Regarding “Da Jooz” and Other Sensitive Topics

Well, I knew I was going to have to cover this stuff at some point in time, so why don’t I just get it over with.

“Da Jooz”

First of all, even will their “tribal” identity, Jews are individuals, just like Alt-Righters and Neoreactionaries are individuals. I have had Jewish teachers, co-workers and even know one Jew who married a relative of mine when I was a child. All of them have been caring, helpful, polite people, and many, if not most, were largely irreligious. The one Jew who married a relative of mine is no more left-wing than my 100% gentile Anglo-Saxon parents. This does not mean that I do not acknowledge that Jews played an important role in the original formulation and application of Marxist ideology (Marx himself was of Jewish parentage, along with Trotsky, and the Jew who married a relative of mine actually admitted to me in a private conversation that many Jews did play an important role in the Soviet Union). And it also does not mean that I do not understand that many Jews are still playing a large role to propagate Marxism in the West, though under a cultural guise, as well as ideologies such as Globalism, Neoliberalism, and Libertarianism (Soros, Rand, Rothbard, Friedman etc.).

Neoliberals/Americanists/Globalists

I treat Jews as individuals, and I also regard the ideological phenomena that I have just listed as products of both Jewish invention AND gentile susceptibility. The gentile susceptibility is mostly caused by Christian ethics, and some inherent ethnomasochism which Europeans are likely genetically disposed to when seen in contrast to other peoples which also have a 1st world standard of living such as the Japanese and Koreans, who lack extreme xenophilic behavior.

jewish_diaspora.jpg
(source)

Another point I want to make is that Jewish leftism, if that’s what you want to call it, appears to be mainly an Ashkenazic phenomenon. This may be due to a higher average IQ than other Jewish (and Gentile groups), leading them to take high intellectual positions in society at a disproportionate rate, which inevitably allows them to study Marxism and feminism, exercise their leftist “Will to Power” over the masses by promoting these ideologies at a professional level. This phenomenon, however, has not been observed at such a high rate in Jewish communities which have long been established in the Middle East (Iraqi, and Yemenite Jews etc.), or in the Mediterranean (take Milo Yianoppoulos, for example, who is of Greek Jewish origin, and clearly anti-Marxist). The leftist Jewish stereotype seems to be mostly a result of behavioral phenomena among Jews who historically resided in Central, Eastern and Northern Europe, and have since emigrated to America, Israel, and other locales. So I cannot call myself an antisemite because it is really only a subset of the entire Jewish people which is engaging in left-wing propagandizing.

Regarding the Holocaust, I categorically reject denial of the Holocaust in toto but am open to scientific revisionism.

And as for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, I see a two-state solution as optimal. As an ethnic nationalist, I think that both Israelis and Palestinians should have a claim to a homeland. If this is not possible to achieve, the West needs to simply leave the situation alone.

Other Sensitive Topics: Sexual Ethics

Like Christianity, one invention of the Jewish people, which some of them later tried to destroy through Bolshevism and Western Cultural Marxism (Critical Theory); the ban on fornication and homosexual behavior, public or private, has been something they appear to have manufactured in their Pentateuch, and have later torn apart in the entertainment industry, and other outlets for left-wing propagandizing, such as the academy.

We must keep in mind, however, that in order for us to become Nietzschean creators of values, we cannot continue to make our values simply an inversion of what certain Jews have promoted most recently.  We have to be in charge of our values, not the Jews — us. So we should evaluate various sexual behaviors and lifestyles on their own merits, in order to determine the ethical guidelines regarding them in an ideal (ethno-) state.

Roman cum manu marriage rite

Monogamy must be encouraged among heterosexual couples of child rearing age as this promotes the stability of the family, and a healthy, nurturing, atmosphere for children to grow up in.

Homosexuality should not be encouraged as this detracts from possible heterosexual pair bonding which can lead to children. However, there are important reasons why homosexuals should not be marginalized. Their reason for existence as homosexuals is likely at least partially inborn and physiological, and therefore currently out of our control, thus marginalization would create a group of people permanently in a state of resentment towards the rest of society, which will only encourage left-wing, broad-scale cultural revolutions, hindering a cohesive society. This is where I likely diverge from many on the Alt-Right and Neoreaction; I don’t think outlawing homosexual behavior will do any good, but rather it may backfire and cause internal instability in an ethnostate. To those who wish to outlaw such behavior, I challenge them to find a foolproof way turn a homosexual person heterosexual; it’s been tried many times, and it rarely ever works.

I do not see all homosexual behavior as inherently degenerate, but only counterproductive if those engaged in such behavior could form stable heterosexual relationships and produce children. For persons who are unable to engage in a stable relationship with someone of the opposite sex, and must have someone of the same-sex to form a romantic relationship, I do not see why a same-sex relationship should be banned in this case.

I think part of the problem with modern homosexuality is that it is promoted as highly effeminate, eccentric behavior. This has resulted from marginalization and merging with the left, which I have previously pointed out as a problem, and also from the way it is promoted in the media. The result is an aesthetic error which makes homosexuality repulsive to anyone with a sense of normal human beauty. This is why I much prefer the way male-male romantic relationships are presented in shonen-ai animes from Japan, such as Free!, where, unlike in modern Western media, the masculinity of the male is not aesthetically negated, but rather amplified by his close relationship with other males, as it is something he seeks to improve as a means by which he ‘shows off’ physically to them. In this sense, homoeroticism could actually help the evolution of our people towards higher man, the Ubermensch, by encouraging fitness, rather than weakness, as a biological ideal to strive towards. (I have actually been suspecting for some time that the rash homophobia of Christianity (and perhaps Judaism and Islam also) is partially a result of its own celebration of weakness and disdain for strength and beauty, its slave-morality, in Nietzschean terms, which developed as a reaction to the Greco-Roman homoeroticism that sought to idealize male fitness).

Other Sensitive Topics: Third Wave Feminism

Do I really need to explain this? No, I don’t think so. (go here)

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s