More (((American))) history

In response to my pointing out the self-serving historical revisionism of certain (((immigrants))), several people claimed that not only were there several Jews involved in the Revolutionary War, but that the war would not have been won without the financing of a Polish Jew by the name of Haym Solomon, who, I was informed, was “the primary financier” of the war.

Several of them cited a theme that I subsequently noticed on Twitter:

Mac ‏@Macdad25
Haym Solomon was instrumental in financing the US in the Revolutionary War. So thank a Jew today

Mordechai Lightstone‏@Motte
@Yair_Rosenberg is @bryanjfischer aware that Jews helped win the Revolutionary War, including Haym Solomon who helped finance it?

 Ina Gilmore ‏@inagilmore
Reading: Forgotten Patriot The Story of Haym Solomon by David Allen Lewis. Financed Revolutionary War with over 40 billion US 2005 dollars

The implied idea that this forgotten patriot merited mention with the likes of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson due to his “instrumental”, and indeed, presumably single-handed financing of the war struck me as highly unlikely, although I supposed that since Messrs. (((Greenspan))), (((Bernanke))) and Ms (((Yellen))) have effectively destroyed 97 percent of the value of the current U.S. dollar, it was not entirely unthinkable that Mr. (((Haym))) might have been involved in whatever led to the phrase “not worth a Continental”. However, this notion was easily determined to be incorrect.

As is my custom once my B.S. detector is triggered, I looked into the documented facts of the matter. I learned the truth is that Haym Solomon was, in fact, a legitimate Revolutionary War hero. He was a spy, he was captured by the British twice, he risked his life for the colonial cause, and as the agent to the French consul as well as the paymaster for the French forces in North America, he was able to broker the sale of bills of exchange from France and Holland and help Robert Morris raise money for the war.

In all, he raised $650,000, a not-insubstantial sum, which amounts to $16,644,272.43 in 2015 dollars. (1913 to 2015 data is the CPI. Inflation data from 1665 to 1912 is from a historical study by  Robert Sahr at Oregon State University.)

However, it is also worth mentioning that $650,000 was 1/1327th of the total $862,688,500 that the Journal of the American Revolution estimates was spent by the Continental Congress and various other revolutionary parties on the Revolutionary War. To say that Mr. Haym’s contribution to the winning effort is exaggerated by the revisionists is to put it mildly. And note that most of the significant efforts to honor that contribution were made more than 150 years later, well after the revisionists had begun rewriting American history.

  • In 1939, Warner Brothers released Sons of Liberty, a short film starring Claude Rains as Salomon.
  • In 1941, the writer Howard Fast wrote a book Haym Salomon, Son of Liberty.
  • In 1941, the Heald Square Monument, a sculpture designed by Lorado Taft was erected at Wacker Drive and Wabash Avenue in downtown Chicago. Taft began the work but died in 1936. It was completed by his associate, Leonard Crunelle. The monument depicts George Washington flanked by Salomon and Robert Morris and grasping hands with both men.
  • In 1943, the United States liberty ship SS Haym Salomon was named in his honor
  • In 1946, a memorial statue was erected to Salomon at Hollenbeck Park in Los Angeles. The statue was rededicated in 2008 at Pan-Pacific Park in the Fairfax District, where it can be found on the corner of Gardner and Third Street.

In summary, Haym Soloman’s legitimately heroic contributions to the American Revolution have been coopted, exaggerated, and weaponized as rhetoric in order to further the false historical revisionism of the deceitful, self-serving (((proponents))) of “the melting pot”, “the nation of immigrants”, and “Judeo-Christian values”. And those exaggerated contributions are now cited by various opponents of the Alt-Right in a futile effort to obscure the historical fact of America having been founded as a very real White and Christian nation, both material and distinct from the current multi-ethnic imperial state known as the USA.

These revisionist efforts are somewhat ironic, because Solomon’s domestic political efforts tend to support the Alt-Right’s perspective on history, identity politics, and the predictable effects of non-native interference in politics.

  • In 1783, Salomon was among the prominent Jews involved in the successful effort to have the Pennsylvania Council of Censors remove the religious test oath required for office-holding under the State Constitution.
Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose. Furthermore, of the 376,000 Continental soldiers and militia members who fought in the Revolutionary War, less than 100 were Jews. It is also interesting to note that only 7,000 blacks fought for the revolutionaries, versus 20,000 blacks who fought for the British.

Assimilationist liars

I’ve recently chronicled how various assimilationists, from (((Israel Zangwill))) to (((Ben Shapiro))), (((Ekaterina Jung))), and (((Andrew Klavan))) have either concocted or attempted to pass off self-serving revisionist lies about American history in order to retroactively write their (((tribe))) into it so they can claim to be “every bit as American” as the Posterity whose rights the U.S. Constitution was written to protect.

Considering that the purpose of the U.S. Constitution was to safeguard the rights of that Posterity, their actions in doing so are not only dishonest, but are literally anti-American. They are more cuckoo than the cuckservatives in this regard, in both senses of the term.

These lies include the following concepts:

  • The melting pot
  • A proposition nation
  • A nation of immigrants
  • Judeo-Christian values

Like any effective lie, each is constructed  around a fragment of truth, in this case, the section of the Declaration of Independence which declares: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

However, it is also self-evident that a secular atheist Jew, such as (((Ekaterina Jung))), who does not believe in a Creator, cannot credibly appeal to the Declaration in order to claim to be an American. And it is documentarily evident that, like the U.S. Constitution, the Naturalization Act of 1790, the writings of John Jay, Ben Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, and other Founding Fathers, and the Alt-Right nationalist position, the Declaration of Independence itself is directly opposed to the revisionist interpretation, as the document also refers to:

  • the connection between [the United Colonies] and the State of Great Britain
  • the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages
  • large Armies of foreign Mercenaries
  • the present King of Great Britain
  • the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners
  • the free System of English Laws
  • our Brittish brethren

To cite one phrase of a document in contradiction to the central theme of the entire document, which is that the People of the United Colonies are an English people, unique and distinct from foreigners, Indians, and the English people loyal to the King of Britain, is an outrageous attempt at deceit that relies entirely on the historical ignorance of the audience. To say that anyone can become an American because “all men are created equal” is a shameless lie. One might as readily cite it as evidence to claim it means anyone can become Chinese.

Now, I was aware of this deception because I am half-American, born in Boston, descended in my paternal line from an American revolutionary who died at Valley Forge, and steeped in the history of the American revolution. My family even celebrated Independence Day 1976 in Lexington, Massachusetts. But what I did not know, not being Jewish, is that Jews have also been victimized by the same sort of revisionist Talmudry to which Americans have been subjected by their assimilationist co-religionists.

In Cuckservative, John Red Eagle and I made the connection between Churchianity and the concept of Tikkun Olam, the Jewish mandate to “heal the world”. But, as one of the Jewish readers here helpfully brings to our attention, it turns out that “heal the world” is just another assimilationist lie, no more historically legitimate than the anti-American lies already mentioned.

“The central mitzvah or commandment for our era is the mitzvah of Tikkun Olam.   It is the defining mission of Jews to strive for the repair of the world by making society more just, fair, egalitarian, and sensitive. Judaism demands that we repair the world by striving for social justice.  It is the mission of Jews in the Divine Plan for the universe to repair the world by repairing man, by improving and advancing mankind.”

The above paragraph is a fair representation of what has become the defining raison d’etre of Judaism as conveyed by non-Orthodox liberal Jewish organizations and synagogues in America.  It is not a direct citation from any of them, but is an accurate paraphrase of what has become the canon of non-Orthodox Jewish liberalism in our time.

It is the “modernized” and contemporary “reinterpretation” of “Jewish ethics” as defined and inculcated by much of the Reform and Conservative movements.  It is also the “theology” of Jewish radical leftist groups operating at the fringes of the Jewish community, including the “Renewal/ALEPH” movement, the “Eco-Judaism” groups, the “Tikkun community” of people and groups that are satellites to the magazine by that same name published by tikkun-activist Michael Lerner, and what remains of the “Reconstructionists.”  Lerner, it should be added, discovers “repair of the world” even in LSD consumption.

What are we to make of “Tikkun Olam” proclamations?

The most important thing that must be understood about the Tikkun Olam catechism in the United States is that each and every sentence in the above proclamation is false.

First of all, there is no such thing as a mitzvah or commandment of “Tikkun Olam.”   Jews are nowhere commanded to “repair the world.”  In all the authoritative or traditional compilations of the commandments of Judaism, none list “Tikkun Olam”.  The expression itself does not appear anywhere in the Torah or in the entire Bible.

Those assimilationist liberals who insist that the entire “ethics of the Prophets” can be reduced to the pursuit of “Tikkun Olam” have to explain why none of the Books of the Prophets use the term.  “Tikkun Olam” is used sporadically in the Talmud, but as a technical term for resolution of certain judicial problems that arise before rabbinic courts.

The only place the expression appears in Jewish prayer is in the “Aleinu” and there it clearly has nothing at all to do with social justice.  In the “Aleinu,” Tikkun Olam is explicitly explained in the prayer text itself as the quest to eliminate pagan superstition and to see God’s rule of the universe implemented. It is a theological concept, not a social, political or environmental one.

It is in the interest of Americans and Jews alike, and in the interest of anyone who values either history or the truth, to continue to expose these “assimilationist liberals” for the liars that they are, and to reject their self-serving, ahistorical, revisionist falsehoods. This post also demonstrates why a broad-spectrum Alt-Right is more effective, and informed, than a narrow-gauge, white American-only Alt-Right.

UPDATE: Lies have ALREADY appeared about this post on Twitter. They are truly People of the Lie.

Blue Meanie ‏@BlueMeanie4
@voxday displays general cluelessness and paranoia re. Jews #Zionism #AltRight


ISIS is good for the Jews?

Therefore, don’t destroy it, protect it from Russia, Syria, and Iran:

According to a think tank that does contract work for NATO and the Israeli government, the West should not destroy ISIS, the fascist Islamist extremist group that is committing genocide and ethnically cleansing minority groups in Syria and Iraq.

Why? The so-called Islamic State “can be a useful tool in undermining” Iran, Hezbollah, Syria and Russia, argues the think tank’s director.

“The continuing existence of IS serves a strategic purpose,” wrote Efraim Inbar in “The Destruction of Islamic State Is a Strategic Mistake,” a paper published on Aug. 2.

By cooperating with Russia to fight the genocidal extremist group, the United States is committing a “strategic folly” that will “enhance the power of the Moscow-Tehran-Damascus axis,” Inbar argued, implying that Russia, Iran and Syria are forming a strategic alliance to dominate the Middle East.

“The West should seek the further weakening of Islamic State, but not its destruction,” he added. “A weak IS is, counterintuitively, preferable to a destroyed IS.”

Inbar, an influential Israeli scholar, is the director of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, a think tank that says its mission is to advance “a realist, conservative, and Zionist agenda in the search for security and peace for Israel.”

I think someone needs to explain the concept of “optics” to this guy. Does he really think it is a good idea for Israel to publicly ally with Islamic State? The Europeans are already less than entirely keen on Israel, and more and more Americans are beginning to question whether the Jews in their midst are on their side or not.

Coming out as ISIS allies strikes me as utter madness. But I’m not the strategic expert. The great Israeli military historian, and Castalia House author, Martin van Creveld is. It would be interesting to know what he makes of this, as he has written forcefully of how to fight Daesh.


The Littlest Chickenhawk clucks again

This time, he’s foolishly taking aim at Mike Cernovich.

The cucks are getting nervous. Their gravy train is rapidly coming to an end, because no one believes anything they say anymore. And the Alt Right is far more interesting, because we actually deal in societal reality, not cultural programming.

Look, it’s a matter of public record that I had (((Ben Shapiro)))’s number back in 2005. He’s not pro-American, he’s not a nationalist, he’s just another nominal Jewish “conservative” who is a professional member of the mainstream media’s Potemkin opposition and more devoted to fighting racism than big government.

And he’s a chickenhawk who went to law school instead of serving in the US military after declaring that the need for sacrifices in “the great battle of our time”.

Most of us realize that during wartime, sacrifices must be made … But taking such a stand requires common sense and the knowledge that we are in the midst of the great battle of our time.
– Benjamin Shapiro, WorldNetDaily, July 28, 2005

As for the idea that a cable network can grant anyone credibility or legitimacy, well, how seriously do you take any of their talking heads? How much legitimacy does the Littlest Chickenhawk have Meanwhile, he cries out in emotional pain as he rhetorically strikes out at the #AltRight.

I’ve experienced more pure, unadulterated anti-Semitism since coming out against Trump’s candidacy than at any other time in my political career. Trump supporters have threatened me and other Jews who hold my viewpoint. They’ve blown up my e-mail inbox with anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. They greeted the birth of my second child by calling for me, my wife, and two children to be thrown into a gas chamber…. Why are the droogs of the alt-right desperate for sexual congress with The Combover?

A much better question is this: why do you prefer the gas chamber for you, your wife, and your two children to Israel, Ben?

Ben, you publicly demanded the sacrifice of young American lives to your interests, a sacrifice you were unwilling to make yourself. So, why should Americans hesitate to sacrifice the lives of you, your wife, and your two children if they happen to believe it serves their interests?


Anti-semitism debate, part two

Louise Mensch and I continue to debate anti-semitism, Ann Coulter, and the #AltRight on Heat Street:

Louise Mensch:     So you don’t care that the left was correct about your racism and sexism? 

Vox Day:     We don’t care what they say or what they think, at all.

Louise Mensch:     You obviously do care because you’re employing tactics against this, you’ve just described.

Vox Day:     No, we don’t care what they do or what they think, but we are certainly engaged in a cultural rhetorical war against them, but we don’t care what they think about us. We’re their enemy, they’re our enemy, and that’s fine.

Louise Mensch:     But you’re not employing this against the enemy. I never see these memes employed against the left, ever. I only see them employed against people on the right. John Podhoretz, Ben Shapiro, Cathy Young, people who are 100% on the right. You don’t seem to bother with anyone of the left. Not that … By the way, God forbid that should be taken as an encouragement to go off to burn Hillary supporters with this stuff, but it’s red on red fire.

Vox Day:     I’m pretty sure they get sent to anyone who attacks them.

Louise Mensch:     You’ve put Ann Coulter in a difficult position, because she has said, not convincingly at all, that she isn’t anti-Semitic. And you’ve just described how …

Vox Day:     I don’t believe she is anti-Semitic.

Louise Mensch:     Right …

Vox Day:     She’s not anti-Semitic.

Louise Mensch:     … but then a whole bunch of anti-Semites are running to her defense by tweeting Holocaust cartoons at Jews?

Vox Day:     That’s what you’re not understanding is that the fact that one is not anti-Semitic does not mean that you have any obligation whatsoever to disavow anyone.

Louise Mensch:     Ann Coulter though, is being defended by a bunch of anti-Semites who as their weapon use anti-Semitism. In order to try and prove she’s not anti-Semitic, that’s not very helpful, is it?

Vox Day:     Well, but again I don’t think that that’s the objective or the concern.

Louise Mensch:     Do you guys even have an objective?

Vox Day:     Absolutely.

Louise Mensch:     What is it?

Vox Day:     The chief objective for … I probably … I don’t speak for the entire alt-right because the alt-right doesn’t have leaders, but I am alt-right, and my objective is the preservation of Western civilization.

Read the whole thing there. Jerry Pournelle did, although he’s been finding the whole thing a little hard to follow:

I’m afraid I wasted my time in trying to follow yet another debate about anti-Semitism, but I never did understand what they were debating about. While America has a small number of genuine anti-Semites (under any definition of the term), they are pretty well irrelevant. As Irving Kristol once said, America is a safer and generally more pleasant place for Jews than Israel is ever likely to be. Now of course there are organizations, mostly but not all Jewish, that equate any criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism, but serious people, including Kristol, found that absurd.

There are of course places where there is real anti-Semitism, but most of them are Semitic now that the National Socialists no longer rule Germany. Fascism isn’t even anti-Semitic although the Nazi’s (who weren’t really Fascists) were. Mussolini had many high ranking Jews in his Fascist regime right up until he gave up trying to prevent the Anschluss with Austria and made alliance with Hitler. At Hitler’s insistence he began persecuting Jews, but it was not part of the Fascist – rods and axe – agenda until imposed by Germany.

But Islam certainly is anti-Jewish, right down to their Holy Koran; since many Islamic nations are Semitic – certainly not all, since neither Persians nor Kurds nor Turks are Semitic – the term anti-Semitic has more political meaning than descriptive accuracy, and is rather useless in rational debate – but on a practical level anti-Semitic in the Middle East means anti-Jewish, and at least to those who believe the Koran, means war to the knife. After the end of days, the rocks will cry out, O Muslim, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him. Now that’s anti-Semitic. Only of course the Muslim who is to do the killing is likely to be a Semite.

Adding to the confusion is the very real problem I mentioned in the debate, which is that the only thing as potential dangerous to the Jewish population in the United States as 1940s-era German-style anti-semitism is insufficient anti-semitism. After all, DNA is destiny.


Anti-semitism debate, part one

Louise Mensch and I debate anti-semitism on Heat Street:

Louise Mensch:     This may surprise the people that have been following our debate thus far, but, I feel like those were all small, little, light-hearted warm up debates, because now we’re going to get into it. Because we’re going to debate anti-Semitism. I want to get a bit granular, because I was surprised and disappointed to see you flaming a very good friend of mine, Cathy Young – who is an equity-based feminist, for those of you that don’t know her, reading this debate – and a long time ally of Gamergate and has worked extremely hard to separate genuine feminism from the kind of “fauxminism” that bullies men for no good reason.

I can’t remember the exact tweet so you can correct me if I’ve got this wrong, but: “…as she would know if she were a real American,” as though she were not an American, or she were less American that you are, which I think is a) racist; b) completely ridiculous; c) unbecoming of an alpha-male who ought to show some loyalty to a tried and tested ally. What I don’t like about this, apart from racism in general, and I say it with reverence, because you of all people know that I’ve been #notyourshield forever, is that it seems to give quite a lot of comfort to those fauxminist harridans, who’ve always said that Gamergate is just about abuse etc … This is a woman who stood strongly with movement forever, and the first sign of disagreement on anti-Semitism and you guys throw her under the bus. So I’ll let you come back, what do you have to say?

Vox Day:     Well, I’m perfectly prepared for things to get hardcore, I’ve been listening to Ministry all afternoon in preparation for this. By the way, I did not know Cathy’s work on Gamergate. We are loyal; until now I did not know.

Louise Mensch:     (Laughs) OK, now I’m scared. Go on.

Vox Day:     First of all, let me point out that, in terms of feminism, Cathy Young committed something that is, in the eyes of the alt-right a … A significant error of the sort that removes any right to avoid criticism. She, very very publicly, and very very vehemently, attacked Ann Coulter. The response that she got was a direct result of that, from me and from others. You can even, if you wish to, portray it as the alt-right white knighting for Ann Coulter. I don’t think that would be accurate but you certainly could do that if you wanted to.

Louise Mensch:     Well Ann Coulter’s been … I mean, you know, please, she attacks herself. She’s been attacked by me and others. She’s said some rabidly anti-Semitic things, about the Jews etc. So …

Vox Day:     I don’t think Ann Coulter’s reasonably said anything that can be considered anti-Semitic. 

Louise Mensch:     How many goddamn Jews do they think there are in America, that kind of thing.

Vox Day:     There’s a difference between … Anti-Semitism, in its historic form, means hatred of Jews.

Louise Mensch:     Yes.

Vox Day:     And there’s a huge difference between hating Jews and wondering why the hell everyone is babbling about them, again, when the subject really has nothing to do with them.

Louise Mensch:     Well in this case Ann Coulter used the words “Jews.” “How many goddamn Jews does he think there are in America,” quote unquote.

Vox Day:     Well yeah, because ..polls show Americans think that 33% of Americans are gay, and certainly there … I don’t know what the exact figure is, I don’t recall a similar study being performed with regards to what percentage of Americans other Americans believe are Jews. I don’t know. But I would guess that the perceived percentage is seriously overestimated, due to the constant discussion of Jews, by American Jews, in the media, because American Jews in the media are prone to navel-gazing.

Louise Mensch:     Vox, Vox, this was Ann Coulter who brought it up herself, who made the remark, herself. Really, as an “Ayn Randian radical,” don’t you recognize this is entirely Ann Coulter’s own fault? She brought it up, nobody else did, she ranted on about the Jews. She outed herself! Nobody else was talking to her about the Jews. On the left it’s people like Ken Livingston in London. He doesn’t seem to be able to go into any interview in London without mentioning the word ‘Hitler’ five times a second. And it was Coulter’s own fault. No one was talking to her about the Jews in Israel. She was commenting on the first Republican debate, and she brought it up, herself, entirely herself, unprompted.

Vox Day:     Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t she discussing the fact that the candidates were discussing Israel, or Jews or something like that?

Read the whole thing there, and discuss it here.


“The Jewish face of immigration reform”

Yeah, so, about that….

Man featured in Time cover story on immigration reform is sentenced to 15 years in prison for child porn and sexually exploiting boy with brain cancer.

Naim, who immigrated to the US with his family when he was three years old, was named the ‘Jewish face of the immigration reform struggle’ after he appeared in the Time story. It was the first time Naim made his undocumented status publicly known.

‘My being public protects me because America loves stories,’ he told The Forward in 2013.

‘And when we hear about a good person — a person who is nice, who cares — we don’t want him deported; we want him in this country.’

No, we definitely want him deported. And all his family with him.


Jonah Goldberg and the end of Holocaustianity

A Twitter discourse:

Jonah Goldberg ‏@JonahNRO
1. Apologize for racist & Jew-hating, “kids” as they celebrate murder etc. 2. ????? 3. Total GOP victory. @Nero’s grand 2016 strategy.

Supreme Dark Lord ‏@voxday
Jonah, no one under the age of 40 gives a damn about Holocaustianity anymore than they do about the Sicilian Vespers.

Jonah Goldberg ‏@JonahNRO
Vox, 1. That’s horseshit 2. Even if it wasn’t, that’s not an argument for saying disgusting and bigoted things for laughs.

Supreme Dark Lord ‏@voxday
How much do you care about the Left calling you racist? That’s how much #AltRight cares about being called anti-semitic.

Supreme Dark Lord ‏@voxday
What do those called anti-semites for supporting Trump have to fear? They’ll be called anti-semites a second time? So what?

Hank Coates ‏@hankhank30
complete and utter horseshit. I went to school with holocaust survivor grandkids. Fuck that fascist.

Supreme Dark Lord ‏@voxday
Nobody cares. The Hispanics don’t care. The blacks don’t care. The Asians don’t care. Most whites don’t anymore.

Milo Yiannopoulos ✘ ‏@Nero
The left robbed racist, sexist and homophobic of meaning. The right did the same to anti-semitic. No one under 40 cares about any of them.

Nunuya Bizinizz ‏@wahrbear
I’m confirming @voxday’s assertion here. Early Millennail Jew and I really find holocaust whiners embarrassing.

AltRightJew ‏@AltRightJew
agreed. Unless you lived through it and endured it, not really interested in hearing you whine about it.

Jonah Goldberg ‏@JonahNRO
All day this crap. Thanks @nero and @voxday your friends get your back

Supreme Dark Lord ‏@voxday
Jonah, you know I respect you. But you did go after @nero…. and this was really nothing. I didn’t even call out the VFM.

Milo Yiannopoulos ✘ ‏@Nero
Guilt by association! A classic Leftist debate tactic. Also: you started it.


Spengler abjures neoconnery

Apparently the neocons are about to learn that they were just another short-term vessel for the Israel First, Last, and Always activists; as David Goldberg not only disavows neoconservatism, but also Bill Kristol.

No one in the conservative Commentariat has beaten up on poor Bill Kristol more than I during the past dozen years. I read David Horowitz’ excoriation of Kristol as a “renegade Jew” with chagrin; I respect David Horowitz  — and have spoken at his conferences on several occasions — and I reviewed admiringly his book A Point in Time.

But his choice of words was churlish. Kristol devotes considerable time to Jewish causes and genuinely identifies as a Jew, although his level of religious observance is low (as is David’s). Kristol certainly doesn’t think that he has reneged on his Jewish identity. But he is so absorbed in the cultish self-adoration of the neo-conservative clique, and so insecure about the perception of his manifold policy blunders (for example, his naive endorsement of the Arab Spring as near-equivalent to the American Founding), that his judgment of late has been dreadful. His third-party proposal will go nowhere.

Kristol makes the mistake of thinking that he still matters. The neo-conservatives enforced party discipline in the media and foundations they control with the same inquisitorial zeal that the Left applies to the persecution of conservatives at American universities. They crushed dissent ruthlessly, and declared anathema upon anyone who questioned them.

Now the American people have vomited them out. No candidate who took ownership of the Bush Freedom Agenda got past first base in the Republican primaries.

He’s right to say that Kristol’s sore loser third-party talk will go nowhere. Rupert Murdoch, Sheldon Adelson, and Reince Priebus have made it clear that despite their reservations about him, Donald Trump will be the uncontested representative of the Red Faction. However, despite his endorsement of Donald Trump in preference to Hillary Clinton, Goldberg clearly can’t be trusted to give a damn about Americans or the American national interest.

In addition to floating a trial balloon about the possibility of the Learned Elders of Wye jumping for what he, and they, have proposed as the safe harbor of China from the future wreckage of the USA, Spengler makes it very clear why he prefers Trump to Clinton.

  1. The Clintons are a criminal enterprise
  2. “Trump is more pro-Israel, and that’s a key issue for me.”

You don’t say. Goldberg appears to be getting increasingly delusional of late, as his explanation of why that’s a key issue for him.

“Israel is not only America’s key ally in a dodgy part of the world, but the cornerstone on which the edifice of the American republic was founded in the first place. In a July 2015 essay for the Jewish media, I asked, “Will Israel Save America?” The destiny of Americans — the “almost chosen people,” in Lincoln’s words — is bound up with the destiny of Israel.”

Fascinating, is it not? Goldberg would have us believe that the United States was NOT founded as a Christian, Anglo-American nation on the basis of the Rights of Englishmen, but was instead a proposition republic founded on the cornerstone of Israel. Still think this lunatic has ANY interest whatsoever in anything you recognize as your country, or even Western civilization?

It reminds me of an old Greek saying: whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.

It isn’t only Kristol who has made the mistake of thinking he still matters. It is clear that the Alt Right, with its total lack of interest in granting even a modicum of respectability to Holocaustianity and cuckservatism, is driving Israel Firsters like Kristol and Goldberg and Shapiro around the bend. They simply don’t know what to do when pointing-and-shrieking “ANTI-SEMITE” and “Muh Holocaust” and “my granddaddy couldn’t join the golf club” is met with a totally indifferent shrug. We don’t care. Not even a little bit. The existential crisis of the nation is a considerably more important matter than the dramatic histrionics of a lesser minority.

Now, the United States should maintain friendly relations with Israel; it behooves any country to be on the best terms it can be with a nuclear power. And Israel would be a very useful ally in the great clash of Christian and Islamic civilizations, or it least it will be if it ever stops trying to convince, persuade and manipulate Americans into fighting its wars for it, as it should for both its own sake and America’s.

But Israel is not the cornerstone of America and its national priorities are neither primary, secondary, nor even tertiary for Americans.

Nevertheless, Goldberg’s dismissive condemnation of neoconservatism and his recognition that it no longer has any hold on Americans is a welcome indication that things have truly changed, and that Fukuyama’s insane neo-Marxian vision of the worker’s paradise as liberal representative democracy is dead.


You can’t shame the Alt Right

It’s fascinating to see how SJWs and other media types simply cannot grasp the fact that the tactics and techniques that worked in pre-internet days simply don’t function in the social media era.

The rise of Trump has been distressing to many people on many levels. It turned out that so many people were hungry for a message of strength, after years of “leading from behind” rhetoric, that they ignored that the message came with vague platitudes and limited workable proposals. For Jews it exposed a lingering suspicion that there exist a lot of people who simply don’t like and don’t accept us as Americans. For Republican Jews, who pride themselves on voting with the people who have unwavering support for Israel, it was especially sad to see these people consider themselves on our political side. When Donald Trump inevitably fades away, and he will with either a bang or a whimper, perhaps these people will retreat back into the shadows. But it will no longer be possible for Jews to ignore that they are there.

It seems very, very difficult for Jews to understand that most people do not give a quantum of a damn about them. That’s not a bad thing, most people don’t care about Eskimos or Filipinos or Malaysians either. People care about themselves and their own nation. That’s pretty much it.

And why would Americans accept Jews as Americans if all they ever hear from Jews is a few of them on television complaining about how everyone hates Jews, how terrible, awful, and evil Americans are, and how white America needs to be destroyed? How is that even conceivable?

Here’s the reality: holocaustianity has timed out. No one under the age of 40 cares any more about it than they do about the siege of Jerusalem in 70 AD. A lot of them don’t care about being called racist or sexist, so why would they care about being called anti-semitic? They think being called a Nazi by lame old people is hilarious; their usual response is to bury the accuser in dank memes full of images that would give the average Baby Boomer a stroke.

The shame game is over. This is the new reality. Deal with it or deny it, but it’s here to stay regardless.