|
|
The Joooos and the folly of group judgmentsAs is usual on this blog, there is a wide division between me and others about Jews. Everybody else here is seeing Jews under every bed and I think that is brain-dead. As it happens, I think that, AS A GROUP, Jews are politically pernicious in the USA. Their overwhelming Leftism shows that old fears overcome intelligence. But who the heck wants to be so thick in the head as to judge ANYBODY by the group to which he belongs? I used to be a bull-terrier breeder and most bull-terrier breeders are tough working-class guys who smoke. So does that mean that I am a tough working-class guy who smokes? Far from it: I am an academic who has never smoked once in his life. It is just NOT USEFUL to treat Jews as a group. Some of the most brilliant and outspoken conservative writers of today are Jews—Jonah Goldberg, Charles Krauthammer, Mark Steyn, David Horowitz etc. Because most Jews are Leftist, do we have to treat THEM as Leftist? It is absurd. There are good and bad people in all groups and it is the widespread recognition of that in contemporary Western societies that will forever relegate the group-dreamers on this blog to marginality and irrelevancy. Posted by jonjayray on Monday, June 26, 2006 at 10:39 AM in Comments:2
Posted by Voice on June 26, 2006, 11:07 AM | # JJR Have you ever read McDonald’s response to John Derbyshire’s similar groveling act? “Conservatism of Fools” is the essay by McDonald..pretty good stuff http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-5417.html BTW, I don’t think they are under every bed either but in the good ole USA we can’t mention they are there at all.. 3
Posted by Karlmagnus on June 26, 2006, 11:18 AM | # Not me, JJR, and I’d be grateful if you’d except me from such sweeping statements. I’m approximately with Derbyshire—there are pluses and minuses, but demonizing Jews is both wrong and foolish. 4
Posted by Alex Zeka on June 26, 2006, 11:37 AM | # Jews are intelligent (although not as intelligent as some would suggest) and so important. As such, they loom larger than other groups, which are equally hostile to us. Real conservative Jews, like Auster, are rare, but should not be tarred with the same brush, nor demonised for not wishing the desturction of Israel. Jonah (Rollin’ in)Goldberg and Horror-witz are another matter entirely. You’re a bull terrier breeder, JJR? I’m as interested, if not more, as I was to find out that you’ve got a hair problem! 5
Posted by Voice on June 26, 2006, 11:46 AM | # I love McDonald’s final paragraph…it also reminds me to mention the US has made an official “Office of Anti-Semitism” in the state department so in the future we can get around that pesky Freedom of Speech thingy in the US Constitution. We need to get to the European Model of jailing Anti-Semites-defined as anyone who mentions any Jewish motivations for any geopolitical action. They will be able to do it now by claiming anti-semitism and classing it as treasonous by giving aid and comfort to the enemy in our declared(although legally undeclared) war on terror and then ship them off to Guantanamo Bay with all the other terrorists. 6
Posted by Red Skull on June 26, 2006, 11:47 AM | # Yeah, more John Ray! After asserting in another post that height, hair color and eye color constitute a linguistic category, we now get this piece of sterling logic: “I used to be a bull-terrier breeder and most bull-terrier breeders are tough working-class guys who smoke. So does that mean that I am a tough working-class guy who smokes? Far from it: I am an academic who has never smoked once in his life.” That is what passes for serious discourse on this blog. Of course, when JJR denounces the presence of blacks or Islamists in a society, this group evaluation is, obviously, good and proper. During WWII, the Allies bombed Dresden, despite the likelihood that, in that city, there were “good Germans” who despised Hitler and supported all the liberal ideals that JJR bases his ideological identity upon. But, you know, when one is involved in group competition - of which, warfare is an obvious manifestation - one has to treat individuals as members of groups. But, let us not be too harsh. John is an academic who has done “studies.” Therefore, criticism of his statements is forbidden. Of course, Richard Lewontin, Stephen Jay Gould and Gillian Rhodes have also done “studies”...but, let’s forget that. After all, it’s just a personality quirk on the part of JJR’s critics. There certainly can’t be any real ideological differences here. We’re all good right-wing conservatives, just like Horowitz. Of course, the *real* problem is not JJR. It is the fact that he is allowed to post this nonsense on the blog. And whose fault is that? 7
Posted by ben tillman on June 26, 2006, 11:51 AM | #
You’re confusing groups and categories. 8
Posted by Steve Edwards on June 26, 2006, 11:52 AM | # That’s funny. Cause John Ray has repeatedly said that Negroes as a group were “trouble”. Yet he is now saying we shouldn’t “stereotype” people according to their group. “I used to be a bull-terrier breeder and most bull-terrier breeders are tough working-class guys who smoke. So does that mean that I am a tough working-class guy who smokes? Far from it: I am an academic who has never smoked once in his life.” That has got to go down as the single stupidest thing that has ever been written on Majority Rights. Either it is useful to make generalisations or it isn’t. John Ray just did, but then implied that generalisations are useless because he is the exception. Tell me John, what is an acceptable generalisation if one single outlier refutes an entire hypothesis? 9
Posted by Steve Edwards on June 26, 2006, 11:54 AM | # “Of course, when JJR denounces the presence of blacks or Islamists in a society, this group evaluation is, obviously, good and proper.” Forget it. I’ve already wasted my time trying to get John Ray to demonstrate a modicum of consistency on this issue, and it just ain’t gonna happen. 10
Posted by Red Skull on June 26, 2006, 11:57 AM | # “But who the heck wants to be so thick in the head as to judge ANYBODY by the group to which he belongs?” Does that include judging people for belonging to the *group* of anti-semitic ‘group dreamers?’ And, if we must not consider groups as being relevant, then this statement: leads one to ask - if it is accepted that Jews as a group are “pernicious” and if that group of Jews is composed of the individual Jews we are not supposed to judge as part of that group, and if that group - by definition - cannot exist apart from the individual Jews who form its mass, then why mention the fact to begin with? In other words, we must not consider people as members of groups, even though groups of certain types of people are acknowledged as “pernicious.” Let us ignore this, though. John Ray has written “studies” and his words are beyond reproach. 11
Posted by Steve Edwards on June 26, 2006, 11:57 AM | # “As it happens, I think that, AS A GROUP, Jews are politically pernicious in the USA.” ... “It is just NOT USEFUL to treat Jews as a group.” I’m not sure John can be helped anymore. I mean, if five lines is the difference between two outright contradictions, what’s the point of taking him seriously? 12
Posted by Steve Edwards on June 26, 2006, 11:58 AM | # I see Red Skull and I have tuned into the same frequency. 13
Posted by Red Skull on June 26, 2006, 12:01 PM | # “Forget it. I’ve already wasted my time trying to get John Ray to demonstrate a modicum of consistency on this issue, and it just ain’t gonna happen.” Better to use your time, Steve, to question the ‘powers that be’ here as to the reason for JJR’s presence. I can think of only two reasons which have utility: comic relief or to provide weak, strawman arguments to knock down so as to prove how smart we all are. Unfortunately, I don’t think the motivation lies in those two areas. I actually believe that JJR’s posts are valued for their own inherent “merit” - which, frankly, is frightening. 14
Posted by Red Skull on June 26, 2006, 12:04 PM | # “I see Red Skull and I have tuned into the same frequency.” Forget it, Steve. This is only some sort of personality quirk on our part. JJR is an academic. Thus, you are wrong. 15
Posted by Steve Edwards on June 26, 2006, 12:36 PM | # Of course! How could I be so naive as to compare myself to JJR’s brilliance? 16
Posted by Søren Renner on June 26, 2006, 01:03 PM | #
I think there is a reason, even though I don’t fully understand it. I think the PTB believe that JJR is useful. I have no quarrel with our editor(s) and neither, I think, do you. 17
Posted by JJR Apologist on June 26, 2006, 01:42 PM | # We don’t have it so bad. Our JJR is superior to these 500 cranially-conjoined academics. 18
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on June 26, 2006, 01:43 PM | # JJR,on this I agree with you-the abject hatred of all things Jewish is absurd.Yes’they ARE pernicious,and to be suspicioned,but primarily because they are sharper[not more intelligent] than we"goyim”.I would much rather have a mass immigration of Israelies,than the present influx of nigs,nogs,wetbacks,and rag-heads.The philosophical debate,I will leave to my bettors on this blog. BTW,how’s the Humber doing? LOL 19
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on June 26, 2006, 02:01 PM | # LOL @ this thread. Slow news day John? 20
Posted by john rackell on June 26, 2006, 02:03 PM | #
YHBY so many times, it’s a wonder you [the earnest commenters] keep falling for it.Wikipedia 21
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on June 26, 2006, 02:12 PM | # John is saying that we should embrace psychosis. That isn’t what he means to be saying but, gripped as he is by psychosis, he doesn’t really know what he’s saying. Someone in the grip of delusion can’t really communicate with someone who has shed that delusion. 22
Posted by Red Skull on June 26, 2006, 02:23 PM | # “YHBY so many times, it’s a wonder you [the earnest commenters] keep falling for it” No, we are aware of it, but we’re hoping that one day GW will wake up and tell JJR to “cut the cr*p.” Thus, until that happens, JJR remains an object of ridicule - for: why must he be trolling here to begin with? Is that the low regard he holds this blog, and its founder? 23
Posted by Ron Jay on June 26, 2006, 02:41 PM | # Guys guys guys. I agree with your basic sentiments, that organized Jewry IS a problem. But don’t take that as an admission from me that organized Jewry is a problem. Okay? Got it? Good. Now, where was I? Of course!! It’s breakfast time already and I better call my polite Sikh rickshaw driver to take me downtown to Pedro’s! 24
Posted by Steve Edwards on June 26, 2006, 02:48 PM | # “John is saying that we should embrace psychosis.” Oh dear. I don’t think I’ll recover after reading that! 25
Posted by Steve Edwards on June 26, 2006, 03:03 PM | # BTW Red Skull - the answer is “comic relief”. This is one of the funniest posts I’ve ever read. I’m glad JJR posts at MR, an otherwise serious blog, ‘cos he’s so unhinged I fear we’d all soon forget how to recognise comedy without him. JJR is a rare bird - a slapstick prose performer. Don’t ask me how he does it. 26
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on June 26, 2006, 04:32 PM | # Damn guys,whats this virolity against JJR? I’m a newby,but this seems to be some kind of academic vendetta.Assholes like me post here,but he seems to get an inordinate amount of crap from several INDIVIDUALS.Did he steal someones wife,screw their maid,or merely purloin their Humber?Just asking—-But it appears to me[the great unwashed]to be a conflict of insecure intellects vs.an established scholer.I don’t always agree with his positions,nor his stated thought processes,but to advocate his disbarment is purely Communistic. 27
Posted by Søren Renner on June 26, 2006, 04:35 PM | # It is good to hear that Mr. Edwards understands that my posts are deadly serious, despite their (sometimes) mocking demeanor. Unless—ulp! - perhaps he doesn’t even read them. 28
Posted by Red Skull on June 26, 2006, 05:10 PM | # Is John Ray this type of established scholer?: I thought the good Dr. Ray was a person and not a house… I don’t quite understand: how is demanding that the ‘scholer’ make arguments at least at the level of a ten year old “communistic?” Is the establishment of standards “communistic?” Is it “communistic” to wonder why one of a blog’s primary participants engages in what John Rackell rightfully describes as trolling? It would seem that JJR’s purpose here is to provide a moderate, philosemitic balance to all the “extremists.” Fine, but couldn’t that be served by trying to recruit someone like with more intellectual heft? Auster or Gottfried would be fine additions in this regard, although I doubt that either would agree. But the point remains: one can attempt to find someone who is moderate *and* who makes a passing attempt at logical/factual rigor. One could find a moderate voice that actually creates posts that contain arguments which pass the triple-digit IQ barrier. The way it is now, the quality of the blog is being lowered by this nonsense. 29
Posted by Red Skull on June 26, 2006, 05:28 PM | # One further comment to illustrate the elementary silliness of this. This blog is “Majority Rights.” What, then, is this “majority” whose rights the blog is so concerned with? It is a GROUP consisting of the predominant element in the population of each western nation - we are talking about white gentiles here. Isn’t that what the bloggers here (JJR excepted?) mean by the term “majority?” Yet, if people are to be judged solely as individuals and not as part of a group, there should be no concern for the rights of the “majority” - which is “group-think”, is it not? If one is to be concerned solely about individuals, then the primary focus of this site - as promoted by all except JJR (e.g., GW, Svigor, Soren, James Bowery, etc.) - makes no sense. If the site’s focus is held to be valid, and the rights of the majority is to be promoted, then it is JJR’s post that makes no sense. Herein lies the problem: why must this common sense be repeated every time the good doctor decides to troll? Perhaps the solution is for everyone to completely ignore JJR’s posts, so they have zero comments. But then, why have them clogging the site to begin with? 30
Posted by Daedalus on June 26, 2006, 05:32 PM | # I think there is an element truth in both positions. How do we reconcile the genuine diversity of the Jewish political spectrum (Noam Chomsky to David Horowitz) with generalizations about Jewish political behavior? Such variation is in no way surprising, as no two individuals (even identical twins) are like in every way (this reflects environmental and hereditary variation), and thus differences between individual Jews, as within all human populations, is something we would predict. It hardly makes sense that all members of a population would pursue exactly the same group survival strategy if it was unconsciously attempting to optimize its fitness relative to other groups. OTOH, while Jewish political behavior is certainly not entirely uniform, it is not entirely arbitrary either; there is enough consistency, I would say, to generate useful and reliable predictions about Jews as a group, and this is what Steve and others are noticing. Thus, I don’t understand why you are saying it is not useful to treat Jews as a group, especially when they self-identify, as a group, and organize themselves politically to advance their interests, as a group. 31
Posted by john ray on June 26, 2006, 06:42 PM | # “You’re a bull terrier breeder, JJR? I’m as interested, if not more, as I was to find out that you’ve got a hair problem! “ That must be an allusion to my hat hair post. Perhaps Alex missed that the hat hair post was jocular 32
Posted by john ray on June 26, 2006, 06:46 PM | # “Slow news day John? “ C’mon! I posted heaps on the same day 33
Posted by john ray on June 26, 2006, 06:47 PM | # “During WWII, the Allies bombed Dresden” I deplore that too 34
Posted by john ray on June 26, 2006, 06:50 PM | # LOL “Now, where was I? Of course!! It’s breakfast time already and I better call my polite Sikh rickshaw driver to take me downtown to Pedro’s! “ RJ is a good satirist 35
Posted by john ray on June 26, 2006, 06:53 PM | # “BTW Red Skull - the answer is “comic relief”. This is one of the funniest posts I’ve ever read. I’m glad JJR posts at MR, an otherwise serious blog, ‘cos he’s so unhinged I fear we’d all soon forget how to recognise comedy without him. JJR is a rare bird - a slapstick prose performer. Don’t ask me how he does it. “ Steve is right that I do enjoy stirring the possum. The abuse here does put a smile on my face. But the underlying point is serious. It would not evoke such rage otherwise. The Juedophobes here KNOW that they are marginal and irrelevant! 36
Posted by wintermute on June 26, 2006, 06:54 PM | #
I see no ‘diversity’ to ‘reconcile’ here. An analogy: how do we ‘reconcile’ the ‘diverity’ of Luftwaffe pilots who flew around in planes, with those of of U-Boat captains, who piloted enormous undersea boats? When one adds to that the ‘diversity’ of the Reichspropagandaministerum, which neither flew nor swam, but spoke, the whole question of a “National Socialist” movement is effectively deconstructed. When one adds to that the Wehrmacht, which neither swam nor spoke nor flew, but invaded countries, the essential anarchy at the core of the whole reification is exploded, and the existence of both “National Socialism” and indeed “Germany” is at once resolved into dust. Meanwhile, back in reality: Chomsky strategizes for his group by providing left wingers with abundant evidence that Israeli atrocities are a result of American Imperial ambition, which itself is free of Jewish agitation. In other words, Israel is a client state, and White Americans the villians. In this way, he neutralizes incipient anti-Semitism on the left, by redirecting it via lies, against an ‘American establishment’ which is virtually a Jewish toy, as is well understood by the Russians, the Iranians, the Serbians, the Chinese, et. al. Horowitz strategizes for his group by providing the right wing with legitimacy and access to the public, to grant moneys, and to status. He does this, in co-ordintaion with other neo-conservatives, by ruthlessly supressing any racial awakening among Whites by financing and theorizing a ‘conservative’ movement which has no racial awareness or defenses. Right wing money, opinion, and energy are therefore funneled into a variety of pro-Isael, pro-Jewish causes, which they would otherwise not be. Please demonstrate the ‘diversity’ at work here, and explain, in light of my German metaphor, what exactly is in need of reconciling? There is only one kind of ‘diversity’ in the Jewish colony-organism: genuine tactical disagreements about which strategies are best to exploit, via crypsis, host populations. There are also figures like Seymour Hirsch and others, who absorb some Jewish ideal that was opportunistic and tactical only, and can’t let go of it. I don’t know that it counts as diversity, but it plays Hell with the Jews, and always gives me a good laugh. Tony Kushner, for example, is currently trying to reconcile his doctrinaire Trotskyism (anti-national) with his vicious Jewish nationalism. He lacks the ‘turn on a dime’ gene most Jews seem to posess, and this causes friction, both within his psyche, and between him and the larger community. So I will grant there are laggards, in addition to disagreements on strategy. You’ll note that Jewish dissenters are not given the unperson treatment, as gentiles expressing the same ideas would be. Finally, history affords us the example of two Jews who turned their back on Jewry and denounced it as the evil it is - Simone Weil and Spinonza. Without that final step as taken by these exemplary figures, there is no genuine diversity of opinion, only a struggle over tactics in pursuit of a single wartime objective - destruction of the enemy’s capacity to resist, and the use of constant propaganda to effect his continuing slavery via self-emasculation or insanity, as in the final chapter of 1984. Chomsky and Horowitz are agents of one power, whose efforts and ideas effectively provide crypsis, while disarming both major divisions of opinion among Whites, divert White resources to Jewish causes, while creating a climate of opinion that demonizes anyone who can correctly identify the game being played. 37
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on June 26, 2006, 07:03 PM | #
An appeal to authority John? I mean sure, I made an ad hom comment above (because I have no desire to argue with you), but surely the one with logic on his side doesn’t need to resort to fallacy. 38
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on June 26, 2006, 07:06 PM | # Also, I find in your consistent position against group judgements vis-a-vis jews but for no one else a whiff of judeophobia. Maybe I’m misinterpreting your position and you could clarify? 39
Posted by john ray on June 26, 2006, 07:07 PM | # Red Skull is prolific in deriding my posts for lack of substance. As far as I can see the most reasoned comments in this thread so far have been by Daedalus and Fred I have of course addressed the group/individual judgments question at some length previously. 40
Posted by Red Skull on June 26, 2006, 07:10 PM | # What shall I comment about John? Your own interesting personal history, vis-a-vis the Australian right? 41
Posted by AD on June 26, 2006, 07:51 PM | # JJR, so i take it you oppose Andrew Fraser’s actions against the Jewish Board of Deputies(that you just posted)? 42
Posted by john ray on June 26, 2006, 08:31 PM | # “What shall I comment about John? Your own interesting personal history, vis-a-vis the Australian right? “ That is already online: 43
Posted by Al Ross on June 26, 2006, 08:38 PM | # JJR is a large-brained intellectual but, unlike the humble amoeba which has no brain or senses to perceive an attacker at a distance yet manages to recognise an attack when an enemy invades its body, the good doctor remains oblivious to the Jewish parasite. 44
Posted by stari_momak on June 26, 2006, 08:54 PM | # Here’s the thing. I’d much rather eat a dinner, have a beer, and certainly spend time in combat with a ‘leftist’ like Alexander Cockburn or his brother Patrick than J. Goldberg, David Frum, Krauthammer or the rest. Cockburn, by the way he lives his life and where he lives it, you can tell he loves America. Real America, Baptist tent meetings, Blue singers, etc. In contrast, for Jonah and his cult, America is the Simpsons, Star Trek and Battle Star Galatica. For Frum and Kruathammer, it is a source of cannon fodder to enforce the Kantian dream of a world -wide zone of liberalism. Jews are okay—but never forget they are not us. 45
Posted by Steve on June 26, 2006, 10:26 PM | # I’m still working on this as a blog entry but it directly addresses the issues here raised. Wake up and smell the Judeo-fascism Our democracy has withered down to a vote between Zionist A and Zionist B:
This is in turn driven by Jewish media control, a fact that single handedly redefines America as a Judeo-fascist regime. Media control and democracy cannot co-exist under any circumstances:
Judeo-fascism is not a recent development. This hidden ruling elite has been intimidating sitting presidents into behaving like frightened children for quite some time now:
Immigration is imposed on us against our democratic will by the Judeo-fascists and their regime collaborators:
Judeo-fascism affects us in many other ways, including personally. Our children are worth less than a third of a person while our tiny elite, the two percent that eat half the pie, are forty times more privileged:
The Judeo-fascist regime is founded and sustained on the persecution of whites:
46
Posted by James Bowery on June 27, 2006, 01:41 AM | # Dear Mr. Ray, You mispelled “Da JOOOOZ!!!” When will you get the adolescent insult technique to which you obviously aspire, correct? 47
Posted by Alex Zeka on June 27, 2006, 03:48 AM | # JJR, Please do enlighten such ignorant, humourless savages as myself: which of your posts are actually serious? 48
Posted by Alex Zeka on June 27, 2006, 03:52 AM | # Oh, and might I sincerely and heart-feltedly apologise to the most brilliant and admirable JJR, whose very name brings ecstasy to the hearts of us all, for our disgraceful rudeness and failure to fully appreciate his magnificent intelligence. Verily! what does he think of us, surrounded as he normally is by his polite (and perhaps nubile) subcon students? Oh, we are not worth of his presence here! Shall I get the richshaw, oh most wonderful master? 49
Posted by Jon on June 27, 2006, 04:05 AM | # The falsity of anti-Semitism is completely obvious. Completely. I don’t argue with Nazis for the same reason why I don’t argue with flat-Earthers, scientologists, commies, etc. We learned at school that the Earth is round, that 1 + 1 = 2, and that anti-Semitism is bad. Why should we dispute the third claim any more than the first two? But you hypocrites can go on “arguing” about Jews, while not arguing about flat-Earth or cold fusion theories. Have fun. 51
Posted by Red Skull on June 27, 2006, 07:13 AM | # John, I know it is online, but you asked for commentary, so let’s explore a bit your role as a paid informant for the Australian political police: http://jonjayray.netfirms.com/intbio.html “HERE”: http://jonjayray.netfirms.com/mehler.html http://fire.prohosting.com/jonjayra/nazimail.htm My questions: Was his paid political spying against (racial)-nationalists restricted to overt Nazis, or did it also include Australian nationalists of the Saleam/Azzopardi faction – who were NOT “Nazis?” How did JJR’s conversations with “Salty Frank” fit into this pattern? Are the police records available, so we can see the extent of JJR’s informer activities, and see whether that matches what he claims he has done, or not done? Does his informant activity continue? While John Ray labels others as marginal/irrelevant, one can ask whether his own “relevancy” derives not only in that he is a shrill shill for the anti-white, anti-majoritarian establishment, but has also worked intimately with the political police apparatus of that establishment. In fact, he suggests that the “studies” that he and others cite and praise so much were in part associated with his role as a police agent, a political informer: “My sociological studies of Australian neo-Nazis yielded not only information of psychological and sociological interest but information of interest to the police too.” Scientific objectivism? One can ask why an anti-nationalist political police informant is participating in a blog full of nationalists, and why is tolerated there. 52
Posted by Steve Edwards on June 27, 2006, 07:23 AM | # The answer to Jon is that “anti-Semitism is bad” is a value judgment, while “The Earth is round” and “1+1 = 2” are basically cognitions. And simply because you were taught something in school, doesn’t mean it’s right. Or were you incapable of thinking independently from your double-digiter teachers? 53
Posted by john on June 27, 2006, 07:23 AM | # Wow, I was going to write in support of ray, as a “nice guy”, “who thinks about the most pathetic thing possible, namely himself”. 54
Posted by since you ask on June 27, 2006, 08:53 AM | # redskull, 30 years ago there was a far right fringe that enjoyed none of the benefits of today’s near-mainstream groups. Ray was a creature of his time but then so were many of us. Now, with the direction of our societies so plain, it’s easy to criticise. Then it was a different matter. 55
Posted by john ray on June 27, 2006, 09:05 AM | # LOL Red Skull seems quite peeved that he had no fresh revelations to make about my past studies of Neo-Nazis. As a libertarian, Nazism is of course the epitome of all I oppose and there has never been here the slightest ambiguity about my being a libertarian. And I act to promote my causes. I also worked against the student Left at the same time in the same manner for the same reasons. I oppose all authoritarianism and apologize not a whit about that I think in fact that all government is Fascist but I also work in the real world where the choice is between centre-Left and centre-right—and I much prefer the latter and do my best to undermine the former My attacks on Judeophobes here are an attempt to bring them back into the same real world where they might do some good—instead of pissing into the wind, which seems to be their main current accomplishment 56
Posted by Red Skull on June 27, 2006, 09:20 AM | # “redskull, 30 years ago there was a far right fringe that enjoyed none of the benefits of today’s near-mainstream groups. Ray was a creature of his time but then so were many of us. Now, with the direction of our societies so plain, it’s easy to criticise. Then it was a different matter.” I’m still waiting for the answers to the questions as to whether JJR is *currently* an informant, as to whether his informing did or did not include Saleam/Azzopardi, etc. “My attacks on Judeophobes here are an attempt to bring them back into the same real world where they might do some good—instead of pissing into the wind, which seems to be their main current accomplishment “ Therefore, you admit that your attacks are serious, with political intent. Given the pitifully illogical aspects of said attacks, JJR is revealed as an incompetent establishment tool, whose “studies” - by his own admission - were tied into his work for the political police. What is the “good” we are to do in the “real world” - support a viciously anti-white genocidal center-right against a viciously anti-white genocidal center-left? Some of us are tired of playing your establishment games, informant. 57
Posted by since you asked on June 27, 2006, 09:37 AM | # “What is the “good” we are to do in the “real world” - support a viciously anti-white genocidal center-right against a viciously anti-white genocidal center-left?” This is true. The definition of “center” is anti-white. The “center” is a worthless and stupid place to stand. Political realism, maybe what Ray means to allude to, includes the understanding that things won’t get better as they stand as well as the understanding that loud and aggressive judeophobes is counter-productive. There are a, lot of people who are half-right, and Ray in one. But so are the judeophobes. 58
Posted by Red Skull on June 27, 2006, 09:43 AM | # John Ray suffers from a similar cognitive problem as Steve Sailer, conflating alleged practicality with achieving particular ideological goals. In Ray’s “real world”, achieving “X” is much easier and practical than achieving “Y”; thus we must all eschew activism for “Y” (or else, we are “dreamers”) and instead promote “X” (which, by amazing coincidence is what John Ray himself believes in). The problem - obvious to any logical person with a triple-digit IQ - is when “X” not only does NOT promote the goals and interests of the person in question, but actually works *against* said goals and interests. Therefore, according to JJR’s logic, we should all work against what we believe in and what we believe to be absolutely necessary, because working against our goals is easier than working for our goals. That, you see, is JJR’s reasoning. Maybe he’s written a few “studies” on that, “studies” that may have ended up in Brisbane police files…. John Ray states: Indeed, Dr. Ray - have you ever considered that other people act to promote *their* causes, and that their causes may not be the same as your causes, and that not everyone here is a center-right “libertarian?” Have you considered that your beliefs - in both their hard (“libertarian”) and soft (center-right politics) - represent the “epitome” of what other people oppose, and therefore the alleged greater “real world practicality” of your views is completely irrelevant - because these views are precisely part of what we are fighting against? No, instead we hear about bull terrier breeders and smoking, or apologia from others for informing. Nice. By the way, Larry Darby - not an ideal candidate by any means - garnered 44% of the vote with an openly “anti-semitic” and racialist platform. And that was in the “real world.” 59
Posted by Red Skull on June 27, 2006, 09:48 AM | # “as well as the understanding that loud and aggressive judeophobes is counter-productive.” I agree, but that is not what JJR’s post is about, is it? It is instead his usual sterling logic: The group made up of individuals of “X” has a pernicious influence on the body politic, but… We musn’t judge people as part of a group, even though he just stated that those people, as a group, are destructive, meanwhile… this is stated on a blog whose entire alleged purpose is to promote the interests of a particular GROUP Tactics and strategy are another thing entirely - why conflate the two? 60
Posted by Voice on June 27, 2006, 10:49 AM | # Let’s face the facts folks. JJR is just anti-PC. He could care less if Western man, culture and civilization is wiped off the face of earth. He would probably be sickened by the genuine posters belief in maintaining a healthy society for their wives, daughters and sons. In fact, he would be one of the first shunned in a healthy environment we wish to create for our descendants. As an example, he has been divorced 5 freaking times! I could never ,ever imagine leaving my wife and kids under any circumstance, ever! No one in my immediate family has ever been divorced, ever! Nothing to do with religion either, agnostic to the core. Most of the posters that are genuine about the cause don’t fit into the dishonorable category. He is just an old liberal who didn’t like it when the PC police stopped him from discussing certain subjects. There is nothing else there except an empty old shell. 61
Posted by Red Skull on June 27, 2006, 11:23 AM | # “As an example, he has been divorced 5 freaking times!” I thought he was divorced four times - four wives? Did we miss one? The problem Voice, is that libertarianism and traditionalism are not the same, and there is a fairly wide gulf between the two. A traditionalist would look askance at serial monogamy, while, for a libertarian, it is just “doing their thing.” There are, of course, other philosophical issues here, not the least of which is the idea that a blog dedicated to the rights of a particular group exhibits the idea that judging people in a group fashion is somehow illegitimate (while, at the same time, doing so). One could - as Derbyshire attempted to do - assert that the presence of the Jewish group is a positive, but, he really didn’t present a full balance sheet, and attempted to make the point by ridiculing KMacD and his work (“what’s a group evolutionary strategy?” LOL). One could, as JJR’s apologist attempted to do, discuss the pros and cons of tactics and strategies in dealing with this question. But, again, this: We musn’t judge people as part of a group, even though he just stated that those people, as a group, are destructive, meanwhile… this is stated on a blog whose entire alleged purpose is to promote the interests of a particular GROUP” makes no sense. 62
Posted by rustymason on June 27, 2006, 11:58 AM | # Steve, good post on Jewish activity. If you are open to suggestions, I’d like to see more names. JJR, thanks for outing yourself so clearly as a proponent of Jewish double standards, and as an enemy of White civilization in general. 63
Posted by Red Skull on June 27, 2006, 12:09 PM | # “bring them back into the same real world where they might do some good” Like? An example of “doing some good?” What? Campaigning for McCain in 2008? Passing out soft drinks and green cards to mestizo illegals crossing the border? 64
Posted by perroazul del norte on June 27, 2006, 12:19 PM | # Those who befriend others and then betray them to the police-especially for money-are very distasteful human beings. Boasting about it later only compounds the crime. 65
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on June 27, 2006, 04:37 PM | # JJR-You can stir up more shit than a crew in a sewage treatment facility.If nothing else,it appears to validate your basic premise.Do a “mea culpa"for the rabids,and get on with the normal order of business.I miss the daily new posts-SVY-time for some of your news articles.Fred,say something cogent on a new subject,GW,make this JOOOS a seperate blog maybe.Cheers all and Semper Fi. 66
Posted by Red Skull on June 27, 2006, 05:01 PM | # What about constructive criticism? Very well. How should this post have been written? After noting, as he did, that as a group, Jews may have a “pernicious” political influence on society (which, by the way, most Jews would consider ‘anti-Semitic’, despite JJR’s philosemitism); JJR could have proceeded to make Tayloresque arguments: 1. The decline of western man is not all due to the “JQ”, and may not even be predominantly due to it. Focusing all attention on the JQ over-simplifies complex problems and diverts attention away from more fundamental aspects of flawed western culture; for example, the lethargy, atomized individualism and, as Svigor as said, boredom of western man, which is being translated into a collective death-wish. JJR could have argued that the “decline of the west” is mostly independent of the JQ, and solutions need to be found elsewhere. 2. A monomaniacal focus on the JQ is not only wrong, but self-defeating, as it will alienate otherwise sympathetic people who do not believe in an over-arching JQ solution to all our ills, and who will see an unhealthy obsession with the JQ as a manifestation of neo-Nazi hobbyism/Hitler worship. Such extremism will lessen the import of statements made about the real extent of the importance of the JQ – statements which would be better received if the person making them did not act like a Julius Streicher clone. 3. Not all Jews are ant-white; instead of mentioning liberal neo-cons, JJR could have mentioned the likes of Auster and Gottfried, or mentioned that article, written by a Jewish woman, recently cited by Svigor. JJR could have argued that lumping these individuals into a “leftist Jewish group” is not only unfair, but counter-productive, as these people may be useful allies (and would help alleviate concerns about point 2). 4. He could have taken the Tayloresque view that Jews are white, and the Austeresque view that Jews are a fundamental part of western civilization, so that our goal needs to be to convince a sizable fraction of Jews to throw their lot in with the west. Now, certainly, these arguments would have been met with fierce counter-arguments by some here, and a lively debate would have ensued. But, it would have been a serious debate, free from ridicule that derives from “I’m not a smoking bull terrier breeder” type arguments, of from attacking the very notion of group distinctions, after making one. Note that I would have advised JJR to delete the last sentences of his post, which not only insult those of different views, but, as I have already stated, are illogical, since easier methodologies are not worth pursuing if they actually harm one’s agenda. Is it too much to ask that bloggers take the time to formulate arguments which, even if we disagree with them, we can all agree are logically consistent and worth answering? That seems reasonable. 67
Posted by José María on June 27, 2006, 05:18 PM | # So JJR is able to deceive and betray. I hope at least that when you acted as a squealer you could avoid a real crime, and I hope that for you free speech, even when exercised by Nazis, is not a crime. Red Skull has also made good questions on the scope of your treason. I even doubt on your role here, are you trying to convert us and praise those that have almost destroyed our race, religion and civilization? The question is are you silly or you are convinced that everybody here is? Libertarians and nationalists are not good companions. I had little respect for you, today´s revelations have killed any respect for you. 68
Posted by Svigor on June 27, 2006, 05:28 PM | #
Here in the States that’s an expression that means, “bored?” 69
Posted by AD on June 27, 2006, 05:44 PM | # My questions: Was his paid political spying against (racial)-nationalists restricted to overt Nazis, or did it also include Australian nationalists of the Saleam/Azzopardi faction – who were NOT “Nazis?” How did JJR’s conversations with “Salty Frank” fit into this pattern? Are the police records available, so we can see the extent of JJR’s informer activities, and see whether that matches what he claims he has done, or not done? Does his informant activity continue? -red skull Hmm, waiting for Ray’s response to this question. 70
Posted by Al Ross on June 27, 2006, 07:08 PM | # Perhaps JJR deserves a bar-mitzvah to celebrate his intellectual circumcision. 71
Posted by john ray on June 27, 2006, 10:35 PM | # LOL What splendid diatribes above! I see one serious question that I think I should answer: I advised the police on three groups only: The local Nazis All three groups are of course extreme socialists I was at the same time a member of the Queensland Liberal Party—a very conservative and successful party at the time. Neither I nor the police had any interest in compiling information about conservatives of any type 72
Posted by JB on June 27, 2006, 11:21 PM | # Red Skull:
If it was only once a year I wouldn’t mind but he comes back almost once a month with a silly post in which he tries to argue against us when he knows he can’t possibly win by using his “rightist” nonsense. If I was the owner of this weblog I would restrict him and have his entries approved before they get posted. JJR:
but
the usefulness of telling a truth should be self-evident but I think it’s not the truth that bothers you but the obvious prescription that follows this truth. Like most conservatives and “highly principled” libertardians the idea of doing something to stop this pernicious group from causing us harm is something you’re afraid of. On the other hand many of us here wouldn’t hesitate to protect ourselves from our racial opponents because our defeat will very likely be final. If I could I would forbid jews from being involved in any media whatsoever save for their ethnic bulletins. We need institutionalized discrimination against our enemies. It’s us or them, there’s no neutrality possible in our current situation. JJR:
typical jews acts according to what they think is good for jews. If they think “leftism” is good for them then good luck trying to convince them to commit actions that goes against their group interests and to adopt a universalistic JohnJayRayesque asiaphiliac brand of “rightism”. We’re the only ones who believe that by refusing to act to further our group interests we’re the most moral of men. Salvation through self-destruction. Any sane white person should realize just how sick this whole thing is. JJR:
Goldberg is anti-white, like Krauthammer, so is Horowitz and Steyn refuses to call the mexican invasion an invasion. Lawrence Auster sometimes writes things that could have been written by David Duke yet he attacks Jared Taylor for letting Duke and other antisemites attend his conferences. We should treat jews as jews. Left, Right, Center, Top, Down, Recto, Verso - these labels don’t matter anymore. JJR:
and your accomplishments ? What have kosher conservatives and libertardians accomplished ? 73
Posted by Steve on June 28, 2006, 03:18 PM | # Rusty Mason wrote:
Yes I am indeed looking for suggestions. One of the problems with the JQ is its complexity. What you see above is my latest attempt at assembling a simple argument that explains the issue and why it is important to face it. I have to keep it around 1500 words for it to fit in a leaflet but if you have any bombshell quotes let me know I can always reduce font size a bit. 74
Posted by WJG on June 28, 2006, 10:48 PM | # Hmmm… A self-styled libertarian who brags about being a stooge for the very government he claims elsewhere is evil. Apparently his anti-White hatred trumps his anti-government hatred. Interesting moral hierarchy for a supposed asset on a pro-White forum. For all the uselessness of libertarianism, being informants to the state police is usually not one of its adherents’ faults. Nice accomplishment JJR. A great moniker for you would be the conservative commissar. 75
Posted by JJR Apologist on June 29, 2006, 02:42 AM | # One of the problems with the JQ is its complexity. What you see above is my latest attempt at assembling a simple argument that explains the issue and why it is important to face it. We need to reassemble a factualist history from circa 1500AD on, with the Jewish dimension fully installed. 76
Posted by Al Ross on June 29, 2006, 07:44 PM | # Find any White who has attempted to enter the 100% Jewish-owned diamond trade in New York or Antwerp and ask him about the"folly of group judgements”, Dr Ray. Next entry: The majority and pluralism Previous entry: Australia’s “Noble savages” |
|
Existential IssuesWhite Genocide ProjectOf note
Recent CommentsAlso see trash folder. QuottevoM commented in entry 'This thread business' on 05/22/12, 07:07 PM. (go) (view) Aborhoorstusa commented in entry 'Ladies against feminism' on 05/22/12, 06:53 PM. (go) (view) Sarws23ls commented in entry 'Thread Wars' on 05/22/12, 06:07 PM. (go) (view) Selous Scout commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 05:56 PM. (go) (view) rmmshzrbpvi commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/22/12, 05:37 PM. (go) (view) Graistetrisog commented in entry 'Top Wog embraces his Inner Englishman' on 05/22/12, 05:18 PM. (go) (view) ovephorie commented in entry 'It's politics. And it's KMD.' on 05/22/12, 05:14 PM. (go) (view) Glurarieepife commented in entry 'Charlene Downes - a murder too far for the MSM' on 05/22/12, 04:56 PM. (go) (view) rarlencourl commented in entry 'Jews: jewish hand-wringing at recent high' on 05/22/12, 04:23 PM. (go) (view) Lifsappoift commented in entry 'Those nasty Christian concentration camps' on 05/22/12, 03:16 PM. (go) (view) winstrol commented in entry 'Was Churchill an antisemite and a Fascist?' on 05/22/12, 02:47 PM. (go) (view) DateSoaxiaDot commented in entry 'A Line in the Sand' on 05/22/12, 12:58 PM. (go) (view) Judy20James commented in entry 'Hurricane can-do in Cancun' on 05/22/12, 12:49 PM. (go) (view) cocreneamenrYk commented in entry 'Time travel and a pol in the MultiCult' on 05/22/12, 12:43 PM. (go) (view) Marles Flora commented in entry 'The Cubans of Miami' on 05/22/12, 12:28 PM. (go) (view) LoomuttertNuBre2 commented in entry 'More thread wars' on 05/22/12, 12:22 PM. (go) (view) Wide plank flooring commented in entry 'Sound principles of money, by Arthur Kitson' on 05/22/12, 12:12 PM. (go) (view) buy nandrolone commented in entry 'Misology in America Part 2.1' on 05/22/12, 11:49 AM. (go) (view) Silver commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 11:37 AM. (go) (view) AnalogMan commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 11:29 AM. (go) (view) higDipseVes commented in entry 'This thread business' on 05/22/12, 10:22 AM. (go) (view) AdepayTwidway commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/22/12, 09:47 AM. (go) (view) sweectexcagma commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/22/12, 09:46 AM. (go) (view) cool math games commented in entry 'The French shooter' on 05/22/12, 08:53 AM. (go) (view) Blow Up Collar commented in entry 'Elitism, secrecy, deception … the way to save white America?' on 05/22/12, 08:08 AM. (go) (view) Leonardo15 commented in entry 'Native U.S. white supremacist militia anthrax hate-bombers attack the entire galaxy' on 05/22/12, 08:03 AM. (go) (view) Inhaphyessera commented in entry 'The Boer genocide' on 05/22/12, 07:54 AM. (go) (view) kejmunoek commented in entry 'A repeatable comment for mass-pasting on American public message boards' on 05/22/12, 07:53 AM. (go) (view) Wandrin commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 07:42 AM. (go) (view) SEO Services commented in entry 'A Wild Surmise About Stonehenge and the Technology of Ancient Brits' on 05/22/12, 07:35 AM. (go) (view) Srakotraqu commented in entry 'A repeatable comment for mass-pasting on American public message boards' on 05/22/12, 07:30 AM. (go) (view) Wandrin commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 07:19 AM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 06:26 AM. (go) (view) SEO Services commented in entry 'Another straw in the wind' on 05/22/12, 05:58 AM. (go) (view) Daniel Mccumllam commented in entry 'Demography challenge' on 05/22/12, 04:57 AM. (go) (view) Recent Posts
General NewsScience NewsScience CategoriesAll CategoriesThe WritersEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages. LinksEndorsement not implied. Controlled Opposition Crime
General
Immigration
Islam Jews
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Whites in Africa |
Posted by Daveg on June 26, 2006, 10:46 AM | #
Some of the most brilliant and outspoken conservative writers of today are Jews—Jonah Goldberg, Charles Krauthammer, Mark Steyn, David Horowitz etc.
There are some conservative Jewish Writers, but these are not them. These are “new” conservatives - neocons. They are not traditional conservatives.
There are pro-immigration for the most part, except for Israel, they are pro war in the middle east, but not elsewhere.
They are *bad* guys who are not to be trusted. When they talk to you you should hide you children (which they want to send to war to defend Israel) and you wallet (they want you to pay for that one way ticket to the middle east).
And if you complain about it you will get the anti-Semite blast all too quickly.