My soul is prepared
(Part I here, Part II here, Part III here, Part IV here)
“Where there is concession, there is strength.” —Arab proverb
I was waiting on the perfect prompt for the concluding post in this series, and Ilhan Omar’s detractors have provided a pretty clean one. Omar is the shmata-clad Somali-American congresswoman from Minneapolis who is being called an anti-semite by some of Israel’s more prominent American supporters, whom she publicly alleged are putting Israel’s interests ahead of America’s, and using dirty money to do it.
As somewhat of a revisionist Zionist myself, I have no problem with Omar’s remarks. In fact, the backlash against them is totally inimical to Zionism. At this point, “Zionism” itself is a bit inimical to Zionism.
Zionism calls for Jewish political and military control over part of the Levant. It does not call for Jewish influence over public discourse in the United States. On the contrary, it was intended to offset any need we might have to concern ourselves with the public discourse in any country but our own. As we all know, however, this theory turns out to be quite different in actual practice:
But just as the eradication of tribal and chauvinistic ideologies is an inherently progressive pursuit, so is the idea of combating a prejudice like anti-semitism. So it is strange to see the American supporters of Zionism, which is basically a tribal and chauvinistic movement, denouncing Ilhan Omar for progressive anti-semitism.
A few years back, a trio of foolhardy Jewboys attempted to start up a Jewish alt-right. The thrust of their ideology was that Jewish progressivism is inimical to Zionism, and that Jews should instead be revisionist Zionists and support white nationalism in its opposition to Islam. They attended an NPI conference, started a blog, did an interview on Red Ice Radio and were smeared in a couple of MSM hit pieces before fizzling back into obscurity. Their website, The Jewish Alternative, no longer exists. The reason they added nothing to the debate is that Zionism is not actually incompatible with progressivism. You could actually say that the two ideologies work hand-in-glove.
The goal of progressivism is to advance progress across a theoretically limitless field of human backwardness. The goal of Zionism is to secure the existence of the Jewish people against a theoretically limitless field of outside hostility. Like the enemies of Big Brother, these ideologies’ adversaries are everywhere and nowhere at once. Efforts to ferret them out and crush them must constantly be redoubled.
Thus, the fundamental premise of both progressivism, and Zionism, is that might makes right. Both movements are made up of basically vindictive, excluded people prone to neurotic discomfort and moral hysteria. Like progressivism, which functions in machiavellian fashion as its adherents go around preaching human rights, Zionism asserts in the same breath both that Israel has a non-contingent moral right to exist, and that its contingent, amoral strength is its ultimate justification:
conflating means with ends
Zionism’s chief adversaries are no progressives, either. Of course the Arabs view Zionism as evil, and they have every reason to. But they view it as evil in effect, not in essence, because its essence is assabiyah, a concept they know all about. However, their assabiyah is manful, rooted in Islam’s transcendent acceptance of death, while ours is pathos-laden, characterized by greed for life, a feminine kind of deviousness, and an almost limitless capacity to nurse a grudge.
This is why Holocaust remembrance (horribly contrived now, and often farcical) keeps becoming more and more central to Zionism, and why military applications, like a locust, consume a greater proportion of Israeli GDP and R&D each year, at the same time that Israel gradually becomes more socially liberal, e.g., by deploying its military to facilitate child-trafficking by homosexuals, allocating funds to further the Muslim invasion of Europe, exporting decadent postmodern art, profaning what is holy (but only what is holy to others) in the name of secularism, and colluding with transnational bodies to cleanse the internet of “far-right” thoughtcrime.
And just like progressivism, with the passage of time the hubristic pride at work in Zionism gradually becomes clearer. For when you enjoy the kind of overwhelming asymmetry of force that Israel does, and still cannot win decisively, you start looking very ugly. The establishment of the State of Israel was an epic scarcely paralleled since WWII, a profoundly inspirational residue of Old Testament heroism. Yet today, Israel is best known for its outsized talent for applying high-tech band-aids to the negative externalities of organic limits, and a foreign policy centered around a perpetual blood boy, ginormous and nonconsensual, from tens of millions of its Arab neighbors. The mask is so far fallen that bald-faced censorship is being prepared in its place. A man is known by the company he keeps, and Israel’s regional allies are the most debauched and senile regimes, clinging to power by their fingernails just like Israel always has its fingers caught in the pearly gates of peace or victory or normalization that never comes. I am not a peacenik, or a proponent of land-for-peace, but Israel’s policy of dividing and immiserating Arab countries has produced so immense and continuous an extent of human suffering in Iraq, Libya, Syria and Palestine that it can no longer be countenanced by civilized men. To be Jewish is to believe that there is some virtue to a beleaguered people weathering centuries of abuse in order to maintain their identity. And yet look what the advances of Israel, Saudi Arabia and America’s proxies in Libya, Syria and Iraq has meant for religious minorities there. It’s unconscionable.
The storied machinations of Israel’s clandestine services are the exact opposite of Nietzschean affirmation—this is what I meant when I referred (above) to “greed for life.” Sometimes, it’s possible to be too clever for one’s own good, or anybody else’s.
This doesn’t mean that Zionism has not been highly successful, but what we’re measuring by here are essential qualities and ultimate aims. Indeed, Zionism has succeeded in every respect except at making the Jews into “a nation like all other nations” because it failed to uproot the voracious bitter herb of victimology official Jewry now worships in place of God.
So the question I’ve tried to address here is, what is Judaism in essence? As opposed to the selectivity with which modern Americans tend to approach identification with their religion and ethnicity, I want to know what Judaism is in the aggregate, and whether, viewed in that light, it is something worthwhile or pernicious.
In Beyond Good and Evil, Nietzsche says that, “In the Jewish ‘Old Testament,’ the book of divine justice, there are men, things, and speeches of such impressive style that the world of Greek and Indian literature has nothing to place beside them.” In the Genealogy of Morals he wrote that, in the Hebrew scriptures, “I find great human beings, an heroic landscape, and something that is rarest in the world, the incomparable naïveté of the strong heart. And what is more, I find a people.”
In contrast, as I’ve tried to explicate in this series, what Judaism has become is, to some significant degree, a neurotic personality disorder. What is worse, its best exponents are financial war criminals, peeping tom tech-oligarchs, Bond-villain grey eminences, and TV court jesters who specialize in mocking and denigrating decent, God-fearing people. A malign, inordinate Jewish influence on public affairs is not a conspiracy theory, it is life imitating farce, and it’s right out in the open. These stereotypes exist for a reason.
If you’re Jewish, and you’ve read this far, you probably think I suffer from a horrific lack of ahavas yisroel. But I would ask you to consider who was the first casualty of the Hasmonean revolt against the Seleucid empire in 166 BC:
Then Mattathias answered and spake with a loud voice,
‘Though all the nations that are under the king’s dominion obey him, and fall away every one from the religion of their fathers, and give consent to his commandments:
Yet will I and my sons and my brethren walk in the covenant of our fathers. God forbid that we should forsake the law and the ordinances. We will not hearken to the king’s words, to go from our religion, either on the right hand, or the left.’
Now when he had left speaking these words, there came one of the Jews in the sight of all to sacrifice on the altar which was at Modi’in, according to the king’s commandment.
Which thing when Mattathias saw, he was inflamed with zeal, and his reins trembled, neither could he forbear to shew his anger according to judgment: wherefore he ran, and slew him upon the altar.
(1 Maccabees 2)
The Maccabees’ first victim—not their second, or third—was a Jew. These Maccabees sound like a bunch of Nazis to me. What the hell was their problem?
A Muslim sermon I heard recently on YouTube channel The Vigilant One put it aptly: in every religion there is the party of God, and the party of Satan—a religion can only be destroyed from within. So if the Jews really believe in the God of Abraham, there is no outside force that can destroy them. But if the Jews do not truly believe in God, then no iron wall, no iron dome, no defensive shield or preemptive strike or increased birthrate or qualitative edge can possibly save them in the long run.
Unfortunately, official Judaism today compares more favorably to King Saul than to King David. For example, the lesson that secular Jews and Zionists take from the Holocaust is that the universe is fundamentally meaningless, and that man must make his own justice, something inimical to classical Abrahamic faith. The lesson the frummies often take from it is that the victims had it coming, on account of collective moral guilt, something not even the Christian churches teach about the Holocaust. Meanwhile, like the Nazis in Indiana Jones, religious Zionism essentially worships intermediate objects it deludedly imbues with talismanic power, e.g., a certain geographic site to be occupied, an archaeological specimen to be located, or the third temple to be built on Mt. Moriah. When its adherents evict Arab shopkeepers’ children from their homes, they are brazen as lions; when their women and children are savaged by Arabs, they transform suddenly into simpering, uncomprehending lambs. As for orthodox Judaism, by far its strongest emphasis is the assiduous rote performance of mitzvot so onerous and convoluted that most Jews perform them only selectively and infrequently, if at all. And the liberal denominations are a superficial moral void so gaping it’s approaching the level of absurdist performance art:
I could gas this one myself
A couple years ago I went to a “conservative” shul for Yom Kippur, only to discover that the “rabbi” was a lesbian, and the cantor was a transgender “man.” A choir of yentas performed kol nidre to the tune of a ginormous circus organ. This is what has become of the people whose forefathers invented jihad. If the prophet Samuel were alive today, he’d be on an ADL hate watch list. Where the Jewish zealots of yore defended their faith at the cost of their lives, Zionism today is determined only to preserve the Jews’ lives at any cost, no matter how sordid and faggoty.
If it is to live with honor, a people, like a man, must live for something greater than itself. I will always be a proud Hebrew, but the truth is more important than Judaism, and Judaism today is a shit-show. I don’t say that the Jews are uniquely bad, or that comparable problems don’t exist in other religions and ethnic groups. But among questions of human difference, the JQ is a unique Gordian knot. While it’s evident that Jews disproportionately occupy positions of great power, it’s equally evident that the vast majority of Jews are fairly average. And while it’s evident that in many ways Jews, as a group, are cohesive and effective at advancing their group interests, it’s just as evident that there has long been great diversity of intra-Jewish trends and factions, and that the Jews have often been persecuted. I couldn’t get a clear understanding of who the Jews really are until I figured out why we keep having the same recurring kinds of problems, and there is immense pressure obscuring the way to satisfying answers, both from my Jewish upbringing and the Jewish community, from the anti-semites (who are enjoying a resurgence and whose ideas I’m obviously willing to entertain), and from polite society at large, which likes to avoid this topic or limit it to kitsch.
So where do we go from here?
In January of 1939, a young American woman, the daughter of German immigrants and married to a Jew, took anonymously to the pages of the Atlantic to talk about the social stigma surrounding her marriage:
Naturally, to our friends, the most interesting aspect of our marriage is its interracial side. I know that even now many of them, aware of my pro-German leanings, still chuckle behind our backs; ‘Well, well, our little Nazi Gertrude had to go and marry a Jew, of all people.’
At one time or another almost every one of my intimates has asked me sotto voce, ‘What is it like, living with a Jew? Is he very Jewish? Do you ever discuss the differences between you?’
It was this that finally propelled me to our typewriter—to tell the world how it really is between a Jew and a Christian, since the world is evidently so intensely interested. I wish I could say that, because Ben and I have worked through to complete happiness, there is no reason why Jews and Gentiles everywhere cannot live peaceably and happily side by side. But I am afraid that this harmonious relationship can come about only when Gentiles stop being one-hundred-per-cent Gentiles and Jews one-hundred-per-cent Jews—when both sides drop their false pride of race, their hidebound, worn-out traditions, and meet each other halfway.
The article is worth reading in its entirety. Though false pride of any kind should of course be abandoned, I’m not an advocate of anybody’s giving up pride in their race. So I’d even say that if this woman’s proposal had been formalized in a contract, most Aryans not only performed their side a long time ago, but in fact went way too far. Needless to say, not only has Judaism not abandoned pride in its race, it has actually cultivated a great deal of false pride, as we have seen. So how, you ask, can the title of this little essay series be effectuated? How can we Make Judaism Great Again? Stay tuned for answers…….