Thanks to Micheal R for the link to this super-zivian tale of a Jewish psychologist.  The Jewish News Weekly hits all the right buttons, so I will just post it and refrain from further comment.

Psychologist: BOYS FROM SINGLE MOTHER, LESBIAN FAMILIES TURN OUT FINE

According to research psychologist Peggy Drexler, boys will be boys, whether dad’s around or not.

In her book “Raising Boys Without Men,” Drexler details the results of her years-long study of single mothers and lesbian couples. Her most striking conclusion: It’s possible, even likely, that boys from those families will grow up emotionally stronger and more well-rounded than boys from traditional mom-and-dad households.

Drexler will be making several appearances at local bookstores and at a reception sponsored by the S.F.-based Jewish Community Federation.

“What surprised me,” says the former San Francisco resident, “was that these mothers were establishing a creative new way of parenting. Good parenting was not anchored to gender.”

She also discovered that the boys in her study formed multiple healthy attachments with male role models other than their fathers, were deeply involved with sports, were diligent about completing household chores and related to women with respect and openness.

“That was the other thing that surprised me,” she says. “The boys were very savvy, with a lot of empathy and sensitivity to themselves and others.”

Drexler studied two populations, single mothers (by choice or circumstance) and lesbian co-moms. Her subjects for the latter group all lived in the Bay Area, and a large number of them were affiliated Jews.

Jewish herself (she formerly belonged to S.F.’s Congregation Sherith Israel), Drexler observed that Jewish families in her study “very much felt that the Jewish spiritual values would provide a strong sense of respect for community.”

READ MORE...

We all know the theory, that Jews are parasites on other nations, has some corollaries such as their tendency to lack a Yeoman class (and therefore hype the mythology of the Jewish peasantry right when they are participating in the destruction of a nation’s family farms, and grabbing the farmers’ daughters, as they were during the entry of the baby boomers to female fertility).  It is therefore gratifying to see that Zionism as the cure for Jewish virulence seems to be paying off for the Jews:

Rise of Israel’s Orthodox Schools Sparks Fear of Army, Work Force Shortage
Study: One-Third of Jewish Students Will Receive Haredi Education in 2012

Daphna Berman | Fri. Aug 03, 2007
Jerusalem - Two recently released government reports have reignited scrutiny of ultra-Orthodox participation in general Israeli society.

A study released last month by the Central Bureau of Statistics predicts that one-third of all Jewish elementary-school students in Israel will be enrolled in the ultra-Orthodox education system by 2012. A week after the education study was released, the Israeli military reported that the number of eligible 18-year-old men not enlisting in the army had sharply risen to one-quarter, nearly half of them ultra-Orthodox.

The findings have alarmed many secular Israelis, who warn that the government-subsidized education system for ultra-Orthodox, or Haredim, is creating a generation of students unequipped to enter the job market and unwilling to serve in the army.

It’s a different game entirely when you have responsibility for the country you occupy isn’t it?  What a relief it would be for Jews to face these realities, cast off the parasitic ways of the diaspora and become a true nation again!

PS: I did not see the entry on The Fjordman Project before setting forth to post this blog entry.  I make no bones about being hostile to the Jewish diaspora that sees itself as “the light unto the nations” while exhibiting virulence virtually unmatched by any other people and I call “coward” all those, such as “Fjordman”, supporting Israel who are not, thus, “anti-semitic”.

Many internet sites that focus on the problems and dangers caused by the massive immigration into Europe of nonWestern and mainly Moslem peoples reject contributions by people who do not support Israel.

“Fjordman” is a well-known contributor to several of these sites and he has written an article that sums up the arguments why Europeans should support Israel. (Why Europeans Should Support Israel, Created 2007-03-12 07:49 Published on Brussels Journal.

I find “Fjordman’s” arguments in favor of making support for Israel a priority unpersuasive.

“Fjordman” asserts there is a powerful “anti-Israeli and sometimes outright anti-Semitic current that is prevalent in too much of Europe’s media”. “Fjordman” does not define what he means by “anti-Israeli” or “anti-Semitic” nor does he provide any examples of what he obviously wants his readers to believe are twinned thought-crimes.

Since expressing hostility against Jews, Moslems, or nonWesterners in general is subject to legal penalties in many European countries, I am not surprised that “Fjordman” evades his duty to provide examples of the alleged current.

READ MORE...

Heritage and Destiny is a quarterly magazine printed in England and promulgated by the rockface scalers of the England First Party and the British People’s Party.  It produces some good work, and an example was sent me today by Tom Sunic: a review of his Homo americanus: Child of the Postmodern Age by Peter Rushmore.

In the course of the review Rushmore observes Sunic’s treatment of Christian Zionism:-

Dr Sunic does not present Christian Zionism as some crude conspiracy of venal pastors and crypto-Jews. Nor does he view the U.S.-Zionist embrace (as more shallow analyses by more orthodox political commentators have tended to) as merely contingent on the ‘neoconservative’ reaction (developing out of early American Trotskyism) against Stalinist anti-Semitism.

His approach is to set Christian Zionism in the context of America’s broader political culture. Dr Sunic maintains that a fundamental deceit is at the core of the American system, just as it was behind the Iron Curtain. But most victims of Soviet tyranny had seen through the official lies decades before the system’s final collapse and had been only maintaining a polite fiction of believing in communist ideology.

... the Holocaust:-

Dr Sunic quotes Jean Baudrillard, the postmodernist critic of America, who has died since this book went to press, to support his argument that the “constant verbal and visual featuring of Jewish Holocaust symbolism” creates a “saturation process among the audience as was once the case with former Holocaust symbolism”. Relentless exterminationist propaganda, not to mention the vicious persecution of those who dissent from the dominant ideology, becomes self defeating.

In Baudrillard’s words even the image of Auschwitz itself - the holy of holies - becomes hyperreality: “not a site of annihilation but a medium of dissuasion”. In other words the exterminationists themselves eventually transform Auschwitz in the public mind from a “historical fact” to a propaganda or marketing tool.

... and, quoting from the text of Homo americanus itself, American anti-semitism:-

Yet Dr Sunic goes on, in a section which should be compulsory reading for many in the movement, especially the many varieties of Christian “anti-Semite”, to reject the most obvious forms of Jewish conspiracy theory.

“Blaming American Jews for extraterrestrial powers and their purported conspiracy to subvert Gentile culture borders on delusion and only reflects the absence of dialogue. American anti-Semitic delusions only provide legitimacy to American Jews in their constant search for a real or surreal anti-Semitic boogieman around the corner. Without the spectre of anti-Semitism, Jews would likely assimilate quickly and hence disappear. Thus, anti-Semitism provides Jews with alibis to project themselves as victims of Gentile prejudice. Consequently, it assigns them a cherished role of posing as the sole educational super-ego for Americans and by proxy the entire world.”

But many who read Sunic’s quite compact book will find not his stance on Jewry in America to be the most interesting thing about it but the deconstructionism that he commends for the postmodern American personality itself.  Rushmore merely notes:-

READ MORE...

Part Two: The Second Front

Prindle believes that all religions are projections of the mind or minds that imagine them. “As projections they comment on the cleanliness or foulness of the projectors.”

The notion of God to the western mind means the Yahweh of the Old Testament. The Jews fantasy is that God chose a particular people to be the bearers and disseminators of his word to all the peoples of the world. The English came to believe the scepter had been passed to them while the East Anglians who eventually formed the Liberal religion believe the scepter has passed to them.

The history of the Jews since their defeat and scattering by the Romans has been a succession of failed messiahs - more than sixty since they rejected Jesus. Failure has modified, but not eliminated this messianic obsession.

Prindle believes that stirrings of European Enlightenment in the seventeenth century were a significant factor in persuading the rabbis to stop recognizing Messianic claimants. “Science points out the absurdity of religious projections.  Thus all religions were shown to be based on false premises.”

Prindle points out that Christianity, Islam and Judaism were all faced with the challenge of scientific thinking. They all have a vested interest in the old way of perceiving the world.

The Jews had always been able to hold their own theologically vis-a-vis the Roman Catholics and the Protestants, but they had no chance against Science which granted none of their claims. Their only alternative was to corrupt Science and destroy it from within.

READ MORE...

This is the second of my essays on the little known but altogether exceptional work of R. E. Prindle, following my appreciation of his insights into Freud and the death of the West.  This essay will focus on Prindle’s The Deconstruction of Edgar Rice Burroughs’ America.

I hope these essays will encourage others to read deeply in the Corpus Prindeliana.

Part One: The First Front

“The key problem for American history is why the Civil War was fought.

Propaganda teaches American schoolchildren the war was about Black slavery. But Prindle points out that none of the cultures involved had ever been opposed to slavery historically.

Prindle asserts the cultural roots of the conflict began with the conquest of Anglo-Saxon England by William the Conqueror in 1066.

The conflict began when the conquering Normans enslaved the Anglo-Saxons, especially those of East Anglia.  The issue then is that like the biblical Hebrews the Anglo-Saxons objected to their own ill-treatment only.  Neither culture objected to slavery in itself.

The East Anglian Puritans who seized power in England under Cromwell expatriated tens of thousands of Irish to the Caribbean islands as slaves to work cheek by jowl with the Negro slaves - no distinctions between the two.”  In addition, the importation of African slaves was largely run by the Puritan merchants from New England; the South played almost no role in the procurement of slaves from overseas. “Thus both the Puritans of New England and the Cavaliers of Virginia had no particular aversion to slavery.  The true issue was not whether but who.”

READ MORE...

What more shall I say about them ?  I cannot and need not say much more. In externals, they were two unobtrusive women; a perfectly secluded life gave them retiring manners and habits.  In Emily’s nature the extremes of vigour and simplicity seemed to meet.  Under an unsophisticated culture, inartificial tastes, and an unpretending outside, lay a secret power and fire that might have informed the brain and kindled the veins of a hero: but she had no worldly wisdom; her powers unadapted to the practical business of life; she would fail to defend her most manifest rights, to consult her most legitimate advantage.  An interpreter ought always to have stood between her and the world.  Her will was not very flexible, and it generally opposed her interest.  Her temper was magnanimous, but warm and sudden; her spirit altogether unbending.

Anne’s character was milder and more subdued; she wanted the power, the fire, the originality of her sister, but was well endowed with quiet virtues of her own.  Long-suffering, self-denying, reflective, and intelligent, a constitutional reserve and taciturnity placed and kept her in the shade, and covered her mind, and especially her feelings, with a sort of nun-like veil, which was rarely lifted.  Neither Emily nor Anne was learned; they had no thought of filling their pitchers at the well-spring of other minds; they always wrote from the impulse of nature, the dictates of intuition, and from such stores of observation as their limited experience had enabled them to amass.  I may sum up all by saying, that for strangers they were nothing; but for those who had known them all their lives in the intimacy of close relationship, they were genuinely good and truly great.

Charlotte Brontë, writing of her sisters Emily and Anne in the preface to the combined edition of Wuthering Heights and Agnes Grey which was published in 1850, just over a year after their deaths.

The amazing, sad story of the Brontë sisters needs no retelling from me, and it is not my purpose to dwell on it here.  But these three remarkable women were a testament to native intelligence, as well as that creative font which intelligence may bestow: an interior life.

Native intelligence is much in vogue in British political circles.  As The Times’ Eleanor Mills wrote last week:-

READ MORE...

My question is:  Did Ian Flemming write this article?

The head of the Papua chapter of the National AIDS Commission, Constant Karma, reportedly slammed the proposal as a violation of human rights.

“People with HIV/AIDS are not like sharks under observation so that they have to be implanted with microchips to monitor their movements,” he told the Jakarta Post on Tuesday.

“Any form of identification of people with HIV/AIDS violates human rights.”

According to data from Papua’s health office cited by the Post, the province has just over 3,000 people living with HIV/AIDS. Some 356 deaths have been reported. Papua has a population of about 2.5 million.