Demographics & Jewish Destiny, Part 1

^[1]3,012 words

Part 1 of 3

Europe, like America, is plagued by a host of cultural, demographic, economic, and political problems that threaten the long-term survival of our race. The peaceful and voluntary departure of our Jewish residents will not entirely solve these problems, but it would be a good start. It would be be fastest way to turn elite opinion away from ethno-masochism and towards a preference for our own.

Thanks to the Israeli Right of Return, this departure will take place along a well-worn path. It will not be dependent on any intervention from White Nationalists. This article will uncover data that show the “Aliyah” (the In-Gathering) of most European Jewry will be necessary to save Israel from certain destruction. Aliyah from Europe will be preferable for Israel, since US Jewry have a bigger role to play protecting Israel at the heart of the New World Order, the source of their military and diplomatic protection. This seems to be a rare convergence of interests for White Nationalists and the organized Jewish elite.

More controversially, this article will illustrate that this emigration is so critical that Israel will depend on a rise in violent anti-Semitic attacks from the Muslim and Arab community to provoke a rise in emigration. Israel may even return to the tactic of black terror (carrying out terror against their own community while blaming it on an enemy) to create the push and pull factors necessary to gain more citizen-soldiers to “defend the realm.” Violence perceived to come from White anti-Semites will be counterproductive. Furthermore, it is in the interest of both White Nationalists and Israel that the push factors work on the Jewish Cultural Marxists and not just on the Neo-Con Zionists.

Zionism or Bolshevism . . . or Orthodoxy

Any discussion of the Jewish Community, with its wide variety of attitudes, may well begin with Winston Churchill’s article ^[3] on the choice faced by Jews at the beginning of the 20th century between Zionism and Bolshevism. Here at the dawn of the 21st century the situation has not changed much, though Orthodox Judaism (for simplicity the phrase “orthodoxy” will be used in this section to refer to Ultra-Orthodox or Haredi, not other denominations that use the word Orthodox in their title) has proven much more resilient than any pre-war observer could have imagined.

While Orthodoxy represents only 10% of Jews today, this proportion will rise because their large families with very high retention rates and movements like the Chabad Lubavitch that are creating “reverts” to Orthodoxy (Frum). As portrayed in the documentary Defamation ^[4], directed by Yoav Shamir, Orthodox Jews are the least political but the first to be targeted by anti-Semitic attacks. As Meir Kahane put it, “Trotskys make revolutions and Bronsteins pay the price.”[1]

Orthodox Jews are rarely as anti-Zionist as the Naturei Karta, but they also typically view the Zionist movement as a diversion from the religious pursuits they are called to. Within Israel their secular countrymen view them as a 5th column that refuses to participate in military service and typically milks the public welfare system while studying the Talmud and making as many babies as possible.[2]

Orthodox Jews will make Aliyah out of necessity, but only if pushed. In a country where a third do not believe in God and only a minority believe the Torah was given to the Jews by God, the Orthodox view the Zionist project as sinfully misguided. The State of Israel is well aware that Israel needs soldiers to survive the Age of Instability,[3] not Talmudic scholars.

Zionists are what Israel obviously needs. The Jewish diaspora is full of Zionists who won’t leave their comfortable lives for Israel. Again, refer to the film Defamation, where Yoav Shamir’s grandmother, descended from one of the early settlers, criticizes Jews who remain outside of Israel. “Why would they come here and work for money, if they can make money there without working? . . .  Lending money at high rates, selling liquor, selling wine. . . . Are they waiting for another Hitler to come and kill them before they run away?” For these Jews the decision is simply a cost-benefit analysis. The departure of Jews from the Former Soviet Union (FSU) illustrates this point and will be explored in Part 2.

Israel is now the second largest market for venture capital and has more companies quoted on the NASDAQ than any country other than the US. Furthermore, one often hears from Israelis that despite the threat of terrorism, they are safer there than in almost any of the 20 urban centers where 80% of the Diaspora lives. The pull factors should be better than ever, but push factors are not present in the G8 countries which contain 88% of the Diaspora, apart from Russia.

Today’s Bolsheviks have divided into several strands of Pied Pipers, still promising a post-Christian utopia, whether Cultural Marxist, Randian, etc. They are often critics of Israel’s policies and are simply not made of the same stuff as Moshe Dayan or Yoav Shamir’s 90-year-old grandmother who worked on a Kibbutz. For a White Nationalist however, particularly in a country that is not totally at the mercy of Neo-Con Foreign Policy Diktats, this is the bloc within the Hebrew people whose departure would be most welcome. This group is least likely to suffer anti-Semitic attacks because they are least likely to wear religious or political paraphernalia that alerts their potential attackers to their ethnicity. They are also the group most integrated into the leadership of the Left. Since the Left is the source of most anti-Semitic violence in our time, their political engagements act as armor. While the push and pull factors are least present in this group, they are the most likely to self-destruct through low fertility and inter-marriage.

These three categories overlook some blurring. The Zionist Settlers and the followers of Meir Kahane are driven by religion and dedication to Israel. White Nationalists often complain about Jews who promote both support for Israel and culture destruction in the US. The truth is most public intellectuals and “philanthropists” will strongly support one and fail to criticize the other. However, for the most part these categories remain relevant.

Israel, the Future of the Jewish People

As of 2010 Israel contained 42.5% of the world’s Jews (5.7m of 13.4m).[4] Israel is the only place in the world where births outnumber deaths in the Jewish community. The Jewish Community’s population in the US is stable and everywhere else is in decline, often terminal decline. Within this decade Israel will have a majority of the world’s Jewish youth. The demographics of Europe’s Jews will be explored in more detail in Part 2. As Jewish youth concentrates in Israel, Zionism will become more normative than it already is. The agenda of international organized Jewry will be more Israel-centric, and the survival of Israel will take precedence over the “local” concerns of the Diaspora.

Human Resources, the Real Arms Race between the Jordan and the Mediterranean[5]

The Palestinians have unsurprisingly maintained a Traditional, pyramid-shaped demographic profile much longer than their modern, economically developed neighbors. Since the Yom Kippur War, however, the natality rate (Total Fertility Rate or births per woman) has dropped from 6 to 4.7 children. The Separation Wall redrew the map of Israel’s “67 Borders” in a desperate attempt to maintain the Jewish population at 80% in the long term. For all lands West of the Jordan there is nearly a 3:2 ratio of Jews to Arabs, and depending on the source, Jews will become a minority in 2013 to 2016.[6] Between 2025 and 2030, Jews will become a minority in Israel and the West Bank (excluding Gaza where settlers have been removed). The recent anti-black race riots, and the explicit support for the rioters by Netanyahu, have proven that an assimilation strategy is not an acceptable defense against the Palestinian demographic threat either among the political elite or “Jewish Street.” This is certainly not the first time Israel has faced dire demographic numbers. The last time was only three decades ago, and the support for Land for Peace rose to a crescendo in the 1990s. Israel depended on Aliyah to maintain Israel’s Jewish and Democratic character.

Land for Peace or Aliyah

In the 1980s and 1990s Israel was much less bellicose than today out of necessity. The survival of a Jewish, Democratic state seemed unlikely in the long term. Jewish natality was following the same downward trend of other developed countries, and Palestinian natality was much higher than today. Land for Peace was the order of the day. Then a solution came in the form of Russian Jews. One million people moved to Israel after the fall of the Soviet Union, sometimes out of a desire to join their fellow Jews but more often to improve their economic prospects in a country with nice weather. Israel traded American missile secrets to the Russians in exchange for the safe passage of its Jews. (Jonathan Pollard, an American-born employee of the DoD, remains in jail for passing this info along to an AIPAC agent.)

Israel was in such dire need that they overlooked the fact that at least 1 in 5 FSU immigrants were economic refugees who were not Jews. These Russians became more Zionist than the Likudniks, with a reliable history of military service and support for Israel Beiteinu Party, a party that has markedly less regard for the Human Rights of Arabs than any Israeli political group outside of the followers of Meir Kahane.

The arrival of Russian Jews after the fall of the FSU came at a critical point in Israel’s recent history without which Israel would not have the leverage to undertake the settlement project and to abandon the negotiation table. Without that, there would be no second Intifada and probably no rise of Hamas. And of course, without another wave of Aliyah, Israel will have to depend on natural growth, which is concentrated in the Orthodox (Haredi) Community, to counter future pressures between the social contract and the territorial aspirations of Israel.

Israel’s Fifth Column

Looking to the Haredi community, with its high natality, as a source of stability for Israel is not the best idea. Every revolutionary regime has those segments of the population which are irreconcilable with the New Order. Make no mistake, Zionism is revolutionary, not in terms of taking control of the land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan away from the Muslims, but in the terms of its conception of each Jew’s relationship to the land “promised to them by God” and the covenant involved in this bargain. With that in mind, the politics of Jerusalem is perhaps more of a threat to the legitimacy and stability of the state than the politics of Gaza or the West Bank. Few outside observers realize that this tension between secular and religious Jews is at the forefront of Israeli politics.

In the summer of 2011 Tel Aviv had its own “Occupy” movement inspired by those in the US, though perhaps a bit more upscale. Many of the secular middle class had been hit by the economic crisis that they did not leave for vacation. While the leaders of the movement limit themselves to protesting the cost of living and demanding affordable housing for secular Jews, the interviews with participants often show that the economy is less important than issues of security and war.

The secular middle class is footing the bill for the more politically cohesive Orthodox, in this case the Haredi, who refuse military service and receive a disproportionate amount of welfare, and the Settlers, whom they view as violent extremists who require billions in support to subsidize and defend. More housing and construction subsidies are only possible by balancing spending toward the secular community. (It is notable that the respected demographer Sergio Della Pergola has found that the correlation between new housing starts and Aliyah is higher than most other measurable variables.) In terms of both participation and popular support, this Occupy-style protest was far more successful than its American counterparts.

Here are several examples of the flashpoints of tension with the Haredi. In Jerusalem, public buses are segregated by sex to avoid unintended physical contact and are a center of focus in Israel’s internal battle over its identity. The Supreme Court, an abomination to the Orthodox since its rulings make no reference to Halakhic Law, outlawed private segregated buses to the chagrin of the Orthodox. Buses are often pelted with rocks by young boys as they pass through Orthodox neighborhoods on Saturdays. Intel and automated public parking garages faced protests when they planned to run 7 days per week. And amongst themselves, the Ashkenazi Haredi protested the desegregation of their schools, allowing Sephardic Haredi to enter, because the Sephardic Haredi girls don’t cover their forearms and calves. In May of 2012, 65,000(!) Haredi rallied against “The Internet.” This is not a group accustomed to compromise or prioritizing logic or sustainability.

Haredi will soon reach 1 million in Israel. They already represent 10% of the population but 1 in 4 live births. This means that in 2030, without any change in Aliyah rates, while Jews will still outnumber Arabs within Israel (excluding Gaza and the West Bank) 1 in 4 young men of fighting age cannot be counted on for military service, putting the balance precariously close if not completely to the side of the Arabs. This challenge is ignored in the cheerleading demographic reports of Yakov Faitelson or former Ambassador Yoram Ettinger (whose reports are more for mass consumption). Those who run Israel are not so foolish. Integrating these Haredi into military service has become a priority, but  little progress has been made so far.

At the creation of the State of Israel, the Status Quo Agreement was set up to divide religious and secular power between the Orthodox (often anti-Zionists) and the Zionists (often Secular Jews). Included in this agreement was the exemption from military service given to young Haredi men whose primary occupation was the study of the Torah, at the time 400 students. In 2007, 11% of males avoided military service under this law. In the same year, 36% of women avoided military service on religious grounds (more than half of these are probably Orthodox who are pro-Zionist). A back of the envelope estimate is that this avoidance rate grows by 0.3 to 0.5% per year and may be applied to the CIA’s estimate that about 60,000 each of males and females reach military age each year. So 400 draft avoiders has become 6,000 in an army stretched to the limit by the manning of checkpoints and the need for constant vigilance.

The Supreme Court ruled that the Status Quo regarding the military draft will expire in August 2012. Again the Haredi are taking to the streets by the thousands.[7]While civil society is lining up behind policy of drafting the Haredi, the Likud-led government depends on a coalition including Israel Beiteinu (a secular party to the right of Likud and dominated by Russian emigrés) who promised to end the double standard on military service, and Shas (a Sephardic Haredi party) that is against conscription of Haredi, who bring 12.5% and 9% of seats, respectively.[8]

Netanyahu is endangering his Premiership by pursuing this policy. He would not do this if he did not see an existential need for this change. Considering the demographic situation, this is the last chance to make such changes, particularly if non-Zionist Ashkenazi Haredi ever abandon their abstention from voting. There is little reason to hope that this will fix Israel’s demographic crisis. Clearly, they will have to depend most heavily on Aliyah to solve this problem. The question is where from and how will Israel promote Aliyah to avoid the end of the Jewish and Democratic State.