Sunday, May 16, 2010

Jewish "liberal" pose has in reality always been a self-serving ethnic strategy used to gouge-out U.S. Protestant leadership in favor of Jews

John Mearsheimer and the Future of Israeli Apartheid
(The Occidental Observer) -- by Kevin MacDonald --

John Mearsheimer has given a fascinating prognosis of the situation in Israel. The basic argument is as follows... {jump}
·An apartheid Israel is non-viable for several reasons: The information freely available on the Internet; continued outrage among the Arabs and Muslims; because it is “antithetical to core Western values”; because it endangers American lives; and because most American Jews will not back it.

·Elaborating on the last point, he divides American Jews into three groups, “righteous Jews” (liberals like Norman Finkelstein and Philip Weiss who are critical of Israel), “the great ambivalent middle,” and the “new Afrikaners” — people like Abe Foxman and Elie Wiesel whose views are identical to those of the politically dominant ethnonationalist government in Israel. At the very least, the new Afrikaners will support Israel no matter what it does.

·Although the organized Jewish community is now dominated by the new Afrikaners, this will not last because Jews, like other Americans are ill-informed about the extent of Israeli apartheid. “This situation, however, is unsustainable over time. Once it is widely recognized that the two-state solution is dead and Greater Israel is a reality, the righteous Jews will have two choices: support apartheid or work to help create a democratic bi-national state. I believe that almost all of them will opt for the latter option, in large part because of their deep-seated commitment to liberal values, which renders any apartheid state abhorrent to them.”
This is where I part ways with Mearsheimer. It is certainly true that Jewish activist organizations like the ADL are constantly going into high dudgeon at the very mention that Israel is an apartheid state. Any such assertion is regarded as an “extreme anti-Israel rhetoric” by the ADL and has the effect of shaping the views of ordinary Jews and preventing them from acknowledging Israeli apartheid as it already exists.

But how is this going to change? The reality is that American Jews are quite comfortable with a morally schizophrenic view in which they have vastly different moral standards when it comes to Israel versus the US. This has been going on for a long time — to the point that I started a recent blog by writing, “Finding examples of Jewish double standards and hypocrisy vis-Ă -vis their attitudes about Israel and the US is like shooting fish in a barrel. But their posturing on the Arizona immigration law is particularly egregious.” Recall that opposition to Arizona-type laws spans the entire organized Jewish community in the US, despite the fact that such practices are routine in Israel.

Jewish moral particularism is a powerful reality among Jews. Mearsheimer takes Jewish liberalism in America and throughout the West at face value, as representing “deepseated commitment to liberal values” that is central to Judaism itself.

In accepting this, Mearsheimer is taking people like Gideon Aronoff of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society at face value — always a bad idea. The HIAS declares,
Drawing strongly on Jewish tradition, we provide services to Jewish immigrants, refugees, and others in need – without regard for their religion, nationality, or ethnic background. We are guided by our Jewish values and texts. The Torah (Hebrew Bible) tells us 36 times in 36 different ways to help the stranger among us. This, and our core belief that we must “fix the world” (tikkun olam, in Hebrew), are the driving principles behind our work.”)
Aronoff makes it sound as though Jewish advocacy of immigration is part of a deep ethical commitment that goes to the heart of Judaism. But of course he never attempts massive resettlement of non-Jews into Israel, nor does he agonize about Israel's biologically-based immigration laws. His moral posturing is entirely directed at the US. Even a casual look at traditional Jewish society shows it to be highly authoritarian, with no concept of individual rights or free speech and deeply concerned about the racial purity of all group members. However one interprets the Torah, Jewish society has never welcomed the stranger, and that is certainly true of Israel.

Jewish commitment to liberalism in the West has been all about ethnic hardball, not about high-flown moral values. Jewish liberalism is the cutting edge aimed at displacing previously dominant WASP elites and their culture. It is not motivated by a moral universalism of human rights — a philosophy that is utterly foreign to the Jewish tradition. Rather, it is motivated by fear and loathing of the traditional peoples and cultures of Europe — and the desire to become a dominant elite.

Obviously, the vast majority of Israelis fail to hold liberal values, and historically the common denominator of Jewish behavior in traditional societies has been alliances with elites, often rapacious alien elites. Jewish radicals in the Soviet Union became "Stalin's Willing Executioners," perpetrating the greatest mass murders of the 20th century, and the Jewish left in the US rationalized or ignored it for decades. Indeed, the remnants of the Jewish left in the US are far more concerned about the imagined excesses of McCarthyism than they are about the horrific deeds of their co-ideologues in the Soviet Union.

The result is that Jewish liberalism is far better seen as ethnic strategizing rather than a core ethical commitment...MORE...LINK

Chris Moore comments:

The Jewish "liberal" pose has in reality always been a self-serving ethnic strategy used to gouge-out U.S. Protestant leadership in favor of Jews...and it's a strategy that has worked to a "T" as epitomized by the recent sequence of events revolving around the last Protestant retiring from the Supreme Court and (the Jewish-dominated) Obama administration tapping (yet another) Jew as his replacement.

And all those white-liberal airheads thought this entire time that Jewry was working with them towards a common goal of liberal universalism. (I doubt that non-white "liberal" ethnics were ever quites so naive, although they are equally complicit.) Why, despite their "intellectual" pretensions, white liberals are just as dumb as the white Dispensationalists who believe "conservative" Jewry is working with them towards a vision of "Judeo-Christianity."

Or perhaps in all cases, its not stupidity at all, but rather a conscientious, free will decision to spurn traditional Western values and Christianity in favor of the easy life of gobbling down the poisonous fruits that Jewry and its money and power-worshipping collaborators dangle in front of their bedazzled eyes. Whatever the case, they've all made a conscious choice, and will have to either live (and die) with the consequences, or work their corrupted asses off to set things right.

God knows I've done what I could.


Chu said...

oops. I guess I didn't serve in Vietnam...
This is definitely worse that George Allen's 'Macaca' moment. Blumenthol is caught in a flat out lie. Are the Connecticut voters going to vote a candidate into national office, when he can't even be honest on the campaign trail? I wonder which Democrats will come to his defense?

Chris Moore said...

@ Chu,

I notice at the linked article, after getting caught lying about serving IN the Vietnam war, the shyster Blumenthal changes his story to serving DURING the Vietnam war.

“I served during the Vietnam era,” he said. “I remember the taunts, the insults, sometimes even physical abuse.”

Next, he'll claim those who are today calling him a liar remind him of "the taunts, the insults, sometimes even physical abuse,” he experienced as a young boy at the hands of those awful Germans before he fled to America.

Oh, woops -- now the Jewish-supremacist collective is getting all of its embellished stories of persecution at the hands of those evil, intolerant Goyim ALL mixed up.