Great (and somewhat hilarious) table. Great essay.
Some thoughts that relate to various comments you made above:
1) On the US Upper Class. The US upper class (or inner party if you prefer) includes plenty of people who are very aware of Jewish people and their particular history. I think you know this, but there's often an undercurrent in dissident right writings of "if only we could reveal them". To that I say, there is little to reveal.
2) On Elite Relations. Relating to #1, the US upper class LIKES Jewish people (kind of). Commentators are on the outside looking in, seeing the equivalent of a male with a hot but obnoxious girlfriend, and saying "Tony - just dump the girl, why do you keep her around". Hmm yes why does he keep her around.
2a) Probably 30% of the power of the United States, and the reason it took over so much of the world in the 20th century, is due to Jewish people. There's no way around this fact, no matter how annoying you think Bill Kristol is, or Merrick Garland, or RBG. Any argument that the US elite should "go to war with the Jews" is an incredible ask. By the way, the last two countries that tried it conspicuously lost (NSDAP, USSR).
3) On Ben Shapiro. A major divide in Jewish opinion is whether one thinks "the West" is broadly good or bad. Right wing Jews, like Ben Shapiro, tend to think of the West as "good" or at least "good for the Jews". Left wing Jews (as is more common in the US), tend to think the West is "bad". Right wing and left wing Jews often hate each other's political opinions and frequently each other's persons as well.
3a) This does not mean that a right wing Jew is a reliable ally - just that they don't generally want to see the West destroyed. David Frum is a good example. He doesn't hate Americans (I think he generally likes them), he doesn't hate Christians, etc., but then again, probably don't trust him on just how urgently we need to depose Saddam or just have rosy that aftermath is likely to be.
3b) My point is not that anyone needs to like Ben Shapiro, but just to clarify what I think his views / objectives are. He's not trying to get revenge for the burning of the Second Temple. But of course, he's not going to help you destroy the ADL either.
4) Getting back to DeSantis... Just because someone takes your money doesn't mean they are a reliable ally. Lenin took money from German intelligence - how did that go for them? I don't personally have any great insight into his character. I don't think he is a weasel, but he is also clearly not (at the moment) a revolutionary. He's the "try to go back to the 1990s" option. Trump is the "try to go back to the 1950s" option. Where one stands on him I think is in large part about where one stands on that question.
Therfore what? That because they are such a large fraction, they should be allowed to run roughshod without pushback. Then you cite two examples as reasons not to. Like a veiled threat if one were to go against American Jewish interests? Interesting. Just looking for clarification.
Think Nehru more than Hitler if you really feel we need to do something.
Having said that, I view the Gen X and younger generation of Jews as comparatively garbage, so you might not have to do anything.
The issue facing American's in 10-20 years is probably either technological (AI / Biotech) or Geopolitical (China et al). Jewish power is going to decline precipitously anyway, because:
1) As mentioned, the younger generations are lazy and spoiled like boomer gentiles.
2) Jews are not good at manipulating non whites (or not as good). That is for example, one can't easily morally blackmail upper caste Indians. It's like the Watto scene in Star Wars. Or as another example, I've yet to see a Mexican that feels guilty over the holocaust. Just because a lot of Jews thought racially diversifying the US was a good idea doesn't mean they were right. Anglos (i.e. Americans) are just as good at leading diverse coalitions as anyone else.
The real medium term issue facing American's, imo, if it is driven by elite demographics, is that you'll get an "Amazon Effect" where 90%+ of Americans (and everyone else) are stuck in the warehouse with a rainbow corporate elite sitting on top of them. Probably that elite will be more pitiless if it is diverse, and I'm sure the diverse public will struggle harder to organize for better treatment.
I honestly don't know what to do about that... I think software and 21st century technology in general is tyrannical (in the George Orwell "You and the Atom Bomb" sense).
Probably wokeness will go down over time (it's not actually a Jewish movement - it's more like a lab escape event from the universities)... Jewish behavior will likely improve as China gets more threatening etc.
Or Dall-e 5 will enslave us all. Something like that.
But why exactly do the "powers that be" like this? You mean they like a corrupt, scheming, self serving cadre of people that reflexively lie and throw Americans under the bus? You haven't explained your point.
And certainly your other point about these people being needed for global power is incorrect.....An American country run by Americans would still be able to exercise power.. We notice a distinct lack of them,for example, in front line forces or anything that requires bravery anywhere.
Regardless of if their behaviour improves—which it never has—the damage and subversion already done calls for something more than apologising and explaining it away. "They've destroyed and subverted our culture for the past 100 years, initiated replacement migration and economically looted our countries, but its fine, because, well, something about a warehouse in the future."
For what it's worth, I am all for an immigration moratorium and brining back the Hayes code.
But, it's a complex situation. I'm not saying that as a narrative tactic - I have no control over policymaking and this isn't a debate in public.
"Are they worth it" has been asked for centuries. If it were easy to answer, it would have been answered 200 years ago.
The powers that be like:
1) Silicon Valley Tech (Intel, Google, FB, etc.).
2) Hollywood persuading the world with pro-USA propaganda (less pro-USA recently, admittedly)
3) NY beating London as the center of Global Finance
4) Manhattan Project
5) etc. etc. etc.
I'm not being coy. It really is an extremely difficult issue. You might not like Marx or Trotsky but how do you feel about Einstein and Feynman?
If the NSDAP view of "poisonous mushrooms" were correct, Europeans would have figured it out centuries ago. Euros aren't that stupid. The issue is that it's a complex and difficult set of tradeoffs that ISN'T stable over time.
The USA is a big boat that turns slowly. If a core component of its 20th century system has acted as a large net benefit up through, say, the 1950s, and a modest net benefit through say, the 1990s, you can't expect US Elites to go berserk on a dime and start calling for expulsion (or what have you) based on a few bad decades, nor based on the realization that Americans were paying more than they thought even during the good years.
It's like finding out the co-founding partner of your law firm, who was instrumental in building it into a massive success, did some sleazy stuff behind your back in the 80s. Are you going to break up the firm over it? Maybe yes, maybe no, but it's not an easy decision. Breakup would mean that the other partner will walk out the door with a third of your clients, a huge disruption to operations, a massive public relations nightmare, etc.
TBF de Santis’ base contains a lot of Florida Jews, so I don’t think he is acting out of turn here, just working the system and it does no harm on the fundraising front - there’s no money in anti-semitism except from some Muslims and they aren’t on his side in any event.
I guess ultimately my question for AA is: is Matt Walsh (who I'm no fan of) incorrect in that statement about Trump and DeSantis? Trump was beaten by the dumbest oldest people in DC and did far less with his power than DeSantis is doing from the govs mansion in Tallahassee. Walsh can be wrong for all the reasons you've outlined, but still be right about Trump vs DeSantis.
Love the chart you made. I'll be sharing that far and wide if you don't mind.
So I can't expect Matt Walsh's next documentary to be, What is the Morgenthau Plan?
Great (and somewhat hilarious) table. Great essay.
Some thoughts that relate to various comments you made above:
1) On the US Upper Class. The US upper class (or inner party if you prefer) includes plenty of people who are very aware of Jewish people and their particular history. I think you know this, but there's often an undercurrent in dissident right writings of "if only we could reveal them". To that I say, there is little to reveal.
2) On Elite Relations. Relating to #1, the US upper class LIKES Jewish people (kind of). Commentators are on the outside looking in, seeing the equivalent of a male with a hot but obnoxious girlfriend, and saying "Tony - just dump the girl, why do you keep her around". Hmm yes why does he keep her around.
2a) Probably 30% of the power of the United States, and the reason it took over so much of the world in the 20th century, is due to Jewish people. There's no way around this fact, no matter how annoying you think Bill Kristol is, or Merrick Garland, or RBG. Any argument that the US elite should "go to war with the Jews" is an incredible ask. By the way, the last two countries that tried it conspicuously lost (NSDAP, USSR).
3) On Ben Shapiro. A major divide in Jewish opinion is whether one thinks "the West" is broadly good or bad. Right wing Jews, like Ben Shapiro, tend to think of the West as "good" or at least "good for the Jews". Left wing Jews (as is more common in the US), tend to think the West is "bad". Right wing and left wing Jews often hate each other's political opinions and frequently each other's persons as well.
3a) This does not mean that a right wing Jew is a reliable ally - just that they don't generally want to see the West destroyed. David Frum is a good example. He doesn't hate Americans (I think he generally likes them), he doesn't hate Christians, etc., but then again, probably don't trust him on just how urgently we need to depose Saddam or just have rosy that aftermath is likely to be.
3b) My point is not that anyone needs to like Ben Shapiro, but just to clarify what I think his views / objectives are. He's not trying to get revenge for the burning of the Second Temple. But of course, he's not going to help you destroy the ADL either.
4) Getting back to DeSantis... Just because someone takes your money doesn't mean they are a reliable ally. Lenin took money from German intelligence - how did that go for them? I don't personally have any great insight into his character. I don't think he is a weasel, but he is also clearly not (at the moment) a revolutionary. He's the "try to go back to the 1990s" option. Trump is the "try to go back to the 1950s" option. Where one stands on him I think is in large part about where one stands on that question.
In response to 2a).
Therfore what? That because they are such a large fraction, they should be allowed to run roughshod without pushback. Then you cite two examples as reasons not to. Like a veiled threat if one were to go against American Jewish interests? Interesting. Just looking for clarification.
Think Nehru more than Hitler if you really feel we need to do something.
Having said that, I view the Gen X and younger generation of Jews as comparatively garbage, so you might not have to do anything.
The issue facing American's in 10-20 years is probably either technological (AI / Biotech) or Geopolitical (China et al). Jewish power is going to decline precipitously anyway, because:
1) As mentioned, the younger generations are lazy and spoiled like boomer gentiles.
2) Jews are not good at manipulating non whites (or not as good). That is for example, one can't easily morally blackmail upper caste Indians. It's like the Watto scene in Star Wars. Or as another example, I've yet to see a Mexican that feels guilty over the holocaust. Just because a lot of Jews thought racially diversifying the US was a good idea doesn't mean they were right. Anglos (i.e. Americans) are just as good at leading diverse coalitions as anyone else.
The real medium term issue facing American's, imo, if it is driven by elite demographics, is that you'll get an "Amazon Effect" where 90%+ of Americans (and everyone else) are stuck in the warehouse with a rainbow corporate elite sitting on top of them. Probably that elite will be more pitiless if it is diverse, and I'm sure the diverse public will struggle harder to organize for better treatment.
I honestly don't know what to do about that... I think software and 21st century technology in general is tyrannical (in the George Orwell "You and the Atom Bomb" sense).
Probably wokeness will go down over time (it's not actually a Jewish movement - it's more like a lab escape event from the universities)... Jewish behavior will likely improve as China gets more threatening etc.
Or Dall-e 5 will enslave us all. Something like that.
My views anyway.
But why exactly do the "powers that be" like this? You mean they like a corrupt, scheming, self serving cadre of people that reflexively lie and throw Americans under the bus? You haven't explained your point.
And certainly your other point about these people being needed for global power is incorrect.....An American country run by Americans would still be able to exercise power.. We notice a distinct lack of them,for example, in front line forces or anything that requires bravery anywhere.
Regardless of if their behaviour improves—which it never has—the damage and subversion already done calls for something more than apologising and explaining it away. "They've destroyed and subverted our culture for the past 100 years, initiated replacement migration and economically looted our countries, but its fine, because, well, something about a warehouse in the future."
I don't think semantics will help you here.
For what it's worth, I am all for an immigration moratorium and brining back the Hayes code.
But, it's a complex situation. I'm not saying that as a narrative tactic - I have no control over policymaking and this isn't a debate in public.
"Are they worth it" has been asked for centuries. If it were easy to answer, it would have been answered 200 years ago.
The powers that be like:
1) Silicon Valley Tech (Intel, Google, FB, etc.).
2) Hollywood persuading the world with pro-USA propaganda (less pro-USA recently, admittedly)
3) NY beating London as the center of Global Finance
4) Manhattan Project
5) etc. etc. etc.
I'm not being coy. It really is an extremely difficult issue. You might not like Marx or Trotsky but how do you feel about Einstein and Feynman?
If the NSDAP view of "poisonous mushrooms" were correct, Europeans would have figured it out centuries ago. Euros aren't that stupid. The issue is that it's a complex and difficult set of tradeoffs that ISN'T stable over time.
The USA is a big boat that turns slowly. If a core component of its 20th century system has acted as a large net benefit up through, say, the 1950s, and a modest net benefit through say, the 1990s, you can't expect US Elites to go berserk on a dime and start calling for expulsion (or what have you) based on a few bad decades, nor based on the realization that Americans were paying more than they thought even during the good years.
It's like finding out the co-founding partner of your law firm, who was instrumental in building it into a massive success, did some sleazy stuff behind your back in the 80s. Are you going to break up the firm over it? Maybe yes, maybe no, but it's not an easy decision. Breakup would mean that the other partner will walk out the door with a third of your clients, a huge disruption to operations, a massive public relations nightmare, etc.
It's not evasive to say it's tough.
Sorry? Just reorganizing. Does it break replies or something?
TBF de Santis’ base contains a lot of Florida Jews, so I don’t think he is acting out of turn here, just working the system and it does no harm on the fundraising front - there’s no money in anti-semitism except from some Muslims and they aren’t on his side in any event.
I guess ultimately my question for AA is: is Matt Walsh (who I'm no fan of) incorrect in that statement about Trump and DeSantis? Trump was beaten by the dumbest oldest people in DC and did far less with his power than DeSantis is doing from the govs mansion in Tallahassee. Walsh can be wrong for all the reasons you've outlined, but still be right about Trump vs DeSantis.
Desantis? More like CRINGEsantis amirite?