Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Neoliberal Brooks claims America's new elite is "meritocracy";in fact, it's entrenched Jewish-supremacist (the phony liberal establishment especially)

Steve Sailer gets it
(Occidental Observer blog) -- By Edmund Connelly --

Now I’ve got more reason to like Steve Sailer...His blog here paints a pretty clear picture again. His column is a coment David Brooks NYTimes column extolling the virtues of the new meritocracy compared to the bad old days when the WASPs ran the country. Brooks claims that “we have opened up opportunities for women, African-Americans, Jews, Italians, Poles, Hispanics and members of many other groups.”

In reality, however, the big winners from this “meritocracy” are Jews. Sailer points out that

"In 2009, 35% of the Forbes 400 are from one ethnic group that makes up only 2% of the population. So, is “The Power Elite” really that much more diverse today?

"If you break down Brooks’ list — “African-Americans, Jews, Italians, Poles, Hispanics”– by membership in the 2009 Forbes 400, you come up with:

"African-Americans: 1 (Oprah)
Jews: 141
Italians: 14
Poles (and all other Eastern Europeans): 6
Hispanics: 2

"Similarly, if you look at the 2009 Atlantic 50 ranking of most influential pundits, it’s half Jewish, versus 2% black and 0.5% Hispanic.

"In other words, this increased “meritocratic diversity” among the elites that Brooks is writing about essentially consists of the rise of Jews over the last century."

The fact is that the new order is reasonably seen as less of a meritocracy than a new form of clubbiness where ethnic ties among Jews ease the way into top positions. Ethnic cohesion is certainly the main story of the Jewish academic and intellectual elite that constructed the Culture of Critique in the academic world, and the vast overrepresentation of Jews in the media elite mentioned by Sailer suggests it’s the same story there. Indeed, Jews are vastly overrepresented as students in elite academic institutions even controlling for IQ.

This new elite based on ethnic networking is at least as corrupt as the old WASP elite and its family ties. The new elite reacts with angry aggression and charges of “anti-Semitism” if one even mentions that they are in fact an elite.

The old elite had a sense of civic responsibility and national interest. As Sailer notes, the new elite seems to care nothing about the long term success of the society as a whole:

"The unspoken implication of Brooks’ analyses is that American Jews should start thinking of themselves less as oppressed outcasts who need to go for whatever they can get while the getting is good, and start thinking of themselves more realistically as the core of the New American Establishment. Thus, American Jews should realize that, like the Protestant Establishment of yore, their privileged position as a de facto leadership caste bestows upon them corresponding duties to conserve the long-term well-being of the overall nation rather than to indulge in personal and ethnic profit and power maximization."

But the terrifying reality is that the Jewish ascendancy remains hostile to the traditional people and culture of America. Jews continue to earn like Episcopalians (actually more than Episcopalians) and vote like Puerto Ricans. They are the financial backbone of the Democratic Party and its coalition of non-White ethnic groups. (83% voted for Obama.) The organized Jewish community is a major pillar of support for massive, non-White immigration that will add 100 million non-Whites to the US in the next few decades.

The new elite is definitely not about conserving America for the long term success of the society as a whole. It’s about ethnic paranoia, ancient hatreds, and the desire to completely transform the society at the expense of its traditional people –elite and non-elite alike — at whatever the cost to the society as a whole. Hey, when it falls apart, just take the money and run to Israel...MORE...LINK

Chris Moore comments:

Another important imbalance (and more proof that post-Christian American "liberalism" is actually Jewish supremacist, and hell bent on perpetuating authoritarian Zionism both at home and abroad) is the hugely disproportionate number of Jewish Democrats in national office in the supposed party of "diversity." In the 111th Congress, there are a total of 257 Democrats in the House. Thirty-one of them are Jewish (all Congressional Jews are Democrats except for Eric Cantor, the only Jewish Republican). That's nearly 12%. (Again, Jews comprise less than 2% of the country).

And the ratio is even more out of balance in the Senate, where there are a total 57 Democrats, plus two "Independents" that caucus with the Democrats. Of that total of 59 Senators, 13 are Jewish -- an astounding 22%.

How many black U.S. Senators are there? Only one: Roland Burris, the only black in the entire Senate, even though African-Americans comprise over 12% of the country (and a lot higher percentage than that of loyal Democratic Party voters).

So it seems the Jewish supremacist Democrats have pulled a bait-and-switch on the "people of color" who routinely provide a big chunk of their votes, running as the party of diversity, equality and racial justice, yet promoting Jews (every one of which in Congress is a Zionist) in hugely disproportionate numbers to the highest levels of national office, and limiting blacks and Hispanics to the Capitol's service entrances.

And on top of that, the Democrats are "religious" supporters of institutionally racist Zionism in Israel, where Jewish Zionists don't even bother to feign dedication to racial equality.

Which is worse: putting on airs of pro-inclusiveness and promises of "access" and "diversity" in order to get elected, only to stab the racial minorities who vote for you in the back once in office by rigging the game in their own favor (as Jewish and white left-liberal Democrats do with routine), or not putting on phony airs and feigned pretenses of inclusiveness at all, but instead advocating true race-neutrality?

In fact, the whole phenomenon is not unlike Obama's putting on anti-war airs to get elected, and then escalating the wars for Israel being fought in the Mideast once safely in office.

The obvious answer to all this, of course, is to vote out the entire parasitic Zionist-establishment juggernaut of both parties entirely, and refuse to vote for anyone who isn't an authentic, universalist Christian -- which by definition is anti-Zionist, anti-racialist, anti-Judeofascist, anti-Marxist and anti-Neocon/Neolib. Problem solved -- both the Zionist problem, and all the institutional racism, wars, engineered domestic ethnic conflicts, leviathan statism, and Wall Street bankster-ripoff baggage that comes with it.

1 comment:

Chu said...

Look forward to Blumenthol for Senate in Connecticut run. They're already hyping this one.
And now Zuckerman and/or Senor consider running for NY.
Without the media hype and money backers, they would never get close to elections. Bloomberg last election was a 5 point spread, and he outspent his oppenent 16 to 1. People said he'll likely win and didn't go to vote. That is the wrong attitude, friends...

It's good news that Patterson never selected Steve Israel to run, but look at the problems Patterson is in now. This article illustrates it all.


“I think it’s become apparent that he should not seek re-election and should announce it soon,” Mr. Israel said. “Look, sometimes friends have to speak unpleasant truths, and as a friend, I told the governor there is life after Albany.”

Mr. Israel declined to say how the governor responded.
< He probably said, this guy's my friend, then please take this knife out of my back you rodef.>