Print this post Print this post

“How Did Anyone Even Notice Me?”

6,310 words

Jonathan Weisman
(((Semitism))): Being Jewish in America in the Age of Trump
New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2018

One finds a dilemma within White Nationalist criticism of Jewish literature: how to reconcile Jewish hysteria concerning imminent pogroms whenever a Jew isn’t treated with reverence with the actual White Nationalist goal of a society non-violently freed of Jews and Jewish influence. There are endless wails of impending doom for the Jews whenever the slightest threat to internationalism and liberalism appears on the public stage, and one cannot help but be amused by these overreactions – or what seem to be overreactions. We want to mock them, but we also want them to leave. If Jews are particularly sensitive to the perfume of ethnonationalism wafting through the marketplace of ideas, we should take their intense allergic reactions as a positive sign, even when we, who have tragically grown so accustomed to systemic racial abuse, find their anxieties to be neurotic and melodramatic. The recent glut of panicky Jew literature should hearten all pro-whites.

Jonathan Weisman

Jonathan Weisman, a Jew and Deputy Washington Editor of The New York Times, has jumped on board the “in the age of Trump” bandwagon and written a book urging Jews to take the threat of the Alt Right very seriously. The types of reactions mentioned above litter the book, but whether the author is describing what could be considered a trivial event or not, the lesson to be learned is uniformly the same: Jewish solidarity in the face of white advocacy is crucial. Though Weisman is actually slightly less hysterical than other Jews, he still manages to find intimidation everywhere. While reading this book and others like it, it is obvious that the standards of social justice and decorum Jews expect of others in relation to themselves are so high that their lack of sensitivity to white complaints about issues of far greater magnitude than any Jews face in the United States can only be a result of pure anti-white hatred. What sends Jews into fits of rage today are things that whites have experienced daily in almost complete silence for decades. If, as Weisman suggests, Jews in the age of Trump are now under existential threat and must begin to act, then whites, if the same standards are applied, have long since passed the point at which Jews have only recently arrived – and are thus morally obligated to defend their interests immediately. A Jew could not last five minutes as a white man in America.

The book has essentially two parts. The first deals with the rise of the Alt Right; the second is Weisman’s soul-searching and his reflections on the Jewish community, which leads him to what he believes to be the proper Jewish response to the threat. For White Nationalists and others of the Alt Right who were active on Twitter during the 2016 election season, the first part of the book is rather entertaining: seeing the names of accounts that were banned long ago is sure to make the reader smile as he remembers both them and the general onslaught of, admittedly, often juvenile but highly amusing verbal attacks upon journalists and others who attempted to stand athwart history, yelling “oy vey.” But there is, of course, far more to it than that, as both White Nationalists and Weisman know. In his Introduction, he begins with his initial contact with the Alt Right and wonders, “How did anyone even notice me? I thought, perplexed as much as anguished” (p. 11).

After tweeting a quote from a neoconservative Jew, Weisman was greeted by the now-famous and ever-useful echo meme: “‘Hello (((Weisman))),’ wrote ‘CyberTrump’” (p. 7). This was just the first of “maybe more than two thousand” (p. 9) such incidents over the next few weeks, and it really got under his skin. He was being confronted by people who were unwilling to decontextualize his thoughts from his identity because they had deprogrammed themselves from the cult of race-blindness, something to which Jews – especially American Jews – are entirely unaccustomed. These same people had also decided that bourgeois etiquette could be disregarded given the gravity of the issues involved. As he relates in the book, this prompted him to delve into his childhood. He informs the reader how fundamentally normal, generally secular, and progressive it was. He is, we are told, a normal adult, too: he shops at the same stores and worries about his weight like everyone else (p. 11). How, then, could these whites possibly object to his thoughts or his support for an ideology that threatened to destroy them? And how could they have possibly noticed that these thoughts and this ideology, and others of similar destructive capability, were shared by so many other Jews?

“The Jew flourishes when borders come down, when boundaries blur, when walls are destroyed, not erected,” is the opening line of Weisman’s first chapter (p. 33). Although this is most certainly not their practice when given their own country to run efficiently and safely, this is indeed how Jews exist and have existed in the past when dwelling in other peoples’ countries. It is also one of the fundamental reasons the author and his fellow Jews received so many hostile messages on Twitter: an increasing number of whites simply recognize precisely what Weisman himself acknowledges, and know that it means a dramatic reduction in their quality of life in the present and unmitigated disaster for their race in the future. And even if it did not necessarily mean either of these things, it would necessarily mean the slow decay and eventual disappearance of national cultures, which for any group of people other than whites would be seen as a tragic loss to posterity. And sharing the same taste in consumer goods does not change these things. But opposing this decay, this erasure, this marginalization, and those who desire and organize it is hateful, according to Weisman.

The author relates a conversation he had with his grandmother in which he inquired whether or not she considered herself to be Russian, to which she answered no. She said that she is Jewish because of the abuse of a rabbi by Cossacks she had witnessed (p. 38). “But we Jews in the United States are American; we value that identity – and most of us would like to keep it,” he writes (p. 38). But why would any white person believe him after reading his very own words? If Jews thrive when borders and boundaries come down, and also disavow any loyalty to their country once something bad happens to them (assuming they had any to begin with), why would any white seriously consider Weisman anything but an American in only a legal sense? And once whites realize the spiritually rootless and ephemeral nature of the relationship between Jews and their host countries, is it any wonder that they resent being lectured on morality, culture, and political policy – which will determine the future of their homelands and the potentiality of their progeny – by such people? What could Weisman possibly mean when he says that Jews are American? We never actually find out. He probably has no idea himself.

For someone who claims to value his American identity, the simple phrase and concept “America First” should be welcomed. But, with hints of his grandmother and her Russian trauma, this phrase reminds Weisman of a former American hero, Charles Lindbergh, and he is surprised that Donald Trump is still using it “despite what must have been hundreds of reminders of how Jewish voters heard those words” (p. 56). What degree of arrogance and entitlement must one possess to believe that a president should alter his domestic policy or even a simple slogan based on a few hundred complaints from members of one’s own particular racial or ethnic minority group? Or is that just the kind of service he has been used to all along? Is this what it is like to be a Jew?

It is in the context of these positions, this Jewish social and psychological orientation towards his host society, that Weisman’s observations of the Alt Right must be placed. When he describes the events that occurred at the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, or a speech given by Mike Enoch,[1] or even Milo Yiannopoulos’s anti-feminist trolling (whom he strategically fails to mention is a Jew), he is incapable of understanding these things as anything other than a threat to the blurred boundaries in which Jews thrive. “When anti-Semitism flares, it is usually inflamed by people who don’t know Jews all that well, if at all,” (p. 46) suggests Weisman, echoing legions of other Jews who want this to be true, but almost certainly know that it is not. Anti-Semitism flares when Jews are no longer able to hide because enough people begin to have the courage to name them and tell others of their nature and their deeds. And criticism of Jews has only recently been somewhat mainstreamed (and at great social risk to those making it so), whereas highly lucrative criticism of whites has been going on for decades, with most whites simply taking it in stride or, worse, internalizing and supporting it. Though neither of these reactions is or ever has been healthy – indeed, they are both symptoms of Jewish cultural control – it is remarkable that when given even the smallest dose of their own medicine, Jews either recoil in terror or react with indignant, vengeful fury.

Weisman describes the anti-Semitism of the first half of the twentieth century in America: Charles Lindbergh, Father Charles Coughlin, Henry Ford, the desire of Americans to restrict immigration, and quotas on Jews at Harvard. America did not do enough to help Jews during the Second World War, he argues: “The borders thickened. Nationalism rose. The drawbridge rose. The Jew did not flourish” (p. 59). But then in the 1950s and ’60s, Jews discovered blacks and began working to stop “hate,” that catch-all term for anything that benefits whites in their own countries. He proudly lists Jews who helped end freedom of association in the South, a “sacrifice [that] helped cement a powerful role for Jews in the Democratic Party . . .” (p. 63). Henceforth, Jews entered mainstream politics at all levels, including the Republican Party, and everything seemed fine. Even following the economic disaster of 2008:

. . . internationalism didn’t miss a beat . . . The borders were still blurred. Nationalism and chauvinism were in check. Undocumented immigrants marched in the streets of Washington and Los Angeles demanding rights. The polyglot nation recovered. . . The Jew thrived. (p. 67)

In a paragraph dripping with the costumed intellectuality and nouveau worldliness so beloved of liberals, he describes dining at a “very bad Thai restaurant” in Iceland with his daughter, who was talking about the “injustices that befall African Americans every day” when she happened to mention that “anti-Semitism basically doesn’t exist in the United States,” to which he responded that Jews can never be at peace (pp. 67-68). It is almost certain that Weisman has never reflected on whether or not Jewish behavior contributes to this state of affairs. What if the majority populations of the countries in which Jews reside do not want blurred borders and boundaries? What if they do not want their cultures to slowly disappear for the sake of a thriving Jewish community? What if, unlike Jews, they have nowhere else to go when things go wrong?

In the second chapter, which focuses largely on Israel, Weisman reveals the accuracy of even more of what White Nationalists and the Alt Right already know about Jews: that differences of opinion within the Jewish community exist only to the extent that opinions on what is best for Jews differ. He begins with the notorious Iran nuclear deal of 2015. Those Jews who supported it, Weisman included, were seen as traitors to Jewry. He frames this as a debate between two conceptions of Israel, one tribalist and one internationalist, but writes, “Embedded in both sides of the angry Jewish debate was the freighted question, Which camp supported Israel more?” (p. 72). This, then, is not really a debate between two conceptions of Israel, but rather between two conceptions of Jewish tribalism. Weisman believes that the focus on Israel among Jews residing in America has caused them to neglect their precarious situation here. Though this is not a new position, its advocates lost momentum following the Second World War. However, with America’s slavish devotion to Israel all but enshrined in the Constitution at this point, Weisman and others are even freer now to meddle in domestic affairs for the benefit of Jews without having to worry about being accused of dual loyalty. They can now claim a sort of impartiality with regard to Israel while knowing that it is safely in the hands of the American taxpayer. He writes, “American Jewry should be at least as focused on maintaining political support for Judaism in the United States as it is for sustaining Israel’s security” (p. 84). With Israel secure, Jews can focus even more on dominating American domestic policy and culture. And to do this, they have the perfect weapon.

While visiting Yad Vashem, President Trump complimented Jews for thriving despite historical persecution and oppression, but Weisman uses this as an opportunity to criticize him for “[letting] slip his cherished stereotypes” (p. 82). Of his childhood, the author writes, “what I remember of my religious education was a near-constant lesson in Holocaust studies with a side of Zionism . . .” (p. 4). And twice he mentions a Pew Research Center study from 2013 in which seventy-three percent of American Jews said that remembering the Holocaust was “what it meant to be Jewish” (p. 13, 83). So, even if we accept the historical Jewish suffering narrative as fact, it is clear that Weisman doesn’t appreciate Trump or whites acknowledging it, either matter-of-factly or in aid of their interests. He has similar attitudes towards pro-Israel Christian fundamentalists (pp. 74-75). Why? Because the Jewish suffering narrative is a weapon, a magical spell to be used by the “chosen” only in defense of their interests or, in certain extraordinary circumstances, by someone or some group to whom they have granted permission. Jewish “suffering,” even if factually accurate, is in a sense not historical at all. It is not to be analyzed or questioned, it is not be discussed by the uninitiated, and it is always one step ahead of the law. It is a treasured state of being, guarded closely by those who possess it, able to withstand rationality, able to evoke humbling and frightening fictions in innocent populations, and able to make powerful men beg for forgiveness for things they have not done from creatures whose vindictiveness they cannot comprehend. There is no way to play the game other than to simply hand Jews the pieces and sit quietly with one’s head down, and hope that one is sufficiently obsequious while losing so as to avoid bad publicity and the destruction of one’s life.

For Weisman, the Boycott Divestment Sanctions (BDS) movement is more evidence of increasing anti-Semitism, and all because people are somehow connecting Israel with Jews. For example, he is distressed to learn that a Jew who applied to be on the student council judicial board at a University of California campus was questioned about her ability to be unbiased. He writes unabashedly, “Isn’t a goal of diversity to have different viewpoints?” (p. 84). Weisman resents the fact that in the hierarchy of oppressed minority groups that exists in multiracial America, the Jew is no longer perceived as top dog:

Sympathizing with the oppressed is the job of the “woke” generation, but although Jews have been exiled, isolated, disenfranchised, and massacred since Nebuchadnezzar, we are no more due the sympathies of the Left on campus than we are due special treatment in higher education admissions or workplace hiring. We’re just doing too darned well, as Trump noted in Israel. To the advocates of BDS, Israel’s current military strength and right-wing policies negate three thousand years of hatred. (p. 85)

By blurring boundaries in order to thrive, the Jew has surrounded himself with people who are either indifferent to the suffering narrative or who are hostile to him, while at the same time angering the native populations who increasingly recognize the Jew as being instrumental in destroying what were once their own homes and cultures.

According to Weisman, he was asked by an Alt Right Twitter user why Jews had been kicked out of so many countries if they had never done anything wrong (p. 90). He does not answer directly, but a few paragraphs later writes that “national borders and walls, wherever they rise, tend to trap Jews, not liberate them” (p. 91) – which is sufficient, given everything we already know just from the author alone in his own book. But this and other such perfectly reasonable questions signaled a remarkable shift in the American political landscape, and Weisman knows it. The Jew, regardless of the power he still possesses, can no longer hide in America. Those days are over. Jews are keenly aware of this, and they sensed it then, too. But still, the author writes, “The rise of the alt-right in 2016 was greeted with almost criminal indifference” (p. 91). Although this is far from accurate, as anyone who was paying attention to such matters at that time can attest, it is important that Weisman believes it, or at least wants others to do so. The lights were turned on and the cockroaches began to scurry across the floor – but if Weisman wants them to scurry faster, then by all means, let them.

In the third chapter, Weisman digs deeper into the specifics of the Alt Right. He places its rise within the context of the maelstrom of 2008: seemingly endless wars, financial disaster, and “the toxicity of mainstream conservatism” (p. 97). These things “had not only energized the Left but sent the fringe Right in search of a new ideology” (p. 97). One is consistently astonished at how little mainstream pundits, journalists, and even academics actually know about anything to the right of the Republican Party. His statement regarding a “search for a new ideology” is, of course, false. The ideas generally accepted among the Alt Right were rarely new. What were new were the methods by which they were disseminated, the ways in which they were presented, and the volume of their presence across the social landscape. But his main point is fair, and each of those issues remains important to this day to White Nationalists and others who have either outlasted or replaced the Alt Right, in one form or another. But this is the end of his causal analysis. All else is relegated to “hate,” that boring word which has been contorted into a grotesque conceptual refuge from actual thought in order to create an immediate, negative emotional response among the masses to any trace of white identity politics.

After suggesting that anti-Semitism played a role in Right-wing criticism of neoconservatism – he actually claims that men such as Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, and George Bush “need not garner a mention” in such criticism (p. 99)! – instead of the Jewish role in neoconservatism having played a role in awakening people to the Jewish Question, Weisman begins his cursory analysis of some of the major figures and ideas of the Alt Right. William Regnery II and Louis R. Andrews of the National Policy Institute (NPI) “peddled discredited [italics mine] racial theories and trafficked in antiSemitic conspiracies” (p. 100). Kevin MacDonald “[posited] a seemingly [italics mine] academic assertion that Jews had harnessed evolutionary forces to develop strong group identity . . . ” (p. 100). As usual, no evidence is provided for these socially-significant qualifiers. Weisman quotes Sam Francis from a National Policy Institute blog post in which he defends MacDonald’s work from charges of anti-Semitism: “The only basis for claiming it is ‘anti-Semitic’ is to so broaden the meaning of the term as to include any attribution to Jews of characteristics that are not uniformly positive or to make any generalizations about them at all” (p. 102). Weisman responds with another implicit call for an end to free speech: “By this argument, you can say anything about any person, group, or race, and as long as it is not a direct solicitation to violence or hatred, it cannot possibly be impugned as hate speech . . . ” (p. 102). To analyze all the implications of his statement would take up far too much space, but the political direction in which he is heading, and urging his readers to head, is clear: limitations on speech based on standards created by and for Jews.

For Weisman, NPI, Kevin MacDonald, and others represent the “standard world of hate” which was transformed when it intersected online with the “ugly misogyny of boys and men” (p. 103) in the form of Gamergate, a reaction by male gamers to efforts to make their hobby more female-friendly, “diverse,” and “inclusive.” The anger expressed on social media against the “social justice warrior” interlopers never really died down, and much of it was redirected into what became the Alt Right. He largely blames Milo Yiannopoulos for this, but also to blame is online anonymity, which led to online forums such as 4chan, which he describes as “a hate-filled underworld available to everyone” (p. 109), which for some will sound more like an advertising slogan than a condemnation. Even YouTube star PewDiePie gets a mention in one very revealing paragraph in which Weisman wonders how it could be possible to find humor in two Indians holding up a sign that reads “Death To All Jews,” a joke included in one of PewDiePie’s videos. This is not an entirely unreasonable question, but Weisman gives too much away by making clear that he is not simply discussing shifts in social norms:

But how did he even think of this prank? What the hell? Such quips were once overtly deemed unacceptable. In 1983, Monty Python, in their least well-regarded movie, The Meaning of Life, merrily insulted Catholics, Protestants, fat people, the rich, the working class, and on and on – until in one scene, a humble cleaning lady (a man in drag) says, “Though I may be down right now, at least I don’t work for Jews, ” an insult too far even for Python. She had a bucket of vomit dumped on her head for that. (p. 110)

Though it is not entirely apparent whether Weisman actually understood the joke or not, it is obvious that he is quite comfortable with jokes at the expense of any group of people other than Jews. One can only imagine the level of insular privilege to which one must be accustomed to have the nerve to even write such a sentence in a book designed, at least in part, to garner sympathy for one’s people. It’s all fun and games until a Jew gets his feelings hurt.

As one of the last spaces available for free expression (a claim that almost seems outdated as it is written), the Internet is highly problematic for Weisman. He writes:

Users can circumnavigate the controls imposed by society through the curated mainstream media, educators, parents, and the like. And that can obviously be a good thing for a teenager wrestling with, say, sexuality or gender identity. But it can also be a bad thing. (p. 121)

Once again, it is apparent that the author is concerned only with ensuring a society that is comfortable for Jews. The social controls that allow Jews to thrive should not be circumvented, but all others should be. Has he paused even a moment to consider that the viciousness of trolling culture is made possible in part because of decades of deliberate Jewish deconstruction of the social controls that kept such behavior in check? As with immigration, Jews have created a situation in which their desire for blurred boundaries, both political and social, places them in a bind. Transgression, when valued in and of itself, and which it seems to be for those unfamiliar with the deeper forces at work, simply cannot be contained in strictly-defined regions of intellectual or social space. Now that this transgression is working for whites, things such as free speech have become thorny issues in need of reframing. But the viciousness has been unleashed, social controls are much harder to build than they are to destroy, and Jews are now surrounded by an ever-growing mass of people who are no longer interested in being offended on their behalf.

Numerous pages are devoted to Alt Right optics, the use of irony, explanations of Alt Right vocabulary, and the various trolling operations of The Daily Stormer. He also treats his readers to a retelling of the wildly distorted mainstream account of the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville and a brief description of the short-lived Coincidence Detector app before moving on to blaming Donald Trump for not stopping such things. Consider this statement regarding the events surrounding Andrew Anglin and Tanya Gersh, the Jewish real estate agent who it seems attempted to intimidate Richard Spencer’s mother into selling some of her property: “No one has suggested the Trump campaign had anything to do with the trolling of Tanya Gersh, but the campaign – and the candidate – did nothing to stop it” (p. 143). And in regard to Trump’s retweet of an innocent anti-CNN image by someone who had also tweeted anti-Jewish content in the past, Weisman writes, “I’ll offer Trump the benefit of the doubt and say he likely had no idea of HanAssholeSolo’s past artwork. . . . But that doesn’t answer the question of why the president of the United States was swimming in the same filthy online waters as the likes of HansAssholeSolo . . .” (p. 148). By this logic, almost anyone who uses the Internet could be accused of having an opinion that someone from some group would find offensive; but Weisman is not interested in such things. His goal is to increase white self-censorship and Jewish in-group solidarity in the face of Jewish discomfort. And Donald Trump was expected to respond to the Tanya Gersh incident because Jews were upset. Anything that upsets Jews is, as Weisman demonstrates consistently throughout his book, a matter of national importance. To not respond, to not place their interests first, is to deny them their chosenness, their place at the head of the table of suffering, and to deny them their fundamental meaning.

Further attacks on Trump and his administration, rooted in the Jew’s hatred of whites, continue throughout the chapter. In a paragraph that reminds this reviewer both of Bronze Age Pervert’s well-known “wine bar” tweet and a Buddy Cole skit from Kids in the Hall, Weisman writes of a chance encounter with Sebastian Gorka following his exit from the White House in August 2017:

A few weeks after his dismissal, I was eating dinner with my girlfriend, Jennifer, at a small French bistro tucked away in a Washington neighborhood. At a high-top in the bar area, Gorka and his wife sat with another couple merrily drinking bottle after bottle of red wine. It was an odd moment for me, a reminder of Erik Larson’s In the Garden of Beasts, when National Socialists casually mixed with the intelligentsia and elite in a still-thriving Berlin. Jennifer planned to say Shabbat Shalom to Gorka as he left the restaurant, but alas, we left first. He just kept drinking. (pp. 152-53)

His laughably dramatic pretentiousness, his ludicrous snobbery, and his pathetic need – rooted in a fundamental cowardice – to inform his readers of his brave plan are obvious. (It is unfortunate for Jews everywhere that he and Jennifer were unable to alter the direction of their walk towards the exit in order to carry out what would have been a heroic act of resistance.) But what will escape most readers of this book is that this story has next to nothing to do with politics and everything to do with the race war that is always being waged inside the Jewish mind. While the author and his girlfriend were busy waging this tacit war, Gorka had the nerve to sit there drinking while white, completely oblivious to the intense Jewish suffering mere feet away. And when on International Holocaust Remembrance Day, the White House mentioned all the victims without mentioning Jews in particular, this was “the official ratification of a decades-long effort by anti-Semites to downgrade the Jewish place in the Shoah,” according to Weisman (p. 153). But on Days of Remembrance of the Victims of the Holocaust, when the White House did mention Jews, “the words were partially cribbed from the Holocaust Museum website,” so it didn’t really count for much (p. 153). Weisman was also offended when Reince Priebus used the phrases “extraordinarily sad” and “miserable genocide” when describing the Holocaust (p. 154). Whites make the mistake of believing that the right words can appease Jews and that they share the same moral universe. But only the right people can appease Jews, and those are the people who do what Jews want in any given situation without question. Trump and Priebus were not authorized to use the suffering narrative. Predictably, the chapter ends with another blatant lie about the response from Jews to the Alt Right’s attention: “The Jews slept” (p. 163).

In the fourth chapter of the book, Weisman turns his attention to why there has been a rise in anti-Semitism, apparently oblivious to the fact that he has spent nearly every previous page of his book providing answers. Although Jew-aware readers will have already predicted that, for the author, absolutely nothing Jews have done could possibly have precipitated any backlash against them, Weisman still manages to take avoidance of any real issues to a staggering level by maintaining that Donald Trump is to blame. According to the author, by having run as an anti-establishment candidate, Trump created a space into which the Alt Right – made up largely of that permanent group of people who will always hate Jews and other non-whites for no good reason whatsoever – could enter. Upon entering this newly opened political space, the Alt Right seized upon Trump’s anti-establishment rhetoric and expanded it in order to spread this irrational “hate” to others because . . . that’s just what haters do. And because Donald Trump advocates stronger borders, he has made people want stronger borders . . . which is reminiscent of the Alt Right’s “hate.” All of this, he argues, is leading to a breakdown of what Weisman claims is the traditional America.

One of the more interesting aspects of the Trump phenomenon is how it has exposed liberals and the milquetoast Left as deeply conservative in that they desperately cling to nostalgic snapshots of their ideal America, refuse to accommodate changing realities, and would rather stick their heads in the sand than admit that they were wrong about any of their fundamental assumptions. It is, of course, no coincidence that these assumptions overlap with Jewish interests. Weisman quotes “Obama’s Rabbi,” David Saperstein:

There are dynamics we’ve never seen before, they’re all coming together, and if we don’t act to preserve the concepts of diversity, inclusion, of E Pluribus Unum, if we don’t restore those norms, the America that we know might not be there for our children (p. 174).

Weisman makes his money in the world of people who will be receptive to the above type of garbage. But his book is ultimately written for Jews alone, and so later in the chapter he includes the following comment from another rabbi which, while not exactly at odds with the Saperstein quote, certainly has dramatically different implications:

A generation or two before me, everyone looked back at beating Hitler. They wanted to fight the Holocaust. I wanted to look forward. But now we have an obligation to work against this. I think it’s about Jewish survival. We don’t want Jews to feel like we need to hide. That’s not just religious. It’s American, right? (p. 187).

Jewish survival and Jewish thriving is commendable for Weisman, but even a hint of collective white self-assertion is considered a threat. Also note that the America that “might not be there for our children” is the one that replaced the America that was purposely destroyed by Jews in the first place, a fact of which whites are increasingly aware thanks to the few years of Alt Right prominence and the continuing activism of White Nationalists and others. And it should be obvious to any objective reader what Weisman’s reaction would be to any white person who wrote about the need for “white survival,” especially in the context of it being “American.” What is it about Jewish survival that is American and white survival that is un-American?

From a white perspective, one in which logical consistency is valued and hypocrisy is scorned, Weisman’s mind is a confused and disingenuous mess. We see this even in his exploration of his own relationship to Judaism in his attempt to understand the Alt Right. He quotes multiple rabbis who offer saccharine sentiments such as Jews being “obligated to counter injustice” (p. 182) and that “[t]o be a Jew is to be a beacon of hope in a world perpetually threatened by a pall of despair” (p. 182). The tension between the tribalism of Orthodox Jews and those “who are most interested in a liberal, internationalist future, who wish to live progressive, assimilated existences free of threat” seems to bother him somewhat, but he never really gets around to saying why, instead writing that this tension can be resolved through love (p. 190). Although this answer is comically meaningless, at least it won’t hurt his book sales by alienating any particular faction of bickering Jews. Throughout the book, he portrays himself as almost proud of his disconnection from his religion in an effort to demonstrate his cosmopolitan credentials, but this only serves to highlight the true origin of his concerns: his racial identity. His enlightened moderate detachment to Hebrew prayer and the Jewish ethnostate did not alter his Jewishness – nor did it turn him into an American in any sense that would be recognized by whites in the past, or even now if they were to read this book with a proper understanding of the Jewish problem.

In the last chapter of the book, “Towards a Collective Response,” Weisman argues that Jews have not done enough to counter the Alt Right and rising “hate.” He suggests that alliances against hate be formed, connections between organization such as the Anti-Defamation League and the Federal Bureau of Investigation be strengthened, and a body of regulatory law pertaining to the Internet be developed (p. 211). He even hints at violence by suggesting “street demonstrations and [italics mine] resistance” (p. 203). (Why include the word “resistance” if not to suggest action in the street other than demonstrations, and what else could such action realistically mean?) But the most important thing, he writes, would be to “regain our voice in the public square, making injustice our primary focus” (p. 211). It is unfortunate that Weisman neglected to provide examples of spaces in the public square not overrepresented with Jews blathering endlessly about injustice – which, for Jews, is nothing but a concept used to frame anti-white hatred in universalist moral language because they know that this is language that appeals to whites’ good nature. He didn’t provide examples because he couldn’t, and he knew it. To admit that Jews dominate the public square would be to fracture the Jewish suffering narrative and betray his people.

In one of the final paragraphs of the book, Weisman quotes a rabbi on Jewish suffering:

There is no quiet life for Jews anywhere, at least not for long . . . We Jews know why we suffer. Society resents anyone who challenges its fundamental beliefs, behavior, and prejudices. The ruling class does not like to be told that morality overrules power. The claim of chosenness guarantees that Jews live unquiet lives (p. 223).

This is sheer nonsense, a phony attempt at bloodless martyrdom, and a rationalization of colossal subterfuge, but even if we were to assume that Jews actually believed that their behavior was grounded solely in decency, the fact is that this rabbi is admitting to consistent Jewish subversion of their host societies everywhere. This will always end up being resented once exposed, and any healthy society will reject those responsible in order to maintain its integrity. Being Jewish in the age of Trump is nothing more than to be Jewish in an age of white racial revival, and that means having to deal with the consequences of this eternal Jewish behavior in the twenty-first century.

Weisman’s experience with the Alt Right should serve as a warning to him and his fellow Jews: whites are rapidly realizing that Jewish morality is nothing but a code of collective Jewish self-preservation; Jewish challenges to fundamental beliefs, behavior, and prejudices are nothing but challenges to white culture and white survival; and the ruling class that he claims to challenge is actually either Jewish or in league with them, and from these positions of power it seeks to destroy everything whites value and, ultimately, whites themselves. Weisman is right to be nervous. A thriving Jewish community is not going to be the concern of anyone but Jews in the future – least of all whites – and they have no one to blame but themselves. If being Jewish in the age of Trump is as nerve-wracking as Weisman claims, pro-whites should take heart. Their frothing, flailing, and transparent feigning of innocence only serves to further expose their treachery. As such, this is a most welcome addition to the anxious Jew corpus.

Note

[1] In describing this speech, which was given at the Lincoln Memorial and included both Alt Right and Alt Lite types, he writes that “both [groups] saw freedom of speech as license to say any damned thing they wanted” (p. 2). One unifying theme of recent “in the age of Trump” literature is an explicit or implicit call for limitations on freedom of speech. This is, of course, already happening, but will doubtless accelerate at a terrifying pace in the very near future. Fighting this should be among White Nationalist priorities.

20 Comments

  1. Spencer J. Quinn
    Posted February 1, 2019 at 4:32 pm | Permalink

    Donald,
    Great review. Thank you so much for putting in the time and effort to write it. 6K words go by really quickly.

  2. Brian
    Posted February 1, 2019 at 10:08 am | Permalink

    Really well-written article.

  3. ehhh
    Posted February 1, 2019 at 2:33 am | Permalink

    Pretty goddamn good article.

  4. Thane of Cawdor
    Posted January 31, 2019 at 3:54 pm | Permalink

    “The polyglot nation recovered… The Jew thrived.”

    That tells you all you need to know, doesn’t it?

  5. Ben G.
    Posted January 31, 2019 at 2:33 pm | Permalink

    This is the best redpill on the Jewish Question, in one article, that I’ve ever seen.

    Well done. I will be spreading it around.

  6. Posted January 31, 2019 at 2:28 pm | Permalink

    Wonderful piece. I look forward to finishing this splendid essay–however I’m halfway in and find the BDS section fatally flawed in taking Weisman’s statements at face value.

    “he is distressed to learn that a Jew who applied to be on the student council judicial board at a University of California campus was questioned about her ability to be unbiased”

    I can almost guarantee that the person who questioned the Jew was Jewish. Can anyone seriously imagine Jews giving an inch of control of the Universities or anywhere they’ve taken power (which means in every single zone of national significance where elections don’t apply).?

    Yeah there are a few Mohammadens who dare assert Palestinian rights–and behind every single one of them is a Jew.

    But Weisman is well aware that the entire BDS conversation–like every other conversation concerning Israel or the Jews– is managed by Jews using controlled [in this case Palestinian] opposition and governed by the 11th commandment. How convenient to bequeath unto yourself victim points in a quarrel among yourselves. Whatever could be the motivation for this…?

    And so I find it at cross-purposes to conclude that … “Weisman resents the fact that in the hierarchy of oppressed minority groups that exists in multiracial America, the Jew is no longer perceived as top dog”?

    That’s giving Weisman far too much credit.

    • Posted February 4, 2019 at 4:42 pm | Permalink

      The student who led the “anti-semitic” questioning was Fabienne ROTH. LOL.

      https://haam.org/2015/02/13/council-members-discussion-of-rachel-beydas-qualifications-for-usac-judicial-board-anti-semitic/

      Weisman even names her without naming her…no acknowledgment of her Jewishness. This juplicity is simply incomprehensible to normies…

      In the same passage Weisman references the Chicago Dyke March of 2017. This also was a jewish quarrel that was widely reported as another incident of anti-semitism. I recall bringing this up to a jewish friend at the time after she posted about this event in alarming tones, indicating a ‘rise in blatant antisemitism’ .. she refused to ever acknowledge that it was left-wing jews who were the ‘anti-semites’ and accused me of having descended down some right wing antisemitic rabbit hole [lol if only she knew..also this friend is not especially zionist but is constantly working to network with palestinians and other muslims to foster peace].

  7. Hollywicker Man
    Posted January 31, 2019 at 2:03 pm | Permalink

    The use of the ((())) on the cover seemingly offers more valuable insight than the book’s contents.

    We should take note at how the memes and digital symbology of the New Right is proving irresistible to the collective modern J mind, for the first time Whites are at the forefront of taboo underground humor gone edgy-mainstream; and New York “intellectuals” like Weisman are drawn to this scene/subversive humor, an addictive bug light, they admire the juvenile, undeniable power of ((())) so much they attempt to claim it, embrace it as a badge of superior oppression, even as they recognise its critical truth. Weisman literslly uses his book to signal waves of echoing influence/alarm to his Tribe. This is very different from the gold star.

    My generation has never witnessed the diaspora so loudly yet slyly push for limitation of 1A, when for decades they championed shock jocks, Lenny Bruce, smut peddlers, “gangsta” rappers, and Hollywood ultraviolence. We never saw the horror of Bolshevik censorship, the neurotic paranoia and squirrelly power tripping, that Weisman belies in his book. The proverbial tentacles have unprecedented, disarming cover, however, in the buzzing recesses of Silicon Valley and Technion.

    Weisman basically says you can’t hit a man with (((glasses))) and btw that pertains to the Internet now. As he hits himself, faux drowns his mind, deliriously awaiting America’s dismantling. New York Times Bestshiller List.

    • Viv
      Posted January 31, 2019 at 5:32 pm | Permalink

      ((())) was the most powerful meme/critical intervention I’ve ever seen.

      • Hollywicker Man
        Posted January 31, 2019 at 7:33 pm | Permalink

        Agreed. If the book were titled ‘Semitism’ no one would buy it or read reviews of it, because “Semitism” has no traction, it means nothing in America, or anywhere, it’s a word Joos summoned only to brashly claim it for dramatic effect, to then zombiefy it, inflate it w/ characteristic, subversive negativity. “Semitism” is defined by “Anti-,” it’s a word that tellingly is defined by a conjured opposition. Joos conjured a word to darken it. Which is what they do to their own name in host countries.

        So it’s very revealing that Weisman calls his book not ‘Anti-Semitism in MAGA Country’ but ‘(((Semitism)))’. For the first time that word has meaning due only to a meme accent. Weisman wraps the word in ((())), then serves it up like a pig in the blanket, deemed kosher by his name on the cover. But it’s the New Right who is dictating Jooish identity in American culture now; they are secretly flattered, intimidated, and furious. We created a funny, vain shell for them to hole up in like a crab, and boy did they, they’re at home in anti-social separation.

        (Enjoyed the review, and I’d bet Weisman has already read it, lurking in the dark of his meme shell.)

  8. Marc
    Posted January 30, 2019 at 8:31 pm | Permalink

    Powerful article. Like sitting on a bus, watching an old Chinese man pick his nose – disgusted and yet not able to turn away.
    For Orwell, the future was a boot stomping on a face, forever.
    For us, it’s eating at a Thai restaurant in Iceland while your daughter lectures you about the suffering of negroes.

    • Posted January 31, 2019 at 4:41 am | Permalink

      The unfortunate truth is that at a restaurant in Iceland today your waiter might be black, brown, or Asian.

  9. Rob Bottom
    Posted January 30, 2019 at 3:12 pm | Permalink

    This is one of the best articles I’ve read on CC. I hope he reads ever searing word. You laid it all out perfectly, but I would have added one more paragraph to underline how ludicrous it is that Jews still complain about quotas at Harvard from a hundred years ago, given what we’ve learned from Hillel and Ron Unz about Harvard’s current student body under Jewish stewardship.

  10. SS
    Posted January 30, 2019 at 1:55 pm | Permalink

    This is the best article I have ever read.

  11. DrExCathedra
    Posted January 30, 2019 at 1:18 pm | Permalink

    What an excellent review, both thorough and thoroughly engaging, insightful, very clear, very dot-connecting and dryly humorous.

    My favorite line (of many): Weisman turns his attention to why there has been a rise in anti-Semitism, apparently oblivious to the fact that he has spent nearly every previous page of his book providing answers.

  12. Henrik Lock
    Posted January 30, 2019 at 1:09 pm | Permalink

    Can I give Jonathan Weisman proof that Jews control the American public square? The majority of white American baby boys are given a JEWISH circumcision right after birth.

  13. Posted January 30, 2019 at 12:11 pm | Permalink

    The story about Sebastian Gorka is particularly hilarious given that Gorka is a pro-Zionist counterjihadist who had multitudes of Jewish groups rushing to his defense when he was accused of anti-Semitism in 2017 because of his membership in the Order of Vitéz. So if they had said “Shabbat Shalom” to Gorka I imagine he would have smiled and repeated it back to them.

    • SS
      Posted January 30, 2019 at 1:54 pm | Permalink

      What was even the point of that story? Gorka would be shocked to know Jews were eating in the same restaurant he was? Jews are strange people.

      • Posted January 31, 2019 at 4:45 am | Permalink

        I’m sure that Weisman, like most neoliberals today, believes that the Alt Right, Alt Lite, New Right, neo-Nazis, KKK, paleocons, Steve Bannon, the Trump administration, and possibly even George W. Bush’s people are all just different names for the same thing.

        • SS
          Posted January 31, 2019 at 6:26 am | Permalink

          If you search for “alt-right” on Twitter you see that it is the new Emmanuel Goldstein the left.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.
 
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
 
Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

*
*

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • Our Titles

    The White Nationalist Manifesto

    From Plato to Postmodernism

    The Gizmo

    Return of the Son of Trevor Lynch's CENSORED Guide to the Movies

    Toward a New Nationalism

    The Smut Book

    The Alternative Right

    My Nationalist Pony

    Dark Right: Batman Viewed From the Right

    The Philatelist

    Novel Folklore

    Confessions of an Anti-Feminist

    East and West

    Though We Be Dead, Yet Our Day Will Come

    White Like You

    The Homo and the Negro, Second Edition

    Numinous Machines

    The World in Flames

    Venus and Her Thugs

    Cynosura

    North American New Right, vol. 2

    You Asked For It

    More Artists of the Right

    Extremists: Studies in Metapolitics

    Rising

    The Importance of James Bond

    In Defense of Prejudice

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles

    Reuben

    The Node

    A Sky Without Eagles

    The Way of Men

    The New Austerities

    Morning Crafts

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Asatru: A Native European Spirituality

    The Lost Philosopher

    Impeachment of Man

    Gold in the Furnace

    Defiance