Mondo weiss: War of Ideas
There I Go Again, Counting Jews
Here is what a dubious character I am. Yesterday I was watching Charlie Rose when he talked with Jon Alter, Eric Foner, and Mark Halperin about historical ideas surrounding the Obama transition. Well I looked up Halperin and Foner, too, and they're Jewish. So is my old friend Alter, whose smart comments on that show about new media vs old media I will get to when I am not counting Jews. I wasn't going to talk about this, I was going to exhibit some discretion, as I don't go off on NPR's many Jewish commentators, were it not for the fact that right now a friend sent me an email, actually a smart Jewish friend saying, "Another Jew, head of OMB, Peter Orszag". (I don't know; he looks Jewish). And last week when I blogged about Jewish money at the Council on Foreign Relations, it was a high-status mole who sent me the report and who circled the names for my edification.
I'm only saying that I'm not the only one circling Jewish names. These facts obviously have some significance to smart people. Though yes, I admit: it's an uncomfortable exercise. It reminds me most strongly of sitting in Fenway Park in 1975 or when the Orioles came up to bat and a guy in front of me–we had a big inning–said, I seem to remember just when Tommie Davis was announced, That makes 5 in a row. Because we had a lot of blacks in the lineup (Bumbry, Blair, Rich Coggins, Earl Williams, then Davis, maybe), and Boston was Boston. Now I'm doing it. Why?
Because it is significant of a large sociological fact that goes unremarked, the importance of Jews in the new establishment, and because Zionism remains an uninterrogated belief system in much of Jewish life. I am able to do this stuff partly because I don't think the story turns out in an unhappy way. There are different ways of imagining significantly disproportionate Jewish influence and power than the central European tragedy. Americans can do that, we have historical imagination. But ignoring the facts, that's a journalistic dereliction. Even Sports Illustrated sometimes does stories about black athletes.
I'm only saying that I'm not the only one circling Jewish names. These facts obviously have some significance to smart people. Though yes, I admit: it's an uncomfortable exercise. It reminds me most strongly of sitting in Fenway Park in 1975 or when the Orioles came up to bat and a guy in front of me–we had a big inning–said, I seem to remember just when Tommie Davis was announced, That makes 5 in a row. Because we had a lot of blacks in the lineup (Bumbry, Blair, Rich Coggins, Earl Williams, then Davis, maybe), and Boston was Boston. Now I'm doing it. Why?
Because it is significant of a large sociological fact that goes unremarked, the importance of Jews in the new establishment, and because Zionism remains an uninterrogated belief system in much of Jewish life. I am able to do this stuff partly because I don't think the story turns out in an unhappy way. There are different ways of imagining significantly disproportionate Jewish influence and power than the central European tragedy. Americans can do that, we have historical imagination. But ignoring the facts, that's a journalistic dereliction. Even Sports Illustrated sometimes does stories about black athletes.
interests not of their own group nor of Israel but for the improvement of this country and the entire planet, there would
be, I suspect, little resentment at their success.
What does a stock analyst do?
What computer models does he use?
How does an expert looking for the best accuracy adjustments for a rifle scope look at
results on the target?
The target should be "in the best interests of the American people, or the best interests of all humanity"
Benthemite?
"The best interests of the children."
Lots of room to play there. The issue is always the net power
of the players on each side.
Every player claims they are only interested in the best interest of the child.
The rule of law takes one side or the other, net. Without ever saying so.
The contest goes on.
Hud Bannon (played by Paul Newman): "Well, I've always thought the law was meant to be interpreted in a lenient manner. Sometimes I lean one way and sometimes I lean the other."
Long and often aquiline nose (or with Eastern European Jews sometimes flat and broader noses); so-called "weak" mouths, narrow and sometimes protruding eyes in a drooping brow, high and prominent cheekbones, oval faces, pointed chin, curly or kinky hair.
Why have the left-liberals given the Jews a pass for decades? Because they were collaborators in the anti-Christian coalition — they were anti-Christian fellow travelers. But now that the Christian underpinnings of America have been destroyed, the left-liberals and the Zionists are starting to fight it out for predominance, and left-liberal Zionists, both Jewish and otherwise, are desperately trying to hold it together, but the center will not hold.
Evaluate Witty’s commentary in this light: he’s desperate to find a way to reconcile the increasingly polarized left-liberals and Zionists. But its futile. Each ones professed fundamental values are irreconcilable. All the spinning in the world won’t be able to change that. The gig is up, Witty. Time to choose sides (but we already know which way you’re going, don’t we?) and begin preparing for war.
When the goy animal does the same–it's the ultimate EVIL.
Should we make a computer model of this?
If so, we cannot count on the free press to give us data.
Propaganda rules the soul.
What theory do you propose?
It's clear that America is being deliberately and radically changed from the ground up. If it is true that there is a new group of ethnic elites without the masses of kinsmen to form a majority, then massive immigration, favoring finance over manufacturing and agriculture, and tying the U.S. to Israel help to form something of a theory to explain a Jewish elite. There are many theories that have been proposed, including by Jews themselves, biological (Jews being either smarter or more inclined to dominate others and behave collectively), sociological (such as Jewish supremacism as a group survival strategy), etc. It is as simple as observing what happens when a new male takes over a pride of lions. There has been interesting why explanations from people such as Dr. Kevin MacDonald from UC (warts and all, who is fond of this blog in his own way.) Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa also has written on the subject only he concentrates on badly supporting shoddy stereotypes such as East Asian intelligence yet inability to be creative (check history- most East Asians were illiterate 50 years ago but they were some of the most creative people in the world two thousand years ago. Conditions change.)
He certainly is, as is his brother.
It's clear that America is being deliberately and radically changed from the ground up. If it is true that there is a new group of ethnic elites without the masses of kinsmen to form a majority, then massive immigration, favoring finance over manufacturing and agriculture, and tying the U.S. to Israel help to form something of a theory to explain a Jewish elite. The sociology is as simple as observing what happens when a new male takes over a pride of lions.
Posted by: Todd
Todd, please elaborate for us morons.
I began making lists of people, and try and guess what kind of horror I felt when I realized just what it was that I was doing: Putting a star * next to the name of every Jew.
And I've being doing it again recently, trying to weigh the change that Obama is bringing us. He fills the sky with stars.
Now imagine if Obama's cabinet was crowded with Kenyans or Cubans or Mexicans or Canadians…
----------------------
Maybe Jewish Ascendancy Will Result in Wave of Conversion
But if Israel began treating its minority population half so well as we treat ours in the U.S., it could usher in a true golden age and light unto the world. Or maybe not.