Are Jews Really Hypocritical?

I disagree with you, Dr. Jobling. I believe there are many American Jews that are anti-Israel (not seeking its destruction just not supportive of it because of its infiltration by Zionists) and anti-Christian. I also believe that many American Jews have an unspoken solidarity amongst themselves that can be, at times, anti-everything and everyone other than Jewish. Being anti-Israel does not make a Jew anti-Jewish. And, yes, I do believe a lot of them are hypocrites. However, I do not blame them for the fall of White America. I blame that solely on all whites, Jew and non-Jew alike. I believe many American Jews put solely Jewish interests above all else. Just read the list of what weathy American Jews support. If they are not purely Jewish organizations, they are organizations with Jews at the top followed by multicultural/diversity-pushing institutions. The worst of the worst are American Jews of Eastern European/Russian ancestry. They are the most liberal of Jews. I am talking most not all.

I lived in NYC for over 30 years. Some of the NY Jews I dealt with (employers) treated non-performing blacks better than hard-working non-Jewish whites. Fear? Yes, and self-promotion-by-proxy. Who here doesn’t believe that Jews promoted civil rights mostly to protect themselves?

I would also like to see you investigate why so many Irish-American Catholics are extremely liberal and, to a lesser extent, Italian Americans.

JEWS & GENTILES

“Jews are hypocrites in MacDonald’s view because they support Jewish nationalism while undermining Gentile nationalism.”

“Jewish hostility to Gentile nationalism would thus seem to be motivated by disinterested intellectual principle than by a lust for ethnic power.”

I don’t understand the division of humanity into two classes (Jews & Gentiles), and only two classes. It certainly puts all Latin Americans, all African Americans, all Asian Americans, all Pacific Islander Americans, and all Atlantic Islander Americans into one undifferentiated blob of humanity, without diversity, nationality, or self-designation. It may be the preferred usage for the majority of the world’s population, but is it helpful? Ideas about nationalism, intellectual principles, and lust for ethnic power vary widely all over the face of the earth.

Donald,

I thought it would be clear from context that I meant white Gentiles when I said Gentiles in this piece. I use the term “white Gentile” in the first paragraph and thought repeating the two word phrase would be wordy.

Here are some examples of a non-hypocritical policy. Let’s see how well they fit the New York Times opinions as expressed in their editorial and “news” pages.

• Americans should lower the confederate flag from their Southern state capitols. Israelis should remove the Star of David from their state flag.

• American public schools should not privilege the teaching of Christianity and Euro-centric history over other religions and histories. Israeli public schools should not privilege the teaching of Judaism and Jewish history over Islam and Arab/Palestinian history.

• America should be a “proposition nation”, not a European Protestant one. Israel should be a “state of all its citizens” (or a bi-national state), and cease to exist as a state of the Jewish people.

I could give lots more examples, but you get the point. MacDonald’s and Sailer’s charge is irrefutable. But as Paul Gottfried has pointed out, Jewish-Americans are not unusual in this respect among diaspora communities. For a diaspora community, hypocrisy is natural and expected.

By the way, your article sets an awfully low threshold for being anti-Israel. By worldwide standards, being anti-Israel doesn’t mean you oppose roadblocks in the Territories; it means you want the state of Israel to disappear, either peacefully or by violence. Obviously CAMERA and the NYT don’t see eye-to-eye, but they’re both strongly and consistently pro-Israel by worldwide standards.

From my time posting on the JTF forum (I am not a cult follower), I can definitely tell you that Jewish infighting is real and huge. Right wing Jews despise the media (as they should) and the ADL despises right wing Jews. IMO the only problem is liberal Jews but its all liberals, both Jew and Gentile. Therefore I unapologetically oppose Hollywood. The fact that some Jews are enemies of politically incorrect causes is beyond doubt. But I see no reason to downplay the fact that the same behavior is repeated among gentile circles, and to never think a Jew can sincerely oppose the movements which destroy national character. That’s when opposition to Jews becomes an obsession, not a reality.

The majority of Jews cannot be hypocrites, just look at the intermarriage rates. If Jews are not careful, they will disappear from the Earth as an ethnically distinct Caucasoid (therefore white) ethnic group and religious community.

I’m sure there are a minority of hypocritical Jews, but what ethnic group is perfect? Name one, just one!

Supporting Israel today against its enemies is different from whitewashing the violence commited by jews during the founding of Israel. Indeed a fair share of the terrorism was commited against the British, the only power capable of enforcing the peace between two peoples claiming the same land.

I have never understood the logic of blaming the Arab states for the refugee problem. The Palestinians fled their homes because of a war and the Israeli government never allowed them back in.

That said the idea that the Palestinians are refugees 60 years after the war is a myth and that Israel has on numerous occassions expressed a willingness to compromise whereas the Palestinians have become more extreme and more indiscriminate in their tactics.

I think Macdonald’s works in terms of describing some of the culture of traditional Judaisms vs. traditional Europe is accurate. His assumption, however, that Jews are still locked into that culture is a stretch. Jews today have taken American universalism to an extreme. In short, they are not acting like traditional Jews, they are acting like Americans. Motivated more by insecurity than by a malice, they are trying to fit in by exaggerating the American ideal (the Black-Jewish alliance). With sympathy towards tribalism, I support the balkanization of America upon ethnic lines rather than a patriotic ideal. I believe Jews should start acting like Jews again as “nation of immigrants” is a flawed ideal, even for white people. Its time for people to stop acting “American” and start identifying ethnically, whether they be Italians, Jews, Anglo-Saxons, Poles, or Blacks! “American” is just a social construct, but ethnic roots are eternal.

Iceman, I partially agree with you.

Although Jews are, indeed, intermarrying at extremely high rates, they aren’t necessarily losing their roots as quickly as the other partners in these marriages who tend to have to convert and agree with the most important term: the children will be raised Jewish in order for the marriage to even occur. Of course regardless of how much they practice Judaism, the offpsring will always be half-Jewish (assuming the Jewish parent was full blooded). Although I am highly critical of American Jews, I wish far more were pro-white and conservative. Yes, they get blamed for more than their fair share but I believe their power and influence is realy the targets of the blame. As always, it’s the message.

Jews tend to be singled out for criticism when it comes to liberal causes due to the financial power they yield and use. And there are far more wealthy/confortable Jews percentage wise, than Christians. They tend to be more vocal as well. When 2% of the population is represented by 22% of the Supreme Court and this percentage leans extremely Left, all Jews are going to get a bad rap with Conservatives/Nationalists. Ditto for Hollywood and its eroding infuences. Ditto for so many Jewish participants in the legal process that works against us. There aren’t too many Paleoconservative Jews who are mainstream. I really can’t think of one. I mean media mainsteam. So although there are many Jews who are conservative or becoming conservative, unless you visit sites like this, you’d never know it.

I do not wish to see Jewish culture disappear any more that I do other white cultures. How we stop this onslaught is by banding together. All whites must band together to protect themselves and their cultures. Unfortunately, neither Jewish nor Christian majorities are acting on this.

David Horowitz takes a hypocritical stance: http://www.amren.com/inthenews/horowitz.htm

The ADL seems to be hypocritical when it becomes to holocausts, take the Armenian Holocaust for example.

They also seem to be just fine discouraging diversity as it applies to Israel (i.e. discourage non-Jewish immigration, etc.), yet they seem to take liberal positions towards US policies. They do not speak up against the fact that it is against the law for a Jew to marry a Gentile in Israel. People with the Cohen name, or variations of it, are not legally allowed to marry anyone with even a drop of non-Jewish blood. They would speak up against a movement in America where Whites, Jewish or non-Jewish, probably particularly non-Jewish, sought to make it illegal for a White to marry a non-White. (Personally I’m for freedom of choice as it relates to marriage, but I’m for taking positive actions to discourage miscegenation (primarily from the media, school, and parents.)

Maybe the Jews at the NYT aren’t hypocritical; I haven’t done the research there. But there is no doubt that there are some Jewish organizations out there that are, and they should be spoken against. But I’m glad there are many Jews on our side.

Horowitz may be hypocritical on this issue, but you don’t prove that he is. I know Horowitz is a strong supporter of Israel, but that may be because he supports Israel’s success in achieving the democratic ideals that he believes in rather than because of the nation’s ethnic character. Again, Horowitz may support a Jewish ethnostate because he thinks the alternative is the slaughter of Jews by Palestinians. But given his integrationist views, I think he would probably support a multiracial Israel if he was convinced it would be peaceful and prosperous, as America is.

From what I’ve read about the ADL, the charge of hypocrisy there is accurate. But that doesn’t excuse Sailer for accusing the NYT of confirming MacDonald’s theories.

I wonder what you mean by “our side” at the end of your comment. I hope you don’t think the NYT is on the side of the pro-white movement!

Ploni Almoni—

I’m far from convinced that the powers that be at the NYT wouldn’t agree with the multiculturalist project for Israel that you outline—that is, becoming a proposition nation, a bi-national, multiculturalist state, etc. Of course, many intellectuals that liberals respect, like Edward Said, believe this is exactly what should happen there, and Said always found an adoring audience at the Times. I suspect that most NYT staff would accept the two-state solution as an unfortunate compromise with the historical animosities in the region and hope for the day when integration would be possible.

Can you cite any instances of flaming Israeli nationalism at the Times? That is what you would expect to see if MacDonald and his followers were right.

1.) Maintaining a white majority in America, although desirable, is not analogous to maintaining a Jewish majority in Israel. The name of ‘Jew’ has been applied to individuals belongong to almost every race on earth. Coloured Jews are just as welcome in Israel as Ashkenazim. American Jews who support Israel as a self-consciously Jewish state aren’t too particular as regards the race of the Israeli majority.

2.) Arthur Jensen in The g Factor asserts that IQ is negatively correlated with conservatism, authoritarianism, and xenophobia. Whether this is because intelligent people are more likely to go to college, where liberal ideas are most vigorously disseminated, or because the negative relationship between IQ and conservatism is intrinstic, I cannot determine. But it follows that any group with a very high average IQ (such as Ashkenazi Jews) would tend to be more liberal than less gifted groups.

“People with the Cohen name, or variations of it, are not legally allowed to marry anyone with even a drop of non-Jewish blood. ”

There is no evidence to support this.

A couple points.

If Jews were truly racists in the purest since of the word, and truly viewed themselves as Semites, it would follow that they would consider Arabs to be their racial Brothers. The fact that they do not see eye to eye with Arabs is proof that Jews are not thinking in racial terms, but are thinking in cultural terms. Either this or its proof that they don’t consider themselves to be semitic. I’m going with the former over the latter. If Jews were “pro-semitic” racists, they would view Arabs as cousins and genetic allies.

A common mistake is to assume “Semite” and “European” are mutually exclusive races from a genetic perspective, but the two categories do not denote separate races. Both are Caucasoid, and they overlap in the Mediterranean. The terms merely denote variation within the same race. Just look at a forum like Skadi.com, which only considers northwestern europeans to be white. The Mediterranean Italians who are praised in this article would be considered non-white by the nordicists who consider Jews non-white, as both exhibit similar features.

Let’s not forget that Thomas Friedman, a full time columnist for the New York Times, was one of the great cheerleaders of the Iraq war.

Of course he didn’t say outright, “It’s for Israel.” He dressed it up in his “civilize the savages” type theories as expressed in “The World is Flat,” and “The Lexus and the Olive Tree.” Friedman’s theories are basically that we can conquer the world with pop culture and pop capitalism, and give everyone Western values and that this will be so GOOD for everybody. His writing is a view of the US military as an army of benevolent missionaries, bringing MTV and Pepsi to women in burkhas.

However, bringing the world under the influence of pop culture and making every country what George Soros calls “an open society,” is certainly good for Jews/Zionists. A world of pop culture zombies like we have in the US is a world that will not offer effective opposition to American and/or Jewish globalism.

I wrote:

“People with the Cohen name, or variations of it, are not legally allowed to marry anyone with even a drop of non-Jewish blood.”

Support: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=541829

BTW, I don’t think that the NYT is on our side….

Rob,

Why is it that when a Jewish commentator says he supports the Iraq War because it would spread democracy, Kevin MacDonald and his followers say that the commentator’s support must really be due to his ethnic loyalties? Why can’t we take statements by Jews at their face value? Why do you always assume there’s an ulterior motive?

Rob,

Why is it that when a Jewish commentator says he supports the Iraq War because it would spread democracy, Kevin MacDonald and his followers say that the commentator’s support must really be due to his ethnic loyalties? Why can’t we take statements by Jews at their face value? Why do you always assume there’s an ulterior motive?

Well, Ian, plenty of Jews admitted outright that the Iraq war was good for Jews because Saddam was considered a threat to Israel. It’s easy enough to see that some other Jews like Thomas Friedman would be clever and dress up “spreading democracy” as a cover for a war for Israel. On average, Jews are much less truthful than Gentiles.

Dr. Jobling, from my reading of Steve Sailor’s article I would respectfully contend that I think you missed his rather simple and light hearted point when referencing Kevin MacDonald. I did not interpret it as taking a “dig” at American Jews, but rather, Steve Sailor, aware of MacDonald’s theories as set forth in The Culture of Critique, particularly the supposed efforts to destabilize host gentile nation-cultures for their own collective gain, merely noted the irony that the person quoted in the article, a self-proclaimed Italian Jew, was being critical of the supposed desire of many Italians to resist multiculturalism. Hence, the clearly factitious suggestion that Kevin MacDonald was rewriting articles at the NYT to support his theories.

Ian, your reply to me still misses the asymmetry between the NYT’s positions on America and on Israel. You “suspect” that the NYT ideally wants Israel to stop being a Jewish state eventually, but we know that the NYT wants America to be a proposition nation (or whatever label you want to use), because they say so vocally and consistently. Even if your suspicions were true, the NYT would still be hypocritical on Israel and the US.

Lots of Jewish Americans are not hypocritical on this, and neither MacDonald nor Sailer suggests that all American Jews are hypocritical.

I’d also like to respond to your question to Rob, Why can’t we take statements by Jews at their face value? Why do you always assume there’s an ulterior motive?. We can assume the statements are sincere and lacking in an ulterior motive, and also believe them to be conditioned on the speaker’s ethnic loyalty. Why do Jews, or virtually any other ethnic group for that matter, tend to believe ideologies which favor their own group? Their (our) beliefs are both sincere and self-serving. No contradiction there.

Rob,

”On average, Jews are much less truthful than Gentiles.”

Any evidence for that? Or is that just naked racial bigotry? When I characterize non-white races in a negative light, I at least try to offer some evidence for it.

Bob,

Sailer was clearly being light-hearted in his allusion to MacDonald’s work. I consider that in execrable taste. When you consider that MacDonald has actually accused Jews of trying to “destroy Europeans,” I think that you should only make allusions to his work with the utmost gravity and circumspection. Hitler would no doubt agree with MacDonald on many points. Would it be light-hearted to suggest that Hitler’s ghost had bought the Times in order to confirm his theories?

Ploni,

It is possible to consistently support racial integration for everyone while believing in some cases it is impossible for historical reasons. The consequence of Palestinian and Israeli integration would likely be immediate violence on a mass scale, whereas that would not be the effect of amnesty in the US. If there was evidence that Hispanics harbored the same genocidal sentiments towards gringos that Palestinians feel towards Israelis, I imagine the Times’ view of amnesty would be very different. So the differences between the two cases could result in different judgments according to a consistent set of principles.

People’s views are obviously not always determined by the interests of their ethnic group. Indeed, white and Jewish liberals self-consciously hold opinions that are opposed to their groups’ interests. As such, I would require considerably more evidence that Jewish interests played any role in Friedman’s views.

Thank you, Scott, for proving that not all criticisms of Jews is rooted in “anti-Semitism” or hallucinations.

I am half Jewish, born of a Jewish mother. From my vast experience dealing with semi-Semites such as myself, I contend that there is no correlation between having a Jewish parent and considering oneself Jewish. I have seen half breeds act more Jewish then full bloods, and others try to accomodate both heritages. Then on the other end of the spectrum there are people like me, who identify more with their Gentile side. For many of the reasons cited in this thread, I find Jews to be world-class hypocrites, in that they push a leftwing agenda on Gentiles, but somehow make themselves immune from their own policies such as affirmative action. For example, consider the newsroom of any major media outlet, such as WTOP here in Washington DC. There are more Jews on that staff than in the Knesset. I have found that my liberal relatives always talk a good diversity game for the military, police and firemen (areas of little Jewish interest and involvement) but when it comes to areas where Jews excel, such as the media and entertainment, then it is somehow OK for Jewish media moguls to hire a staff that usually is disproportionately overwhelming Jewish. I am not anti-Semitic, just anti-Semihyprocritic.

Mark,

That’s an interesting point. I hadn’t considered the Jewish position on affirmative action and employment. It’s a rather different matter from the one I raise in my article, and I’m not quite sure what I think about it yet. Also, your family’s view of the matter is, of course, not definitive.

But what about the point under consideration in my article? Do you think the NYT’s position on Israel contradicts MacDonald’s theory of Jewish hypocrisy?

Also, as a highly self-critical Jew, you’re kind of proving my point that Jews are critical of themselves as well as Gentiles! It’s kind of a Catch-22 situation for you, isn’t it? If you agree with me, you agree with me, and if you disagree, you really agree with me!

No doubt, Ian, American left-wing Jews will criticize Israel, but not to the point of putting its very existence in danger. The criticism usually centers around the alleged mistreatment of the Palestinians, but for the most part when it comes to maintaining the Jewish essence of Israel, my mother’s tribe falls in line like sardines in a can. Hence, I agree with MacDonald and yet I agree with the Israelis for doing whatever it takes to preserve the demographic integrity of the Jewish state. I view Israel as the paradigm of White Nationalism. My problem is with those American Jews who seem to welcome the third worldization of America, and the Islamic tide overtaking Europe, and yet call people like you and me xenophobes, while not calling the Israelis on the carpet. Hypocrisy to the maximum. What is good for the kosher goose should be good for the Gentile gander, right?

“My problem is with those American Jews who seem to welcome the third worldization of America, and the Islamic tide overtaking Europe, and yet call people like you and me xenophobes, while not calling the Israelis on the carpet.”

It is not hypocritical because: “Maintaining a white majority in America is not analogous to maintaining a Jewish majority in Israel. The name of ‘Jew’ has been applied to individuals belongong to almost every race on earth. Coloured Jews are just as welcome in Israel as Ashkenazim. American Jews who support Israel as a self-consciously Jewish state aren’t too particular as regards the race of the Israeli majority.”

Well, I think the issue is, indeed, more complicated than I initially realized. I suspect, on reflection, that it’s quite likely, that the majority of Jews are both highly ethnocentric and hostile to Gentile ethnocentrism. I’d like proof before I was sure though.

On the other hand, it should be recognized that there is quite a sizable and powerful segment of the Jewish intelligentsia that is not hypocritical on these issues. The NYT establishment is part of that intelligentsia, and there are certainly others, like Noam Chomsky and Ilan Pappe. I’ve given sufficient evidence that the NYT publishes articles about Israelis that are just as slanderous as those it publishes about whites. This fact refutes MacDonald’s claims that Jews are a highly ethnocentric group (“hyperethnocentrism” is his word). Very few ethnic groups engage in the kind of self-criticism that Jews do. In fact, Gentile whites are probably the only other one.

And I think you have to admit that Sailer’s crack was stupid and ill-considered.

So, you’ve helped me refine my case against MacDonald and his followers, so it’s been a productive discussion.

I hate to go against someone who calls him- or herself Jewish Race Realist (JRR), since I consider myself one as well, but this person needs to be a Jewish demographic realist and face the undeniable fact that “colored Jews” amount to probably no more than 100,000 people throughout the planet, and Israeli Jews know that. Thus they can be accommodating to such a tiny minority which does not threaten their demogrpahic integrity. On the other hand, white Americans face a demogrpahic onslaught from Latin America, the Middle East, SW Asia and even Africa which is currently inundating them with unassimilable populations who will impose restrictions and values alien to the western mind. Thus the example JRR threw up is erroneous.

Ian Jobling wrote:

‘the majority of Jews are … highly ethnocentric’

The majority of Jews in America are self-hating traitors who detest and reject Zionism, Torah Judaism, and Jewish values. The Jewish rate of intermarriage is 50 percent. This is considerably higher than that of other ethnic minorities, e.g. Japanese Americans, whose intermarriage rate is only 15 percent. American Jews can scarcely be described as ‘highly’ ethnocentric.

‘I hate to go against someone who calls him- or herself Jewish Race Realist (JRR), since I consider myself one as well, but this person needs to be a Jewish demographic realist and face the undeniable fact that “colored Jews” amount to probably no more than 100,000 people throughout the planet.’

The fact remains true that Jews are not a race; and therefore, maintaining a white majority in America is not analagous to supporting Israel as a self-consciously Jewish state.

JRR has a point when he talks about high rates of Jewish miscegenation. Would a group as hyperethnocentric as MacDonald claims they are behave that way?

JRR, someone wrote to me yesterday and said he would very much like to see an article by you on MacDonald or other relevant Jewish issues. Are you game? Click on my name to contact me privately by e-mail.

This is my last posting in this thread, because although I am a semi-Semitic race realist, my game is promoting white racial consciousness and its distant cousin, white nationalism. Jews - even the Sephardic ones, whom some may classify as “colored,” although I think JRR was referring to Ethiopian Jews, are overwhelmingly Caucasian, as are most Arabs and other inhabitants of the Middle East and southwest Asia. While JRR makes a good point about the high intermarriage rate among American Jews, to prove that Jews are not particularly ethnocentric, to me it does not alter the unalterable fact that Jews as a group undeniably work against the interests of traditionalist white people in America. And this is a fact that we at Inverted World cannot - and should not - ignore.

Ian,

You neglected to mention an important part of Sailer’s post:

>Franca Eckert Coen echoed that remark. An Italian Jew in an overwhelmingly Roman Catholic city who lives in an apartment filled with Jewish art, she was in charge of multicultural policy under the former mayor of Rome, Walter Veltroni.

Following that are comments from Coen chiding Italians for their nativism then she expresses the need for diversity. Notice first of all that the Jewish NY Times reporter went to Italy then interviewed a fellow Jewish multiculturalist about diversity instead of, say, Catholic Italian victims of diversity. Secondly, this Jewish multiculturalist is living in an apartment “filled with Jewish art” but is criticising Italians for their ethnocentrism! Why wasn’t her apartment filled with African or Arab art - or even Italian art! - if she’s so pro-diversity? It seems she wants diversity for Italians but she wants to celebrate her own culture.

It is only after that part Sailer makes the comment you alluded to about the NY Times trying to prove MacDonald’s theories correct.

Jews are the international scapegoat. Every one focuses on the Jews in Israel and how they allegedly robbed the so-called Palestinians of their “country”. This issue gets more attention than all the other transfers of large populations combined. For example, after World War II, millions of ethnic Germans were evicted from various Eastern European countries. Germany quietly accepted these refugees and resettled them within Germany. The amount of people displaced was easily 10x the number of Palestinians who left their homes. If anyone is looking for hypocrits,look no further than some the posters on this topic. Ploni are you equally upset about the Jews DELIBERATELY evicted from Arab countries whose numbers exceeded the displaced Palestinians? It is bizarre,to the exclusion of any other issues there is this intense focus on the actions of one group of people who fighting for a tiny piece of land in their ancestral homeland after 40% of their people were murdered because they had no country of their own. I would also like address the ignorance regarding how Israel and Jews or “NeoCons” manipulated the most powerful country in the world to fight a war allegedly benefiting only Israel but not the US. Israel can easily take care of itself. They have one of the most powerful armies and air forces in the world. They are the 3rd or 4th leading exports of weapons and other military systems. The idea that Israel needed the US to protect from Iraq is absurd. Another untrue anti-semitic cannard is how Israel is only strong militarily because they receive massive US aid. The opposite is true . Whatever aid they receive from the US must be spent buying US weapons. Israel produces many top of the line weapons systems. The financial aid Israel receives from the US is actually hurting it more than helping it. Israel was prohibited from selling any Israeli developed military technology to China ,costing Israel 2-3 times the money they receive yearly from the US. Ian, I think you do a great job, and I admire your intelligence in not taking the easy way and blaming the “usual suspects” the JEWS.

MacDonald is right. Jews are guilty of “towering hypocrisy.”

Where Jobling goes wrong (here) is by accepting uncritically the specious claims of a group of rabidly Zionistic Jews in their family squabble with another group of merely very Zionistic Jews. As a matter of fact, the editorial position of the NYT has always been strongly committed to Israel as a Jewish ethnostate. What was under discussion (mostly during the Clinton years) was to accept the Palis’ right of return as a legal formality, only for it to be promptly defeased by (1) paying them off (with US funds, naturally) and/or (2) resettling them in other places. Canada was mentioned. So much for Jews being on the side of white nations against Muslims. And so much for Jobling calling other people’s analyses “threadbare.”

There is a lot of confusion in the minds of antisemites like MacDonald because they think in terms of culture and race but have little to no interest in or knowledge of politics. America was simply not founded as a European state. It is a republic, but it is also an Enlightenment internationalist project. The attempt to remake America into a Christian nation, or a white nation, therefore goes against the meaning of America just as much as the attempt to balkanize it by recognizing different estates, ethnic groups, etc. So it is a feature of American citizen-minded conservatism to consistently reject identity politics in the US. The “neocons” fit in the mainstream of American conservatism and there is nothing sinister or double-standard about their defense of universalism in the US and particularism in Israel. The two states were founded according to different principles. There is nothing specifically white or even European about the principles in the Declaration of Independence. If you disagree with those princples, fine, but that document was not written by Jews.

As for the European question, here I disagree with mainstream American conservatism. Mainstream Americans - not just Jews - look suspiciously on European nationalism not because of hatred for whites but because of WWI and WWII. Wrong-headed as this may be, there is nothing specifically “Jewish” here and there is no sinister conspiracy to destroy the white race; there is wariness about Fascism because most American patriots have been raised to see WWII and the Cold War as America’s crusades to preserve liberty. These same people also hate communism for that reason.

Most “neocons”, by the way, although they support immigration in the US, do not support it in Europe. They encourage native Europeans to “up” their birth rates, support American withdrawal from Europe in order to encourage Europeans to learn again to defend themselves, complain about multicultural PC madness in Europe, etc.

Simply put, it’s the delusion of American “nationalists” who are motivated by fantasy comic-book concerns and believe they’re living in 1936. Most European nationalists don’t care about Jews, or otherwise support Israel. Only fantasists in the US, which has no vibrant nationalist constituency, indulge in vapid paranoia about Jews.

As Hyperion hints, the desire to attack Jews comes from an attempt to defend “nostalgic America.” In other words, the viewpoint holds that America was a racialist paradise before 1960 and then the Jews ruined it. I hate to break it to people who hold this viewpoint, but the paradise never existed. There were always multiple races living on the continent, the only difference was that in the past, many Blacks and Indians had less self-determination. Even though there were Jim Crow Laws and before that Slavery, Blacks and Whites were basically operating in the same society, just with different levels of status. Is this really the racialist ideal? Is declaring the entire European continent to be equal to the Mayflower Anglos who founded to the country not a gateway to racial universalism? Surely the universalism started before 1960!

Secondly, if left-leaning Jews have gained influence, it’s because left-leaning Gentiles are in agreement. This is a free market. If the media did not have a target market, it would not be in existence. Why do you think CNN has more influence than VNN? The answer is that CNN sings the tune that America innately accepts, and VNN doesn’t.

It’s time to circumvent the distraction, which is Jews, and attack the source, which is American ideals. The serious European nationalists of today (BNP, FNF) do not push the Jewish question, only blind American people who are trying to defend an indefensible patriotism do. Can anyone really believe that Jews entirely operate in a vacuum, not effected by the society around them?

Concerned, The majority of Jews despise the Iraq War. The majority of Jews vote Democrat (which is a whole different problem). I have both statistical evidence and personal interactions which convince me that statistical majority of Jews are not responsible for whatever small amount of Jews Bush appointed. From 2003 to recent times, Jews have always had a higher percentage of opposition to the war than most other white groups.

Bush appointed Colin Powell. Should blacks be blamed for it? Bush appointed Rumsfeld. Should whites be blamed for it? Bush appointed a few Jews. It’s dumb to blame the average Jew for Bush’s attempt to perpetuate his viewpoints by appointing those who agree with him.

The Jews did not elect Bush. Overwhelmingly, “white Christians” did.

The fact is Jews have been lobbying hard to end the Iraq War. On this website, which supports the policy, it may be seen as a negative, but clearly the anti-war crowd (of which I am a part of) cannot blame the Jews, who are among the most outspoken. No other Caucasoid group (Christians, Anglos, you name it) has been as outspoken against this war as Jews. From my viewpoint, I applaud them.

I disagree with the liberalism of the Democrats, but yes, the Buchananites, the Jews, and the Democrats are all correct the GWB is a moron.

Mr. Jobling, Instead of using only Elias Khoury as evidence that the NYT is pro-Palestinian and thus anti-Israel, perhaps you would have a better case if you were able to cite some statistics over say a two year period and offer an analysis of how many articles and op ed pieces are pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel. As it is, your case is unconvincing.

Sincerely, Byron Jost

I said I would no longer post on this thread, but since Mr. Iceman has referred to me by name, I will politely and gladly repsond.

Mr. Iceman, I have not brought up the Iraqi War and I have not mentioned anything about Jewish neocons, so why the post addressing me by name? When I speak of Jewish influence undermining traditionalist white America, I am talking about Jewish support for increased immigration and affirmative action, and Jewish dominance of the media which magnifies white racism while conveniently ignoring the multitude of racist attacks against whites. That Mr. Iceman, is my beef with liberal Jews. Disproportionately, we Ashkenazim are very smart, very affluent, and very active in politics. Liberal Jews wield their considerable financial resources to promote leftist, anti-white causes. That is why, in my opinion, Jews do far more on a per capita basis to undermine traditional white America than any other group.

And as far as America being a racial paradise, yes, in 1960 America was nearly 90% white. That was indeed paradise. But today, due to immigration and high non-white birth rates, that percentage has fallen to 66% and is ever diminishing.

Concerned wrote:

“I am talking about Jewish support for increased immigration and affirmative action”

The mere presence of Jews amongst the supporters of increased immigration and affirmative action is not even logically substantive of suspicion. Prove that Jewish participation, or even overrepresentation, within the equalitarian movement is indicative of some sort of cohesive ‘Jewish’ agenda, divergent from an ‘American’ or humanitarian agenda. In respect of ideological inspiration, or active membership, or corporate sponsorship - is the presence of Jews necessarily indicative of an unamerican plot?

By the way, I don’t believe for one moment that you are a Jew. You are about as Jewish as a pork chop at a Bar Mitzvah.

Concerned wrote:

“Liberal Jews wield their considerable financial resources to promote leftist, anti-white causes.”

You are wildly exaggerating. In any case, as I pointed out earlier, IQ is positively correlated with liberalism and negatively correlated with racism, authoritarianism, conservatism, religiousity, and xenophobia. Any group with a high average IQ will therefore exhibit marked tendencies towards liberalism and equalitarianism.

JRR, I know Mark and I sincerely believe him to be a semi-Semite, as he says.

JRR wrote:

“Any group with a high average IQ will therefore exhibit marked tendencies towards liberalism and equalitarianism (sic).”

Hmmm. The Chinese, Japanese and Koreans are high-IQ groups and yet they don’t strike me as being particularly liberal or egalitarian, do they? The high-IQ Japanese egalitarian?! That’s a laugh!

Notice how I attempted to refute JRR’s point without getting personal. It can be done. But once you bring personal attacks into the game, I abandon the playing field. As I have said before, there are more important fish to fry. Other folks can play if they’d like - but not me.

And by the way, Ian, thanks for verifying my semi-Semitism. I was thinking about JRR calling me a liar and I was wondering how would a semi-Semite such as I, with a Polish last name, prove my Jewishness against such a ridiculous charge. Perhaps a picture of me at a Jewish camp website? Maybe a transcript from City College of New York listing the Yiddish and Jewish Studies courses I took? Or perhaps the coup de grace? A phone call from my Jewish mother?

Concerned, I erroneously mentioned your name, when in fact “Rob” made the comment. BTW, I’m a semi semite too, 1/4.

As for your last comment, my response is that I never denied this : -SOME Jews are hypocrites, but MOST are not.
-SOME Catholics are hypocrites -SOME [insert your ethnicity here] are hypocrites. -SOME businessmen are hypocrites

I do “deny” that Jewish hypocrites represent the Jewish population.

Mark, Look at the European media. It’s not nearly as Jewish, but its just as counterproductive. Look at the Gentile leaders (McCain, Obama, Bush) in America. Look at Chris Matthews (Irish), Keith Olbermann (who knows what he is). All of these people are basically following the liberal tradition. There is no reason to single Jews out because some Jews have erroneously followed the same liberal tradition, because they are just “acting American.” Instead, you should blame the society that rewards the media. The media is a reflection of a market demand and greater society, and that’s not my opinion, its just common business sense. You are blaming the symptom and missing the cause. The problem is the liberal attitude, and if Jews were not fulfilling the market demand, than Gentiles would be instead. Is Ted Turner really any better? Media Jews didn’t make America liberal. They merely adapted to the liberal tradition that already existed!

America was never perfect, it may have been sensible, but it always had a universalistic anti-tribal attitude. I don’t know about you, but I don’t believe “all whites are equal.” I’m not anglo-saxon myself, but even before 1960, Anglo-Saxons were declining in numbers as compared to other whites (Germans have passed them now), and multiple races existed in a less prestigious way, but still as part of the same greater society.

The paradise never existed. So Jews couldn’t have ruined it.

Concerned wrote:

“Hmmm. The Chinese, Japanese and Koreans are high-IQ groups and yet they don’t strike me as being particularly liberal or egalitarian, do they? The high-IQ Japanese egalitarian?! That’s a laugh!”

No one suggested that the inverse correlation between IQ and conservatism was fully intrinsic. It may simply result from the more vigourous dissemination of liberal ideas in American and European colleges.

Concerned wrote:

“And by the way, Ian, thanks for verifying my semi-Semitism. I was thinking about JRR calling me a liar and I was wondering how would a semi-Semite such as I”

The only possiblity I can see that is credible is that by claiming to be ‘semi-Semitic’ you are able to take upon yourself the mantle of the dissatisfied Jew, thus giving apparent credibility to your anti-Jewish opinions.

But take away this mantle, and we are left with a man whose views are no different from those of David Duke or Adolf Hitler; and the only mantle you wear is your own pseudo-intellectualism to disguise prejudices which have existed for thousands of years, and which have had many names, but have always been directed against the same people.

You are a clever man, of this there is no doubt. But then there have always been clever antisemites.

Iceman:

It is pointless to continue since you did not acknowledge the key modifiers to my obviously nerve striking comments. I used the words “disproportionately” and “on a per capita basis.” That is the point I am trying to make. Not all Jews are liberal (look at me!) and not all liberals are Jews. But while Jews may be less than 2% of the American populace, they exert a media and entertainment influence that is way, way beyond their numbers. And while the media usually reflects the culture, it can often influence it as well.

My personal experience and study of voting patterns lead me to estimate that approximately 60% of American Jewry is left or hard left, 20% is middle of the road, but left leaning, and the other 20% is like me - right wing, and usually hard or far right. Those numbers put Jews considerably to the left of the average white Gentile.

If you and JRR are among the 20% on the right, then we should find more to agree about than to disagree. As conservative Jews, or semi- or quad-Semites, we are an ideological minority within a tiny ethnic minority. Let us choose to drop this on an amiable note and move on to other threads and issues.

I strenuously object to JRR’s comparing Concerned to Duke and Hitler. There is simply no comparison between Mark’s arguments—Jews are disproportionately liberal and use their wealth and power to promote liberal causes that are hostile to white Gentile interests—and Duke’s promotion of Holocaust denial and 9/11 conspiracy theories, let alone Nazi genocide. JRR does his cause and his people serious harm by making this comparison, as it strengthens the perception that Jews use their history of persecution to silence all criticism of Jewish political beliefs and activism. Such unfair debating tactics tend to strengthen anti-Semitism.

I am certainly not saying that I agree with Mark about everything he says. I am simply calling for ethical debate.

Moreover, there is considerable evidence that American Jews have been disproportionately on the left in their views of race and immigration issues—see Did the Jews Do It? If you want to argue otherwise, feel free to do so, but make factual arguments rather than abusing your opponents.

I think many of MacDonald’s views are profoundly wrong and that he is a malign influence, and I also think that the rampant anti-Semitism among pro-whites is poisoning our movement. I will continue to assert this view in my writings. But denying facts or hurling abuse at our opponents will only weaken our side of the argument.

Both sides in the debate between Concerned and Iceman/JRR have had their say. I’m not going to allow this acrimonious exchange to continue unless the debaters become more factual. I would like to see both sides support their views through the use of published analyses and statistics on Jewish beliefs that are referenced either through citations or links. If you don’t substantiate your claims and merely state your subjective perception of the issues, I will delete your comments.

Please differentiate between my argument and the argument made by “Jewish race realist.” If you actually listen to what we are saying, though we are both defending Jews, we are not saying the same thing, therefore referencing us both as a monolithic entity isn’t logical.

I am not questioning that Jews are liberal, the stats I’ve seen (I am not just speaking intuitively) line up with the stats Concerned posted. Voting records, polls, etc, consistently show the trend towards Democratic ideals. I’m questioning the importance of focusing on this when American society, including both Democrats and Republican, is a reflection of a liberal tradition. There is no fascist movement, there is no “national socialist” movement, and there is no Communist movement in America. Truly, the two parties are more alike than different. If you think McCain, Bush, and Romney are outside of this tradition, I think you are being deceived.

As for Hollywood in America, again I am not disputing facts here. I am aware that it is overwhelmingly Jewish. What does it matter if Jews are popular in Hollywood, do you think it would be any different if it became less Jewish? Media outlets do not succeed without a complicit section of society. And what about Europe? Do you actually allege the media there is pro-white and anti-liberal, because it is less Jewish?

http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/world-jewish-population.htm With those statistics, I have trouble believing Jews “Control” Europe. 6,500,000 Jews in America, and no European country has more than 600,000. But the media isn’t any better there.

THE NON-EXISTENT “JEWISH QUESTION”

by Constantin von Hoffmeister

I have come to the realization that there is no “Jewish Question.” Reducing all the problems that Europe has as being the result of a “Jewish conspiracy” is downright ridiculous. This way of thinking leads to worship of Jews. Neo-Nazis and the like (believers in the all-powerful and all-influential Jews) do not give much credit to Europeans when it comes to the latter’s history and politics. According to them, Europeans have been misled by the Jews for 2,000 years. Neo-Nazis and the like actually undermine the notion that European man has free will! I say that if Jews demand one thing and Whites happily follow their orders, then it is the Whites who are chiefly to blame. Not to mention that most Jews are European both culturally and genetically. Besides, Jews are not a threat to Europe. One has to understand that the Islamic threat is by far the gravest one that Europe faces at the moment. Israel must be defended as an outpost of Western civilization. We should ally ourselves with the Zionists (in Israel) to solve the “Mohammedan Question” together.

The Jewish mainstream has not adopted the “neocon world view.” As a matter of fact, I would dare argue that about the same amount of Jews were vehemently opposed to the war in Iraq as were rooting for it. Noam Chomksy and Justin Raimondo come to mind. After all, the war in Iraq has not made Israel safer. On the contrary, it created more Muslim hostility towards the Jewish state. Hence, it is silly to say that the war in Iraq was fought on Israel’s behalf. It was fought squarely for oil and dominance in the Middle East on behalf of AmeriKa. AmeriKa controls Israel and not the other way around. Many Jews in Israel resent the influence that AmeriKa has over the Jewish state and therefore want all financial aid to the Jewish state cut off. I support this view. The Palestinians never existed as a people, and Palestine never was a state. Israel is the legitimate home of the Jewish people. Where else would Jews emigrate to?

While the Mohammedans occupy significant areas of Europe, the world whines because a tiny strip of land in the Middle East is inhabited (NOT occupied) by Jews. Talking about hypocrisy!

Is it any surprise that the majority of Jews are opposed to European nationalism if the majority of European nationalists are openly anti-Semitic? These lunatics drive away Jewish support. Also, one has to keep in mind that the persecution of the Jews under the Hitler regime has created a deep-rooted psychological barrier in the Jews’ collective mind against supporting any kind of radical European nationalism. During World War I, many Jews fought bravely and loyally for Germany. During the Third Reich, many Zionists supported the Nazis (while many Nazis supported the Zionists). What did the Jews get in return? A stay in a concentration camp or execution, that is what!

I guess the Mohammedan apologists also supported the Kosovo Muslims. The majority of Israelis, on the other hand, supported the righteous cause of Serbia in suppressing these separatist terrorists. After all, it was mostly Serbians in World War II that rescued Jews from the clutches of the Albanians and the Croatian Ustasha. Serbian partisans fought vehemently against the Fascist aggressors. Again, this shows that Israel does INDEED care about the survival of Europe. Most Israelis support Europe’s struggle against its number one enemy - Islam. They do so not because they only care about the welfare of Jews but because they realize that they belong to Western civilization and would like to see it survive. Being anti-Israel means being pro-Fascist.

Communists, because of the historical legacy of Jewish anti-Fascist activism, must by default be pro-Israel. After all, the internationalist Czech Brigade, made up of East-European Communist volunteers (both Jewish and non-Jewish) and supported by the Soviet Union (under the aegis of Georgy Dimitrov who said that he himself would have fought on behalf of Israel if he had been younger), fought for the independence of Israel. As Arnold Krammer says in his book “THE FORGOTTEN FRIENDSHIP: Israel and the Soviet Bloc, 1947-53”: “Mikuni’s [General Secretary of the Communist Party of Palestine] project was based on the concept of the International Brigades which came to the aid of the Spanish Republic during the civil war of 1936.” Stalin’s closest confidant, Malenko, urged the youth of Eastern Europe to support Israel’s struggle on 21 June 1948 at a press conference in Prague. After the war, most members of the Czech Brigade stayed in Israel, some of them founding the Kibbutz Kerem Ma’ha’ral.

Also, many influential racial thinkers today are Jews. For example, Michael Levin wrote the widely acclaimed book WHY RACE MATTERS. Neither 300 nor LORD OF THE RINGS were “Jewish films.” Frank Miller, who wrote the comic book on which 300 is based, is not a Jew. Zack Snyder, the director of 300, is not a Jew. J.R.R. Tolkien, who wrote THE LORD OF THE RINGS, was not a Jew. Peter Jackson, who directed the THE LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy, is not a Jew. This, of course, does not mean that Jews have not contributed positively in the area of film. Stanley Kubrick, arguably the most brilliant director of the 20th century (and very pro-European as most of his movies show), was a Jew. Also, Kirk Douglas, who starred in the great pro-European epics THE VIKINGS and THE ODYSSEY, was a Jew.

Because of Hitler’s over the top racist (against fellow Whites!) and anti-Semitic policies, the West now views ALL racialist thought as intrinsically evil. For example, why did Hitler (the Antichrist of Anti-Europe) declare war on AmeriKa, a White (and predominantly Germanic!) country that had sane and progressive racial policies (such as the practice of eugenics and segregation)? Hitlerites and anti-Semites are the real enemies of Europe.

Since Israel is a White Western nation, it is high time for it to join the European Union. This would be the culmination of the millennia-old struggle of the Jewish people to successfully integrate themselves into the European ethnos. The Jews are a European ethnic group (both genetically and culturally), like the Poles, contributing with their rich culture and traditions to the greatness and superiority of European civilization. The Jews’ religion has been the basis for European Christendom. The glory of the Crusades was indirectly based on the theological thought of ancient Jews in the Middle East (back when Jews were still a Semitic people). Israel should be stocked with nuclear weapons, so that any Muslim state will think twice before attacking it.

The geographical location of Israel is irrelevant. Europe is not a geographical term but rather a cultural one. Wherever Europeans have established civilizational outposts, another part of Europe has come into existence. AmeriKa is as much a European country as Israel is. Of course, today, AmeriKa is in opposition to the interests of the European peoples worldwide. Hence, AmeriKa is in opposition to Europe PROPER. However, that does not mean that one day AmeriKa will not return to its rightful place: into the bosom of Mater Evropa.

You’re right Iceman. I shouldn’t have conflated your position with JRR’s.

Ian,

One thing to keep in mind is that Jews have only started to intermarry relatively recently. Alan Dershowitz writes about this in The Vanishing American Jew. The fact that they refused to be absorbed is what kept them around for so many years, and this is great. All White ethnics should be able to preserve their own “sub-race.” (Jews are a sub-race (ethnic group) of Whites, just as Italians, Irish, Germans, Russians, English, etc. are.)

White within-group competition is natural to a certain extent, as all White ethnic groups tend to be more sentimental to their own and less so towards other White ethnic groups, just as Whites as a broad group tend to have greater feeling towards Whites than say Blacks, for example. I’m 75% Norwegian, with the rest being Swedish, Scottish, and German, in declining predominance. I care more for the Norwegian people than other White ethic groups in general (I keep this to myself), and yet I recognize the hard and fast differences between Whites, Blacks, and Asians, and would prefer to be around other Whites, as opposed to Blacks or Asians, even though they may not be part of my aforementioned ethic groups.

The reality is that competition amongst ethnic groups can produce resentment and jealousy, especially when a relatively small group arises to elite status, helped by a high median IQ. With Jews, religion added a particular flair as the “other,” and, unfortunately, as previous generations witnessed, pogroms and genocide happened. A continuum of strife has happened throughout all history amongst different ethnic groups, even when they are of the same race. Throughout American history we’ve had less of it than Europe, because the other two “major” races share a greater percentage of the population than the latter, so the attention as been focused on them more so than White sub-races.

Here’s a great article (from the NYT surprisingly) about Syrian Jews, who compose a very small fraction of today’s Jewish populace (80% of all Jews (today) are Ashkenazi. n 1931, it was 92%): http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/14/magazine/14syrians-t.html

As the readers can hopefully see, there’s a lot that Whites as a whole could learn from the Jews, including Syrian Jews, who are Mizrahi (non-White yet Caucasian unlike White Caucasian Ashkenazi Jews).

The fact that they refused to be absorbed is what kept them around for so many years, and this is great.

Religion was a barrier to entry. In most cases differentiating white ethnicities, the barriers to entry include language and geography. In the case of Jews it was religion.

All White ethnics should be able to preserve their own “sub-race.” (Jews are a sub-race (ethnic group) of Whites, just as Italians, Irish, Germans, Russians, English, etc. are.)

Exactly. I share the viewpoint that micro ethnic activism is superior to pan-racial unity. If every ethnic group preserves itself, the race will also be preserved. I think this is an important distinction that every racialist has to pick a side on. I’m for breaking whites down into further groups, but not to the point of pointless conflict (Jews vs Germans, Serbs vs Croats, etc.) I’d also put my money on European activism over American activism, largely due to the fact that larger clearly defined ethnic enclaves exist inside Europe.

Very interesting comments. Actually educational. However, I’d like to point out that when people say “Gentile,” they mean all the non-Jewish peoples of the world (not just the “white” ones). We saw Iceman (7/17/08 at 1:35 am) say so when he said,

“Look at the Gentile leaders (McCain, Obama, Bush) in America.”

His inclusion of US Senator Obama as a “Gentile” is clear enough evidence that consciously or unconsciously, “Gentile” stands for all Others.

This is a problem because setting up a duality among the world’s populations distorts reasoning, logic, and clear thinking about these issues. We need to retire the label “Gentile” as a misleading reference to all Africans, Americans, Europeans, and Asians.

Well the word Jew can be used in rare cases to include converts and Ethiopians, therefore it cannot be explicitly racial. There are two main types of Jews, ashkenazi and sephardic, if you want to talk racially, perhaps that terminology should be used. Just as the word “infidel” means someone who is not a Muslim, analogously the word “gentile” should mean someone who is not a Jew. “Heretic” may mean someone who is not a Christian.

The fact is, Obama is quite popular among whites (though perhaps not >50%), so that would only go far to prove my point that the liberal values in America have spread to a wide audience. The point of including Obama in a list of liberals is to show that a diverse array of people promote the same liberalism that “white nationalists” with one track minds single out Jews for. White nationalists see one tree, the Jews, but they miss the forest, and its mainly a non-Jewish forest. Then they blame Jewish liberalism on bizarre reasons, still missing the point that Jews are liberal for similar reason to the multi-racial forest of American liberals.

I think the article confuses many groups of paleoconservatives. For example, Steve Sailer is outspoken on issues of race; Pat Buchanan is too to a smaller extent. Some paleos don’t mention race but are conservative in other respects. But there is also a recent unfortunate trend among paleos, especially paleolibertarians, such as Justin Raimondo, Lew Rockwell, Scott McConnell and Thomas Fleming to be very liberal on race matters even though these people used to be conservative.

Kevin MacDonald barely qualifies as a paleocon since Chronicles or The American Conservative won’t even publish any racialist article let alone anything by him. Also, supposedly Sailer disagrees with MacDonald and was just raising an ironic point: namely that one particular Jew in the Jewish owned New York Times lambasted Italy’s preserving its culture.

I doubt the New York Time’s expresses commensurate opposition to Israeli nationalism, since it publishes occasionally pro-Israel editorials. I don’t know how biased its reportage of Israel is, but it doesn’t publish the blatantly anti-Israel articles or editorials that one sees in the Arab or leftist British press.

Ajo, again, you are expecting Jews to exit mainstream American thought just to prove they are not bigots. It is mainstream in America to support Israel. It’s also mainstream in America to be anti-racist. Why are Jews accused of being right-wing extremists and simultaneously hypocrites for not publishing anti-Israel articles which would deviate far from American mainstream thought? Just like Jews do not publish pro-Soviet articles, as this would be outside mainstream American thought, they do not publish articles that attack allies of America

It makes no logical sense for a liberal, Jew or Gentile, to support Israel’s enemies. Israel is far more “liberal” and secular than its Islamic neighbors. I’ve never heard a rabbi demand the killing of all who will not convert to Judaism, but I have heard Islamic extremists demand the equivalent for their religion! Why then, would a liberal, who believes in secularism, support Islam over Israel? These are people who get angry at school prayers and Christmas Carols. These are people who flip out when they see “In god we trust” on currency and “under god” in the pledge. Yet you demand they support populations that oppose their values as proof of their lack of bigotry!

And again, Israel allows citizenship to non-Jews who are willing to behave, and its law of return is replicated in several european and non-european nations which would never be described as racialist states. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rightofreturn