Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Can the Jewish Model Help the West Survive? Kevin MacDonald


I just recently learned that the neocon patriarch Leo
Strauss was a follower of Jabotinsky. Jabotinsky was
deeply ethnocentric, believing that Jews were shaped
by their long history as a desert people and that the
establishment of Israel as a Jewish state would allow
the natural genius of the Jewish race to flourish,
stating, for example: "These natural and fundamental
distinctions embedded in the race are impossible to
eradicate, and are continually being nurtured by the
differences in soil and climate."7 What is striking
is that virtually the entire organized Jewish
community in the United States is allied to the Likud
party and the settler movement in Israel, whose
leaders openly idolize Jabotinsky.

As a European in a society that is rapidly becoming
non-European, I can sympathize with Jabotinsky's envy
of the native Slavic peoples he observed in the early
twentieth century. He wrote:

I look at them with envy. I have never known, and
probably never will know, this completely organic
feeling: so united and singular [is this] sense of a
homeland, in which everything flows together, the past
and the present, the legend and the hopes, the
individual and the historical.8

Every nation, civilized or primitive, sees its land as
its national home, where it wants to stay as the sole
landlord forever. Such a nation will never willingly
consent to new landlords or even to partnership.9


Indeed, hatred toward all things European is normative
among a great many strongly identified Jews.11 I
recently came across the following statement by Dov
Fischer, vice-president of the Zionist Organization of
America, in the Forward, a very prestigious Jewish
publication, in 2002:

Although we appreciate a half-century of West European
democracy more than we appreciated the prior millennia
of European brutality, we recognize who they are, what
they have done—and what's what. We know, if they
don't, that they need Arab oil more than they need
Jewish philosophy and creativity. We remember that the
food they eat is grown from soil fertilized by 2,000
years of Jewish blood they have sprinkled onto it.
Atavistic Jew-hatred lingers in the air into which the
ashes rose from the crematoria.12


An excellent example of an ethnically conscious
wealthy Jew is Haim Saban, who was recently profiled
in the New York Times. Mr. Saban controls the largest
media company in Germany. Saban has stirred
controversy in Britain, where he publicly expressed
interest in buying ITV, the country's biggest
commercial network, while accusing its competitors,
including BBC News, of pro-Arab coverage. He views his
acquisition of a dominant position in German media as
benefiting Israel in the long run. Obviously he thinks
of media ownership as not simply a way of making
money, but of influencing content by promoting Jewish
causes. The Times describes him as "perhaps the most
politically connected mogul in Hollywood"—and that's
saying a lot. He is described as "throwing his weight
and money around Washington and, increasingly, the
world, trying to influence all things Israeli. `I'm a
one-issue guy and my issue is Israel.'" To that end,
he has become one of the largest individual donors to
the Democratic Party and its candidates in the
country, giving millions over the past decade—$7
million in just one donation to the Democratic
National Committee in 2002. He hobnobs with John Kerry
and he vacations with Bill Clinton. It is certainly
striking that Bill Clinton is on record as expressing
very positive attitudes about massive immigration and
the impending minority status of his own people, while
maintaining a close relationship with a wealthy Jewish
ethnic activist intent on advancing the interests of
Jews. One could say virtually the same thing about the
entire political class in America. This is, I think, a
parable of our times.


The point is that Jewish elites have been hugely
influential in advancing the interests of their
people. This is surely a goal to emulate.

The best way to preserve ethnic interests is to defend
an ethnostate—a nation that is explicitly intended to
preserve the ethnic interests of its citizens. From an
ethnic point of view, a major problem with massive
immigration is that there is likely to be an increase
in ethnic competition. Multicultural societies
sanction ethnic mobilization because they inevitably
become a cauldron of competing ethnic interests.

In this very dangerous game of ethnic competition,
some ethnic groups are better prepared than others.
Ethnic groups differ in intelligence and the ability
to develop and control economic resources. They differ
in their degree of ethnocentrism, in the extent to
which they are mobilized to achieve group interests,
and in how aggressively they behave toward other
groups. They differ in their numbers, fertility, and
the extent to which they encourage responsible
parenting. And they differ in the amount of land and
other resources held at any point in time and in their
political power.

Given these differences, it's difficult at best to
ensure peaceful relations among ethnic groups. Even
maintaining a status quo in territory and resource
control is very difficult, as can be seen by the
ill-fated attempts of Americans to achieve an ethnic
status quo with the 1924 immigration law.18 And
accepting a status quo would not be in the interests
of groups that have recently lost land or numbers; nor
is it likely to be acceptable to groups with
relatively low numbers and control of resources; nor
would a status quo be likely to be acceptable to
groups prone to high fertility. Yet the
alternative—that all humans renounce their ethnic
group loyalties—seems utopian to say the least.

And given that some ethnic groups—especially ones with
high levels of ethnocentrism and mobilization—will
undoubtedly continue to function as groups far into
the foreseeable future, unilateral renunciation of
ethnic loyalties by some groups means only their
surrender and defeat—the Darwinian dead end of
extinction. The future, then, like the past, will
inevitably be a Darwinian competition in which
ethnicity plays a very large role.

The alternative faced by Europeans throughout the
Western world is to place themselves in a position of
enormous vulnerability in which their destinies will
be determined by other peoples, many of whom hold deep
historically conditioned hatreds toward them.
Europeans' promotion of their own displacement is the
ultimate foolishness—an historical mistake of
catastrophic proportions./

No comments:

Theresa May left university with a 2nd class degree in Geography and was immediately given an important job at the Bank of England. Go...