Posted by mjs on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 00:59 | #

I prefer Joe Sobran’s Cynosure:

http://www.sobran.com/cynosure.shtml

My favorite: “anti-Semite: a person who is hated by Jews.”

Posted by Mark on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 02:53 | #

There is nothing hip about anarcho-capitalism; we ancaps are hated both both the left and the right.  It is, however, the only moral and intelligent choice.

I’m hoping Chinese stocks crash soon, followed by world-wide real estate, and then the welfare states, including the US.

Posted by PF on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 02:58 | #

Independence: When a fully-functioning bureaucracy, military, industry and school system created by European whites is handed over gratis to the descendents of those who tilled soil in the outlying regions while it was being constructed.

Famine: Food shortage. (For causes, see ‘Independence’).

Coup: Ambitious army officer joined by starving peasant army. OR: Ambitious army officer joined by rival tribal faction(possibly also starving).

Birth Rate: Statistical representation of the time it takes for two mistakes to become three. (See ‘Compounding Error’.)

White Birth Rate: The rate at which white eggs are discarded in favor of trips to the theatre, vacations, partys, girls-nights-out, the realization of romantic dreams, novel reading, clothing and fitness fads. Can be used to calculate the time period across which such a lifestyle will be feasibly maintainable. (See ‘List of Famous Black Engineers’)

List of Famous Black Engineers: A list supposedly containing the names of all famous black engineers, several of which were mythical, including the supposedly black Pharoah Ramses II. In addition to containing several entries which could not be verified, the document lists several names twice, and includes the names of blacks who were not engineers, such as Nelson Mandela and Maya Angelou. The list was later confirmed upon further inspection to be a list of all distinguished black people ever, even though some of the names, such as “Bozart”, appear to be ingenuine. (See ‘Single-Page Documents’)

Posted by PF on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 03:10 | #

What in God’s name are those obscenely leering smiley-faces doing in the middle of my post: they mar my post like my acne mars my face. Did I somehow end up in the Kiddie’s section at Majority Rights? Is there a Kid’s Section?

Maybe that would be a good idea. We need to make some simple puzzles for children to solve, and when you put the peices together, it spells out in big block red letters “RACISM”.
A great way to talk to your kids about a touchy subject. Maybe record a song with a gentle female voice cooing the word ‘racism’ would make people finally swallow the pill.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 03:52 | #

”repatriation redemption from the folly and self-destructiveness of post-war immigration policy in the West.”  (—from The Little Lexicon)

Maybe Sarkozy’s been reading The Little Lexicon?  Wherever he got the idea, the man seems to have got his head screwed on frontwards.  Pray God this catches on all over Europe, then all over the Europshere!

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 04:00 | #

And pray God they get aggressive with the amounts offered till we see some real numbers packing up and leaving, taking families with them of course.  If the current paltry amounts won’t get those numbers rapidly up into the millions, increase them till they do.  Of course also tighten the screws “in various ways” at the same time, so as to ... give an incentive to take the money and go without being too picky, shall we say?  Yes ... so as to give an incentive to take the money and go without being too picky ... .

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 04:14 | #

I’d love to have written, “And next, tighten the screws on those traitor Frenchmen who brought this about in the first place, this attempted natiocide.”  But I didn’t want to be greedy — one step at a time.  Maybe at some future date there’ll be an occasion for a little ... settling of accounts, shall we say?  Yes, a little ... settling of accounts.  But let’s not ... what was that proverb again?  Oh yes:  let’s not ... count our chickens before they’re hatched, shall we?  So, I didn’t write it ... (Doesn’t mean I didn’t think it ...)

Posted by Al Ross on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 04:14 | #

Sarkozy’s plan to give six thousand Euros to unwanted interlopers to return to Africa seems sound. Perhaps it’s just a coincidence that Africans are turning up in London with six grand in their pockets.

Posted by 17% on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 15:26 | #

Evidence for the definition of Ashkenazi Jews?

Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 17:41 | #

The Ashkenazim who write the Wikipedia page paint a rather vague picture of their racial origins ...

“ancestry can be traced to the Jews of central and eastern Europe”

but only ...

“For roughly a thousand years”

and ...

“despite living in many countries.”

So where were they before then, since they do not claim a native connection to the central and eastern European soil?  The Wiki is silent.

But it does go to the trouble of de-emphasising and even smearing the Turkic theory.  Call me contrary, but that’s enough to interest me in the Turkic theory!

The Wikipedia Ashkenazim also state that 80% of Jews alive today are Askenazim, down from a pre-war high of 92%.  But they also say that over two-thirds of the 8.5 million Jews alive in pre-war Europe were “systematically” murdered by the Nazis (meaning, I suppose, that none of these two-thirds died of natural causes or disease).

So where to pitch the percentage?  Your guess is as good as mine, but mine is 90%.

The point about The Little Lexicon, however, is that pithy correction is invited.  Please correct it, if you are so minded.

Posted by Jean Depression on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 17:51 | #

“Call me contrary, but that’s enough to interest me in the Turkic theory!”

It seems most of the data point to a Near Eastern, levantine origin, which was a subject of an old MR post.

Posted by jlh on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 18:06 | #

Nicholas Wade in “Before the Dawn” says that the Ashkenazis are mostly Semites on the male line mixed with whatever Euro ethny they were living among on the female line, with a significant componant picked up from the Khazar conversion. I’m quoting from memory without aid of my copy, so I can’t give the exact percentages.

Posted by Jean Depression on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 19:21 | #

I think Wade’s work is outdated, as a significant Middle Eastern (or, most likely, Middle Eastern) matrilineal heritages seems to be the case for the Ashkenazi as well:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2006/01/matrilineal-ancestry-of-ashkenazi-jews.html

The Khazar issue is still open to question.  But, it seems that the Ashkenazi do in fact have significant historical (‘recent’0 ME ancestry.

Posted by 100% on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 22:53 | #

“Nicholas Wade in “Before the Dawn” says that the Ashkenazis are mostly Semites on the male line mixed with whatever Euro ethny they were living among on the female line . . .”

No, that’s not what he says, though you’re not the first one to repeat this misconception.

Quoting from Before the Dawn (p. 264):

Mostly, the mitochondrial DNA in each Jewish community doesn’t closely resemble that of any other population, meaning that the geographic origin of the founding mothers of Jeish communities cannot be identified for certain. However, in several cases it looks as if it could come from the host community. For example, among the Bene Israel, the Jewish community of Bombay in India . . .

Better still, let’s look at what the actual paper he’s discussing says:

Unfortunately, in many cases, it is not possible to infer the geographic origin of the founding mtDNAs within the different Jewish groups with any confidence. It would appear that the founder effects on the maternal side have been so severe that mtDNA frequencies in the Jewish populations are very different from those found in any non-Jewish population. The non-CRS modal haplotypes in the Jewish populations are generally rare in the non-Jewish populations. The CRS, on the other hand, is too ubiquitous to allow it to be pinpointed to anything other than a general Eurasian origin.

For example, the most extreme founder effect is seen in the Georgian Jews, of whom 51% possess the same haplotype. The Georgian Jewish modal type is matched by a single individual in the Georgian sample. However, a search of the mtDNA database (Richards et al. 2000) shows that it also occurs in Syria (2/69 individuals) and Iraq (1/116). One directly derived type is present in two Georgians, but derived types are also found in the North Caucasus (2/208 individuals), Turkey (1/218), Armenia (1/191), and Sicily (1/90). For the Georgian modal haplotype, there is therefore no clear indication of provenance, although an indigenous origin is certainly possible, given the data.

  In two cases, however, comparison with the published data does provide some indication of the possible geographic origins of the modal types. The modal type in the Bene Israel is a one-step mutational neighbor of a haplotype present in the Indian sample, as well as being a one-step neighbor of a type previously identified in India (Kivisild et al. 1999a, 1999b). Similarly, the commonest type in the Ethiopian Jewish sample is also present in the non-Jewish Ethiopian sample and occurs in the worldwide mtDNA database only in Somalia (Watson et al. 1997). Other high-frequency haplotypes in the Ethiopian Jewish sample are also found almost entirely in Africa (data not shown). The lack of an indication of a Middle Eastern origin for these haplotypes, on the basis of the Richards database, makes local recruitment a more reasonable explanation in these two cases.

The paper makes no claims about maternal origins of Ashkenazim.

Posted by 100% on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 23:01 | #

The paper I quoted in the last post is Founding Mothers of Jewish Communities: Geographically Separated Jewish Groups Were Independently Founded by Very Few Female Ancestors.

Here is the conclusion of a more recent paper that does look specifically at Ashkenazi maternal origins:

Both the extent and location of the maternal ancestral deme from which the Ashkenazi Jewry arose remain obscure. Here, using complete sequences of the maternally inherited mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), we show that close to one-half of Ashkenazi Jews, estimated at 8,000,000 people, can be traced back to only 4 women carrying distinct mtDNAs that are virtually absent in other populations, with the important exception of low frequencies among non-Ashkenazi Jews. We conclude that four founding mtDNAs, likely of Near Eastern ancestry, underwent major expansion(s) in Europe within the past millennium.

Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 23:07 | #

Thanks, 100%.  I shall change Central Asian to Near Eastern.

Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 23:16 | #

Capitalism:  The extended phenotype of Jews which expresses as governments with nonsubsistence property rights enforced by taxing anything and sometimes everything except nonsubsistence property rights.

Posted by Veritas on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 23:27 | #

Try this URL, from the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=402&letter=C&search=chazars

There’s always Koestler’s “The Thirteenth tribe”.  For convenience I add a quote from that taken from my recent Daily Telegraph blog post:-

The late Arthur Koestler’s book “The Thirteenth Tribe” cites Jewish authorities to suggest that “the large majority of surviving Jews ... is of Eastern European ... origin. This would mean that their ancestors came not from the Jordan but from the Volga, not from Canaan but from the Caucasus ... genetically they are more closely related to the Hun, Uigur and Magyar tribes than to the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Should this turn out to be the case, then the term ‘anti-Semitism’ would become void of meaning, based on a misapprehension ...”

Posted by Jean Depression on Thu, 07 Jun 2007 23:54 | #

GW, now you are saying that they are Near Eastern but non-Semitic…

I realize that “Semitic” is not exactly a well defined taxonomic category, but with respect to popular conception, a Near Eastern Jewry would in fact be “Semitic.”

Posted by 100% on Fri, 08 Jun 2007 00:01 | #

GW:

Ashkenazi probably have some Central Asian ancestry, but not in large amounts.  When jlh mentioned “a significant componant picked up from the Khazar conversion” he was indirectly referring to a paper that found about half of Ashkenazi Levites carry R1a1 Y chromosomes (while the proportion is under 6% in Sephardic Levites and Cohens and Ashkenazi Cohens). The authors speculate these lineages were introduced by Khazar converts, but one can also speculate they come from Eastern European men, or that they were present in the Near Eastern Jewish source population.

The relevant quote:

If a European origin for the Ashkenazi Levite haplogroup R1a1 component is accepted as a reasonable possibility, it is of interest to speculate further on the possible timing, location, and mechanism of this event. Because the modal haplotype of haplogroup R1a1 found in the Ashkenazi Levites is found at reasonably high frequency throughout the eastern European region, it is not possible to use genetic information to pinpoint the exact origin of any putative founder from the currently available data sets. Intriguingly, the Sorbian tongue, relexified with a German vocabulary, has been proposed as the origin of Yiddish, the language of the Ashkenazim, but there has been no suggestion of an association between Ashkenazi Levites in particular and the Sorbian language. One attractive source would be the Khazarian Kingdom, whose ruling class is thought to have converted to Judaism in the 8th or 9th century (Dunlop 1967). This kingdom flourished between the years 700 C.E. and 1016 C.E. It extended from northern Georgia in the south to Bulgar on the Volga River in the north and from the Aral Sea in the east to the Dnieper River in the west—an area that falls within a region in which haplogroup R1a1 NRYs are found at high frequency (Rosser et al. 2000). Archival material also records migration of Khazars into the Hungarian Duchy of Taskony in the 10th century. The break-up of the Khazar Empire following their defeat by invading Rus led to the flight of some Khazars to central and northern Europe. Although neither the NRY haplogroup composition of the majority of Ashkenazi Jews nor the microsatellite haplotype composition of the R1a1 haplogroup within Ashkenazi Levites is consistent with a major Khazar or other European origin, as has been speculated by some authors (Baron 1957; Dunlop 1967; Ben-Sasson 1976; Keys 1999), one cannot rule out the important contribution of a single or a few founders among contemporary Ashkenazi Levites.

An earlier paper makes the same speculation about khazars and r1a (eu19 in the excerpt below), and finds 12.7% of its sample of Ashkenazi Jews carry this lineage:

Ashkenazi Jews consolidated into a distinct ethnicity in Germany during the Middle Ages and spread eastwards to Poland and Russia in the 13th century (Ben-Sasson 1976). Previous studies of Y chromosome polymorphisms reported a small European contribution to the Ashkenazi paternal gene pool (Santachiara-Benerecetti et al. 1993; Hammer et al. 2000). In our sample, this low-level gene flow may be reflected in the Eu 19 chromosomes, which are found at elevated frequency (12.7%) in Ashkenazi Jews and which are very frequent in Eastern Europeans (54%–60%; Semino et al. 2000). Alternatively, it is attractive to hypothesize that Ashkenazim with Eu 19 chromosomes represent descendents of the Khazars, originally a Turkic tribe from Central Asia, who settled in southern Russia and eastern Ukraine and converted en masse to Judaism in the ninth century of the present era, as described by Yehuda Ha-Levi in 1140 A.D. (Dunlop 1954)

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 08 Jun 2007 00:01 | #

I was thinking about that.  Near Eastern is the Levant, I guess.  Obviously, that’s non-Arab, so on what basis do we conclude that Ashkenazics must be semitic?

I’m perfectly open to change it.  I just need to see the reason why.

Posted by ben tillman on Fri, 08 Jun 2007 01:03 | #

anti-semite:  any European who resists behaviour by Ashkenazic Jews damaging to his people.

Anyone who rejects the proposition that all conflicts of interest between Jewry and non-Jews must be resolved in favor of Jewry.

In other words, anyone who rejects the “Chosen People” myth.

Posted by G. Winterbourne on Fri, 08 Jun 2007 03:00 | #

Judeo-Gypsy (or alternatively, Judeo-Roma). 1. Collective grouping of parasites of altruistic societies. 2. Two peoples embodying identical short term thinking and anti-societal behavior, differing only in the levels of vectorism employed. 3. Substitution for the jingoistic term “Judeo-Christian”. 4. Term employed to subconsciously link two similarly destructive yet often separately considered peoples.

Posted by Amalek on Fri, 08 Jun 2007 11:37 | #

I thought the ‘Khazar conversion’ was a canard, and that there was no proof that large numbers of Khazars ever were converted, though some at the court may have been.

Koestler was always something of a prankster, you know.

Posted by Jean Depression on Fri, 08 Jun 2007 11:44 | #

GW, the term “Arab” is also imprecise, as is “Semitic”, but, Levantine groups like Palestinians, Syrians, and Lebanese are popularly considered “Arabs”, and, hence, “Semites”, so it makes no sense to call Levantine Jews “non-Semitic.”

Posted by jlh on Fri, 08 Jun 2007 14:59 | #

100%,

Thanks for the correction. But let’s return to Wade: “The explanation proposed by Goldstein and his colleagues is that the founding fathers of Jewish communities came from the Middle East, the founding mothers from the host population in each country. The Jewish men, arriving perhaps as traders and presumably unmarried, took wives from the local population in each country, and it seems then converted their wives to Judaism. Once the community was established and reached sufficient size, it became closed; no more wives were taken from the host population, and community members married among themselves. With no fresh infusions from the local population, the mitochrondrial DNA in each Jewish community fell under the influence of genetic drift, making it look less and less like that of the local version from which it originated.” (p. 246-7)

Posted by jlh on Fri, 08 Jun 2007 15:08 | #

Half of Ashkenzic levites bear a genetic signature known as R1a1. “(T)he original ancestor seems to have entered the Jewish community about 1,000 years ago .... The geneticists who discovered the R1a1 signature among the levites ... note that outside the Jewish community the R1a1 chromosome is relatively common in the region north of Georgia, in the Caaucasus, that was once occupied by the Khazar kingdom. The Khazars were a Turkic tribe whose king converted to Judaism in eighth or ninth century AD.” (p. 250) The conclusion is that the Jewish priest class was infused with quite a few members of the Turkic Khazars in the medieval period.

Posted by 100% on Fri, 08 Jun 2007 20:06 | #

“Thanks for the correction. But let’s return to Wade”

Read the paper. It deals with samples from nine jewish groups, only one of which is Ashkenazi. As you should have gathered from the excerpt I posted, the authors find evidence linking Indian and Ethiopian Jewish maternal lineages to their respective local populations, and weaker evidence of this for Georgian Jews.

In the paper, Goldstein and his co-authors do not claim in general “founding fathers of Jewish communities came from the Middle East, the founding mothers from the host population in each country”, and certainly don’t make this claim for Ashkenazim.

In Wade’s New York Times article, the idea is clearly identified as Goldstein’s own personal speculation:

Dr. Goldstein said it was up to historians to
interpret the genetic evidence. His own speculation, he said, is that most Jewish
communities were formed by unions between Jewish men and local women, though
he notes that the women’s origins cannot be genetically determined.

“The men came from the Near East, perhaps as traders,” he said. “They established
local populations, probably with local women. But once the community was
founded, the barriers had to go up, because otherwise mitochondrial diversity would
be increased.”

In his book, Wade is guilty of misleading his readers by attributing this sentiment to “Goldstein and his colleagues”, but you still should have picked up on the more salient point: “the geographic origin of the founding mothers of Jewish communities cannot be identified for certain”.

Posted by Jean Depression on Fri, 08 Jun 2007 20:52 | #

Entine and Sailer promote the misconceptions here:
http://www.isteve.com/2003_QA_Jon_Entine_on_Jewish_Genes.htm

And also see the July 22, 2003 post on Jews at “Gene Expression.”

Posted by Jean Depression on Fri, 08 Jun 2007 20:58 | #

Words of wisdom from gnxp on this topic (7/22/03):

Melnorme: “I still think Ashkenazic Jews have more ‘German’ then ‘Slavic’ genes…”

Evidence?

In response to Greg Cochran’s claim of the Ashkenazim being ~80% “Middle Eastern”, Godless Capitalist replied:

“Also, the “80%” Middle Eastern admixture claim just doesn’t pass the smell test - Ashkenazi Jews just look too European.”

Evidence?

Posted by jlh on Fri, 08 Jun 2007 21:48 | #

It seems that 100% is a more careful reader than I am.

from jean depression’s post:

In response to Greg Cochran’s claim of the Ashkenazim being ~80% “Middle Eastern”, Godless Capitalist replied:

“Also, the “80%” Middle Eastern admixture claim just doesn’t pass the smell test - Ashkenazi Jews just look too European.”

Evidence?

I suppose it’s just an argument from authority, but isn’t that what Carlton Coon thought?

Posted by Jean Depression on Fri, 08 Jun 2007 21:59 | #

“but isn’t that what Carlton Coon thought? “

I don’t recall what he wrote in “The Races of Europe”, but that is, essentially, an argument from authority as well.

I’ll go by the DNA evidence, and the full story has definitely not yet been told.  So far though, the evidence does point to signficant Near Eastern historical ancestry.

Posted by Jean Depression on Fri, 08 Jun 2007 22:04 | #

Coon’s work is here:
http://carnby.altervista.org/troe/troe.htm

From the perspective of the 1930s, Carleton Coon did the best he could.

Today, we can do better.  The papers cited in this thread I believe give a more objective reading to Jewish ancestry than does Coon.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 09 Jun 2007 00:25 | #

JD,

I will abide by your wishes in the morning.  In England it’s bedtime ... already.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 09 Jun 2007 11:06 | #

I’m also going to remove the Begin quote following a query I received earlier this week and research into its origins by Veritas. 
The attribution I had was to an article by the respected journalist Amnon Kapeliouk titled “Begin and the Bests” and from the New Statesman, 25th June 1982.  Begin’s moral character renders him an all too plausible patsy, and that’s what we now suspect he is.

Must have been those Tzarist secret police again.

Posted by 555 on Sat, 09 Jun 2007 11:52 | #

‘Peoples of European descent’ is just as insufficiently specific and exclusive as ‘White’.  Albanians aren’t White.

Posted by Unite against the Askenazic slime on Mon, 11 Jun 2007 03:44 | #

“Anarcho-capitalism” - theory formulated by petty Jewish theorists who never worked a real job in their entire lives

“Anti-Semite” - truth-realizers and freedom fighters; those opposed to Jewish financial-political-cultural hegemony over the non-Jewish majority; a trait of those opposed to urbanization, corporatism, superficiality, crudeness, materialism, relativism, immorality, exploitation, and rootlessness

“Ashkenazi Jews” - the general slime of humankind; a parasitic, inbred tribe of nation-wrecking rootless cosmopolitans; money worshippers and unabashed materialists; anti-nativists, fanatical relativists, and destructive internationalists; a group that rides on the back of other ethnic and/or national groups because they are too weak to form their own self-sustaining societies because they always need a group of naive Gentiles to exploit; the universal enemy of good Europeans everywhere

“Boer genocide” - Africans taking back their native land from White imperialists

“Capitalism (20th-21st Centuries)” - urban Jewish plutocracy; the method of economics that will eventually ruin the environment of the world through unchecked and idiotic growth; money worship

“Communism (20th Century)” - urban Jewish plutocracy; native European disenfranchisement and Jewish led anti-Europeanism; State worship

“White (Europeans)” - the only ethnic group that has the power to defeat the international Jewish menace before it is too late but are held back by too much individualism; the group that has suffered the most from Jewish machinations over the centuries; the most effective imperialists, explorers, and colonizers in the history of humankind (conquered and settled land from the Pacific to the Pacific: from Far East Russia all the way to North America’s West coast)

Posted by Rise up on Mon, 11 Jun 2007 04:04 | #

“Arabs & Persians (Muslims)” - potential allies of White Europeans against the international Ashkenazi menace

Posted by Wunderhund on Tue, 12 Jun 2007 01:23 | #

Metapedia is a white nationalist version of wikipedia.
The link to it was sent to me by a friend in Denmark.

http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

Posted by Matt on Wed, 13 Jun 2007 02:03 | #

Seems to me you left out the definition of “colonialism”- random oversight?  Or do you have divine right to the entire globe?  Seems to me that colonialism came before mass third world immigration into the advanced, white-run societies that you bemoan today.  You reap what you sow.
Perhaps if whites had not spent the better part of several centuries busy with their colonial adventures, their countries would not be experiencing the death-by-multiculturalism that we see today.  Yes, I know your next point, those crafty joooooooooooos are to blame for this multi-culti crap.  Perhaps we should blame your Ancient Roman brothers for colonizing and thus dispersing the joooooooos into your European heartland.

I’d love to hate you people, but you’re so blinded by hatred it’s pathetic- I feel sorry for you.

Posted by Lurker on Wed, 13 Jun 2007 02:17 | #

So Matt we must never even be allowed to learn from history then? Let alone do anything about it.

Because of the mistakes of the past we must be made to suffer now and our descendents too.

Although if thats the case…

Then Christians get to kill Jews because of what they did to Jesus or Europeans get to enslave the Turks because their ancestors enslavement of Europeans.

Youd be OK with then?

Obviously you would, if the Jews or Turks had the temerity to complain it was all a long time ago etc you be the first to jump up and denounce them as haters wouldnt you, denying their past crimes, of course you would.

If not then would you care to explain the difference?

Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 13 Jun 2007 02:36 | #

Three words:

Creating carrying capacity

Posted by wintermute on Thu, 14 Jun 2007 01:43 | #

Judah (prounounced JU-duh or JU-da): The Tanakh, Torah, Talmud, and Diaspora and Israeli Jews understood as a totality; also possibly including a hypothesized non-coroporeal entity or intelligence, ontological standing unknown, around which these phenomena have accreted

Golem (pronounced GO-lehm, not “gollum”): A non-Jewish human or group of humans who have become part of Judah’s extended phenotype and whose own inner life, conscience, intellect and will are employed solely to advance the interests of that Race-Culture

conservative, also conservatism: the practice or belief of playing adversarial team sports solely in an atomized and defensive manner; in a hockey game between two teams where one of the teams consists simply a goalie, that team is the “conservative” team.

It remains one of the great unknowns of history that no “conservative” team has ever been known to have won a game; or at least history affords us no example of this happening

Posted by ben tillman on Thu, 14 Jun 2007 05:24 | #

Seems to me that colonialism came before mass third world immigration into the advanced, white-run societies that you bemoan today.  You reap what you sow.

Colonialism was a Jewish project.  *We* didn’t “sow” anything.

Posted by Scimitar on Thu, 14 Jun 2007 06:55 | #

Cameron declares himself a Zionist

“I am a Zionist,” Conservative Party leader David Cameron told an audience of party supporters of Israel in London on Tuesday.

“If what you mean by Zionist, is someone who believes that the Jews have a right to a homeland in Israel and a right to their country then, yes, I am a Zionist and I’m proud of the fact that Conservative politicians down the ages have played a huge role in helping to bring this about,” Cameron declared.

The Conservative leader was guest of honor at the Conservative Friends of Israel annual business lunch, which was attended by some 500 people - including half the parliamentary party, 30 Conservative parliamentary candidates, former leaders, lords and Israel’s ambassador.

Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 14 Jun 2007 13:11 | #

Surely, if Jewish political donors only benefit politicians who are Zionists or in some other way “good for Jews”, then those donors are “racists”, aren’t they?  And I suppose they must be fascists and Nazis, too, because that’s what everybody says about Europeans who support their own people.  Come to think of it, didn’t someone once say that National Socialism was a mirror image of Judaism.  If that’s right, Jews who are, well, Judiac must be as racist any Nazi.

And as totalitarian.  Don’t they all condemn the tiny handful of Jews who criticise Israel or question the Holocaust narrative or any other holy shibolleth as “self-hating Jews”.  Isn’t that as good as saying that Jewish opinions, Jewish interests, Jewish ethnic rights are sacrosanct and beyond critique?  But Jews critique European opinions, European interests, European ethnic rights all day and all night long.  So they do sound very like the worst kind of hypocrites and racists, yes?

Surely I’ve got something wrong here, because everybody knows ... well, gets told all the time that Jews are the perfect and perfectly integrated immigrants, bringing great benefits to their hideously white hosts.  Like Third World immigration, feminism and gay rights ... which means the destruction of European genetic and cultural integrity, loss of homeland, the corruption of the bonds between man and wife and child ... wonderful things, all of them.  Where would we be without them?  How could a race of hypocrites and racists every produce such bounty?

What foolish, evil thoughts I have when left for a moment to think without my sayanim at my shoulder.

Posted by Harry on Thu, 14 Jun 2007 15:21 | #

A very serious activist with a good voice would create an audio file so that the people he hoped to influence could listen to these important words and phrases while commuting to work.  This would have the potential to convert as well as teach and have a good time.

Posted by reader on Thu, 14 Jun 2007 15:47 | #

At Cameron’s own site there is a public forum to which he contributes occassionally.

A thread has been started there for discussion of his belief in a ‘right’ to a ‘homeland’ for the Jewish people, while he believes any Englishman who seeks a similar settlement for his people is a racist.

Posted by Scimitar on Thu, 14 Jun 2007 16:07 | #

Scimitar,

By the definition given by Cameron (“someone who believes that the Jews have a right to a homeland in Israel and a right to their country”), many of us here would qualify as Zionists. I have no objection to Jews having a nation somewhere, and infact welcome this as a step towards civilising the previously nomadic mindset of Jewry.

My objection is the lack of reciprocity on the part of the Jews. Zionists, Jew and Christian alike, also have a nasty habit of attempting to manipulate our foreign policy.

Posted by Scimitar on Thu, 14 Jun 2007 16:09 | #

Come to think of it, didn’t someone once say that National Socialism was a mirror image of Judaism.

If I recall correctly, that was Kevin MacDonald.

Posted by Jun on Thu, 14 Jun 2007 18:01 | #

Re.: anti-semite—personally, I’d like to see ‘semite’ (and all the semite-related terms) broadened to include all the Semitic peoples:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitic#Ethnicity_and_race

The genetic relationships between Jews and other Arab peoples are there:
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1274378

And it’s pretty clear that all of the populations from that area of the world have an overall detrimental effect on Europe/the West.

Anti-semitism should mean ‘anti-Semitic peoples’—all inclusive.

Posted by Scimitar on Thu, 14 Jun 2007 19:09 | #

This is important because many, rightly or wrongly*, perceive WNs as genocidal towards the Jews in intent. Diffusing this impression will leave antis with little that can appeal to a moderate.

That’s because Jews are so influential in the media, academia, entertainment sector, government and so forth. Their perspective invariably colors and dominates mainstream discussions of the issue. I’m not willing to support a Jewish state until Zionists show their willingness to reciprocate by supporting white self-determination in North America and end their attempts to manipulate our foreign policy.

*Certainly, some go on in a way, objecting to a Jewish homeland anywhere, that makes them genocidal de facto.

1.) I’m aware of that.
2.) I haven’t expressed any genocidal intent towards the Jews. I have simply stated that my support for Zionism is conditional and predicated upon reciprocity.
3.) Anyone who is willing to rationally evaluate my post can see that. There is little we can do to persuade those who associate any expression of self-interest on the part of whites with de facto anti-semitism.

In that case you should make that clear in all your criticisms. So, don’t castigate someone for declaring themselves a Zionist, but for refusing to extend similar rights to Euros.

That’s a fair criticism of David Cameron. It’s also a major reason why “conservatives” are held in such disrepute amongst racialists; they shill for the Jews, but turn their backs on their own kin. What precisely is your objection? Are you in favor of unconditional racialist support for the Zionist project in Israel?

Posted by Viridovix on Thu, 14 Jun 2007 19:31 | #

I’m not willing to support a Jewish state until Zionists show their willingness to reciprocate by supporting white self-determination in North America and end their attempts to manipulate our foreign policy.

The Zionists must stop manipulating our foreign and domestic policy. They fear a united European or Euro-American people will put a stop to their plans, so they create domestic policies to dilute and dissolve ethnic cohesion. Most whites who are not Zionist supporters are otherwise liberals who oppose the “inhumane racism” practiced by the Zionists, necessary so that Jewish ethnic interests can survive into the future. The uncounted millions of liberal whites are at least as much a problem, even without any Zionism in the world.

Posted by 123 on Sat, 16 Jun 2007 23:26 | #

A potential new entry: Jimmis, Jimmitude, Jimmitudists.

It may have entered the popular discourse here:

Powellite (sic) asks: What about the people who lived in those lands before the Muslims came and took them over and forced them to live as Dhimmis?

P, what is the equivalent term for a Tory party committed to the national rights of Jews but hostile to extending equal rights to Englishmen?

Jimmis, perhaps?

And let us not attack the Tories alone - ALL the major parties express a belief that ‘Israel’, a Jewish ethnic-nationalist state has a ‘right to exist’, yet they are ALL similarly committed to the notion that an English ethnic-nationalist state has no ‘right’, nor ‘reason’ to exist.

Did the Jimmitudists beat the Dhimmitudists to the punch P? If not, how to explain our current situation?

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 16 Jun 2007 23:49 | #

New one on me, 123.  The usual term, I suppose, is “useful goy”, with one or two less kind phrases close behind in popularity.

Thank you to all who have bent their brains to this task.  Some suggestions has been incorporated in part or whole.  All will be considered.  The Little Lexicon is gradually evolving to a state whereby it can be buttoned on the side-bar, ie there are a decent number of entries under most letters of the alphabet.  We should get there at the next airing.

Posted by 123 on Sun, 17 Jun 2007 00:06 | #

New on me too, but a really good lexicon has to be quick to politically-uncorrect all our workplace conversations, internet debates, and newspaper columns.

In those arenas where ‘dhimmis’ and ‘dhimmitude’ are employed usefully, Jimmis and Jimmitude serve a rather better purpose.

I second what you say - the lexicon is a wonderful resource, and those of us who harass non-nationalists can only benefit.

Posted by wjg on Tue, 19 Jun 2007 13:12 | #

I saw Maguire use the last name of the Duke Lacrosse DA as a verb and here’s a definition.  Loxist is a term coined by Alex Linder that concisely describes the tenor of our times.

Nifonging - unscrupulous acts by Euros in positions of power against their own race in the hopes of advancing careers and otherwise winning praise from our Loxist establishment.

Loxist - the eternal hatred of Judah for the Aryan.

Posted by William on Thu, 12 Jul 2007 06:17 | #

SEMITIC PLENITUDE

I hope I haven’t missed it above, but we need some term that mocks the phenomenon of Jews writing about Jews making films about Jews who write Jewish music celebrating Jewish martyrs who wrote poems celebrating Jewish victories. Well, that gets the concept across.

So I nominate that we name this kind of carom shot across the wonderful world of Jews, “Semitic Plenitude.”

A great example was posted on VDARE today (Peter must be losing his mind) at:

http://www.vdare.com/horowitz/070711_shelly.htm

The principal subject of the essay is the wonderfulness of Adrienne Shelly, a Russian-Jewess, by one Carl F. Horowitz. So already we have a two-tier Semitic Plenitude in play.

According to Horowitz, Murray Weiss (and two others) wrote her murder up for the New York Post as did Norma Meyer for the Copley News Service. Julia Moskin of the NYT also wrote about the killing, and played down the immigration status of the killer.

Shelly’s husband, Andrew Ostroy, set up a foundation in the name of the deceased victim.

So Horowitz promotes knowledge about Shelly; includes references to stories in other media by Jews (Weiss, Meyer, Moskin); and ends by promoting knowledge about the victim’s Jewish husband, Ostroy.

This isn’t the best example of Semitic Plenitude (only three layers deep, although the third layer is well-populated), but it’s pretty good. We should have a contest about the phenomenon. Stories by Jews about Jews who write about Jews are always funny.