Pkg xen changes - Jan 2009 - The problem with intellectually insecure whites -- Jewish Involvement in Black American Affairs

The problem with intellectually insecure whites
By Kevin MacDonald
January 19, 2009

America will soon have a white minority. This is a much desired state of affairs
for the hostile elites who hold political power and shape public opinion. But it
certainly creates some management issues ? at least in the long run. After all,
it?s difficult to come up with an historical example of a nation with a solid
ethnic majority (90%
white in 1950) that has voluntarily decided to cede political and cultural
power. Such transformations are typically accomplished by military invasions,
great battles, and untold suffering.

And it?s not as if everyone is doing it. Only Western nations view their own
demographic and cultural eclipse as a moral imperative. Indeed, as I have noted
previously, it is striking that racial nationalism has triumphed in Israel at
the same time that the Jewish intellectual and political movements and the
organized Jewish
community have been the most active and effective force for a non-white America.
Indeed, a poll in 2008 found that Avigdor Lieberman was the second most popular
politician in Israel. Lieberman has advocated expulsion of Arabs from Israel and
has declared himself a follower of Vladimir Jabotinsky, the leading pioneer of
racial
Zionism. The most popular politician in the poll was Benjamin Netanyahu ?
another admirer of Jabotinsky. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Foreign Minister
Tzipi Livni are also Jabotinskyists.

The racial Zionists are now carrying out yet another orgy of mass murder after a
starvation-inducing blockade and the usual triggering assault designed to
provoke Palestinian retaliation ? which then becomes the cover for claims that
Israel is merely defending itself against terrorism. This monstrosity was
approved by
overwhelming majorities of both Houses of Congress. The craven Bush
administration did its part by abstaining from a UN resolution designed by the
US Secretary of State as a result of a personal appeal by the Israeli Prime
Minister. This is yet another accomplishment of the Israel Lobby, but one they
would rather not have
discussed in public. People might get the impression that the Lobby really does
dictate US foreign policy in the Mideast. Obviously, such thoughts are only
entertained by anti-Semites.

But I digress.

In managing the eclipse of white America, one strategy of the mainstream media
is to simply ignore the issue. Christopher Donovan  (?For the media, the less
whites think about their coming minority status, the better?) has noted that the
media, and in particular, the New York Times, are quite uninterested in doing
stories that
discuss what white people think about this state of affairs.

It?s not surprising that the New York Times ? the Jewish-owned flagship of
anti-white, pro-multicultural media ? ignores the issue. The issue is also
missing from so-called conservative media even though one would think that
conservatives would find the eclipse of white America to be an important issue.
Certainly, their audiences
would find it interesting.

Now we have an article ?The End of White America? written by Hua Hsu, an
Assistant Professor of English at Vassar College. The article is a rather
depressing display of what passes for intellectual discourse on the most
important question confronting white people in America.

Hsu begins by quoting a passage in F. Scott Fitzgerald?s The Great Gatsby in
which a character, Tom Buchanan, states: ?Have you read The Rise of the Colored
Empires by this man Goddard?? ? Well, it?s a fine book, and everybody ought to
read it. The idea is if we don?t look out the white race will be?will be utterly
submerged.
It?s all scientific stuff; it?s been proved.?

Buchanan?s comment is a thinly veiled reference to Lothrop Stoddard?s The Rising
Tide of Color which Hsu describes as ?rationalized hatred? presented in a
scholarly, gentlemanly, and scientific tone. (This wording that will certainly
help him when he comes up for tenure.) As Hsu notes, Stoddard had a doctorate
from Harvard
and was a member of many academic associations. His book was published by a
major publisher. It was therefore ?precisely the kind of book that a 1920s man
of Buchanan?s profile ? wealthy, Ivy League?educated, at once pretentious and
intellectually insecure ? might have been expected to bring up in casual
conversation.?

Let?s ponder that a bit. The simple reality is that in the year 2009 an Ivy
League-educated person, "at once pretentious and intellectually
insecure,"  would just as glibly assert the same sort of nonsense as Hsu.
To wit:

The coming white minority does not mean that the racial hierarchy of American
culture will suddenly become inverted, as in 1995?s White Man?s Burden, an awful
thought experiment of a film, starring John Travolta, that envisions an
upside-down world in which whites are subjugated to their high-class black
oppressors. There will
be dislocations and resentments along the way, but the demographic shifts of the
next 40 years are likely to reduce the power of racial hierarchies over
everyone?s lives, producing a culture that?s more likely than any before to
treat its inhabitants as individuals, rather than members of a caste or identity
group.

The fact is that no one can say for certain what multicultural America without a
white majority will be like. There is no scientific or historical basis for
claims like ?the demographic shifts of the next 40 years are likely to reduce
the power of racial hierarchies over everyone?s lives, producing a culture
that?s more likely than any before
to treat its inhabitants as individuals, rather than members of a caste or
identity group.?

Indeed, there is no evidence at all that we are proceeding to a color blind
future. The election results continue to show that white people are coalescing
in the Republican Party, while the Democrats are increasingly the party of a
non-white soon-to-be majority.

Is it so hard to believe that when this coalition achieves a majority that it
will further compromise the interests of whites far beyond contemporary concerns
such as immigration policy and affirmative action? Hsu anticipates a colorblind
world, but affirmative action means that blacks and other minorities are
certainly not treated as
individuals. And it means that whites ? especially white males ? are losing out
on opportunities they would have had without these policies and without the
massive non-white immigration of the last few decades.

Given the intractability of changing intelligence and other traits required for
success in the contemporary economy, it is unlikely that 40 more years of
affirmative action will attain the outcomes desired by the minority lobbies.
Indeed, in Obama''s America, blacks are rioting in Oakland over
perceived racial injustices, and from 2002
?2007, black juvenile homicide victims increased 31%, while black juvenile
perpetrators increased 43%. Hence,  the reasonable outlook is for a continuing
need for affirmative action and for racial activism in these groups, even after
whites become a minority.

Whites will also lose out because of large-scale importation of relatively
talented immigrants from East Asia. Indeed, as I noted over a decade ago,
"The United States is well on the road to being dominated by an Asian
technocratic elite and a Jewish business, professional, and media elite."

Hsu shows that there already is considerable anxiety among whites about the
future. An advertizing executive says, ?I think white people feel like they?re
under siege right now ? like it?s not okay to be white right now, especially if
you?re a white male. ... People are stressed out about it. ?We used to be in
control! We?re losing
control?? Another says, "There?s a lot of fear and a lot of
resentment."

It''s hard to see why these feelings won''t increase in the
future.

A huge problem for white people is lack of intellectual and cultural confidence.
Hsu quotes Christian (Stuff White People Like) Lander saying, "I get it: as
a straight white male, I?m the worst thing on Earth." A professor comments
that for his students "to be white is to be culturally broke. The classic
thing white students say when
you ask them to talk about who they are is, ?I don?t have a culture.? They might
be privileged, they might be loaded socioeconomically, but they feel bankrupt
when it comes to culture ? They feel disadvantaged, and they feel
marginalized."

This lack of cultural confidence is no accident. For nearly 100 years whites
have been subjected to a culture of critique emanating from the most prestigious
academic and media institutions. And, as Hsu points out, the most vibrant and
influential aspect of American popular culture is hip-hop?a product of the
African American
urban culture.

The only significant group of white people with any cultural confidence centers
itself around country music, NASCAR, and the small town values of traditional
white America. For this group of whites ? and only this group ? there is 
"a racial pride that dares not speak its name, and that defines itself
through cultural cues instead?a
suspicion of intellectual elites and city dwellers, a preference for folksiness
and plainness of speech (whether real or feigned), and the association of a
working-class white minority with ''the real America.''?

This is what I term implicit whiteness ? implicit because explicit assertions of
white identity have been banned by the anti-white elites that dominate our
politics and culture. It is a culture that, as Hsu notes, "cannot speak its
name."

But that implies that the submerged white identity of the white working class
and the lack of cultural confidence exhibited by the rest of white America are
imposed from outside. Although there may well be characteristics of whites that
facilitate this process, this suppression of white identity and interests is
certainly not the natural
outcome of modernization or any other force internal to whites as a people. In
my opinion, they are the result of the successful erection of a culture of
critique in the West dominated by Jewish intellectual and political movements.

The result is that educated, intellectually insecure white people these days are
far more likely to believe in the utopian future described by Hsu than in hard
and cautious thinking about what the future might have in store for them.

It''s worth dwelling a bit on the intellectual insecurity of the whites
who mindlessly utter the mantras of multiculturalism that they have soaked up
from the school system and from the media. Most people do not have much
confidence in their intellectual ability and look to elite opinion to shape
their beliefs. As I noted elsewhere,

A critical component of the success of the culture of critique is that it
achieved control of the most prestigious and influential institutions of the
West, and it became a consensus among the elites, Jewish and non-Jewish alike.
Once this happened, it is not surprising that this culture became widely
accepted among people of very
different levels of education and among people of different social classes.

Most people are quite insecure about their intellectual ability. But they know
that the professors at Harvard, and the editorial page of the New York Times and
the Washington Post, and even conservative commentators like Rush Limbaugh and
Sean Hannity are all on page when it comes to racial and ethnic issues. This is
a
formidable array, to the point that you almost have to be a crank to dissent
from this consensus.

I think one of the greatest triumphs of the left has been to get people to
believe that people who assert white identity and interests or who make
unflattering portrayals of organized Jewish movements are morally degenerate,
stupid, and perhaps psychiatrically disturbed. Obviously, all of these
adjectives designate low status.

The reality is that the multicultural emperor has no clothes and, because of its
support for racial Zionism and the racialism of ethnic minorities in America, it
is massively hypocritical to boot. The New York Times, the academic left, and
the faux conservatives that dominate elite discourse on race and ethnicity are
intellectually
bankrupt and can only remain in power by ruthlessly suppressing or ignoring the
scientific findings.

This is particularly a problem for college-educated whites. Like
Fitzgerald''s Tom Buchanan, such people have a strong need to feel that
their ideas are respectable and part of the mainstream. But the respectable
mainstream gives them absolutely nothing with which to validate themselves
except perhaps the idea that the world
will be a better place when people like them no longer have power. Hsu quotes
the pathetic Christian Lander: "?Like, I?m aware of all the horrible crimes
that my demographic has done in the world. ... And there?s a bunch of white
people who are desperate ? desperate ? to say, ?You know what? My skin?s white,
but I?m not one
of the white people who?s destroying the world.??

As a zombie leftist during the 1960s and 1970s, I know what that feeling of
desperation is like ? what it''s like to be a self-hating white. We must
get to the point where college-educated whites proudly and confidently say they
are white and that they do not want to become a minority in America.

This reminds me of the recent docudrama Milk, which depicts the life of gay
activist Harvey Milk. Milk is sure be nominated for an Oscar as Best Picture
because it lovingly illustrates a triumph of the cultural left. But is has an
important message that should resonate with the millions of whites who have been
deprived of their
confidence and their culture: Be explicit. Just as Harvey Milk advocated being
openly gay even in the face of dire consequences, whites need to tell their
family and their friends that they have an identity as a white person and
believe that whites have legitimate interests as white people. They must accept
the consequences
when they are harassed, fired from their jobs, or put in prison for such
beliefs. They must run for political office as openly pro-white.

Milk shows that homosexuals were fired from their jobs and arrested for
congregating in public. Now it''s the Southern Poverty Law Center and
the rest of the leftist intellectual and political establishment that harasses
and attempts to get people fired. But it''s the same situation with the
roles reversed. No revolution was ever
accomplished without some martyrs. The revolution that restores the legitimacy
of white identity and the legitimacy of white interests will be no exception.

But it is a revolution that is absolutely necessary. The white majority is
foolish indeed to entrust its future to a utopian hope that racial and ethnic
identifications will disappear and that they won?t continue to influence public
policy in ways that compromise the interests of whites.

It does not take an overactive imagination to see that coalitions of minority
groups could compromise the interests of formerly dominant whites. We already
see numerous examples in which coalitions of minority groups attempt to
influence public policy, including immigration policy, against the interests of
the whites. Placing
ourselves in a position of vulnerability would be extremely risky, given the
deep sense of historical grievance harbored by many ethnic activists and
organized ethnic lobbies.

This is especially the case with Jews. Jewish organisations have been unanimous
in condemning Western societies, Western traditions, and Christianity, for past
crimes against Jews. Similar sentiments are typical of a great many African
Americans and Latinos, and especially among the ethnic activists from these
groups. The
?God damn America? sermon by President Obama''s pastor comes to mind as
a recent notorious example.

The precedent of the early decades of the Soviet Union should give pause to
anyone who believes that surrendering ethnic hegemony does not carry risks. The
Bolshevik revolution had a pronounced ethnic angle: To a very great extent, Jews
and other non-Russians ruled over the Russian people, with disastrous
consequences for the Russians and other ethnic groups that were not able to
become part of the power structure. Jews formed a hostile elite within this
power structure ? as they will in the future white-minority America; Jews were
?Stalin?s willing executioners.?

Two passages from my review of Yuri Slezkine''s The Jewish Century seem
particularly appropriate here. The first passage reminds me of the many American
Jews who adopt a veneer of support for causes of leftist versions of social
justice and racial tolerance while nevertheless managing to support racial
Zionism and the mass
murder, torture, and incarceration of the Palestinians. Such people may be very
different when they become a hostile elite in a white-minority America.

Many of the commentators on Jewish Bolsheviks noted the ?transformation? of Jews
[after the Bolshevik Revolution]. In the words of [a] Jewish commentator, G. A.
Landau, ?cruelty, sadism, and violence had seemed alien to a nation so far
removed from physical activity.? And another Jewish commentator, Ia. A.
Bromberg, noted
that:

the formerly oppressed lover of liberty had turned into a tyrant of 
?unheard-of-despotic arbitrariness??. The convinced and unconditional opponent
of the death penalty not just for political crimes but for the most heinous
offenses, who could not, as it were, watch a chicken being killed, has been
transformed outwardly into a
leather-clad person with a revolver and, in fact, lost all human likeness. ...

After the Revolution, ... there was active suppression of any remnants of the
older order and their descendants. ... The mass murder of peasants and
nationalists was combined with the systematic exclusion of the previously
existing non-Jewish middle class. The wife of a Leningrad University professor
noted, ?in all the
institutions, only workers and Israelites are admitted; the life of the
intelligentsia is very hard? (p. 243). Even at the end of the 1930s, prior to
the Russification that accompanied World War II, ?the Russian Federation?was
still doing penance for its imperial past while also serving as an example of an
ethnicity-free society? (p. 276).
While all other nationalities, including Jews, were allowed and encouraged to
keep their ethnic identities, the revolution remained an anti-majoritarian
movement.

The difference from the Soviet Union may well be that in white-minority America
it will not be workers and Israelites who are favored, but non-whites and
Israelites. Whites may dream that they are entering the post-racial utopia
imagined by their erstwhile intellectual superiors. But it is quite possible
that they are entering into a
racial dystopia of unimaginable cruelty in which whites will be systematically
excluded in favor of the new elites recruited from the soon-to-be majority.
It''s happened before.

Kevin MacDonald is a professor of psychology at California State University?Long
Beach.

URL with hyperlink sources:

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/articles/MacDonald-Hsu.html


-------

 Jewish Involvement in Black American Affairs

Reflections on Martin Luther King Jr?s Birthday

By Paul Grubach

Just about every year on the eve of the national holiday honoring Martin Luther
King Jr.?s birthday, the mainstream media in the United States put forth
numerous articles about the large Jewish involvement with Dr. King and the
equally large Jewish involvement with the Black American Civil Rights movement.
Not surprisingly, the mainstream media?s description of this phenomenon is seen
through rose-colored glasses. Jewish influence in Black American affairs is
portrayed as overwhelmingly selfless, altruistic, charitable and humane. But is
this really true? Let?s take a look.

In 1991, The Nation of Islam, a Black religious group, published a very
important study of Jewish involvement with the Black slave trade. Entitled The
Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews (SRBBJ), it is a well documented and
well argued book, and the authors make this clear from the very beginning:

?The information contained herein has been compiled primarily from Jewish
historical literature. Every effort has been made to present evidence from the
most respected of the Jewish authorities and whose works appear in established
historical journals or are published by authoritative Jewish publishing houses.?

The Black American expert on the slave trade, Dr. Tony Martin, has endorsed the
book, as he has made it assigned reading in his courses. I have investigated at
least some of the sources and they do indeed check out.

In the book?s introduction we read:

?Deep within the recesses of the Jewish historical record is the irrefutable
evidence that the most prominent of the Jewish pilgrim fathers used kidnapped
Black Africans disproportionately more than any other ethnic or religious group
in New World history and participated in every aspect of the international slave
trade.?

Further on it is written:

?Most have always assumed that the relationship between Blacks and Jews has been
mutually supportive, friendly and fruitful ? two suffering people bonding to
overcome hatred and bigotry to achieve success. But history tells an altogether
different story.?

Not surprisingly, Jewish-Zionist groups, and those allied with them, have
attempted to blacken the book?s reputation. Unable to refute its thesis, they
resort to smear tactics. But Black Americans would do well to heed SRBBJ?s
advice. The relationship between Blacks and Jews, they write, ?is a relationship
that needs further analysis. [?] Hidden and misunderstood, it is indeed time to
reopen the files and reconsider The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and
Jews.?

Furthermore, the irrational attacks upon SRBBJ highlight the hypocritical double
standard that pervades the study of the sordid and evil business of the Black
slave trade. It is socially and morally acceptable for Jewish scholars like
Bernard Lewis to write books (Race and Slavery in the Middle East: An Historical
Inquiry) that discuss Arab involvement in the Black slave trade, and it is
socially and morally acceptable to discuss Black and European involvement in the
Black Slave trade. But it is positively ?wrong, evil, and immoral? for any
non-Jewish scholar to openly discuss Jewish involvement in the Black slave
trade.

Indeed, consider the case of the brave Black scholar Tony Martin, who did try to
tell the world about the large Jewish involvement in the Black slave trade.
Readers of The Revisionist should check out his book The Jewish Onslaught:
Despatches from the Wellesley Battlefront. For attempting to tell the truth
about the large Jewish involvement in the Black slave trade he was harassed,
persecuted, and Jewish-Zionist forces tried to damage his career. Indeed, any
non-Jewish intellectual that attempts to bring to light the large Jewish
involvement in the Black slave trade will almost certainly be attacked and
maligned by Jewish-Zionist groups.

Black American intellectual Harold Cruse and California psychology professor
Kevin MacDonald have also fearlessly scrutinized Jewish involvement in Black
affairs. Both have written some very insightful analyses of the question: Why
were Jews so disproportionately involved in the Black Civil Rights movement? In
their books, Cruse?s The Crisis of the Negro Intellectual and MacDonald,?s The
Culture of Critique, they have noted that many Jews want a racially integrated
society because it provides a hospitable environment for their long term policy
of non-assimilation and group solidarity. Many Jews view white/Euro-American
nationalism as their greatest potential threat, and they promote racial
integration precisely because this presumably dilutes Euro-American power and
lessens the possibility that a powerful and cohesive Euro-American standing in
opposition to Jewish interests will develop.

There is evidence that supports their viewpoints. If the primary motive of the
Jewish groups that were involved in the Black American Civil Rights movement was
to promote racial equality and racial integration, then we should expect that
they would promote racial equality and ethnic integration in Israel just as
ardently as they promoted it in the United States. But this is not the case. For
the most part, the Jewish groups that were and are working to create a racially
integrated society in the US are the same Jewish groups that were and are ardent
supporters of the ethnically segregated apartheid state of Israel where racial
segregation and Jewish supremacism are enshrined in law. Jewish scholar Uri
Davis has written a book, the title of which says it all: Israel: An Apartheid
State.

If there is ever to be harmony between the races in the United States, then we
are all going to have to literally lay ?all of the cards on the table.? That is
to say, Blacks and whites, Jews and non-Jews, are going to have to discuss these
racial problems in an open, honest and forthright manner, free of name-calling
and emotional outbursts. The history of Jewish involvement in Black affairs has
been, for the most part, surrounded by taboos and ?off-limits? for discussion.
It is about time that Black Americans ? and all other Americans for that matter
? break down these taboos and reconsider Jewish involvement in Black American
affairs.


Source :
 http://www.davidduke.com/general/the-suppressed-history-between-blacks-and-jews_7214.html
 
Jewish Involvement in Black American Affairs Part 2
www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?id=1444

 

---------------------------------------------


Lawrence Auster,
238 W 101 St Apt. 3B
New York, NY 10025
Contact: lawrence.auster at att.net