A New York rabbi explains where antisemitism lurks, gives examples, and claims the right to decide what is and isn't antisemitism. I explain the danger of New York rabbis.
If the NCCA announced by Biden in May gives anyone the mistaken impression that ti is an outrage perpetrated by the democrats, please remember DeSantis' “Muzzle-the Goyim” law and, as an act of complete submission, doing it in Israel.
Ditch the elephant and donkey symbols, the Uniparty’s symbol is the 6-pointed star. Don't look left or right for hope.
As for "Khazar extremist organizations like the SPLC and the ADL,” a more accurate description would be “openly extremist Khazar organizations,” unlike some still in the closet, like ACLU and many others.
I am inclined to support rabbi Fersko’s move to get the Jews to drop the White disguise and call themselves Jews. Performing in “Whiteface” masks helps them to (1) confuse the Whites and (2) push the "White guilt” poison while pretending to be Whites … with a conscience.
Within the first few months after seizing power, the Bolsheviks found time to pass a law explicitly allowing people to change their names. Quite an odd thing to make room for amid all the laws nationalizing complete industries, seizing church property, closing down religious schools (except for the yeshivas), requiring banks to open everyone;s safety deposit boxes "for inspection," and so on.
As I understand it, no gentile authority is ever permitted to count Jews. I don't think the question is on the Census forms, though I may be wrong. I'd bet money that if Rabbi Fersko were offered the option of a checkbox for Jews, she would decline, if for no other reason than it would remove "evidence" of the antisemitism she's been preaching to her congregation for ten years.
I thought it was interesting that her older congregants offered some push back. In Russia, even going back to the 19th century, the "Jewish youths" were frequently mentioned as their own political force and sometimes in direct opposition to the wishes (and well-being) of their parents' generation.
"Within the first few months after seizing power, the Bolsheviks found time to pass a law explicitly allowing people to change their names.”
I read "200 Years Together" many years ago in French (no English translation was available anywhere, even unauthorized) so my memory may be faulty but…. I seem to recall that at the first Communist Party General Assembly (or whatever it was called then), when the names of the appointed commissars were read out the crowd started shouting repeatedly “Tell us their REAL names.” There were too many “Ivanovs” who were in fact "Evreyevich."
The real power during the Kerensky government between February and October was some sort of shadow committee whose names were secret and the subject of much speculation in the queues. If I remember correctly, they were all Jews, or almost all Jews. It is often claimed that Kerensky was a Russian, since Kerensky, apparently is a Russian name, but both his mother and father were 100 percent Jewish. His father died when he was young, his mother remarried a Russian, and he took his last name.
When Trotsky was ready, he handed him the keys and left for New York and the bloodbath was underway. Felix Dzerzhinsky, too, the head of the CheKa and an unbelievably bloodthirsty monster, is always referred to as the son of a Polish aristocrat, but he too was a Jew whose father converted to Catholicism in a successful bid for Polish nobility. He had the CheKa up and running by December.
Apparently there is an official translation, finally, of 200 Years Together coming out in 2024
The older people probably got attacked more often going to/in school by the people doing the current attacks on Jews. The ones the rabbi would call allies.
Or probably the older generation was more likely to be members of the Bund, a jewish organization wary of the bolsheviks' "internationalist" slogans and not trusting them to watch out for jewish interests.
Plus the older generation was happy with the results of the February revolution. The Jewish masses were not attracted to the radicals, as you point out, and the radicals were both Russians and Jews.
The Bolsheviks were weakest in 1917 in Odessa, which had the largest Jewish population in Russia, IIRC, and the Bund absorbed all the Jewish left there. After October, the Bolsheviks outlawed all political parties but their own. The Bund simply changed their name to "bolshevik" and took control of the city's administration, which, initially, was run out of a synagogue.
While the Bolsheviks were razing churches and hunting down the clergy and murdering them with their wives and children, synagogues in Odessa and elsewhere began receiving state funding to run Yiddish-language schools. I think Minsk might have been another place that that happened.
Glad you dropped the usage of Khazar after the opening part. It's become a buzzword for the controlled Right. I believe it's intentionally misleading. Khazarian does not equate to the Ashkenazim ethnicity, let alone the Jewish race/nation/people. Koestler overstated his case, also perhaps intentionally.
I had a Jewish history prof in college who presented Kerensky's Mensheviks favorably compared to the Bolsheviks. There were more Jewish liberals then than revolutionaries, same as now. But the leadership whether bankers or masons just pull their strings because liberals are more talk than action and desirous of holding on to their privilege.
Talk of the Bund in comments confused me because I was thinking of the German American Bund in pre-war USA.
Try asking a Jew whether they identify as White. A simple question which will not elicit a simple answer, same as asking a liberal what's a woman?
"[Khazar has] become a buzzword for the controlled Right. I believe it's intentionally misleading. Khazarian does not equate to the Ashkenazim ethnicity, let alone the Jewish race/nation/people."
1. The Ashkenazim are generally accepted to be hailing from Khazaria, hence the name Khazars.
2. The global Jewish "elite" is massively comprised of Ashkenazim, hence the name Khazars applies.
If A=B and B=C it is safe to state that A=C while, as in any generalization, exceptions can be listed in a footnote. In this case the fact that not all Jews are Ashkenazim and a relatively small minority are Sephardim does not invalidate the use of the generic term "Khazars."
The two "communities" do no differ in the main tenets of their Judaic ideology anyway. The term is useful to debunk their claim of hailing from the land they stole from the Palestinians of any faith.
Nevertheless if you prefer to call them all 'Jews,' I have no objection.
I dispute premise one. I believe it's based on faulty evidence popularized by Koestler. I feel rushed now, but perhaps we can renew this discussion in the near future.
I'm glad you brought this up, because it's something I haven't been able to pin down in my own head. What do we call them? Khazarian Jews? Talmudic Conspiracy? Levitical Cabal? The term "Jew" alone fails to distinguish between Eastern Jews and Western Jews, and those are two completely separate groups. On the other hand, since the time the Eastern Jews achieved complete dominance of world Jewry, many Western Jews have reverted to the extreme ethnic chauvinism and subversive Orientalism of the Eastern Jews and, it seems to me, the Western Jews have all but disappeared.
I suppose the term "Jew" is most accurate, but that allows for the slipperiness between race and religion with all the problems and confusion that causes--e.g., DeSantis claiming in Israel that the new laws in Florida providing prison terms for antisemitism were laws guaranteeing religious liberty, or the howls to newspaper editors when a Jew is identified as a Jew that Baptists and Episcopalians are never so identified.
Are you sure that the Ashkenazim are not Khazarian? I've read claims they are, though it seems almost all European Jews claim to be Ashkenazi. To me, the Sephardic Jews are the descendants of the Jews expelled from Spain and dispersed among the European nations with whom the Ashkenazi from Russia, Poland, Moldavia, etc. came into contact.
Identifying the enemy isn't easy. They've had centuries at creating camouflage.
Jew is accurate and useful in most cases. It's the umbrella term. Once you start getting into subdivisions, there are many different ethnicities. Jews are multi-ethnic, even multi racial. It's a global tribe. My advice: don't get into subdividing designations unless there's a specific need. All Jews are supremacist by religion AND culture.
Eastern Jews v Western Jews doesn't seem a meaningful division. East or West of where? London or Jerusalem? Khazaria was a historical khanate in the east. But Khazarians were like Cossacks, horsemen and warriors. Does that sound like Jews? Mounted rabbis w/ scimitars? I don't think so.
Ashkenazim means German Jews. We think of Germany as being central Europe, between Spain in the west and the Pale of Settlement in the east. Where did the Jews in the Pale come from? Koestler would say Khazaria, farther east and south. But their language is Yiddish, mainly German vocabulary.
Khazarian Mafia was all the buzz 6 months ago. As if only we could round up those exotic marauders, we'd roll back the oppressive tide. Great, but how do we identify them? And how is their predation different than Sephardic, Mizrahi or atheistic Judaics.
That's an attempt at a big picture. Hardly the last word.
"All Jews are supremacist by religion AND culture."
True. To that extent taxonomy is a somewhat superfluous exercise.
Nevertheless, "Khazar/Ashkenazim" are useful toponymic labels for the reasons I stated before.
"Khazaria was a historical khanate in the east. But Khazarians were like Cossacks, horsemen and warriors. Does that sound like Jews? Mounted rabbis w/ scimitars? I don't think so."
That is as much an argument as saying "the Germani the Roman legions tried to vanquish were peaceful tribes, engaged mostly in agriculture. Does that sound like the Prussian Junkers?
The Khazars were semi-nomadic Turkic tribes infamous for highway robberies and for extorting "tolls" from the passing caravans/travelers, and considered thieving thugs by their neighbors. They had no rabbis back then, and some inchoate animistic religion.
When their "king," Bulan, allegedly looking for a "neutral" stance between the Christianized Slavs and the growing Muslim pressure, considered the three major religions, chose Judaism and mass converted them (7th century AD, I believe) did they take to it like a duck to the water because the Judaic precepts matched their mentality, skills and ethos, as some speculate? Possible.
The fact that those who migrated to German-speaking areas developed a pidgin German (Yiddish) is no more of a mystery than the fact that the Sephardim who settled in Spain and Portugal developed the pidgin dialect called Ladino.
When I read Koestler's Thirteenth Tribe, I became familiar w/ the official story on Khazaria, but in retrospect it sounds like typical Jewish contrivance. "We were picked as the best of the people of the book: the most civilized of all the literate." I believe this interpretation is closer to the truth: https://www.unz.com/article/lev-gumilev-and-the-khazar-chimera/
Scroll down to the section on the Khazar Chimera in bold.
If you're not familiar w/ the author, Laurent Guyenot, I recommend him highly.
I'm going to read that article and I have learned a lot from Guyenot, but just a quick thought. Isn't it good news if whites are at least talking--accurately--about a specific group of people as their enemy as opposed to blaming "liberals" or "the left?"
Blaming the "liberals and the left" would be unfair because it would ignore the contributions of such luminaries on the "right" as the Kristol family, Podhoretz, and Lawrence Kaplan.
To my mind it's Judaics, people infected w/ the Judaic mindset, who are the enemy. Some rare Jews are not infected. Most are to some degree. As Ariadna points out, that includes the entire neo-con contingent.
Laurent Guyenot is one of the best authors on UR. Scholarly, truly erudite. So drop Koestler already.. :-))
Gumilev' contributions to the history of the vast Eurasian space and ethnography are considerable and not fully appreciated. I would venture a guess that his current appreciation in Russian is truncated for political reasons. I think his theories on the necessity of Russia to forge an organic relationship with Asia dovetail perfectly with current geostrategic imperatives, BUT that they soft pedal his (compelling to me) theory of the Khazarian chimera, just as they do Solzheniysyn's "Two Centuries Together." The Soviet Union's active and material contribution to the creation of the myth of the Holocaust makes it a mined terrain. There will be no revision of that in Russia for any foreseeable future.
I was just reading some UWW student's MA thesis which was analyzing anti-fascist films from 30s. He was chastising Hollywood for having waited for so long to begin pointing out all the antisemitism bustin out all over the place. He blames gentile censorship and persecution for Hollywood's tardiness. (I assume the student was Jewish). He throws up as models a few Soviet films that were already addressing the Nazi genocide of the Jews as early as 1938!!
One thing I thought was interesting in the Guyenot article Billy Thistle linked to was his mention of Dostoevsky's position in favor of the Russia-Asia relationship. In "Demons," I think it was, he writes that the salvation of the West will come out of Russia, and that Russians love Europe and the "stones of the streets of Venice and Paris" more than Europeans do.
In Israel Shahak's Jewish Religion, Jewish History, he notes that the first occurrence of the term "anti-Semitic" in a European language was in a circular letter by a Polish rabbi to his fellow rabbis, complaining that Napoleon's emancipation of the Jews was preventing rabbis from exercising their traditional right to execute any congregant who dared to express disagreement with said rabbi. Emancipation is anti-Semitic!
very important to reveal the direct linkage if Talmudism to Bolshevism and the horrific, massive genocide of MILLIONS of white people. Once that connection is made in a person's understanding, the veils can begin to fall away.
If the NCCA announced by Biden in May gives anyone the mistaken impression that ti is an outrage perpetrated by the democrats, please remember DeSantis' “Muzzle-the Goyim” law and, as an act of complete submission, doing it in Israel.
Ditch the elephant and donkey symbols, the Uniparty’s symbol is the 6-pointed star. Don't look left or right for hope.
As for "Khazar extremist organizations like the SPLC and the ADL,” a more accurate description would be “openly extremist Khazar organizations,” unlike some still in the closet, like ACLU and many others.
I am inclined to support rabbi Fersko’s move to get the Jews to drop the White disguise and call themselves Jews. Performing in “Whiteface” masks helps them to (1) confuse the Whites and (2) push the "White guilt” poison while pretending to be Whites … with a conscience.
Within the first few months after seizing power, the Bolsheviks found time to pass a law explicitly allowing people to change their names. Quite an odd thing to make room for amid all the laws nationalizing complete industries, seizing church property, closing down religious schools (except for the yeshivas), requiring banks to open everyone;s safety deposit boxes "for inspection," and so on.
As I understand it, no gentile authority is ever permitted to count Jews. I don't think the question is on the Census forms, though I may be wrong. I'd bet money that if Rabbi Fersko were offered the option of a checkbox for Jews, she would decline, if for no other reason than it would remove "evidence" of the antisemitism she's been preaching to her congregation for ten years.
I thought it was interesting that her older congregants offered some push back. In Russia, even going back to the 19th century, the "Jewish youths" were frequently mentioned as their own political force and sometimes in direct opposition to the wishes (and well-being) of their parents' generation.
"Within the first few months after seizing power, the Bolsheviks found time to pass a law explicitly allowing people to change their names.”
I read "200 Years Together" many years ago in French (no English translation was available anywhere, even unauthorized) so my memory may be faulty but…. I seem to recall that at the first Communist Party General Assembly (or whatever it was called then), when the names of the appointed commissars were read out the crowd started shouting repeatedly “Tell us their REAL names.” There were too many “Ivanovs” who were in fact "Evreyevich."
I believe it. The common people seem to have been much smarter about what was happening than the intellectuals. The painting here blows me away: https://craignelsen.substack.com/p/hidden-bolshevik-past-hidden-bolshevik
The real power during the Kerensky government between February and October was some sort of shadow committee whose names were secret and the subject of much speculation in the queues. If I remember correctly, they were all Jews, or almost all Jews. It is often claimed that Kerensky was a Russian, since Kerensky, apparently is a Russian name, but both his mother and father were 100 percent Jewish. His father died when he was young, his mother remarried a Russian, and he took his last name.
When Trotsky was ready, he handed him the keys and left for New York and the bloodbath was underway. Felix Dzerzhinsky, too, the head of the CheKa and an unbelievably bloodthirsty monster, is always referred to as the son of a Polish aristocrat, but he too was a Jew whose father converted to Catholicism in a successful bid for Polish nobility. He had the CheKa up and running by December.
Apparently there is an official translation, finally, of 200 Years Together coming out in 2024
The older people probably got attacked more often going to/in school by the people doing the current attacks on Jews. The ones the rabbi would call allies.
@Brettbaker
Or probably the older generation was more likely to be members of the Bund, a jewish organization wary of the bolsheviks' "internationalist" slogans and not trusting them to watch out for jewish interests.
Plus the older generation was happy with the results of the February revolution. The Jewish masses were not attracted to the radicals, as you point out, and the radicals were both Russians and Jews.
The Bolsheviks were weakest in 1917 in Odessa, which had the largest Jewish population in Russia, IIRC, and the Bund absorbed all the Jewish left there. After October, the Bolsheviks outlawed all political parties but their own. The Bund simply changed their name to "bolshevik" and took control of the city's administration, which, initially, was run out of a synagogue.
While the Bolsheviks were razing churches and hunting down the clergy and murdering them with their wives and children, synagogues in Odessa and elsewhere began receiving state funding to run Yiddish-language schools. I think Minsk might have been another place that that happened.
the Bund is alive and well in Israel. It is the labor union that loves and watches out for all workers, except of course the Palestinians.
I forgot to mention its current name: Histradut
Good point. Not as likely to feel the sting from being "slotted" as white.
Glad you dropped the usage of Khazar after the opening part. It's become a buzzword for the controlled Right. I believe it's intentionally misleading. Khazarian does not equate to the Ashkenazim ethnicity, let alone the Jewish race/nation/people. Koestler overstated his case, also perhaps intentionally.
I had a Jewish history prof in college who presented Kerensky's Mensheviks favorably compared to the Bolsheviks. There were more Jewish liberals then than revolutionaries, same as now. But the leadership whether bankers or masons just pull their strings because liberals are more talk than action and desirous of holding on to their privilege.
Talk of the Bund in comments confused me because I was thinking of the German American Bund in pre-war USA.
Try asking a Jew whether they identify as White. A simple question which will not elicit a simple answer, same as asking a liberal what's a woman?
"[Khazar has] become a buzzword for the controlled Right. I believe it's intentionally misleading. Khazarian does not equate to the Ashkenazim ethnicity, let alone the Jewish race/nation/people."
1. The Ashkenazim are generally accepted to be hailing from Khazaria, hence the name Khazars.
2. The global Jewish "elite" is massively comprised of Ashkenazim, hence the name Khazars applies.
If A=B and B=C it is safe to state that A=C while, as in any generalization, exceptions can be listed in a footnote. In this case the fact that not all Jews are Ashkenazim and a relatively small minority are Sephardim does not invalidate the use of the generic term "Khazars."
The two "communities" do no differ in the main tenets of their Judaic ideology anyway. The term is useful to debunk their claim of hailing from the land they stole from the Palestinians of any faith.
Nevertheless if you prefer to call them all 'Jews,' I have no objection.
One more thing...
A good recap of the birth of the ASDL was published in UR
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-the-leo-frank-case-and-the-origins-of-the-adl/?showcomments#comments
And comments #4 and #49 give a general idea of the readers' reaction
I dispute premise one. I believe it's based on faulty evidence popularized by Koestler. I feel rushed now, but perhaps we can renew this discussion in the near future.
I'm glad you brought this up, because it's something I haven't been able to pin down in my own head. What do we call them? Khazarian Jews? Talmudic Conspiracy? Levitical Cabal? The term "Jew" alone fails to distinguish between Eastern Jews and Western Jews, and those are two completely separate groups. On the other hand, since the time the Eastern Jews achieved complete dominance of world Jewry, many Western Jews have reverted to the extreme ethnic chauvinism and subversive Orientalism of the Eastern Jews and, it seems to me, the Western Jews have all but disappeared.
I suppose the term "Jew" is most accurate, but that allows for the slipperiness between race and religion with all the problems and confusion that causes--e.g., DeSantis claiming in Israel that the new laws in Florida providing prison terms for antisemitism were laws guaranteeing religious liberty, or the howls to newspaper editors when a Jew is identified as a Jew that Baptists and Episcopalians are never so identified.
Are you sure that the Ashkenazim are not Khazarian? I've read claims they are, though it seems almost all European Jews claim to be Ashkenazi. To me, the Sephardic Jews are the descendants of the Jews expelled from Spain and dispersed among the European nations with whom the Ashkenazi from Russia, Poland, Moldavia, etc. came into contact.
Identifying the enemy isn't easy. They've had centuries at creating camouflage.
Jew is accurate and useful in most cases. It's the umbrella term. Once you start getting into subdivisions, there are many different ethnicities. Jews are multi-ethnic, even multi racial. It's a global tribe. My advice: don't get into subdividing designations unless there's a specific need. All Jews are supremacist by religion AND culture.
Eastern Jews v Western Jews doesn't seem a meaningful division. East or West of where? London or Jerusalem? Khazaria was a historical khanate in the east. But Khazarians were like Cossacks, horsemen and warriors. Does that sound like Jews? Mounted rabbis w/ scimitars? I don't think so.
Ashkenazim means German Jews. We think of Germany as being central Europe, between Spain in the west and the Pale of Settlement in the east. Where did the Jews in the Pale come from? Koestler would say Khazaria, farther east and south. But their language is Yiddish, mainly German vocabulary.
Khazarian Mafia was all the buzz 6 months ago. As if only we could round up those exotic marauders, we'd roll back the oppressive tide. Great, but how do we identify them? And how is their predation different than Sephardic, Mizrahi or atheistic Judaics.
That's an attempt at a big picture. Hardly the last word.
"All Jews are supremacist by religion AND culture."
True. To that extent taxonomy is a somewhat superfluous exercise.
Nevertheless, "Khazar/Ashkenazim" are useful toponymic labels for the reasons I stated before.
"Khazaria was a historical khanate in the east. But Khazarians were like Cossacks, horsemen and warriors. Does that sound like Jews? Mounted rabbis w/ scimitars? I don't think so."
That is as much an argument as saying "the Germani the Roman legions tried to vanquish were peaceful tribes, engaged mostly in agriculture. Does that sound like the Prussian Junkers?
The Khazars were semi-nomadic Turkic tribes infamous for highway robberies and for extorting "tolls" from the passing caravans/travelers, and considered thieving thugs by their neighbors. They had no rabbis back then, and some inchoate animistic religion.
When their "king," Bulan, allegedly looking for a "neutral" stance between the Christianized Slavs and the growing Muslim pressure, considered the three major religions, chose Judaism and mass converted them (7th century AD, I believe) did they take to it like a duck to the water because the Judaic precepts matched their mentality, skills and ethos, as some speculate? Possible.
The fact that those who migrated to German-speaking areas developed a pidgin German (Yiddish) is no more of a mystery than the fact that the Sephardim who settled in Spain and Portugal developed the pidgin dialect called Ladino.
"Khazarian Mafia was all the buzz 6 months ago."
Six months ago?! You need to get out more
When I read Koestler's Thirteenth Tribe, I became familiar w/ the official story on Khazaria, but in retrospect it sounds like typical Jewish contrivance. "We were picked as the best of the people of the book: the most civilized of all the literate." I believe this interpretation is closer to the truth: https://www.unz.com/article/lev-gumilev-and-the-khazar-chimera/
Scroll down to the section on the Khazar Chimera in bold.
If you're not familiar w/ the author, Laurent Guyenot, I recommend him highly.
I'm going to read that article and I have learned a lot from Guyenot, but just a quick thought. Isn't it good news if whites are at least talking--accurately--about a specific group of people as their enemy as opposed to blaming "liberals" or "the left?"
Blaming the "liberals and the left" would be unfair because it would ignore the contributions of such luminaries on the "right" as the Kristol family, Podhoretz, and Lawrence Kaplan.
To my mind it's Judaics, people infected w/ the Judaic mindset, who are the enemy. Some rare Jews are not infected. Most are to some degree. As Ariadna points out, that includes the entire neo-con contingent.
Laurent Guyenot is one of the best authors on UR. Scholarly, truly erudite. So drop Koestler already.. :-))
Gumilev' contributions to the history of the vast Eurasian space and ethnography are considerable and not fully appreciated. I would venture a guess that his current appreciation in Russian is truncated for political reasons. I think his theories on the necessity of Russia to forge an organic relationship with Asia dovetail perfectly with current geostrategic imperatives, BUT that they soft pedal his (compelling to me) theory of the Khazarian chimera, just as they do Solzheniysyn's "Two Centuries Together." The Soviet Union's active and material contribution to the creation of the myth of the Holocaust makes it a mined terrain. There will be no revision of that in Russia for any foreseeable future.
I was just reading some UWW student's MA thesis which was analyzing anti-fascist films from 30s. He was chastising Hollywood for having waited for so long to begin pointing out all the antisemitism bustin out all over the place. He blames gentile censorship and persecution for Hollywood's tardiness. (I assume the student was Jewish). He throws up as models a few Soviet films that were already addressing the Nazi genocide of the Jews as early as 1938!!
One thing I thought was interesting in the Guyenot article Billy Thistle linked to was his mention of Dostoevsky's position in favor of the Russia-Asia relationship. In "Demons," I think it was, he writes that the salvation of the West will come out of Russia, and that Russians love Europe and the "stones of the streets of Venice and Paris" more than Europeans do.
Agree w/ all you say here and am chuckling at your nervy humor.
I've had to step back from my Rootin' for Putin stance, just as I'd previously retreated from MAGA.
In Israel Shahak's Jewish Religion, Jewish History, he notes that the first occurrence of the term "anti-Semitic" in a European language was in a circular letter by a Polish rabbi to his fellow rabbis, complaining that Napoleon's emancipation of the Jews was preventing rabbis from exercising their traditional right to execute any congregant who dared to express disagreement with said rabbi. Emancipation is anti-Semitic!
very important to reveal the direct linkage if Talmudism to Bolshevism and the horrific, massive genocide of MILLIONS of white people. Once that connection is made in a person's understanding, the veils can begin to fall away.
"There is a feeling that the word ‘Jew’ itself has become an indecent term"
This is true and but one reason I refuse to capitalize the word, "jew".