"It's difficult to admit the obvious"
political world

Jewish influnced POlish Scholars against Poland's intrest This review is from: Understanding Jewish Influence

jan peczkis|Tuesday, August 2, 2016


In the Introduction, Dr. Samuel Francis comments, (quote) As happens to anyone who discusses Jewish influence openly and honestly, Dr. MacDonald was soon accused of “anti-Semitism”, and efforts were made to end his career, prevent him from publishing, and smear him as a scholar and a person. So far these efforts have been unsuccessful. (unquote). (p. 5).
MacDonald retorts, (quote) The American Jewish community is well organized and lavishly funded. It has achieved a great deal of power, and it has been successful in achieving its interests. One of the great myths often promulgated by Jewish apologists is that Jews have no consensus and therefore cannot wield any real power. Yet there is in fact a great deal of consensus on broad Jewish issues, particularly in the areas of Israel and the welfare of other foreign Jewries, immigration and refugee policy, church-state separation, abortion rights, and civil liberties. Massive changes in public policies on these issues, beginning with the countercultural revolution of the 1960s, coincide with the period of increasing Jewish power and influence in the United States. Indeed, one is hard-pressed to find any significant area where public policy conflicts with the attitudes of mainstream Jewish organizations. (unquote). (p. 33).


Cultural Insurrections: Essays on Western Civilization, Jewish Influence, and Anti-Semitism.

RUFFLING A FEW FEATHERS. ATTEMPTS AT CENSORSHIP OF THE AUTHOR



At least Kevin MacDonald is in good company. Francis continues, (quote) But of course, as with many others who have discussed (or tried to discuss or even to mention) the question of Jewish influence frankly—Pat Buchanan, Joe Sobran, Congressman Paul Findlay or James Moran, and, more recently, Gen. Anthony Zinni, Senator Ernest Hollings, or Ralph Nader—any effort to argue against the charge is fruitless. The accusation of “anti-Semitism”, much like those of “racism”, “xenophobia”, “sexism”, “homophobia”, etc., is essentially a power trip, an effort to avoid and destroy discussion of substantive issues and deflect it onto an ad hominem level that is impossible to deny or defend against. How do you “prove” that you’re not whatever bad name you have just been called? (unquote). (p. 6).

“BUT JEWS ARE DIVIDED. SO HOW CAN THEY POSSIBLY BE INFLUENTIAL?”

MacDonald retorts, (quote) The American Jewish community is well organized and lavishly funded. It has achieved a great deal of power, and it has been successful in achieving its interests. One of the great myths often promulgated by Jewish apologists is that Jews have no consensus and therefore cannot wield any real power. Yet there is in fact a great deal of consensus on broad Jewish issues, particularly in the areas of Israel and the welfare of other foreign Jewries, immigration and refugee policy, church-state separation, abortion rights, and civil liberties. Massive changes in public policies on these issues, beginning with the countercultural revolution of the 1960s, coincide with the period of increasing Jewish power and influence in the United States. Indeed, one is hard-pressed to find any significant area where public policy conflicts with the attitudes of mainstream Jewish organizations. (unquote). (p. 33).

[Consider Jewish non-consensus on another matter. What does it matter if there is a range of opinion, among American Jews, about Poles and Poland, when the Polonophile Jews have no influence, and it is the Polonophobe Jews that are the ones “holding the microphone” in academia, media, and the entertainment industry?]

"BUT JEWS RARELY FORM A MAJORITY OF PEOPLE IN INFLUENTIAL POSITIONS"

It is a mistake to think of Jewish influence solely as a "grocery list" of Jews in high positions. One must also consider how Jews set the tone for movements and endeavors in which they are prominent, even if they never become a numerical majority in these movements. In other words [using my terms, not MacDonald's], Jews do not just become a large part of the landscape: They TRANSFORM the landscape.

Consider Communism at about the time of the Russian Revolution (1917). We are told that at no time did Jews comprise the majority of the leaders in Communism. However, MacDonald cites a Jewish author, Albert Lindemann, who described non-Jews in the Bolshevik revolution as "Jewified non-Jews". (p. 69).

[Now consider a more recent example: GAZETA WYBORCZA, Poland's leading newspaper. We are told that Jews in Poland cannot possibly be influential because there are so few of them in Poland. Think again. The head of GAZETA WYBORCZA is Adam Michnik vel Schechter, and a significant number of its editorial staff is Jewish. Even if Jews are not the majority of its editorial staff, there are sufficient numbers of them to set the tone for the paper, and to attract like-minded gentile Poles to be on its staff. GAZETA WYBORCZA frequently runs articles that besmirch Poland's religious and patriotic traditions. No wonder that some Poles have called it the "Kosher Times".]

INFLUENTIAL JEWS CULTIVATE LIKE-MINDED GENTILES

There is more. As discussed in his CULTURE OF CRITIQUE [see my review], MacDonald expands on the theme of Jews effectively recruiting like-minded gentiles to help promote their agendas. This is, in part, because influential Jews are relatively few in number, and in part to lessen the Jewish visibility in Jewish-supported initiatives. As MacDonald sagely comments, “This of course lessens the perception that the movement is indeed a Jewish movement, and it makes excellent psychological sense to have the spokespersons for any movement resemble the people they are trying to convince”. (pp. 69-70). By contrast, Jews disparage those influential gentiles that are inconvenient to them. (pp. 73-74).

[Another example of the foregoing modus operandi is provided by the relatively-new Holocaust establishment in Poland. Jews had befriended, supported, and financed those Polish scholars who are willing to cooperate with Jewish attacks on Poland. That way, Jews can triumphantly say, for example, “See, these pathbreaking Polish scholars have now admitted Polish culpability for Jedwabne.” In contrast, Jews have ignored those Polish scholars who disagree with them, making them Orwellian unpersons. Either that, or they have tried to delegitimize non-Judeocompliant Polish scholars by labelling them (what else) “anti-Semites”, “nationalists”, or some other smelly species.]

WHY THE New York Times HAS SO CONSISTENTLY BEEN ANTI-POLISH

Author MacDonald provides a clue to this, (quote) As is well known, the NEW YORK TIMES is Jewish-owned and has often been accused of slanting its coverage on issues of importance to Jews. It is perhaps another example of the legacy of Jacob Schiff, the Jewish activist/philanthropist who backed Adolph Ochs’s purchase of the NEW YORK TIMES in 1896 because he believe he “could be of great service to the Jews generally.” (unquote). (pp. 72-73).

GOING BACK IN HISTORY: THE ECONOMIC CAUSES OF POLISH ANTI-SEMITISM

Kevin MacDonald touches on the long history of Polish-Jewish hostilities. They were caused by economic rivalry and the Jewish economic hegemony over Poland. This hegemony did not arise simply by Jews “working hard”, but by the following, (quote) The origins of Zionism and other manifestations of the intense Jewish dynamism of the twentieth century lie in the Yiddish-speaking world of Eastern Europe in the early nineteenth century. Originally invited in by the nobles as estate managers, toll farmers, bankers, and moneylenders, Jews in Poland expanded into commerce and then into artisanry, so that there came to be competition between Jews and non-Jewish butchers, bakers, blacksmiths, shoemakers, and tailors. This produced the typical resource-based anti-Jewish attitudes and behavior so common throughout Jewish history. Despite periodic restrictions and outbursts of hostility, Jews came to dominate the economy apart from agricultural labor and the nobility. JEWS HAD AN ADVANTAGE IN THE COMPETITION IN TRADE AND ARTISANRY BECAUSE THEY WERE ABLE TO CONTROL THE TRADE IN RAW MATERIALS AND SELL AT LOWER PRICES TO COETHNICS. (unquote. Emphasis added). (p. 41).

[For a Jewish perspective on how Jews were able to use their extensive friend- and family-networks to defeat nascent Polish business competitors, and thus to maintain their economic privileges, please click on, and read my review, of Polin, Volume Seventeen - The Shtetl: Myth and Reality (Studies in Polish Jewry)].
Copyright © 2009 www.internationalresearchcenter.org
Strony Internetowe webweave.pl