Dixie
Clive Webb’s Fight Against Fear: Southern Jews and Black Civil Rights complicates the traditional White Nationalist narrative of the Civil Rights Movement and the Jewish Question.
At the outset, Webb takes us on a tour of Southern history and reminds us that Jews were staunch supporters of secession, served in prominent roles in the Confederate government, never played much of a role in the abolitionist movement, and even condemned and in some cases opposed Reconstruction.
The South was settled by Sephardic Jews in the 17th and 18th centuries who were accustomed to the culture of slavery and white supremacy due to their background in the slave trade in the Caribbean and Latin America. Ashkenazi Jews settled in Southern cities in smaller numbers in the 19th century and typically embraced the traditional pattern of harmonious Jew-Gentile relations.
By the early twentieth century, the South was the least anti-Semitic region of the United States. In the Old South, the planter class had traditionally opposed ethnic and religious bigotry, and accepted Jews and Catholics into the Southern elite in order to maintain a united front for slavery and white supremacy. In the New South, Protestant Christians admired Jews as God’s “Chosen People.”
Southern Jews reciprocated by accepting the South’s traditional racial mores (even if they privately objected to those mores) as the price of access to the commercial and social opportunities in mainstream White Southern society. It was also a way of deflecting attention away from Jews and onto blacks as the region’s threatening minority.
When the Civil Rights Movement erupted in the 1950s, Southern Jews had done almost nothing to advance the cause of negro equality. Instead, they had grown rich during the Jim Crow era by specializing in retail trade where they had enforced the local segregation laws for generations in their department stores in Southern cities like Little Rock, Atlanta, Birmingham, and New Orleans.
When Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat and the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. became a celebrity during the Montgomery Bus Boycott in 1955, Montgomery’s own Jewish community refused to support the boycott. When the Freedom Riders arrived in Birmingham in 1962, they were condemned as uninvited outside agitators by Birmingham’s Jewish community.
In the 1963 demonstrations in Birmingham in which Bull Connor used water hoses and attack dogs on black school children, Martin Luther King, Jr. and Fred Shuttlesworth were attempting to integrate several of the Jewish-owned downtown department stores. In fact, Rabbi Milton Grafman was one of the White moderates condemned by the Rev. Martin Luther King in his “Letter From a Birmingham Jail.”
In 1965, hundreds of Northern Jews came to Selma to participate in the Selma-to-Montgomery March, where Jews owned the downtown department stores which were being boycotted and disrupted with sit ins by local civil rights activists. Selma’s Jews resented the national Jewish organizations which were supporting the Civil Rights Movement and attracting negative publicity to the city.
In Mississippi, the hundreds of Northern Jews who came to Hattiesburg to participate in the 1964 Mississippi Freedom Summer aroused the ire of the local Jewish community. In the Mississippi Delta, the local Jews created their own Jewish organization, and denounced the New York Jews who were fomenting social revolution in their midst.
In South Carolina, the Jewish Speaker of the South Carolina House of Representatives, Solomon Blatt, was a key leader in the massive resistance movement. A minority of Southern Jews like Sol Tepper of Selma, Charles Bloch of Georgia, and Al Binder of Mississippi were outspoken segregationists. The majority of Southern Jews were social chameleons like Dick Rich of Atlanta and Louis Pizitz of Birmingham who privately supported the Civil Rights Movement, but who did almost nothing to advance the cause.
Of the approximately 200 Southern rabbis who could have taken a public stand in favor of desegregation, a total of 9 were active participants in the Civil Rights Movement: 3 of them were born outside the United States, 3 were born in the South, and 3 were Northern transplants. In Atlanta alone, 312 White ministers supported Rabbi Jacob Rothschild in opposing the closing of Atlanta’s public schools.
The White resistance in the South was divided over the Jewish Question and how to respond to desegregation. The Citizens’ Councils were mainstreamers who believed in economic boycotts, social ostracism, and electing strong segregationists to public office. They accepted Jews as members and purged anti-Semites from their ranks in order to maintain an air of respectability.
The Klan and other vanguardist elements preferred to bomb synagogues and black churches and engage in other types of violence. In most cases, the synagogues which were targeted had refused to support the Civil Rights Movement, and the strategy backfired by creating sympathy for Jews which only further emboldened them. The bombing of the Sixteenth Street Baptist Church in Birmingham was a public relations disaster that expedited the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
In the end, the White resistance failed to preserve segregation, but its demise had little to do with Southern Jews who were paralyzed by fear and sat on the sidelines through most of the conflict. The plight of the segregationists can be seen most clearly in the career of George Wallace who was defeated, not by Alabama’s Jews, but by federal court orders, federal troops, federal laws, a federal electorate and finally by a bullet in the back from a deranged Northern leftist.
If George Wallace had been running for President of the Confederacy, he would have won in a landslide and Jim Crow would have been saved. Instead, Martin Luther King Day is now a federal holiday in Alabama and the “Stand in the Schoolhouse” door has become something we apologize for in this state.
Clive Webb reminds us that Jim Crow was destroyed from the outside, not sabotaged from within.
@Hunter
Jews in the South were about as scarce as hens teeth in the 1960’s, maybe scarcer. The only reason they are noticed is that they were engaged in trade, otherwise they would not even have made a blip on anyone’s radar.
Now those same Jews, and their descendants are on the Boards of Directors of many Southern Institutions. Even Protestant Institutions.
As I’ve said before, George Wallace should have called them big nosed Jews, rather than “pointy headed liberals”, or “outside agitators”. LOL.
Jews don’t understand nice.
Your posts assume Jim Crow is the be-all-end-all of White self-interest.
Really?
Frankly, I don’t mind sharing a water fountain with Thomas Sowell and Senator Tim Scott. I just don’t want Abe Foxman’s boot stamping on my face . . . forever.
Mass migration, anarcho-tyranny, anti-White content in entertainment/MSM/academia, affirmative action for Blacks and Hispanics + meritocracy for Asians and Jews, sexual revolution, Ponzi schemes – these are the things which are destroying the White race worldwide, and all of them have their roots in Jewish hyper-ethnocentrism. The universalistic Christian morality of the Puritans and Quakers can be used to demolish every one of these evils.
Looking back on the 18th century, I see opponents of the slave trade such as Ben Franklin as my brothers, hyper-ethnocentric Sephardic slave traders as the brothers of my enemies, and some of my own ancestors as fools.
But after all that has happened 1965-present, don’t dare expect *me* to be a fool.
In medieval Spain, the Moors were Japeth and the Spaniards were Ham.
In early modern Poland, the “Sarmatian” nobles and their Lipka Tartar enforcers were Japeth and the peasants were Ham.
In the golden circle, the White man was Japeth and the Black man was Ham.
In modern PC, Whites are Ham and non-Whites are Japeth.
But guess who *always* gets to be Shem?
The plain truth is, I don’t hate Jews, but I will *never*, for *any* reason make even the *slightest* concession to Jewish hyper-ethnocentrism.
The Klan and other vanguardist elements preferred to bomb synagogues and black churches and engage in other types of violence.
Prove it.
It is all in the book.
There were dozens of Klan and lone wolf bombings all across the South. Birmingham was known as “Bombingham” at the time.
Hunter is searching for reasons to embrace Jews as a way of attacking the despised White Nationalists. White Nationalists who are in point of fact about the only allies Southern Secessionists have in the world today. The reason for this is that a sizable percentage of the White Nationalists who visit this site happen to live in the North and so we are standing in as make-shift “Yankees”, even though as already mentioned we tend by a very large degree to be nearly 100% on the Southern Nationalists’ side. Strange.
Re: crowley
That’s not the case at all. I bought the book because 1.) the South and 2.) the Jews are the two most popular subjects that are discussed in the comments. I assumed that researching “Southern Jews” would pique interest here.
Re: Whites Unite
The book is about Southern Jews and how they responded to the Civil Rights Movement and the demise of Jim Crow.
Southern Jews were more liberal than Gentiles, more sympathetic to the Civil Rights Movement, but were typically social chameleons who valued their wealth, social status, and security in Southern society more than their sympathy for the negro.
They played a negligible role in the Civil Rights Movement.
Re: Earl
Clearly, numbers played a major role in the unwillingness of Southern Jews to challenge the status quo, and the treatment of blacks was another deterrent. The example of Leo Frank deterred many a Jew from antagonizing the Gentile majority.
interesting article.
I should add here that none of the above applies to Northern Jews who were heavily involved in every aspect of the Civil Rights Movement.
The collision between Northern Jews and Southern Jews in Selma and Mississippi was fascinating reading.
I’m going to continue to probe the South’s Jewish Question.
Some points that support the WN view:
1.) Southern Jews didn’t have the numbers and confidence to challenge the status quo.
2.) Southern Jews were more liberal and more supportive of the Civil Rights Movement than Gentiles.
3.) Southern Jews were social chameleons who hid their true views on integration.
No one knows who bombed Birmingham or what their agenda was.
Except that some of the people who were doing it were caught and prosecuted.
Hunter is searching for reasons to embrace Jews
You still don’t know what their agenda was. I know this forum doesn’t like conspiracy theorists, but False Flags are a reality. And demonization of white people and rightwingers is also very real. As one example, in the 60’s, Saul Alinksy told students to go to a Bush, Sr. speech dressed as KKK members who support him to make it look bad on Bush. And Jews are never-ending victims as well. They have to keep the sympathy for themselves at the surface constantly. As we type, they’re busy trying to arrest yet another wrinkled old white man who was an “evil Nazi soldier” who made lampshades out of Jews. These old men didn’t start WWII or decide what should take place in the war, but they have constantly, for over 60 years now, tracked down random elderly European men to hang the war “atrocities” on. It’s like when Jews report an evil anti-semitic person is stalking and threatening them and (of course) it makes the news — gasp, shock, horror, someone is being anti-semitic!! — and then the police find out it was the Jew him/herself covering the walls with swastikas and threatening phrases.
There are a lot of different opinions out there and everyone is entitled to their own. More power to you. But people who know what Jews are strategically doing to our white countries are generally not arguing about it because of stubbornness or because it’s fun. It’s just that none of your efforts will help the future of white people if you don’t know who’s attacking you and how they do it. And I just find it odd how you strongly you defend them.
Not really surprising regarding *Sephardic* Jews. Revilo P. Oliver, in his America’s Decline, gives a long discussion of the sharp contrasts up to the 1930s or so between them and the Ashkenazis, whom they called “the scum of the earth.” His discussion is entirely consistent with what is reported above.
There was a drastic reversal in status among the two groups following the Second World War. The “niggers” of the Jews became the top dogs over the more Eurocentric, whitecentric Sephardic Jews.
JP’s posts illustrate the most tedious aspect of WN: the exaggerated fantastic nobleness of all whites and the habit of attributing EVERY less flattering deed of our race to a secret Jew or non-white. These are the people who see a mugshot of a blue-eyed blond caught redhanded in a crime and with confession and immediately start claiming non-white or Jewish features.
It’s actually fucking annoying.
JP,
I strongly support your comments! I have said similar words in my own posts. We certainly have “apologists” on this blog, don’t we? And the Leo Frank matter was a big deal. It was a horrendous crime and the big New York Jews were working hard to free Frank. Georgia’s governor was asceeding to the Jew’s wishes. I would use different wording from Hunter’s “antagonizing whites” to describe the crime. P’s. I also do not dismiss matters merely because the main stream media labels them as conspiracies..how convenient for the main stream to be able to shut down our minds with a simple expression.
Hunter,
I thought about my last post. If it was you sister or mother that was raped and murdered by Leo Frank, would you have used the wording you did? I think this was a high point in our history. The corrupt government was put in their place and the guilty paid the price for the crime.
If George Wallace had been running for President of the Confederacy, he would have won in a landslide and Jim Crow would have been saved.
Which begs the question, why didn’t Wallace or any other prominent politician advocate for Southern independence during the civil rights era?
From the integration of the armed forces in 1948 to the Loving v. Virginia decision in 1967, the Jim Crow laws regulating segregation and anti-miscegenation were overthrown one after the other. Yet apart from the insurgent presidential campaigns of Strom Thurmond in 1948 and Wallace in 1968, there was virtually no serious political pushback to the dismantling of the South’s racial system. Certainly nothing like the Southern reaction to Lincoln’s election in 1860.
During the 1945-1970 era of decolonization, scores of nations worldwide became independent, some peacefully, some not. Why didn’t the South use this opportune time to re-assert their independence like so many other nations? Especially since their entire social order was under systemic attack from without by federal politicians and judges.
Yes, the Cold War was on at the time, but that didn’t stop the activities of separatists in Scotland, Wales, Flanders, Corsica, Quebec or even within the American empire itself, e.g. Puerto Rico. The Catalans and Basques were suppressed by Franco at the time, but that had nothing to do with the Cold War. If anything, the Soviet-American conflict provided the perfect cover for a neo-secessionist movement in the South: would the US government really have rolled the tanks into Little Rock and Birmingham to crush a popular uprising like the Russians did in Budapest and Prague? The Western alliance might have completely fallen apart in the face of such American brutality and hypocrisy. What a propaganda coup that would have been for the Communists.
There were many concurrent examples that the South could have used to make their case for independence: the creation of the state of Israel, the division of French West Africa into several different nations, the separation of Pakistan from India, or Singapore from Malaysia, etc. But the two most obvious choices were South Africa and Rhodesia. In 1961 South Africa declared itself a republic and left the Commonwealth. In 1965 Rhodesia unilaterally declared independence from Britain. In both cases–at the height of the Cold War, mind you–whites were willing to face international opprobrium, internal rebellion, crippling economic sanctions and a declining standard of living in order to preserve white rule and segregation.
Why weren’t white Southerners willing to do the same? When the South needed unflinching leaders of the calibre of Hendrik Verwoerd and Ian Smith, all they got were second-rate governors like Orval Faubus and George Wallace, who both rolled over and eventually reconciled themselves to integration. And where were the intellectual leaders of the South? Why were there no Robert Barnwell Rhett-types relentlessly clamouring for independence in the crucial 1945-1970 period?
An independent South could have taken many different forms. It could have been made up of all the Jim Crow states, including Delaware, Maryland and Missouri (even Washington DC!). It could have included all of the 11 Confederate states, or possibly just the 7 Deep South states of the original Confederacy. Or independence could have been declared on a state-by-state basis, with Mississippi, Alabama et al becoming fully sovereign nation-states. The point is less that the South didn’t achieve independence in the civil rights era, it’s that it wasn’t even *attempted*.
Fast forward to today. There is no region of the US that has changed as radically as the South has over the past half century. All the vestiges of Jim Crow are gone, there has been a massive influx of tens of millions of immigrants and transplants, and from being largely rural in the post-WWII era, it is now heavily urbanized. The modern South has been fully integrated, urbanized, corporatized, homogenized and Americanized. The cultural unity and distinctiveness that characterized the South from the earliest days of white settlement up to the 1960s is going, going and almost gone.
What exactly do Texas and Virginia have in common today? Or Florida and Oklahoma? Or Louisiana and West Virginia? Not a whole lot, definitely not as much as they used to, that’s for sure. But, paradoxically, at the same time there is a cookie-cutter homogeneity common to American suburbia in general. How can anyone tell the difference between suburban Atlanta and suburban Dallas from suburban Philadelphia and suburban Seattle? They’re all just vast wastelands of paint-by-numbers subdivisions interspersed by the usual Wal-Marts, McDonalds, Exxons, Holiday Inns, Costcos, Applebees, Meineke Mufflers, et cetera et cetera ad nauseam ad infinitum. It’s undeniable that the South has become much less distinctively Southern and much more generally American.
That’s why I think that pushing for a neo-Confederacy is a waste of time. Not because it’s a bad idea, but because there’s simply no popular support for it whatsoever. If Southerners had no interest in seceding from the US in the 1945-1970 period, back when the South was “The South” and they had a distinct racial and social system they were trying to preserve, then there is zero chance that they’re about to band together today in a Southern federation.
That’s not to say that secession itself is a dead letter, just that the neo-Confederacy model has to be jettisoned for a more realistic and achievable objective. Probably the biggest upsurge in separatist sentiment in the last 150 years came in the wake of Obama’s re-election. That was for state secession, IMO the most logical and promising way forward. It was a good start to be sure, but unfortunately there’s been little follow-through.
I think that separatist movements around the world need to be studied in depth for what works and what doesn’t in terms of popularity, and the lessons brought home to the US and applied by American secessionists. One thing that strikes me is the relative timidity of the separatists in places like Quebec, Scotland, Catalonia and Flanders: none of them want to establish their own currencies, none of them want border controls with their former countries, and all of them want to at least partially subsume their sovereignty in supranational entities like the EU or a proposed Canada-Quebec union.
The obvious lesson here is that secession needs to be soft-pedalled in order to gain popular support, at least in the Western world. People will accept an amicable divorce and a sort of separation-with-benefits, but will turn away from a harsh and angry separation which will lead to permanently bad relations with their former countrymen. Moderation rather than extremism and incrementalism rather than radicalism are the keys to building a successful secessionist movement.
Re: “In the Old South, the planter class had traditionally opposed ethnic and religious bigotry, and accepted Jews and Catholics into the Southern elite in order to maintain a united front for slavery and white supremacy”:
Because they opposed and did not have “bigotry,” they were able to import and breed millions of Africans in cooperation with a small (but important) number of slave-trade-experienced Talmudists — creating a multi-racial, multi-ethnic, MULTI-RELIGIOUS caste system that “created immense wealth.” As one of your other “Southern Judaism” articles noted, “they built their synagogues next to the plantation houses” all over the South, and the white elite “didn’t take their religion too seriously” — no crusading, no inquisitions, not even evangelistic zeal (except to tame the Africans) but “live and let live” — much like the Sunni Turks and Arabs in the Middle East who presided over and tolerated a variety of religious and ethnic groups such as Copts and other eastern Christians, Zoroastrians, Druze, Shia, and especially: a small but important number of Talmudists.
Re: “In the New South, Protestant Christians admired Jews as God’s Chosen People”:
Not really Jews according to the New Testament. The same unscriptural heresy is present north of the Line as well, especially among northern Baptists.
Re: “Southern Jews reciprocated by accepting the South’s traditional racial mores “:
But Talmudism was originally supremacist, and they did NOT accept the white religion.
Re: “By the time of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1950s, Southern Jews (…) had grown rich”:
The system designed to created wealth for some, did just that. White “trash” sharecroppers and hill folk did not grow rich.
Re: “If Southerners had no interest in seceding from the US in the 1945-1970 period, back when the South was ‘The South’ and they had a distinct racial and social system they were trying to preserve, then there is zero chance that they’re about to band together today in a Southern federation”:
They were being distracted and entertained with global war after global war during that period, just finishing up with Germany and Japan, before starting with Russia, China and North Korea and later, Vietnam, and many other global conflicts, while their own land was being invaded and corrupted.
Re: “secession needs to be soft-pedalled in order to gain popular support, at least in the Western world. People will accept an amicable divorce and a sort of separation-with-benefits, but will turn away from a harsh and angry separation which will lead to permanently bad relations with their former countrymen. Moderation rather than extremism and incrementalism rather than radicalism are the keys to building a successful secessionist movement”:
Moderation is what we already have.
What HW says about the Southern Jews trying to fit into the Southron ethos is on target, as usual. During the Leo Frank trial, the prosecutor made some statements to counter the anti-Semitic smear that the Northern ‘Christian’ and Jewish papers were spreading about the trial and the South. He said that Jews were never, as a group, ever mistreated in the South, rather, they have obtained high social and financial status. Interestingly enough, two of the jurors that voted to convict Ol’ Leo were Jews, but I suppose the critics will say they were the self-hating kind.
My main problem with Jews is that they are not white Europeans but Middle Easterners. This means that they have as much business being in the United States – or Europe – as Arabs do. I think that the goal of all people of white European ancestry should be to make the United States and Europe Semite-free.
“What HW says about the Southern Jews trying to fit into the Southron ethos is on target, as usual.”
But it completely misses (and ignores) the target of proving whether or not they “fit into” any CHRISTIAN ethos, whether northern or southern.
But then, Christianity is a very MINOR, side issue here….
TEST
Apparently even one link is subjecting my posts to moderation queue.
All I wanted to do was link to begthequestion(dot)info where Jeppo can learn how to properly use the phrase.
And to say Brutus is correct.
Thanks.
“Frankly, I don’t mind sharing a water fountain with Thomas Sowell and Senator Tim Scott. I just don’t want Abe Foxman’s boot stamping on my face . . . forever.
The universalistic Christian morality of the Puritans and Quakers can be used to demolish every one of these evils.”
Whites Unite- Two statements, one of which I concur with, the other, I scratch my head at, totally.
The first is clear- “God hates the Jews.” -St. John Chrysostom.
Orthodox Christianity (as opposed to Romanism) knows the Jew, identified him, and kept him at arm’s length, up to and including St. Cornelius Codreneau’s ‘Iron Guard’ during the days of WWII. It is only the Papal west, who has consistently confused the AshkeNAZI with the Biblical Judean, and that, even after every single nation in Europe kicking the Jews out, (sometimes, twice!) they STILL let them back in, to work their evil.
Having said that, and being Orthodox, rather than Roman, I yet wonder at your second statement. The Puritans and the Quakers are never to be conflated into one statement. For, if you do, you make a mockery of what the Protestant West saw as their connection to historic Christianity. Puritans (and Pilgrims) were Calvinists, believing in the Doctrine of Election- there is/was NO ‘universalism’ among them, at all, until (possibly) the “Fundamentalist/Modernist” controversy of the 1920’s.
Quakers, OTOH, are heretics, not even trinitarian (some of them) and trusting to the ‘inner light’ which, in some cases, clearly is very, VERY Dark. [Open, Faggot composer Ned Rorem is/thinks of his upbringing as ‘Quaker;’ and yet his ‘Diaries’ and his unrepentant faggotry, clearly shows him to be as anathematized as any human could possibly be.]
HW, two points in your article. Others have noted them. The Sephardim are a different RACE than the AshkeNAZIs. I’ve known, and worked with, BOTH. The Sephardim (much less numerical) actually are far more ‘human’ than the historic Neanderthals – the (non-racially mixed) AshkeNAZIm. Therein lies a HUGE difference. While both groups can say ‘We are Jews’ (even though they are not- Rev. 2:9) I’d at least be willing to give the Sephardim some credit, whereas the AshkeNAZIs, I call the greatest imposters the world has ever known.
Their penchant for siding with the Adamic Whites, makes perfect sense, when compared to the Antebellum South. That the Ashkenazis, however have historically sided with the Negro bespeaks more than ‘charity’- I mean, just look at most ‘pure’ East Europe Jews! (They clearly are of a related ethnic strain to the ‘Out of Africa’ crowd- think of the Nazi propaganda posters, pictures, and drawings of the “Jews” from ‘beyond the Pale’- thick lipped, kinky hair, short, squat bodies, perverted sexual tastes, odiferous, etc.) and you can see affinities with another ‘inferior race.’
To ignore that, downplay that, or minimize the racial differences between the ‘Two Jews’, is to continue to validate their totally invalidated claims, on every front.
@Hunter
This letter may appear in an Alabama newspaper or two:
“Our Federal Government has to intercept & scrape all your phone calls & emails because our Federal Government forgot to enforce immigration law on 17 expired visas (illegal aliens) & 3 “students” (legal) in 2001!
Today, the Federal politicians like my friend and yours, Senator _____ are considering letting 30 some Million highly questionable 3rd World pagan & “catholic” immigrants into the United States over the next 10 years, and granting amnesty to another 12 Million or more visa violators & invaders already here.
The Roman Catholic politicians like Durbin, Casey, Pelosi, Leahy, Menendez, Rubio, etc. who are pushing this so-called immigration reform need to realize that they are jeopardizing the life & property of their White Protestant neighbors. Every Catholic in the Senate, with a few exceptions, are pushing immigration reform. The same goes for the dozen or so Jews in the US Senate like Schumer, Feinstein, Boxer, etc.
Do we as Americans have to give up our Constitution & Bill of Rights to accommodate the 3rd World?”
-33-
(Anyone may use this letter.)
“Their [ Sephardics] penchant for siding with the Adamic Whites, makes perfect sense, etc.”
Sorry, missed a word.
Re: “While both groups can say ‘We are Jews’ (even though they are not — Rev. 2:9) I’d at least be willing to give the Sephardim some credit”:
These groups, and the Mizrahim and others, do overlap to some extent, especially today. The “both groups” you reference have more European admixture, though. What do you mean by giving credit, Fr John? In my comments I noted that the planters’ materialism and lack of “bigotry” made cooperation with Talmudists possible, synagogues rise ‘next to plantations, and multiracialism possible, in the southern states.
Given the ongoing tensions within Judaism regarding acculturation to the general culture and the attempt to restore Jews to the community of nations, the rejection of the Sephardic model of what in Arabic is called “Adab,” a model of behavior based on a literate humanistic manner, has been disastrous. Given the contentiousness of so much of Jewish discourse on both the Left as well as the Right, the seemingly robust nature of Jewish life at present hides a profound discombobulation that has led us to dysfunction and political catastrophe.
Rather than seeing cultural integration as its preferred ideal, contemporary Jews seek to mark out their parochial territory and battle it out. These battles frequently spill over to become global contests, particularly in Israel where the Ashkenazi ideal of fractiousness has been taken to absurd extremes.
The Sephardic ideal has always been understood in terms of political moderation and community unity. Rarely did Sephardim lose their internal cohesion — that is, until the process of cultural erosion set in. Following the Ashkenazi lead, Sephardim abandoned their traditional culture and adapted to the fractious Ashkenazi model. Under the rubric of a single Jewish nation, the Sephardi particularity, with its cultural genius and sophisticated social mores, has become a lost value. The Ashkenazi culture, with its deeply unsettled relationship to the larger world, has now become the Jewish standard. – David Shasha, Director, Center for Sephardic Heritage, NYC
“These are the people who see a mugshot of a blue-eyed blond caught redhanded in a crime and with confession and immediately start claiming non-white or Jewish features. It’s actually f*cking annoying.”- Brutus
Except when it’s true.
http://abundanthope.net/pages/True_US_History_108/Media-Caught-Hiding-Fact-Loughner-Is-Jewish.shtml
“By way of deceit, shalt thou wage war.”- Motto of the Mossad, Israel’s Secret Service
http://incogman.net/2009/04/columbine-10-years-of-jew-media-lies/
Oh yea. Forgot about these two Jew fags, also.
No-Man, thanks for that bit of corroborative info.
“What do you mean by giving credit, Fr John?”
Mosin- sorry, unclear.
I am willing to give the Sephardim, the credit of being ‘called’ [sic] ‘Jews.’
For they act more like Christian Whites, than have the AshkeNAZIs.
(i.e, Civilized, gentlemanly, cultured.)
@Hunter
Two Jews who are brothers get off the boat in 1903. One goes to Detroit, Michigan to buy & sell rags, the other goes to Birmingham, Alabama to buy & sell rags. What’s the difference? LOL.
This baloney about Jew ethnic origins, is just that, baloney. Every genetic study I have ever seen shows that Jews cluster up genetically regardless of origin, or claimed origin. The cult aspect of Judaism creates the genetics.
The proverbial Swedish Jew is closer genetically to his Levantine cousin than he is to any Swede. Unless there is bastardry or adoption, which is possible.
The sex murder of Mary Phagan, an exceptionally lovely little White girl, by the vile, DEPRAVED Kike sick Leo Frank case was especially horrendous – and illumination. If you want a starkly clear illustration of how “benign” the presence of the Race of Devils, in any social order is – ya have it RIGHT there. White men were still White MEN, then. They knew how to defend, and punish, when one of their own kind was attacked. Now we have a bunch of “White” degenerate febriles, whining abut being “fucking annoyed” when the eternally CONSISTENT crimes of the Devil Race are pointed out, and other, who post absurd and childish and PATHETIC videos about slapping women around.
So fuck OFF, “Brutus”. Maybe you can dress up in a wig and skirt, and No Man can slap you around.
Hugh – the despicable craven treachery of Southern Governor Slayton is where I get the use of my term, “Sheeny Gold”. The non-Jew defiled newspapers of the era decried Slayton’s betrayal, and his literal buy out, due to Jews above the Mason Dixon line, flooding money – Sheeney Gold – in below. Slayton and his wife FLED TO NYC, to avoid the wrath of the Righteous Whites ,who were coming to lynch him. Jews have been smearing little Mary’s named, EVER since, calling her a little whore, and a seducer, and a tramp. They’ve been pimping that Frank was a VICTIM if Anti Jewism WAH WAH WAH!
I have the book that Mary’s great niece wrote. The KIKES have succeeded in getting a pardon for the fiend Frank. They can’t get the verdict overturned, ya see. It’s tragic; she really didn’t understand what was happening, and why Jews were trying to say Frank was innocent, and why they were slandering her murdered relative, when she wrote the book.
But go ahead you craven bitches. Defend the Devil Race. There are centuries’ worth of examples of what happens when you strike a bargain with the fiends. They HATE you worse than “Nazis” like me. They destroy YOU after you’ve served them, and they throw you in the trash. You boys think you’ll enjoy a different fate:?
Thank you, Earl.
Even now, the Jew Bent Stein is on Faux News, owned by the Jew Murdoch, whining about giving billions i n foreign aid to Arab Nations, and whining LOUDER about the NEED to keep sending money to Israel.
ya have it RIGHT there. White men were still White MEN, then. They knew how to defend, and punish, when one of their own kind was attacked. Now we have a bunch of “White” degenerate febriles, whining abut being “fucking annoyed” when the eternally CONSISTENT crimes of the Devil Race are pointed out, and other, who post absurd and childish and PATHETIC videos about slapping women around.
It starts at home. When white men were still men you wouldn’t henpeck thoughtful men like Brutus because we would laugh at you/ smack you. You want pussy-whipped whiteknights AND heroes ready to slit jewish throats. You’re being a shrew, shut that hole under your nose.
Once, again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCsxdgW_xqY
Look at those ebil misogynists! Eek! Hitler was right! Gas them all!! Eek! don’t smack me when I’m being a dumb bitch! Kill all the Jews! I’m an aryan goddess, my pussy is platinum, *queef* death to kikes! I want a new car, stop talking politics with the men and kill jews! *queef*
No Balls Man reveals his true un-natural Nature. It was always a matter of time. And Kweers for Kikes like you and Brutus would never be able to smack ANY-ONE around – especially women like me, or my cohorts. We’d kick your heads up your anal tracts in seconds flat – as soon as we are able to figure out which part of your pallid weak spongy flatworm anatomy is which.
Un-naturals like YOU must fantasize about smacking women around, because you OFFER yourselves up to your Kosher Masters, to smack YOU around willingly. “Yes SIR! I’ll have another! Whip me hard next time! I’ll bend over deeper! YES SIR!!! AGAIN!!!”
It’s so obvious…..you’ve really been outing yourself, of late.
Men of the gallery,
^Behold your modern aryan goddess. Preserve the “beauty” of a second wave feminist.
Men of the Gallery ^
Behold the posts of a very incompetent agent provocateur.
Denise,
Glad you expanded on the Leo Frank crimes! I was going to attach a good detailed commentary on the crimes, but it might no longer be available due to the efforts of you know who. But I did find a good little story, “The fable of the ducks and the Hens”. It’s narrated by Edward Steele, who rots in jail after being set up by you know who. Highly recommend viewing it. Here’s the link:
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=f3Qw5xVn7c0&desktop_uri=/watch?v=f3Qw5xVn7c0
http://youtu.be/DRTg419BNnU <— Sean Connery explains to Barbara Walters how to deal with a shrew that wants the last word.
Just remember folks,
The ancient philosophers & the Church fathers were all wrong about the place of women. BRA, the stupidest poster here that can't even spell 'emasculate' and Denise have the right idea.
Re: jeppo
As to why Southerners didn’t secede in the 1960s, I have addressed the matter a million times in the archives over the years.
The U.S. government did send troops into Birmingham and Little Rock … and Tuscaloosa and Oxford.