Thank you for bringing this to people's attention, Carlson's CPAC speech this year was my first inkling that he will be the next R nominee for president. Keep an eye on MTG to be on the ticket. She is making moves against the party after she realized how much they hate women in power. The Republicans cowered to a mob boss to save their skins and ended up handing the whole thing over to the worst people on the planet.
Fascism never walks in wearing jackboots anymore. It shows up in a blazer, quoting scripture, thanking you for having him on the show. Tucker’s not interviewing evil. He’s laundering it. Making it smell like intellect. Blessed be the ones who recognize propaganda before it starts shaking hands with power.
…mediocrity, routine and comfort breeds stupidity and propaganda does its work
…”There was no point in seeking to convert the intellectuals. For intellectuals would never be converted and would anyway always yield to the stronger, and this will always be "the man in the street." Arguments must therefore be crude, clear and forcible, and appeal to emotions and instincts, not the intellect. Truth was unimportant and entirely subordinate to tactics and psychology.”
Famously or infamously there’s a video clip of him saying that heterosexual sex is gay. That’s how deep this guy‘s gaslighting is. And his followers lap it up as ironic clubs to beat society with.
The conservative kid that shot Charlie Kirk lived in the cultural silos of people like Fuentes or even more insane corners of the dark Internet
The level of gaslighting in the dark Internet social silos has to be seen to be believed. It’s the conservative boys who end up going down those rabbit holes. And we know who’s algorithms have been doing that.
I know the notion that Kirk's shooter was a Groyper was passed around shortly after the assassination (gaining enough traction that Fuentes had to disavow it), but since then I've seen little actual evidence to suggest it.
Apparently, there are other dark Internet social silos. Based on somebody who investigates that end of the world, and I believe roughly referred to as black pilled, is another sub culture that believes everything is going to fall apart, they have no place, and accelerates it simply by pressing on the seams of society as the author discusses. Somebody like Nick is out to “rule”. This group simply wants to see everything explode (ruin).
Which can only suggest, the reason why you don’t find evidence for him being a fan of Nick, is supposedly he was in this subculture. The issue here would be that individuals in group intentionally and deliberately mix up social signals to cause chaos.. there is the other suggestion that dating somebody who says they’re trans has to do with the very desperately messed up psychology of all this. Take what I’m saying with a grain of salt.
Black pillers don’t necessarily want to take it all down. I’m a bit of one myself. It’s more like hyper realism snd tossing away all comforting illusions. I’m also a bit of a Doomer too.
I don’t get why any straight men trannies but they exist. They’re often woman haters too. They want something that looks like a woman but acts like a man.
Um you don’t know much about gay men, do you? They absolutely ARE correlated especially in older generation gays like Brion Gysin and William Burroughs.
For 45 years now there has been a “type” of gay man who hates women. My observation was it was the more masculine ones you would never think were gay.
We had a group of three of them in my student teaching. This “type” of gay man still exists. It might be 15-20% of them? It seems to be a minority but they definitely exist.
One of my good friends is gay and he tells me he hates women. Discuss naked women’s bodies in front of a gay man he will yell at you ti shut or he’s going to vomit.
That’s not necessarily hate but they are often revolted by women’s bodies. They hate breasts too. They say they look like cows 😂. And they don’t like women’s flabby, fatty, soft bodies. That’s like blubber to them. They like hard bodies.
Yes. Hating the other sex is a psychological issue that doesn’t have to do with sexual orientation.
But gosh, darn it it has a lot to do with being a conservative these days and the Christian nationalist. For them shooting pepper spray balls point blank into the face of clergy men seems to cause sexual gratification given one specific photograph of a recent incident in Alameda, California.
Everything about the far right is supported by a system that cultivates dark triad personality traits, and given the influence of large language models, psychosis.
No this is not correct. Hatred of men is extremely correlated with lesbianism. With gay men it is less so but there’s a “type” that hates women. And Fuentes is one of the masculine ones who are more likely to hate women.
I’m not sure conservatives or Christian nationalists hate women. They are sexist though. They think women are somewhat inferior to men.
Well, the only thing I could find on that somebody’s opinion which I can’t agree with the same degree but without any statistics or studies which I couldn’t find anything of that’s based on anecdote.
And beyond that you are implying that lesbians congenitally hate men and that’s something I don’t agree with. You would have to pull up psychological research to establish that or at least least have a chance of doing so
I’m not sure if it’s congenital. Probably not because I’ve met a few who like men. You haven’t been around many lesbians have you?
Nor have you been around many gay men either. I hung out in Hollywood for years. LA is incredibly gay. It’s gayer than Frisco. I could write a book about these people. I know then inside and out.
Lesbians are much more likely to hate men than gay men are to hate women. And why that is I am not sure. But hatred of men is definitely a hallmark of lesbianism.
I see that you are philosophically trained and wear the label of academic philosopher. So surely you agree that framing the question that one should ask is an ontological antecedent to rational action towards any end. This kind of reads to me like saying “don’t present a problem, without a solution”. And I am quite hostile that stance.
True, I am philosophical trained, which helps me to differentiate between inquiry that leads to constructive dialogue and mere rhetoric that leads nowhere. I've subscribed to your missives for a while. You give complaints, which, although wrapped in honed language are, as you say "documenting that cracking," and I say are mere rhetoric. Substack, like the information space in general, is filled with people documenting their complaints, and devoid of seeking any constructive dialogue much less spurring catalysts for change. You say you are hostile to those wanting solutions. Well, there we have it. Not mere rhetoric but hostile rhetoric. We already have enough of that nonsense.
I'm not hostile to people wanting solutions. I'm hostile to people critiquing the framing of a problem as a wasted effort, if it doesn't include a proposed solution in the second breathe. And I HAVE proposed solutions, Douglas: https://www.notesfromthecircus.com/p/the-liberal-populist-path
Thank you for bringing this interview to our attention, Mike. Another awesome Mike (Madrid) also pointed out that Tucker would be prime for presidential candidacy a while back. It’s not far fetched in the politics-is-culture world we live in. The propaganda and testing grounds for what we the people will accept will be getting more and more sophisticated and calcified as our information platforms continue to become controlled by the same powers. I’m curious how long Substack has and what the next dependable iterations for communication will be. Nostr? Along with Mastadon? Since they are decentralized and not under ownership? How do you see our future comms evolving?
Carlson interviews Fuentes, normalizing him. Bad, indeed! But, how do we get from the facts at hand to the certainly that the intent is a progression of presidents from Trump to Carson to Fuentes? Not everything that makes some kind of rational sense is necessarily true. In its current form, this essay is an idea, not a proof.
The side note, in all of this is the teleconference of Ben Shapiro with the rest of his daily wire staff. He doesn’t understand that every other participant in that meeting are culturally aligned to Tucker Carlson or Nick Fuentes.
He’s in a den of leopards worried about the far right as if it’s somewhere else. All the while the rest of them, especially Matt Walsh has the I am bidding my time thought bubble above his head.
I can only speak for me, but I’d assess that most American Jews would agree that the threat is far greater from the left. Why? Because not only are those our former friends & allies (I was a D until recently), the kids who’ve been taught a totally false history & false narrative - those kids are our future leaders and they are marching for the terrorists who want every last Jew dead & our ancestral land eliminated.
Israel fought & still fights a war of self-defense. Read Andrew Fox, John Spencer, or Paul Cobaugh for more details on why Hamas, not Israel, is guilty of genocide. Also, read Amir Pars, a former anti-Semite who grew up in Egypt (I think).
I have some news for you. A large and growing segment of the MAGA base now has their sights on “all Jews” because it’s “the Jews” who have compromised Daddy Trump:
I’ve been watching this unfold since August. In an attempt to make sense of things, I decided to immerse myself in the right wing algorithm on Instagram. I also live in Orange County, CA….let me tell ya, it’s worse than most people realize. Fuentes is capturing all strains and varieties and ages of MAGA who “know” they’ve been duped by Trump. But they aren’t willing to admit it to themselves so they’re looking for a scapegoat: someone/something compromised Trump….this isn’t the Trump we voted for. He’s compromised. It’s the “the Jews.” It’s been shocking to see people I know personally engaging with Fuentes and other hardcore anti-Semitic content.
Then there’s this evangelical subset who are in full blown Holocaust denial. there’s a series of reels I keep seeing which reinforce this absurd belief that historical Christian persecutions and mass murders/genocides were never taught in school because “the Jews” owned the publishing houses that produced US textbooks. They also (falsely) believe that 60,0000 million Christians were killed by the Bolsheviks (ya know, “the Jews”).
Here’s a quote from a direct message I received recently. It’s from a OC Gen X dad and high school coach I know through sports. (it was in response to a post I made about the Young Republicans group chat.)
“What we were taught about Hitler isn’t true. He was supposed to be a bad guy that did bad things… He wasn’t perfect, but was trying to protect Germany from the Jews who had basically been kicked out of all the other countries. Nobody wanted them in their country….Do you know who the Rothschild family is?”
I kid you not. This is the level of propaganda, brainwashing, ignorance, lack of education and immorality that we’re up against. And they’re all “Christians.”
And btw, despite the heinous acts by Hamas on Oct 7, Israel DID engage in horrific behavior since then (genocide? yeah that seems to be the consensus). The world sees it. Middle of the road Americans see it. And now MAGA sees it too. Yeah that MAGA base who used to defend Israel: no. matter. what. I’d strongly suggest you reconsider the statement that the Ds are your enemy. Because when MAGA gets bored by this Admin dehumanizing and deporting brown people, the base is already primed via the algorithm—and through the normalization of people like Fuentes & other neo-Nazi MAGA influencers—to shift their focus to “the Jews” who compromised Trump.
If you don’t believe me, head on over to a social network that Fuentes is on and watch his reels. Like a couple. Save a couple. And then you will be served everything that I’ve been served. It’s dark. And it’s way darker than college students doing what college students do and have always done: speak out about injustice and oppression.
Conservative Jews are about to find out what MAGA Latinos found out.
Btw- I absolutely recognize how the anti-zionist language on the activist left has contributed to this mess. But I can assure you that the left (and former Never Trumpers like me), will be the first to defend Jewish Americans. I have been waving the red flag for weeks now to anyone who will listen. MAGA has shown us who they are, time and time again.
I would like to thank you for taking the time and being willing to listen to what the mainstream, low information Republicans are being fed. I wish everyone would take the time to listen and understand. I have seen it also and it’s beyond disheartening, but understanding is the first necessary step. The next step is to find common ground in-person with neighbors so that we can build coalition. Most people aren’t monsters. Solidarity through acts of love is the only way through.
Absolutely. I’ve tried to alert people who are politically indifferent or possibly lean right but aren’t politically engaged or don’t think of themselves as MAGA. At the very least raising awareness of how ugly the anti-Semitic rhetoric has gotten is key. As you said, most people aren’t monsters. Aren’t hateful. And doubtful they want to be associated with this trend.
The individual you responded to somebody who’s come under the influence of the right wing without really realizing it. His talking points are right wing talking points about the left.. of the individuals who are leftish who are antisemitic they aren’t structural at least anywhere near the same degree as on the right and the difference for many unfortunately native antisemitism is a difference between being an asshole and building a gas chamber
You seem to me to be claiming that all anti-Zionism is inherently anti-Semitic in nature. If that's not what you're claiming, then what would be, in your view, an anti-Zionist position that would not be anti-Semitic?
Theoretically, I think it’s possible for antiZionism to exist without antisemitism. In reality and in practice, I don’t think it’s possible - I haven’t seen it yet.
AntiZionism is actually a Soviet invention from the 60s. They used it to persecute Soviet Jews for a permissible reason, knowing that almost all Jews are Zionists. Israel features large in every Jewish prayer, hymn, song and in Torah. Zionism can’t really be extricated from Judaism.
I don’t think that the Israel haters all feel malice towards Jews; I don’t think they understand that their malice towards Israel, to Zionist Jews, which is about 95% of us, it is received as malice.
I think that the Israel haters mostly have been fed entirely false narratives, either in school or from media, about the present war & the more complete history. For example, Israel isn’t an apartheid state & all citizens have the same rights, though I don’t think non-Jews are required to serve their mandatory two years. Many still do.
The Palestinians are not citizens and they never will be. This is a result of their culture & a hatred that is passed down to tiny children & taught in schools.
Here’s a good discussion of antizionism/antisemitism by a better & more entertaining writer than I, in case you are interested. Pat Johnson is a progressive, Canadian, non-Jewish journalist & fierce Zionist.
Sorry for long rambling answer, but Jewish questions rarely have simple answers.
That’s kind of crazy because I watch a couple of historical channels that focus on Jewish history. The idea that it’s some product of the Soviet Union is kind of nuts.
All sorts of streams of Judaism have both scriptural as well as behavioral objections to Zionism. The people who say Zionism as fundamentally a blood and soil movement, a movement that embraces the racism of Europe as antithetical to their culture and their faith in the commandment of God.
I have enough awareness of Judaism and Jewish culture and history to know that questions about and around it rarely have simple answers, so I do not mind that your answer was long and rambling, and I thank you for considering my question seriously.
However, I would suggest that anti-Zionism dates back much further than the 1960s in the Soviet Union.
In 1917, the Government of the United Kingdom was preparing to issue the Balfour Declaration, its official statement of support for the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. The government at the time was a wartime coalition; David Lloyd George, a Liberal, was Prime Minister (having replaced H. H. Asquith in December 1916), while Arthur Balfour, a former Conservative Prime Minister, was Foreign Secretary. (Winston Churchill, then a Liberal, had just returned to the government as Minister of Munitions.) Importantly, there was one Jewish Briton in the government at the time, Edwin Montagu, Secretary of State for India, also a Liberal. (His cousin, Herbert Samuel, also a Liberal, eventually rising to be party leader, was a Zionist and was the first High Commissioner for Palestine after the creation in 1920 of what would become the British Mandate there. He had been Home Secretary under Asquith but resigned despite Lloyd George requesting that he remain in post.)
Montagu was privy to the plans to issue the Declaration. In response, he sent a memorandum titled "The Anti-Semitism of the Present Government" to the Cabinet arguing that the policy "is anti-Semitic in result and will prove a rallying ground for Anti-Semites in every country in the world."
Montagu circulated two further memoranda on the matter in the Cabinet; I have found a source compiling them but I do not know if it is in the public domain and thus am reluctant to provide a link to it. (The documents themselves would be by now, but the work itself contained some small amount of commentary which might not. It also contained various draft versions of the Declaration; Wikipedia compiles them from another source here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration#Drafting )
I have, upon further searching, found the following records of Montagu's three 1917 memoranda on the matter in the UK National Archives, with scans:
I do not, admittedly, profess much knowledge of the state of anti-Zionism following the establishment of the modern state of Israel in 1948. But I would submit that Montagu's view, expressed in those documents, was certainly anti-Zionist, but not anti-Semitic, and, quite obviously, dates back well before the 1960s.
Thank you for bringing this to people's attention, Carlson's CPAC speech this year was my first inkling that he will be the next R nominee for president. Keep an eye on MTG to be on the ticket. She is making moves against the party after she realized how much they hate women in power. The Republicans cowered to a mob boss to save their skins and ended up handing the whole thing over to the worst people on the planet.
Fascism never walks in wearing jackboots anymore. It shows up in a blazer, quoting scripture, thanking you for having him on the show. Tucker’s not interviewing evil. He’s laundering it. Making it smell like intellect. Blessed be the ones who recognize propaganda before it starts shaking hands with power.
…really? …”he show you a future”?! …but you never saw it coming right? …this country is dumb as bag of fucking hammers
…fascism is not an ideology it’s the way to take and hold power and once you install dictator peacefully you can not peacefully remove him - FACT
Yeah, exactly. Fascism doesn’t start with ideas, it starts with obedience. Once people trade conscience for comfort, the rest is just logistics.
…mediocrity, routine and comfort breeds stupidity and propaganda does its work
…”There was no point in seeking to convert the intellectuals. For intellectuals would never be converted and would anyway always yield to the stronger, and this will always be "the man in the street." Arguments must therefore be crude, clear and forcible, and appeal to emotions and instincts, not the intellect. Truth was unimportant and entirely subordinate to tactics and psychology.”
Joseph Goebbels
That was bizarre. The last 30-40 minutes in particular.
Fuentes: Here's my litany of incel complaints and pronouncements about the nature of women.
Carlson: Have you ever lived with a woman?
Fuentes: No.
WTF?
I do weep for America if that's the level of thought that will win the next election.
He’s gay. That’s what the woman hatred is all about. He’s not an incel.
Famously or infamously there’s a video clip of him saying that heterosexual sex is gay. That’s how deep this guy‘s gaslighting is. And his followers lap it up as ironic clubs to beat society with.
The conservative kid that shot Charlie Kirk lived in the cultural silos of people like Fuentes or even more insane corners of the dark Internet
I know…
The level of gaslighting in the dark Internet social silos has to be seen to be believed. It’s the conservative boys who end up going down those rabbit holes. And we know who’s algorithms have been doing that.
It’s so demented. And a nightmare.
I know the notion that Kirk's shooter was a Groyper was passed around shortly after the assassination (gaining enough traction that Fuentes had to disavow it), but since then I've seen little actual evidence to suggest it.
It’s false.
Apparently, there are other dark Internet social silos. Based on somebody who investigates that end of the world, and I believe roughly referred to as black pilled, is another sub culture that believes everything is going to fall apart, they have no place, and accelerates it simply by pressing on the seams of society as the author discusses. Somebody like Nick is out to “rule”. This group simply wants to see everything explode (ruin).
Which can only suggest, the reason why you don’t find evidence for him being a fan of Nick, is supposedly he was in this subculture. The issue here would be that individuals in group intentionally and deliberately mix up social signals to cause chaos.. there is the other suggestion that dating somebody who says they’re trans has to do with the very desperately messed up psychology of all this. Take what I’m saying with a grain of salt.
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/black-pill-blackpilled
https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/exclusive-leaked-messages-from-charlie
This is what I've seen.
He was a Lefty.
Black pillers don’t necessarily want to take it all down. I’m a bit of one myself. It’s more like hyper realism snd tossing away all comforting illusions. I’m also a bit of a Doomer too.
I don’t get why any straight men trannies but they exist. They’re often woman haters too. They want something that looks like a woman but acts like a man.
LOL
Now you've stepped innit!
An actual gay man might step in here and correct me, but I don't think being gay and hating women are necessarily correlated.
Um you don’t know much about gay men, do you? They absolutely ARE correlated especially in older generation gays like Brion Gysin and William Burroughs.
For 45 years now there has been a “type” of gay man who hates women. My observation was it was the more masculine ones you would never think were gay.
We had a group of three of them in my student teaching. This “type” of gay man still exists. It might be 15-20% of them? It seems to be a minority but they definitely exist.
One of my good friends is gay and he tells me he hates women. Discuss naked women’s bodies in front of a gay man he will yell at you ti shut or he’s going to vomit.
That’s not necessarily hate but they are often revolted by women’s bodies. They hate breasts too. They say they look like cows 😂. And they don’t like women’s flabby, fatty, soft bodies. That’s like blubber to them. They like hard bodies.
Yes. Hating the other sex is a psychological issue that doesn’t have to do with sexual orientation.
But gosh, darn it it has a lot to do with being a conservative these days and the Christian nationalist. For them shooting pepper spray balls point blank into the face of clergy men seems to cause sexual gratification given one specific photograph of a recent incident in Alameda, California.
Everything about the far right is supported by a system that cultivates dark triad personality traits, and given the influence of large language models, psychosis.
No this is not correct. Hatred of men is extremely correlated with lesbianism. With gay men it is less so but there’s a “type” that hates women. And Fuentes is one of the masculine ones who are more likely to hate women.
I’m not sure conservatives or Christian nationalists hate women. They are sexist though. They think women are somewhat inferior to men.
Well, the only thing I could find on that somebody’s opinion which I can’t agree with the same degree but without any statistics or studies which I couldn’t find anything of that’s based on anecdote.
And beyond that you are implying that lesbians congenitally hate men and that’s something I don’t agree with. You would have to pull up psychological research to establish that or at least least have a chance of doing so
I’m not sure if it’s congenital. Probably not because I’ve met a few who like men. You haven’t been around many lesbians have you?
Nor have you been around many gay men either. I hung out in Hollywood for years. LA is incredibly gay. It’s gayer than Frisco. I could write a book about these people. I know then inside and out.
Lesbians are much more likely to hate men than gay men are to hate women. And why that is I am not sure. But hatred of men is definitely a hallmark of lesbianism.
Okay, now that you’ve complained (appropriately) about it, what do you think we should DO about it?
I see that you are philosophically trained and wear the label of academic philosopher. So surely you agree that framing the question that one should ask is an ontological antecedent to rational action towards any end. This kind of reads to me like saying “don’t present a problem, without a solution”. And I am quite hostile that stance.
True, I am philosophical trained, which helps me to differentiate between inquiry that leads to constructive dialogue and mere rhetoric that leads nowhere. I've subscribed to your missives for a while. You give complaints, which, although wrapped in honed language are, as you say "documenting that cracking," and I say are mere rhetoric. Substack, like the information space in general, is filled with people documenting their complaints, and devoid of seeking any constructive dialogue much less spurring catalysts for change. You say you are hostile to those wanting solutions. Well, there we have it. Not mere rhetoric but hostile rhetoric. We already have enough of that nonsense.
https://dgilesphd.substack.com/p/how-meidas-touch-and-the-rest-of?r=2ddaj4
I'm not hostile to people wanting solutions. I'm hostile to people critiquing the framing of a problem as a wasted effort, if it doesn't include a proposed solution in the second breathe. And I HAVE proposed solutions, Douglas: https://www.notesfromthecircus.com/p/the-liberal-populist-path
Oh look—more people you can be hostile toward.
https://dgilesphd.substack.com/p/question-for-my-subscribers/comment/171324606
After about 5 minutes, all I could think was “it’s like Beavis and Butthead, but they’re both Nazis!” Heh heh, heh, heh, fascism’s cool, heh heh.
Thank you for bringing this interview to our attention, Mike. Another awesome Mike (Madrid) also pointed out that Tucker would be prime for presidential candidacy a while back. It’s not far fetched in the politics-is-culture world we live in. The propaganda and testing grounds for what we the people will accept will be getting more and more sophisticated and calcified as our information platforms continue to become controlled by the same powers. I’m curious how long Substack has and what the next dependable iterations for communication will be. Nostr? Along with Mastadon? Since they are decentralized and not under ownership? How do you see our future comms evolving?
I don't think Carlson can fill Kirk's shoes as leader-in-waiting of the right. Too long a public record, not enough charisma, and that lunatic laugh.
Carlson interviews Fuentes, normalizing him. Bad, indeed! But, how do we get from the facts at hand to the certainly that the intent is a progression of presidents from Trump to Carson to Fuentes? Not everything that makes some kind of rational sense is necessarily true. In its current form, this essay is an idea, not a proof.
Watching that is one difficult task.
The side note, in all of this is the teleconference of Ben Shapiro with the rest of his daily wire staff. He doesn’t understand that every other participant in that meeting are culturally aligned to Tucker Carlson or Nick Fuentes.
He’s in a den of leopards worried about the far right as if it’s somewhere else. All the while the rest of them, especially Matt Walsh has the I am bidding my time thought bubble above his head.
…really? …”he show you a future”?! …but you never saw it coming right? …this country is dumb as bag of fucking hammers
I can only speak for me, but I’d assess that most American Jews would agree that the threat is far greater from the left. Why? Because not only are those our former friends & allies (I was a D until recently), the kids who’ve been taught a totally false history & false narrative - those kids are our future leaders and they are marching for the terrorists who want every last Jew dead & our ancestral land eliminated.
Israel fought & still fights a war of self-defense. Read Andrew Fox, John Spencer, or Paul Cobaugh for more details on why Hamas, not Israel, is guilty of genocide. Also, read Amir Pars, a former anti-Semite who grew up in Egypt (I think).
I have some news for you. A large and growing segment of the MAGA base now has their sights on “all Jews” because it’s “the Jews” who have compromised Daddy Trump:
I’ve been watching this unfold since August. In an attempt to make sense of things, I decided to immerse myself in the right wing algorithm on Instagram. I also live in Orange County, CA….let me tell ya, it’s worse than most people realize. Fuentes is capturing all strains and varieties and ages of MAGA who “know” they’ve been duped by Trump. But they aren’t willing to admit it to themselves so they’re looking for a scapegoat: someone/something compromised Trump….this isn’t the Trump we voted for. He’s compromised. It’s the “the Jews.” It’s been shocking to see people I know personally engaging with Fuentes and other hardcore anti-Semitic content.
Then there’s this evangelical subset who are in full blown Holocaust denial. there’s a series of reels I keep seeing which reinforce this absurd belief that historical Christian persecutions and mass murders/genocides were never taught in school because “the Jews” owned the publishing houses that produced US textbooks. They also (falsely) believe that 60,0000 million Christians were killed by the Bolsheviks (ya know, “the Jews”).
Here’s a quote from a direct message I received recently. It’s from a OC Gen X dad and high school coach I know through sports. (it was in response to a post I made about the Young Republicans group chat.)
“What we were taught about Hitler isn’t true. He was supposed to be a bad guy that did bad things… He wasn’t perfect, but was trying to protect Germany from the Jews who had basically been kicked out of all the other countries. Nobody wanted them in their country….Do you know who the Rothschild family is?”
I kid you not. This is the level of propaganda, brainwashing, ignorance, lack of education and immorality that we’re up against. And they’re all “Christians.”
And btw, despite the heinous acts by Hamas on Oct 7, Israel DID engage in horrific behavior since then (genocide? yeah that seems to be the consensus). The world sees it. Middle of the road Americans see it. And now MAGA sees it too. Yeah that MAGA base who used to defend Israel: no. matter. what. I’d strongly suggest you reconsider the statement that the Ds are your enemy. Because when MAGA gets bored by this Admin dehumanizing and deporting brown people, the base is already primed via the algorithm—and through the normalization of people like Fuentes & other neo-Nazi MAGA influencers—to shift their focus to “the Jews” who compromised Trump.
If you don’t believe me, head on over to a social network that Fuentes is on and watch his reels. Like a couple. Save a couple. And then you will be served everything that I’ve been served. It’s dark. And it’s way darker than college students doing what college students do and have always done: speak out about injustice and oppression.
Conservative Jews are about to find out what MAGA Latinos found out.
Btw- I absolutely recognize how the anti-zionist language on the activist left has contributed to this mess. But I can assure you that the left (and former Never Trumpers like me), will be the first to defend Jewish Americans. I have been waving the red flag for weeks now to anyone who will listen. MAGA has shown us who they are, time and time again.
I would like to thank you for taking the time and being willing to listen to what the mainstream, low information Republicans are being fed. I wish everyone would take the time to listen and understand. I have seen it also and it’s beyond disheartening, but understanding is the first necessary step. The next step is to find common ground in-person with neighbors so that we can build coalition. Most people aren’t monsters. Solidarity through acts of love is the only way through.
Absolutely. I’ve tried to alert people who are politically indifferent or possibly lean right but aren’t politically engaged or don’t think of themselves as MAGA. At the very least raising awareness of how ugly the anti-Semitic rhetoric has gotten is key. As you said, most people aren’t monsters. Aren’t hateful. And doubtful they want to be associated with this trend.
The individual you responded to somebody who’s come under the influence of the right wing without really realizing it. His talking points are right wing talking points about the left.. of the individuals who are leftish who are antisemitic they aren’t structural at least anywhere near the same degree as on the right and the difference for many unfortunately native antisemitism is a difference between being an asshole and building a gas chamber
You seem to me to be claiming that all anti-Zionism is inherently anti-Semitic in nature. If that's not what you're claiming, then what would be, in your view, an anti-Zionist position that would not be anti-Semitic?
Theoretically, I think it’s possible for antiZionism to exist without antisemitism. In reality and in practice, I don’t think it’s possible - I haven’t seen it yet.
AntiZionism is actually a Soviet invention from the 60s. They used it to persecute Soviet Jews for a permissible reason, knowing that almost all Jews are Zionists. Israel features large in every Jewish prayer, hymn, song and in Torah. Zionism can’t really be extricated from Judaism.
I don’t think that the Israel haters all feel malice towards Jews; I don’t think they understand that their malice towards Israel, to Zionist Jews, which is about 95% of us, it is received as malice.
I think that the Israel haters mostly have been fed entirely false narratives, either in school or from media, about the present war & the more complete history. For example, Israel isn’t an apartheid state & all citizens have the same rights, though I don’t think non-Jews are required to serve their mandatory two years. Many still do.
The Palestinians are not citizens and they never will be. This is a result of their culture & a hatred that is passed down to tiny children & taught in schools.
Here’s a good discussion of antizionism/antisemitism by a better & more entertaining writer than I, in case you are interested. Pat Johnson is a progressive, Canadian, non-Jewish journalist & fierce Zionist.
Sorry for long rambling answer, but Jewish questions rarely have simple answers.
https://open.substack.com/pub/pat604johnson/p/inverting-antisemitism-and-anti-zionism?r=2q93jc&utm_medium=ios
That’s kind of crazy because I watch a couple of historical channels that focus on Jewish history. The idea that it’s some product of the Soviet Union is kind of nuts.
All sorts of streams of Judaism have both scriptural as well as behavioral objections to Zionism. The people who say Zionism as fundamentally a blood and soil movement, a movement that embraces the racism of Europe as antithetical to their culture and their faith in the commandment of God.
I have enough awareness of Judaism and Jewish culture and history to know that questions about and around it rarely have simple answers, so I do not mind that your answer was long and rambling, and I thank you for considering my question seriously.
However, I would suggest that anti-Zionism dates back much further than the 1960s in the Soviet Union.
In 1917, the Government of the United Kingdom was preparing to issue the Balfour Declaration, its official statement of support for the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. The government at the time was a wartime coalition; David Lloyd George, a Liberal, was Prime Minister (having replaced H. H. Asquith in December 1916), while Arthur Balfour, a former Conservative Prime Minister, was Foreign Secretary. (Winston Churchill, then a Liberal, had just returned to the government as Minister of Munitions.) Importantly, there was one Jewish Briton in the government at the time, Edwin Montagu, Secretary of State for India, also a Liberal. (His cousin, Herbert Samuel, also a Liberal, eventually rising to be party leader, was a Zionist and was the first High Commissioner for Palestine after the creation in 1920 of what would become the British Mandate there. He had been Home Secretary under Asquith but resigned despite Lloyd George requesting that he remain in post.)
Montagu was privy to the plans to issue the Declaration. In response, he sent a memorandum titled "The Anti-Semitism of the Present Government" to the Cabinet arguing that the policy "is anti-Semitic in result and will prove a rallying ground for Anti-Semites in every country in the world."
You may find the document here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Anti-Semitism_of_the_Present_Government,_Edwin_Montagu,_23_August_1917.jpg An imperfect transcription can be found at https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/montagu-memo-on-british-government-s-anti-semitism
Montagu circulated two further memoranda on the matter in the Cabinet; I have found a source compiling them but I do not know if it is in the public domain and thus am reluctant to provide a link to it. (The documents themselves would be by now, but the work itself contained some small amount of commentary which might not. It also contained various draft versions of the Declaration; Wikipedia compiles them from another source here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration#Drafting )
I have, upon further searching, found the following records of Montagu's three 1917 memoranda on the matter in the UK National Archives, with scans:
https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/D7640371
https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/D7640698
https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/D7640771
I do not, admittedly, profess much knowledge of the state of anti-Zionism following the establishment of the modern state of Israel in 1948. But I would submit that Montagu's view, expressed in those documents, was certainly anti-Zionist, but not anti-Semitic, and, quite obviously, dates back well before the 1960s.
Here’s a good article someone just shared that looks like a less convoluted discussion of the two terms.
https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/the-a-word-on-resisting-to-name-antizionism/
Yes