Add this to the growing exhibit documenting the covergence of leftism, fascism, and Islamism in the West. Which of the above quotations is lifted from the Web site of the white supremacist National Alliance, and which was uttered this summer by independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader?
(A) "The days when the chief Israeli puppeteer comes to the United States and meets with the puppet in the White House and then proceeds to Capitol Hill, where he meets with hundreds of other puppets, should be replaced."
(B) "Bush also repeated the catch-phrase . . . 'committed to the security of Israel as a Jewish state,' which is repeated almost word-for-word again and again by Israel's sycophants and Capitol Hill puppets."
Michael Totten has the answer. For the record, I guessed wrong.
Ouch, I didn't realize that Nader was that, dare I say it, anti-semitic? There are some things that you just can't put into context. His statement is one of them.
Ouch, I didn't realize that Nader was that, dare I say it, anti-semitic? There are some things that you just can't put into context. His statement is one of them.
How is Nader being anti-Semitic? If I was Sharon (or the leader of any other country, for that matter) I'd want to purchase the US leadership. Given the current purchase price of Senators, and the incredible rate of return, it almost be treasonous for the Israeli leadership NOT to subvert the US government.
For the price of an ongoing propaganda campaign, much lobbying, some well placed campaign contributions, and a bit of black ops, the Israelis get 5 billion dollars a year plus the world's largest nuclear power at their back. Compare that deal to what the ignorant chumps who court Europe or Russia get.
People like Nader are complaining about this because they think that the USG should serve the interests of its citizens, rather than rich, well organized foreign interests like the Israelis or Saudis. But that's just silly. We're stuck here, and have to pay large amounts of protection money regardless of what the leadership does. The USG isn't accountable to us -- why should we expect to control it? It's only natural that the US leadership become beholden to interests that actually have some leverage and freedom of action.
This isn't a "Jewish" issue any more than CIA guys handing suitcases full of cash to drug smugglers is a "Christian" issue.
If this theory worked, T.J., then Israel should be gone. The Saudis alone regularly spend far more, at all levels.
I think T.J. has actually highlighted an important intellectual transmission belt here. When you start talking about "For the price..." and assuming that everything happens on that basis, the next step is to look at who has influence in the current debates and assume they must have bought it. If that group is small, it must be a very effective conspiracy. Pretty soon an organized program to subvert the government doesn't seem so out of line.
And POW! there you are, blithely repeating the old tropes about how rich Jews control the world - or the U.S. superpower, anyway. And wondering why repeating these tropes and using terms like "puppets" in conjunction with them could possibly be considered offensive.
Nader alleges that there is a small Jewish conspiracy to control Western governments, and have them reflect the interests of international Jewry Zionism.
How could that possibly be interpreted as antisemitic?
Exactly Joe. It seems a recent theme in my posting about Central Asia & the Caucasus is butting heads with the idea that everything happening involves US money and power. Saakashvili is trying to reunite Georgia? US conspiracy to weaken Russia. US troops in Uzbekistan? Same deal. The list goes on.
It's exactly the opposite of scientific, rational thinking because it starts with the result and works backwards. Specifically, one looks for the beneficiary of a policy then works backwards to show how they must have engineered it--usually excluding evidence to the contrary. (As a potentially divisive aside, Intelligent Design "Theory" works the same way).
This kind of analysis is that it's based on a premise of healthy skepticism, but it easily runs amok. I think it's especially appealing because, well, it's easy for even a fried bowler to handle: DUDE: It's all a goddamn fake. Like Lenin said, look for the person who will benefit. And you will, uh, you know, you'll, uh, you know what I'm trying to say--.
I too guessed wrong. In my defense, perhaps the ellipsis in the other quotation hides slurs or other give-away text.
Perhaps Ben Stein and other Republicans should ask Nader for their $2,000 back, unless their contributions were made for some strange, unfathomable reason. </sarcasm>
The 'international Jewry' was supposed to be striked...
Joe - I think you have an important point. The left is all about MONEY. When they ask "qui bono?" they only think in terms of $$. Maybe that is one problem with the "materialist" part of "dialectical materialist"??
I guessed wrong as well. I knew Nader was out there, I just never realized he was out there. .
Andrew Lazarus,
It's exactly the opposite of scientific, rational thinking because it starts with the result and works backwards.
There is nothing particularly irrational or anti-scientific about deductive reasoning; indeed, arguing from premises is a tried and true method of scientific reasoning going back to the Greeks.
And what your fumbling about to describe here is known as a post hoc fallacy.
Sorry, but this guilt by association fallacy is a bit silly.
"Jews want power and influence, which is the American way of life, but when we (become successful) and someone talks about the Jewish lobby and Jewish influence, we scream," he said. "We can't have it both ways." - Abe Foxman, ADL
Note the interesting assumption in Gary's post that U.S. policy toward Israel is driven solely by the Jews - and not by common enemies, common values & interests, or the beliefs of other groups within the electorate.
Again, we see the importance inherent in the act of collapsing everything into one actor, and the corresponding assumption that the rest of the system can be controlled by that actor.
Once you believe that, everything else is easy... even for someone who can recognize the post hoc fallacy described by Nathan Hamm. And defense of a candidate for the Presidency who openly describes past and current administrations as "puppets" of foreign Jewish interests is a natural step.
FYI, here's an article containing the Foxman quote, in context.
Nice critique of Nader, except that you claim convergence of "leftism, fascism, and Islamism in the West." We leftists don't have much sympathy for Ralph Nader at the moment; he's in bed with the hard-core nativist crowd just now.
In short, I'm not quite sure what "left" you are talking about in this post. The Naderites--the few the proud, the irrelevent? The Democrats? Kerry voters?
Joe Katzman,
Where exactly is that assumption? Do point it out, because I sure as hell didn't know I was acting under any such assumption. I think you're jumping to some conclusions here that are unwarranted and completely baseless; I'd hate to call you a liar, so I'll wait for an explanation.
And I did not quote him "out of context."
Oh, and here's Foxman's new book. Its title?
Never Again? The Threat of the New Anti-Semitism
Gary, using Foxman as an authority in this case wasn't exactly the smartest move you could have made.
Joe Katzman,
I am still awaiting a response.
Gary, using Foxman as an authority in this case wasn't exactly the smartest move you could have made.
It was a very smart thing to do actually; quite intelligent on my part; because here we are discussing Nader and by reference to that, the United States - which is what Foxman's statement referred to. :)
Joe Katzman,
See, when you actually in engage in discussion, instead of dishonestly trying to create arguments out of whole cloth for people and otherwise creating assumptions out of thin air, you actually get something accomplished. BTW, I'm still waiting for you to justify your earlier lie - and that is exactly what it is - because I think none of those things. So let this be an object lesson to you on how to engage in rationale and honest discourse.
Gary,
Where exactly is that assumption? - it's inherent in a response that quotes a man speaking about the need to be comfortable with Jewish power, as a reaction to a quote describing the U.S. government as "puppets" of foreign Jewish interests. All as part of a defense of the person who said it and the excusing of his actions.
Doesn't get much clearer than that.
mac,
We've noted the increasing convergence between the anti-war left and the Buchananites for some time now, so this isn't a surprise to us. And there are many leftists like Geras, LaFreniere, Walzer, and others who are fighting this tide. But follow the link in our post to the "Hatred rising" topic category, and scroll down for a bit. The growing anti-semitism of today's left, and their convergence with other forces like neo-nazis and Islamists, is hard to deny.
Read Simon Sebag Montefiore in Britain, or Fred Siegel of the Democratic Leadership Council in the USA or Totten's takedown of Adbusters or ESPECIALLY this summary we did a while ago or this essay by a French writer -or perhaps you'd prefer videos from an American 'peace' demonstration ?
Etc. Etc. Etc.
Joe Katzman,
...it's inherent in a response that quotes a man speaking about the need to be comfortable with Jewish power, as a reaction to a quote describing the U.S. government as "puppets" of foreign Jewish interests. All as part of a defense of the person who said it and the excusing of his actions.
It is not. Sorry, but you're a liar. I'm not excusing anyone's actions. I never said anything about "economics," nor did I ever state anything remotely similar to the assumptions that you make up for me. Indeed, my qoutation of Foxman had NOTHING to do with with EITHER remark as qouted above, but concerned general criticisms of Jewish influence on American government, which exists and is perfectly natural (indeed, Madisonian theory predicts the influence of factions upon government), and isn't neccessarily tied to economics (indeed, I would state that economics has very little to do with the relationship between Israel and the United States). Your spin has NOTHING to do with my thoughts on the matter. And to be blunt, instead of creating assumptions for me whole cloth, you ought to have the decency to actually ask me what my assumptions are.
Joe Katzman,
Now, try again.
Joe Katzman,
Might I suggest that you read Getting To Yes? It will help you avoid embarressing moments such as these. Indeed, you made one of the more familiar rookie mistakes people make when they first get into ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) - making an assumption based on slim amounts of knowledge and your own biases which turned out to be false. I'm getting a big laugh out of it I assure you.
I'll let our readers judge who is being truthful here.
>>If this theory worked, T.J., then Israel should be gone. The Saudis alone regularly spend far more, at all levels.
A more accurate model would involve demonstrating that both the Israelis and the Saudis rent the US government, for different purposes. To the extent the Saudis and Israelis attempt to use their well-bought influence to destroy each other, there's a lot of cancellation and even more schizophenia. Hence we have the State Department not leaning hard on the Saudis very hard while at the same time the Defense Department is busy looking for enemies of Israel (besides the Saudis) to smash.
Both the Saudis and the Israelis can use their influence to divert favors their way in ways that don't conflict. This explains why in the past we've had both the huge transfers of cash to Israel and the upgrades to the Saudi military -- simultaneously. The military industrial complexes of both nations grow, and each can use the growth of the other to justify its own continued growth. Everybody wins!
>>If that group is small, it must be a very effective conspiracy.
That particular group may just want it the most, and be willing to invest more resources winning the bidding war.
The Ashkenazi Jews do have more capacity for efficient organization, but that's just a function of centuries of selection pressure.
The average IQ for an Ashkenazi Jew is about 115, or one full standard deviation above the US mean. This really helps organizations of Ashkenazi to avoid "mythical man-month" issues.
The IQ advantage is most likely due to the commercial role played by Jews in Europe during the Middle Ages, when many Christians foolishly shunned professions like banking. Certain cultural aspects also seem to have led to Jews with lower IQ leaving the religion over the years.
The IQ advantage explains a lot of the "Jews are responsible for X-ism" garbage where X is anything from Communism to Austrian Economics. High IQ people will be disproportionately involved in philosophy of any kind, so we would expect Ashkenazis to be disproportionately at the forefront of any new movement, good or bad. The notion that the Jewish faith is either good or bad doesn't follow from this at all.
All of this, of course, is yet more evidence that dislike of Jews is stupid. There's a reason my pals refer to the Holocaust as "Europe's self-induced lobotomy."
>>Nader alleges that there is a small Jewish conspiracy to control Western governments, and have them reflect the interests of Zionism.
Which is completely true, and also misleading.
Of course the US branch of the Mossad is a small Jewish conspiracy to control the US government so as to support Zionist interests. It's what they're paid to do -- it's their JOB. What's misleading is the omission of the zillions of other conspiracies attempting to do the same thing for their own interest groups. That's what lobbies and intelligence forces are for. There's nothing more sinister about it then any other aspect of government. Government is about brokering coercion services. Different government forms have different "currency" but the basic principle is the same.
Nader himself is part of a small Leftist conspiracy to control the US government. It's just not very well organized and isn't doing very well. Mostly it's just sour grapes by Nader over losing.
T.J.: The Ashkenazi Jews do have more capacity for efficient organization, but that's just a function of centuries of selection pressure.
The average IQ for an Ashkenazi Jew is about 115, or one full standard deviation above the US mean.
Are you saying it's genetic, that evolutionary pressures within Ashkenazi populations caused selection for higher IQs? I'd love, at the very least, a citation for the study that draws from Ashkenazi populations all over the world. I'd also like to know how such a study would be of higher quality than The Bell Curve (remember that one, the one that "proved" whites are inherently more intelligent by failing to consider why there are IQ differences?).
"The IQ advantage is most likely due to the commercial role played by Jews in Europe during the Middle Ages, when many Christians foolishly shunned professions like banking."
You left out the fact that Jews were forbidden to own land, excluded from many crafts guilds, and forced into moneylending.
"Certain cultural aspects also seem to have led to Jews with lower IQ leaving the religion over the years."
????? I don't know where you get this.
"The IQ advantage explains a lot of the "Jews are responsible for X-ism" garbage where X is anything from Communism to Austrian Economics."
I think all this can be explained with nurture rather than nature. Jewish culture emphasizes continual learning and intellectual activity for everyone, and also emphasizes improving this world rather than emphasizing an afterlife. Also, Judaism believes in daily practice of ritual and good deeds as the primary way to develop and show faith. Add all that together, and you get lots of Jews in sciences and politics.
>>You left out the fact that Jews were forbidden to own land, excluded from many crafts guilds, and forced into moneylending.
Yes, this is quite correct.
Side note: Few realize that dermatology in Europe was crippled in the 1935-1955 period because of a similar effect. Earlier, treatment of VD was part of dermatology. This led to the profession having a low reputation, so Jews excluded from being other kinds of doctors became concentrated in the profession. This in turn damaged the reputation of the profession further, etc.
When the Holocaust came, the "Jewish medicine" of dermatology was basically ruined. Not a good thing in the middle of a war, with lots of burn victims, etc.
>>>>"Certain cultural aspects also seem to have led to Jews with lower IQ leaving the religion over the years."
>>????? I don't know where you get this.
>>Jewish culture emphasizes continual learning and intellectual activity for everyone, and also emphasizes improving this world rather than emphasizing an afterlife.
Yes, and people who are not very smart are going to have problems operating in this culture. They will be vulnerable to conversion to other religions, thus draining the Jewish culture (and gene pool) of low-IQ people over the centuries.
Assessing the Ashkenazic IQ
La Griffe isn't exactly nice, and his findings aren't always pleasant, but before people start screaming I would like them to show me where the math is wrong.
Lots more discussion of this, and related issues, can be found over at the Gene Expression blog.
IMHO most of these genetic issues will be eliminated in the coming decades with more advanced biotechnology. I look forward to going out and purchasing an extra 15 points of IQ myself.