.

Frankenstein is one of the classics of English literature. The great irony of being tormented and eventually destroyed by one’s own creation has captured the imagination of readers over the past two centuries since the novel’s publication. I found myself reminded of the story of Frankenstein during the past several weeks as the new “current thing” has emerged out of the Middle East. The never-ending Israel-Palestine conflict has flared up once again.

I am not too invested in how the conflict itself plays out. The most important thing for me is that no Western money or resources — much less lives — are devoted to either side and that no migrants from either Israel or Palestine are admitted to Western countries. I have no sympathy for the Israelis or the Palestinians, and simply wish we could stay out of it. I think that the optimal outcome is the two-state solution, both to avoid migration into the West from the region and so that there would exist states where both Palestinians and Jews could be sent in a future where European rule is restored in Western countries.

^[2]

While I don’t sympathize with either the pro-Israel or pro-Palestine camp, I do find the divide which has emerged over the issue in the West rather interesting. Following the initial strikes against Israel by Hamas, Western governments, the mainstream media, and Zionist-controlled alt-media such as Rebel News and The Daily Wire predictably came out strongly on the side of the Israelis. Several conservative commentators such as the Jewish owner of The Daily Wire, Ben Shapiro, and his buck-broken pet Jordan Peterson made lunatics out of themselves by screaming for the genocide of Palestinians on social media.

Several days after the initial Hamas attacks, Israel launched military operations in the Gaza Strip. Both sides have accused the other of committing atrocities and a plethora of reports of such coming out of the region have already been proven false. The factual nature of any of these claims by either side is irrelevant to the point of this essay, however. In the era of the Internet, it’s extremely difficult to discern true information from false, and most people will just choose to believe whatever reaffirms their preconceived notions. Regardless of which reported atrocities are fact or fiction, there has been a large showing of support for Palestine among the public in Western countries, including large demonstrations championing the Palestinian cause.

Several polls in various Western countries bear this out. CNN reported ^[3] that 50% of Americans believe Israel’s military response to Hamas is justified. However, when broken down by age, their survey showed that 81% of Americans aged 65 and over support Israel’s military actions, 56% for ages 50-54, 44% for ages 35-49, and only 27% for ages 18-34. According to Deutsche Welle ^[4], 63% of Germans believe that Israel’s policies towards Palestine are unjust. The Times of Israel claims ^[5] that 56% of Britons hold at least some of what the publication considers anti-Israel sentiments. For what these polls are worth, they suggest that Israel has lost a lot of sympathy which it once had among the publics of Western countries.

Before we understand where this general attitude is coming from, we must first understand where this is not coming from. These figures are not indicative of the number of white people aware of the negative effects that Jewish influence and Zionism have had the on the group interests of peoples of European descent. While I do believe that the number whites who are both racially conscious and aware of the Jewish question has increased significantly over the past decade, the numbers aren’t nearly high enough to cause this big of a shift in attitudes. I think white advocates can take heart in the progress we’ve made towards exposing the malignant influence of Zionism in the West, but I don’t believe that we can be credited with the general public losing sympathy for Israel. Rather, I think that the organized Jewish community only have themselves to blame for that.

To explain why, we must understand the impact which Jewish influence has had on the West over the past century. In his groundbreaking book The Culture of Critique, Dr. Kevin MacDonald outlined how Jewish-led intellectual movements during the twentieth century created the present-day zeitgeist under which Jews became the most powerful group in the United States and the West. Their strategy was to break white ethnocentrism by levying a moral indictment against it through the lens of an egalitarian universalist worldview while maintaining Jewish ethnic cohesion for themselves. In the latter half of the twentieth century, Jewish particularism would be justified by their purportedly unique victimhood status following the Holocaust.

The Culture of Critique outlines several Jewish-led movements, including Boasian anthropology, which denied any innate differences between the races; psychoanalysis; critical theory, which pathologized healthy social mores among people of European descent; and the Jewish involvement in mass non-white immigration into the West. Dr. MacDonald later wrote of neoconservatism. While neoconservatism was also a Jewish-led movement, he noted that it was somewhat of a departure from the worldview advanced by the aforementioned ones. The goal of neoconservatism was to harness the military power of the United States and its allies in order to serve the geopolitical interests of the State of Israel. So again, serving Jewish interests was at its core, but neoconservatism relied on a slightly different set of values — faux patriotism, national security, spreading democracy, etc. — to justify doing so.

Present-day clown world is the result of several decades of the ideas advanced by these intellectual movements holding sway over the ruling class in the West. While Jews are not solely responsible, they’ve played a pivotal role in mass non-white immigration into the West (including Muslims), inculcating ethnic resentment among non-whites, and instilling a universalist, egalitarian worldview into the white majorities of Western countries. This inadvertently laid the foundation for the Left-wing pro-Palestine movement in the West which seems to have taken a sizeable amount of sympathy away from the cause of Zionism.

Israel is a glaring contradiction of the values which the organized Jewish community has advocated for Western countries. Israel is an explicitly Jewish ethnostate that is unafraid of asserting the Jewish dominance over the country, often by violent means. For decades, this has been justified by narratives of Jewish suffering during the Second World War. However, it seems now that the ability of Jewish victimhood narratives to win sympathy for Israel’s actions in Palestine is wearing thin. The new generation, for whom the Second World War is a faded memory of little importance, have proven a lot less sympathetic to the Jewish state.

The pro-Palestine camp in the West can be divided into three parts. First, there are white Leftists who have fully embraced the universalist egalitarian worldview which the organized Jewish community has been instrumental in promoting. While they promoted this worldview as a Machiavellian ploy to undermine white ethnocentrism and transfer power to their own ethnic group, white Leftists — and even some Leftist Jews — have become true believers in this ideology and no longer support an exemption for the State of Israel.

^[8]

This could simply be the result of the amount of time which has passed since the war. It also could be because Jews have been decentered from the white guilt narrative and replace primarily by blacks as the biggest victim group. The most powerful pieces of propaganda for the previous generation were movies such as Schindler’s List, Life Is Beautiful, or The Pianist. For those who came of age more recently, the most powerful pieces of propaganda in their time were Get Out, Django Unchained, and 12 Years a Slave. Another factor could be that alleged Jewish suffering is framed as historical, while the alleged suffering of black people and other non-white groups is said to be both historical and in the present.

Secondly, there are Arabs and other Muslims in the pro-Palestine camp. They are simply supporting their own ethnic and religious in-group.

Thirdly, there are other non-white groups in the West in the pro-Palestine movement. They likewise feel no sympathy for alleged Jewish suffering throughout history because they haven’t been bashed over the head with guilt over it for decades. On the contrary, they have been told that they are the ultimate victims and that they are the ones who are owed sympathy.

Jewish activism has played no small part in both bringing non-whites to the West and putting them on a pedestal above the native white populations. While it might seem counter-intuitive, this is also true for Muslims, despite their general hostility to Jews. A few years back, Horus made several videos ^[9] detailing the Jewish role in Muslim immigration to Britain and the promotion of Muslims and Islam throughout the country. While there is significant hostility between Israel and Muslim-majority countries in the Middle East, in countries such as Britain ^[10], Jewish elites have used Muslims as a hammer with which to bash the white majority.

It is important to understand that Jews and people of European descent are separate groups, both genetically and culturally. Jews are not white. However, the pro-Palestine movement (incorrectly) views Israelis as white, mirroring the racial oppression narrative applied to Western countries — which again, Jews have played a significant role in propagating, only this time the same narrative is being turned back against them by the very people they inculcated it into.

Thus, the pro-Palestine movement can be seen as something of a Frankenstein monster for the organized Jewish community in the West. They played a vital role in creating and promoting the worldview which forms the basis of the support for Palestine as well as in increasing the demographic numbers of those who sympathize with this cause. Now, this movement is out of their control and poses a serious threat to continued Western support for Israel in the future.

This isn’t the first time that this has happened ,either. During the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Jews were crucial to the creation and propagation of Communism, an earlier universalist egalitarian creed. They had a central role in the Russian Revolution of 1917 and held a huge amount of power in the early Soviet regime of the 1920s and ’30s. However, much like today, Jewish particularism eventually became a problem for the Communist system, which wanted to eliminate national and ethnic loyalties. This especially became an issue following the formation of the State of Israel in 1948, when Zionism among Soviet Jews became seen as loyalty to a foreign state. The power of Jews in the Soviet Union rapidly declined in the later decades of the era, and most Soviet Jews would eventually emigrate to Israel. So again, as with Frankenstein and his monster, a system which they played no small part in creating eventually turned against them.

There is a white pill in all of this, but it’s important not to draw the wrong conclusions. Despite what some overweight Telegram neo-Nazi with a Third Reich-inspired pseudonym and Palestinian flag in his bio will tell you, those in the pro-Palestine movement are most certainly not allies of white advocates. They are equally as anti-white as any Zionist. The divide between the pro-Palestine and pro-Israel camps in the West is over whether or not Israel will get an exemption from the toxicity of globalist values. Zionists support these values for every country except Israel. The pro-Palestine movement supports these values for every country, including Israel. The only thing they disagree on is whether Israelis will get lumped into the “white oppressor” category or not.

The white pill in all of this is that the Israel-Palestine issue is a fissure in the anti-white coalition. Zionists, Islamists, and third worldists might have some common ground in that they are all anti-white, but beyond that, they have diverging interests which come into conflict with each other. The system could have a harder time juggling its various client groups going forward, because the glue which holds their coalition together might not be all that strong.

I stand by my position that what comes of the Israel-Palestine conflict is largely irrelevant. However, we should exploit the conflict as an opportunity to drive a wedge between the various factions among our enemies. The organized Jewish community lobbies for the United States and its allies to go to war against Muslim-majority countries that are hostile to Israel in the Middle East, while also pushing for the importation and promotion of Muslims in the West. They play both sides. We can, too.

We should use the State of Israel and its treatment of Palestinians in contrast to the values which Zionists prescribe for the West as an illustration of their fundamental dishonesty and hypocrisy. Why do they advocate one policy for their own people and a different one for everyone else? We should use Western government’s unwavering support for Israel in spite of public opinion to exemplify how the loyalties of our politicians don’t lie with us, but rather with a foreign country. Why are they so concerned with the security of Israelis in the Middle East, but couldn’t care less about the security of their own citizens?

At the same time, we should also use Hamas and their supporters in the West to bolster arguments against Muslim immigration, and perhaps even start a conversation about deportations. We should likewise help direct the fury of the Jewish censorship-industrial complex away from ourselves and towards anti-white third worldists for their support for Palestine. For example, if you’re a university student, get the Jewish students’ group to go after the local Black Lives Matter chapter for their rhetoric about Israel. Who knows? Maybe they’ll even get the Anti-Defamation League involved. You’d be redirecting the time and resources they usually spend on harassing white advocates towards anti-whites, and it also has the potential to get an anti-white organization shut down (albeit for the wrong reasons).

Dr. Goldenstein created the anti-white legion as a monster to terrorize us. But in a twist of irony, that monster has now turned against him. The creator and his creation find themselves in a battle against each other. Let the two of them fight it out. We only stand to gain from it.

The above was reprinted with the permission of the author from Endeavour’s Substack ^[13].