May 16, 2022·edited May 16, 2022Liked by Graham Seibert
The Solzhenitsyn book is available here: https://ia803108.us.archive.org/2/items/200YearsTogether/200%20Years%20Together.pdf - entirely for free, all 774 pages of it. Ethnic Jews tend to be successful because they observe strict laws for conduct between themselves in their communities, but for a lot of them, if you're not in the "tribe", anything goes. Quite frankly, the same goes for the Han Chinese, and the Anglo-American upper class, and other similar groups - all of which one is born into. Amongst themselves they observe laws which set out the limits of ethical behavior, but in their relations with outsiders, no such laws apply, and that puts them at an advantage - unless the community they're competing against is able to organize itself in a similar fashion.
As for "MacDonald talks about widespread cousin marriage among the Jews, with the Rothschild family being exceptional even among the Jews for the incidence cousin marriages and uncle-niece marriages. Nobody has noted an intelligence deficit among the Rothschilds. Somebody needs to come up with a reconciliation." It's not intelligence per se but the ability to engage in ruthless and cunning behavior in a concerted fashion against outsiders, to keep the code of omerta (in the case of another quite successful group, the Sicilian Mafia), while abiding by a strictly enforced code of ethics amongst one's own.
Thank you for the link. What you write about the Anglo-American upper class applied historically, before they became so woke. There have been dynasties like the Taft, Bush and Gore families. I think that's in the past. Biden tried, but it does not seem to have worked.
Actually, the woke stuff came out of Yale, it's classic British Establishment "Divide and Rule" tactics - if you can get your opponents to war against themselves, they won't be a threat to you...
"Today's charges of anti-Semitism, and racism in general, are made against the backdrop of today's moral and ethical values. It is important to recall that in every century prior to our own it was natural and expected for identifiably different groups of people to be in conflict with one another. The French and the Germans went at it for years. Going back to the Jews, the Bible is a 2000 year litany of conflict between the Jews and their neighbors, in which God himself endorsed genocide against Israel's enemies. The Bible states that the Jews took over the promised land of Canaan from the peoples who dwelt there before the time of Moses and Joshua, and who, because they had had no contact with Israel, cannot have been guilty of any aggression against them. Unprovoked, Israel invaded Canaan and killed everybody, man woman and child, and livestock as well."
The Bible makes no such statement at all, and it doesn't even use the word "Jew" anywhere in the Old Testament, outside later reference to the southern kingdom of Judah centuries later, and calling them "Jews". The Canaanites had extensive contact with Israel, it would have to be impossible in such a small area to avoid it. The tone and language of Scripture hardly suggests the Canaanites were "innocent", and they were the overlords of a countryside already populated by Hebrew villagers and herdsmen:
"Our syngenic instinct, and indeed our whole anthropological substance, has been eroded by two thousand years of Christian “salvation”, with its deadly cocktail of individualism and universalism. Only people whose mind has been indoctrinated by Christianity for many generations can be made as vulnerable as we are to the accusation of racism, to the point of welcoming hostile invaders in the name of universalistic moral principles, and not daring to denounce them when they rape our children. We must forgive."Laurent Guyenot
That's nice. When there are Two Witnesses for all the world to see (however that comes to pass), then everyone will have a choice. It is what is amirite? It is, whatever it is.
I don't take any of the "UNZ" nonsense from Christianity, which historically was a life wish.
There is a writer published on the Unz Review (where I found your blog btw) that rips the whole "MacDonald" thing apart, but I forget his name and website (James Something?)
Basically said "all of this is pretty recent, and only goes back to the 19th century when European Jews showed up in the West. They are drawing on the same social decay that happens cyclically, and the groundwork was laid by the liberal Protestants, etc."
Macdonald look like Anthony Blinken, at the end all of these derivations are slight in the larger context of very broad civilisational development.
The Solzhenitsyn book is available here: https://ia803108.us.archive.org/2/items/200YearsTogether/200%20Years%20Together.pdf - entirely for free, all 774 pages of it. Ethnic Jews tend to be successful because they observe strict laws for conduct between themselves in their communities, but for a lot of them, if you're not in the "tribe", anything goes. Quite frankly, the same goes for the Han Chinese, and the Anglo-American upper class, and other similar groups - all of which one is born into. Amongst themselves they observe laws which set out the limits of ethical behavior, but in their relations with outsiders, no such laws apply, and that puts them at an advantage - unless the community they're competing against is able to organize itself in a similar fashion.
As for "MacDonald talks about widespread cousin marriage among the Jews, with the Rothschild family being exceptional even among the Jews for the incidence cousin marriages and uncle-niece marriages. Nobody has noted an intelligence deficit among the Rothschilds. Somebody needs to come up with a reconciliation." It's not intelligence per se but the ability to engage in ruthless and cunning behavior in a concerted fashion against outsiders, to keep the code of omerta (in the case of another quite successful group, the Sicilian Mafia), while abiding by a strictly enforced code of ethics amongst one's own.
Thank you for the link. What you write about the Anglo-American upper class applied historically, before they became so woke. There have been dynasties like the Taft, Bush and Gore families. I think that's in the past. Biden tried, but it does not seem to have worked.
Actually, the woke stuff came out of Yale, it's classic British Establishment "Divide and Rule" tactics - if you can get your opponents to war against themselves, they won't be a threat to you...
Great review.
The third paragraph is the best.
Humans, with their 'forever' thinking ability
always forget how time-bound they are.
"Today's charges of anti-Semitism, and racism in general, are made against the backdrop of today's moral and ethical values. It is important to recall that in every century prior to our own it was natural and expected for identifiably different groups of people to be in conflict with one another. The French and the Germans went at it for years. Going back to the Jews, the Bible is a 2000 year litany of conflict between the Jews and their neighbors, in which God himself endorsed genocide against Israel's enemies. The Bible states that the Jews took over the promised land of Canaan from the peoples who dwelt there before the time of Moses and Joshua, and who, because they had had no contact with Israel, cannot have been guilty of any aggression against them. Unprovoked, Israel invaded Canaan and killed everybody, man woman and child, and livestock as well."
The Bible makes no such statement at all, and it doesn't even use the word "Jew" anywhere in the Old Testament, outside later reference to the southern kingdom of Judah centuries later, and calling them "Jews". The Canaanites had extensive contact with Israel, it would have to be impossible in such a small area to avoid it. The tone and language of Scripture hardly suggests the Canaanites were "innocent", and they were the overlords of a countryside already populated by Hebrew villagers and herdsmen:
https://www.knowingthebible.net/topical-studies/the-extermination-of-the-canaanites
You have a collective death-wish.
"Our syngenic instinct, and indeed our whole anthropological substance, has been eroded by two thousand years of Christian “salvation”, with its deadly cocktail of individualism and universalism. Only people whose mind has been indoctrinated by Christianity for many generations can be made as vulnerable as we are to the accusation of racism, to the point of welcoming hostile invaders in the name of universalistic moral principles, and not daring to denounce them when they rape our children. We must forgive."Laurent Guyenot
https://www.unz.com/article/bring-out-your-dead/
That's nice. When there are Two Witnesses for all the world to see (however that comes to pass), then everyone will have a choice. It is what is amirite? It is, whatever it is.
I don't take any of the "UNZ" nonsense from Christianity, which historically was a life wish.
There is a writer published on the Unz Review (where I found your blog btw) that rips the whole "MacDonald" thing apart, but I forget his name and website (James Something?)
Basically said "all of this is pretty recent, and only goes back to the 19th century when European Jews showed up in the West. They are drawing on the same social decay that happens cyclically, and the groundwork was laid by the liberal Protestants, etc."
Macdonald look like Anthony Blinken, at the end all of these derivations are slight in the larger context of very broad civilisational development.