In his new tome Suicide of the West, Jonah Goldberg refers to the miracle of Western civilization as “capitalism.” While it is generally true that the nations that have most readily embraced the free market and free enterprise are indeed the freest today, even that statement comes with asterisks galore. Capitalism is anything but a miracle, and it is telling that Goldberg uses revelatory and religious language to describe an economic system. We live today in the midst of a globalist revolution that would turn the entire West into a mocha-colored strip-mall. The neoconservatives are particularly invested in this model of gigantic, exploitative multi-national corporations, but they couch this support in an appeal to the “greater good” of the planet’s rising standard of living. It is true that when individual nations embrace market economics their people typically experience a resultant elevated standard of living, but is this really “miraculous”? Quoting Tucker Carlson:
Market capitalism is not a religion. Market capitalism is a tool, like a staple gun or a toaster. You’d have to be a fool to worship it. Our system was created by human beings for the benefit of human beings. We do not exist to serve markets. Just the opposite…[For Republican leaders] questioning markets feels like apostasy…For our ruling class, more investment banking is always the answer. They teach us it’s more virtuous to devote your life to some soulless corporation than it is to raise your own kids…As if putting a corporation first is empowerment. It is not. It is bondage... Not all commerce is good. Why is it defensible to loan people money they can’t possibly repay? Or charge them interest that impoverishes them?...Under our current system, an American who works for a salary pays about twice the tax rate as someone who’s living off inherited money and doesn’t work at all. We tax capital at half of what we tax labor. It’s a sweet deal if you work in finance, as many of our rich people do. In 2010, for example, Mitt Romney made about $22 million dollars in investment income. He paid an effective federal tax rate of 14 percent. For normal upper-middle-class wage earners, the federal tax rate is nearly 40 percent… Our leaders rarely mention any of this. They tell us our multi-tiered tax code is based on the principles of the free market. Please. It’s based on laws that the Congress passed, laws that companies lobbied for in order to increase their economic advantage. It worked well for those people. They did increase their economic advantage. But for everyone else, it came at a big cost.
Unrestrained “free trade”—let alone crony capitalism—is very damaging to our people. The growing Indian middle class, for example, does nothing to benefit Americans; indeed much of the tech and service sector job-creation in India comes at our expense primarily due to outsourcing. And when outsourcing cannot be feasibly accomplished, the government is more than happy to hand out H-1B visas, H-2B visas, et cetera like candy. These allow for the employment of foreign workers who fill positions that would otherwise be occupied by Americans. Additionally, the importation of mass unskilled labor on a permanent basis for non-specialized work floods the labor market and keeps wages on the home front nice and low. Sure the Guatemalan and Honduran day laborers’ standard of living has risen, but what about the Americans they’ve displaced?
I have an alternate title to propose for Mr. Goldberg: The Nation-Killing Guide to Conservatism. The introduction would be a haughty dismissal of the white working class, possibly going so far as to advocate for their complete replacement a la Bill Kristol, or for their death a la Kevin Williamson. Next the virtues of global free trade, endless wars for Israel, de-stabilizing regime change, open borders, and identity politics for me but not for thee. Oh, that’s what the book is about. Never mind.
It is worth pointing out at this juncture that Monsieur Goldberg, if you hadn’t guessed by his name, is Jewish. “What does that matter?” The Rashida Tlaib wing of the Left probably would not ask this question, its ready embrace of Islam streaking their movement through with some decidedly anti-Israel sentiments. But the “race-blind” conservative or do-gooder liberal is aghast at such bald statements as the following: that Jonah Goldberg, Bill Kristol, and so many other neoconservatives are Jewish matters a great deal. Allow me to explain.
Jewish infiltration of existing national or imperial structures and the usage of these entities for their own benefit has been a hallmark of the Jewish people since at least the time of the Babylonian Empire. Indeed, as Revilo P. Oliver informs us, the “Jewish Strategy” is laid out in the Old Testament as regards ancient Egypt:
Whatever their origin, there cannot be the slightest doubt about the method that the Jews have always regarded as ideal in capturing control of a country: it is set forth clearly and explicitly in the “Old Testament” (Gen. 47.1-27). The hero of this tale is a Jew named Joseph, who is said to have been brought to Egypt as a slave, but who cleverly riggled upward in Egyptian society until he was in a position to prey upon the good nature and superstition of the Egyptian king, whom he first manipulated to permit an influx of Jews, who somehow take possession of the best land in the nation; then he uses the king’s authority to corner the grain market and is thus able to take from the Egyptians all their money, all their cattle, and then all their land, so that he has all the Egyptians (except the Egyptian priests, with whom he evidently maintains a prudent but odd alliance) at his mercy, forces the famished wretches to sell themselves into slavery, and then shrewdly transports groups of the slaves from one end of the country to the other, mixing up the population so thoroughly that all his victims find themselves among strangers with whom they would scarcely dare to concert an effective protest…It is hard to say how much fact may underlie the story, which is obviously an exposition of the Jews’ ideal methods…The principle features of the tale more probably reflect Jewish ambitions than actual events. However that may be, the tale certainly sketches an ideal modus operandi for subjugating the goyim. And the Jews of today will surely not have the audacity to claim that that description of their methods was forged by the secret police of Russia under the Czars! (my note: he’s referring here to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion).
Though Jews have become synonymous with liberalism in the contemporary West, it is but one vehicle through which to advance their interests. Kevin MacDonald writes:
Historically the Jewish left has not distinguished itself by tolerance or promotion of civil liberties. One need only think of the high Jewish participation rate in communist and communist front organizations through the 1950s, and their role as an elite in the Soviet Union during the period after the Bolshevik Revolution at least through the 1930s—the highpoints of mass murder, ethnic deportations, and political repression. In this regard it’s interesting that the left in the U.S. and elsewhere in the West is increasingly authoritarian, especially on college campuses where dissenters are publicly shamed and harassed, and dissenting speakers are forced to cancel or are greeted with disruptive, often violent demonstrations from the left—hardly a sign of Openness as traditionally understood. Liberals cheer as White identitarians are de-platformed, and broadly defined “hate speech” is increasingly subject to legal penalties in Western Europe and to informal but nevertheless effect sanctions in the U.S. Such laws—which hardly fit with the classically liberal society championed by [Jordan] Peterson—have been promoted by Jewish organizations throughout the West.
All one need do is look at the dense peopling by Jews in socialist, neo-conservative, and neo-liberal leadership positions, the latter two of which are basically the same thing except one doesn’t like abortions. On the one hand you get the American military advancing the Yinon Plan and plus global free trade that enriches the financial sector and the corporations, and on the other hand you get the gradual erosion of the mores, taboos, and identity of the host population, opening it up to further colonization. Quoting Lothrop Stoddard, “Before the revolutionary onslaught can have any chance of success, the social order must first have been undermined and morally discredited. This is accomplished primarily by the process of destructive criticism.” Insert Kevin MacDonald’s A Culture of Critique reference here. Critical theory is the demon-spawn of destructive criticism, and its waste products like cultural relativism, post-colonial theory, post-modernism, and others provide an intellectual patina and legitimization of what is at its core nothing but anti-Westernism and iron-fisted coercion. It is alienism in sheep’s clothing. To quote Bruce Thornton, cultural relativism, “makes it impossible to pass judgements on dysfunctional cultures and to stand up for the unique good of one’s own when it is under attack.” As the Czech writer Milan Kundera, no stranger to communist totalitarianism wrote:
The first step in liquidating a people is to erase its memory. Destroy its books, its culture, its history. Then have somebody write new books, manufacture a new culture, invent a new history. Before long that nation will begin to forget what it is and what it was.
I wonder, does that sound at all like what’s going on in the West today, with the toppling of statues, the racial re-casting of historical figures in motion pictures, the banning of books and censorship of dissent, the Cult-Marx take-over of the academy, the re-framing of American (and European and the European Diaspora’s) history, the doctrines of diversity and multi-culturalism, the perversions of the Constitution, and so much more? It can’t possibly be serving an agenda, can it? Stoddard continues:
Many Jews promptly adopted revolutionary ideas and soon acquired great influence in the revolutionary movement. For this there were several reasons. In the first place, the Jewish mind, instinctively analytical, and sharpened by the dialectic subtleties of the Talmud, takes naturally to dissective criticism. Again, the Jews, feeling themselves more or less apart from the nations in which they live, tended to welcome the distinctly international spirit of social revolutionary doctrines. Lastly, the Jewish intellectuals, with their quick, clever intelligence, made excellent revolutionary leaders and could look forward to attaining high posts in the “officers’ corps” of the armies of revolt. For all these reasons, then, Jews have played an important part in all social revolutionary movements, from the time of Marx and Engels down to the largely Jewish Bolshevist regime in Soviet Russia to-day (1922).
The objection to the term “globalist” as an “anti-Semitic dog-whistle” seems to me to be a mass Freudian slip of the Jewish people—a great irony given their obsession with psychoanalysis and pathologization and repression. “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.” The heavily Jewish-influenced Frankfurt School and other arms of the media, academia, and finance have put a full-court press on the pathologizing of Western Man’s ability to express a healthy sense of national and racial pride. Indeed, from Bolshevism to neo-conservatism to “anti-racism,” you will find the Jews disproportionately represented. The invention of the very word “racist” in 1933 is courtesy of German Jew Magnus Hirschfeld whose career was largely centered on the “normalization” of homosexuality and various other sexual proclivities and perversions.
Civic nationalism is another Jewish invention. The first person to advance the idea of the United States as a “proposition nation” divorced from its specific racial/ethno-cultural past was Jewish neocon Ben Wattenberg. His notion of a “universal nation” is an oxymoron. As for mass immigration, the seeds were sown by various Eastern European Jews such as the socialist Emma Lazarus in the late-19th century, and the concept of “open borders” took on ideological form via French-Jewish ‘Artistic Director’ Catherine David’s 1997 exhibition documenta X and the publication of British-Jewish intellectual Steve Cohen’s No One Is Illegal: Asylum and Immigration Control, Past and Present in 2003. The Jews, it would seem, wear many hats. Revilo P. Oliver adeptly analyzed the language of the “Left-wing activist” role as played by Jewish actors, but which, in practice, results from neoconservative policies as well; only the rhetoric changes, not the end or in many cases even necessarily the means:
It must be remembered that the Jews operate by discovering and exploiting causes of dissent within nations, inciting classes and comparable groups within the nation to reciprocal antagonism, and exacerbating the rivalries to the point of civil war, until the nation is paralyzed and reduced to masses of individuals who no longer feel they have anything in common except the geographical territory they inhabit. The Jewish technique, as was too candidly explained by the notorious agitator, Herbert Aptheker, consists in finding large groups of goyim who can be isolated from the rest of the society on the basis of some economic, occupational, regional, cultural, sexual, or racial interest they have in common, persuading them that they are “oppressed” by the wicked society, inciting them to hatred of their “oppressors” and making them greedy for the profits they think they can gain by “demanding their rights,” and thus setting each group against all others until the nation is paralysed by pseudo-legal contention that may hopefully be expected to eventuate in civil wars, massive massacres, and a reversion to total barbarism. The Jews, who are always careful to wail that they are a “persecuted minority” with a passion for godly “justice,” are thus ideally prepared to incite the “underprivileged” to outbreaks for “social justice,” and it is, of course, well-known that all of the multiple forms of subversion are directed by Jews, often quite openly, although they usually try to associate with them some hired or light-headed members of each group they are inciting to what will be, in the end, self-destruction.
With mass media, ease of transportation, and abundant gadgets and distractions, genocide has never been so easy! In fact, for the first time in human history, genocide has gone global! Now is this the preferred end-game of all Jews? Of course not. The godfather of the Alt-Right, Paul Gottfried, himself a member of the Tribe, brutally excoriated Goldberg’s nonsense for the Unz Review (run by Ron Unz, also Jewish, and an outspoken critic of Harvard’s vast overrepresentation of Jews):
For his newest venture into deep thought, Goldberg has crassly stolen the title of James Burnham’s great work, Suicide of the West, published in 1964 at the height of the Cold War.That is where the similarity ends. Unlike Burnham’s scalding indictment of liberalism as “the ideology of Western suicide,” Goldberg’s random opinions represent the very pathology that Burnham railed against. Goldberg hates national identities (although he makes an exception for Israel), opponents of the Deep State, immigration patriots, and those who imagine that democracy has something to do with the popular will. Rather his “conservative” view of democracy privileges public administration, the operation of multinational corporations, and socially sophisticated journalists such as himself.
Like Unz and Gottfried, Stephen Miller is another Jewish man whose policy positions on immigration are extremely favorable. There several other similar figures on the non-colonized wing of the Right. All of that said, it is indisputable that a not-insignificant portion of world Jewry is, and always has been, committed to the exploitation and, ultimately, extermination of their Western hosts.
The so-called elites practicing divide-and-conquer are playing a dangerous game, however. When the various tribal loyalties are stoked to hostility, conjoined with social revolutionary agitation and the entropy of Lothrop Stoddard’s Under-Man, there is no guarantee that these profoundly destructive forces can be harnessed. The gamble of course is that they can and will be, and if the spike in “anti-Semitic” attacks across the West are any indication, the Internationalist Jews are willing to sacrifice many of their own in this global gambit. To quote William Kilpatrick, “We seem to be at one of those strange junctures in history when societies fight against their own interests because they are no longer able to understand their best interests. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Muslim Turks came close to seizing the whole European continent because European Christians were too busy fighting among themselves.” The current Islamization of Europe—driven in no small part by the egalitarian, open-borders ideology propagated by Barbara Lerner Spectre and her ilk adhering to the Kalergi Plan— continues to proceed at a rapid pace. Islam demands perfect submission, just like egalitarianism and the various Cult-Marxist permutations; all are aimed at forcing people into unthinking complicity by whatever means necessary. As Lothrop Stoddard wrote in The Revolt Against Civilization:
Syndicalism (my note: which was en vogue over a century ago, and is basically like a communistic guild system in its conception but is more or less interchangeable with communism and Bolshevism on a practical level) is instinctively hostile to intelligence. It pins its faith to instinct—that “deeper knowledge” of the undifferentiated human mass; that proletarian quantity so much more precious than individualistic quality. Both the intellectual elite and their works must make room for the “proletarian culture” of the morrow. Intellectuals are [according to Georges Sorel] a “useless, privileged class”; art is “a mere residuum bequeathed to us by an aristocratic society.” Science is likewise condemned.
And that’s really the essence of the entire project, isn’t it? The various competing models of totalitarianism want—need—control of your gray matter. If it’s nothing but addled Cult-Marx soup with a wallet, so much the better. Why do you think a “conservatism” so thoroughly colonized by Jews would be readily accepting the premises of the Left in its slow surrender? This weird fusion of anarcho-tyranny and socialism is, adding to the seemingly paradoxical strangeness of the whole enterprise, undergirded by the most ruthlessly cut-throat capitalism humanity has ever seen in the importation of entirely new under-class to exploit and a new over-class to exploit them, and where the melanin-rich foot soldiers run “extra-legally” roughshod over the native populace while said native populace is mercilessly crushed with re-distributive taxes, propaganda, and legal and state-sanctioned assaults on life, limb, and capital. The end-game is the “cattle ranch” neo-liberalism discussed by Revilo P. Oliver in The Jewish Strategy, the tax cattle and mindless consumers alike have a bovine docility cultivated to the last, a trip to the abattoir and a captive bolt gun pressed to their temples. All beauty, all thought, all reason, all identity must be stamped out, the global shopping mall nothing but a holding pen.
“All the world’s a cage and we are animals pounding at the glass
Housebroken, declawed, unaware of the threat
Bull hooks that keep us in line while cameras flash
And we play while the trespassers plot to collect on their debts.”-Every Time I Die, “Organ Grinder”