Classic EssaysRevilo P. Oliver

America after the Holy War, part 12

Dominance of Jews over Whites in America, 1937: Stephen S. Wise (foreground left) of the American Jewish Congress meets with Washington, DC area Christian minister Harry A. Atkinson (foreground right) at Washington’s Willard Hotel; the agenda: totally Jewish — to discuss ways to “combat anti-Semitism.” This meeting also included numerous other subservient White “leaders,” including military men and members of Congress. According to Library of Congress records of the meeting, “This group was responsible for the first bill brought up in the special session of Congress making it unlawful ‘to teach or advocate principles of government based on discrimination against individuals of any particular race or religious creed.'”

parts 1234567891011

by Revilo P. Oliver

AN OBJECTIVE DISCUSSION OF the Jews would infuriate them — understandably and, from their point of view, righteously — because it would threaten the bases of their power. It would also exasperate those among us who hate them, because we should have to concede to them some virtues that are superior by our own standards, first of all, their absolute loyalty to their own race. It would be possible to argue that no Jew, despite the intense antagonism between individuals and factions, has ever committed treason against his own people, but we need not try to determine the putative motives of such rare individuals as Raymond Martin, Pfefferkorn, and Samuel Roth. Those who can be suspected of betrayal are certainly rare, and although Aryans like to talk about the greed and unscrupulous rapacity of the Jews, they would do well to remember — and ponder with shame — the fact that, so far as I know, there is no example of a Jew who betrayed his race for a bribe or profit.

There are instances of racial loyalty that at first sight seem to us unbelievable. Virtually all of the opulent and luxurious ghetto in Frankfurt am Main was destroyed by fire in 1711, and the Jews believed that the conflagration had been caused in spite by a Kabbalist named Cohen, who, to be sure, prudently fled to Prague. But there seems to have been a singular lack of resentment against Cohen, who was not hunted down and was permitted to attain eminence among his fellow Kabbalists in Poland and the Ukraine. One explanation of his odd immunity is that the Jews of Frankfurt, who even issued a quite handsome gold medal with an inscription that described the devastating fire as having occurred with the permission of their god, resolved not to excite a scandal that would increase suspicion of their race.

An even more singular example is the fact that Jews, including those who resided in Germany during the Hitlerian regime, evince no resentment or even disapproval of the intensive efforts of their Zionists before 1939 to instigate pogroms in Germany as a means of arousing among the goyim in Britain and the United States enthusiasm for a crusade against the Germans and for a repetition of the Jews’ seizure of Palestine as described in the Old Testament. It is true that the Zionists were unable to incite the Germans to a massacre of the Jews in Germany and thus had to devise the hoax about the “six million” after the war they had induced by other means, but their efforts to sacrifice a part of their own people, which seem shocking to us, are evidently regarded by the Jews as proper and justified by the strategic purpose. They apply, as they have done throughout their long history, the one absolute standard: “Is it good or bad for the Jewish people?” We make foolish jokes about that criterion, instead of recognizing a capacity for self-sacrifice that is admirable by our own standards and is also a biological force that assures the survival and promotes the dominion of the international race on Earth.

Aryans are also a small minority on this planet, but how many members of our race seem to have even an inkling of that fact? We may have to ponder that question for several minutes before we think of Commodore Josiah Tattnall, who, in June 1859, exclaimed “Blood is thicker than water,” and led the American squadron to the assistance of the British gunboats that were hard pressed as they tried to pass the forts at the mouth of the Pei-ho river. And if we rack our memories, we may eventually extract ten or a dozen more names from the past two centuries and all our nations. I see no monument to Tattnall, and I suspect that if the little punks that are hatched out by the public boob-incubators heard of him, they would spit on his memory. You will remember that not long ago, when it was desired to keep Americans under the illusion that they were “fighting Communism” in Vietnam, swarms of the disgusting creatures were sent out to protest and demonstrate, and they howled because darling Mongolians were being killed, but one never heard from them a word of sympathy or compassion for the young men of our race who were being butchered in that bloody fraud.

There are no monuments to Tattnall, but Americans have been taught to venerate a particularly vicious homicidal maniac named John Brown, who, after a long series of murders in Kansas, appointed himself President of the United States and slipped into Virginia in the hope that he could enjoy seeing White men, mutilated but alive, hanging by their heels from trees while their intestines were pulled out of their bodies and torches were used to ignite their hair, and he yearned to see White women blinded and herded together in pigpens, but kept alive for the amusement of black beasts. And those facts were, of course, well known to the liars, chiefly of degenerate Puritan stock, who started the canonization of Brown and publicly compared him to Jesus Christ as they labored to arouse enthusiasm for an invasion of the more civilized states in the southern half of the nation — enthusiasm for the war that they greatly enjoyed, to say nothing of its aftermath, when they so richly appeased their sadistic lusts with the suffering they inflicted on the conquered White population. That, it seems, is the “idealism” Americans love.

And there is no need to multiply the many examples from the recent past. Today, you can watch “educators” gloat as White children are hauled around in buses so that they can be spat on, robbed, beaten, and raped by savages. And you can see our clergymen lick their lips in joyous anticipation of the time when the White men and women of Rhodesia will be pauperized, virtually enslaved, and eventually butchered.

This spectacle of insane racial hatred — hatred of our own race by some of its members — does not perturb our people. They all willingly subsidize it through their taxes and many contribute further subsidies through their churches, and, so far as we can tell, not one in a thousand Americans (or Englishmen or Swedes et al.) feels even a momentary qualm, to say nothing of uttering (or even muttering) one word of protest.

The cause of this psychopathic state of sadism blended with masochism is not quite certain. Our minds may have been rotted by centuries of Christian and “Liberal” superstitions about “love of all mankind” and morbid preoccupation with whatever is lowly, inferior, proletarian, diseased, deformed, and degenerate. Or it may represent a biological degeneracy, a progressive atrophy of the vital instincts, for which there can be no remedy.

Let us assume, however, that we have been brought to this suicidal mania by the cunning of the Jews, who are unmistakably using other devices to afflict and destroy us. That, to be sure, is very wicked by our standards, but (as we must recognize, if we are to be rational) not by theirs.

For a long time our people in North America thought that the American Indians were children of Satan, diabolically evil creatures, because they scalped their victims, fought by skulking behind trees, treacherously murdered defenseless women, children, and other non-combatants in our settlements, and were guilty of many other “crimes against humanity.” Eventually, however, we realized that they were not inspired by Satan, were not innately evil, and also realized that they could not be transformed into White men by telling them our favorite myths and sprinkling them with, or dousing them in, magic water. They were a biologically different race, so different from ours that no real comity was possible, and they fought by methods that seemed entirely right and proper according to their own standards, using, indeed, the only weapons with which they could defend the land that we wanted to take from them — the land to which we had a right by our own standards and our race’s need for new territory. And we proved our right — that we were the superior race by the only criteria that have real meaning.

The Jews’ major weapons are, and always have been, cunning and deceit — except in rare situations, they have no other. Their use of these weapons is justified by their own standards, their sublime confidence in their immeasurable intellectual and moral superiority to all other races. And without cunning and deceit they could not survive. They are a tiny minority — much smaller than the Aryans — on this planet, and they are the only human race that is by nature parasitic on other races, just as we are parasitic on cattle, sheep, horses, and other animals that we use for food or enslave. So far as the historical evidence goes, the Jews never had a “homeland,” only a kind of capital they established after they dispossessed the inhabitants of part of Palestine, probably, as they admit in moments of candor, by fraud and deceit, although their legends speak of military aggression and conquest.

When Jews first appear in history, they are an international race with colonies in many lands. (The tale about a Diaspora after the siege of Jerusalem in AD 69 is, of course, just another hoax.) They always maintained a very large colony in Babylon, which they betrayed to Cyrus and the Persians in 538 BC, just as, much later, they habitually betrayed the Graeco-Roman cities of Asia Minor to the Parthians. During the Graeco-Roman period, in fact, Babylon was their real capital, the seat of their Nasi, the Chief Executive of their international nation. In oracles that they forged near the beginning of the second century BC under the name of an early Greek prophetess, the Jews boast that all the lands and seas of the Earth are full of them. In the first century BC, Strabo, one of the foremost geographers of antiquity, stated that it was almost impossible to find an inhabited place on Earth into which the Jewish race had not penetrated and acquired an effective control over the natives. And at that time, although Strabo probably did not know it, they were already in China, where they have today an influential but unnumbered colony. In the first century of the present era, Josephus repeatedly boasts that there is no people anywhere on the globe who do not have a segment of the Jewish race lodged among them. Other Jewish writers agree, of course.

It would probably be no exaggeration to say that ever since some indeterminably early date no people on Earth has become prosperous enough to have property worth taking without having Jews appear to get some of it. And the Jews, always whining about persecution and using their own religion to enlist sympathy and conceal their real but clandestine power, have survived and flourished, outlasting all their victims. And this they have been able to do only through their phenomenal ability — their genius — for deceiving the peoples on whom they feed and whom they eventually destroy.

Now all this is reprehensible and wicked by our standards, not by theirs. Their right to our property is exactly like our right to the Indians’ land: a certainty of their own superiority. And they are using their only weapons as we used ours. And although you may disapprove of the weapons (and what do you suppose the Indians thought of firearms?), if they batten on us and destroy us, as they have so many nations, they will have proved that they are biologically superior.

The Jews are a unique race. They began, so far as we know, with a belief that they had made a bargain with a god who was stronger than some or many other gods, and when they learned that there were goyim who were monotheists, they probably began to claim their tribal god as the one universal god for propaganda purposes, but they soon, I think, convinced themselves. It paid.

The Jews are a unique race, and the secret of their strength is disclosed in all their writings. As Maurice Samuel phrases it concisely, religious Jews always conceived God as a Big Jew. And Jews who are atheists nevertheless have a god in whom they have an ardent, unshakable, and instinctive faith: the Jewish People — the Master Race whose vast superiority has been demonstrated by its survival. This is no figure of speech: It is a psychological fact. As Samuel says, “The feeling in the Jew, even in a free-thinking Jew like myself, is that to be one with his people is to be thereby admitted to the power of enjoying the infinite. You may be, as I am, unable to comprehend such a feeling, but do not be so foolish as to ignore it or to underestimate its power in history and the world today.”

I have written these few pages, not to examine the Jewish problem, but only to show why it was not feasible in 1955 — and may not be feasible today — to discuss the Jews in political writings that are intended to be factual and rational, as distinct from anti-Jewish propaganda.

On the one hand, one could not — and cannot — appeal directly and cogently to a scholarly and scientific audience in terms of books that are yet unwritten. The data are available but scattered in hundreds of sources in different fields of knowledge, and in an age of ever-increasing specialization in minutely divided areas of research, historical, linguistic, and biological, few men are likely to have encountered more than a small number of seemingly random data in their own work, and many will have noticed none at all. For sixteen centuries the minds of our race have been injected with the idea that veneration of the Jews is the beginning of wisdom, and even the perpetual whining about “persecution” has been accepted as evidence of some moral superiority. Even in anthropology, the very concept of an international race that exhibits the physical characteristics of many different races is as novel as was Lavoisier’s idea about oxygen in his day, and requires as careful demonstration.

In genetics, the little that is certain indicates the need for intensive research that is now, for all practical purposes, forbiddeny. In short one would have to begin with a treatise that brings together the data now scattered in many and diverse sources and examine each datum critically and without prejudice — a study at once historical and biological, and written with the cold objectivity of the vue de Sirius. Such a work would require more pages than Gibbon’s Decline and Fall and more years than he spent on his masterpiece.

And, incidentally, if the treatise were written, who would brave the Jewish Terror to publish an expensive and unpopular work? Occult but irresistible powers would assure his financial ruin, with assassination a possibility, if he did not cringe promptly.

On the other hand, one could not discuss the Jews rationally without infuriating the Christians. A factual consideration of the Jewish problem must begin with rejection of the greatest and most pernicious of all their hoaxes, the Self-chosen People’s impudent claim to have been chosen by God to inherit the Earth. But although the Christians have tacitly jettisoned many articles of their faith, they cling desperately to the central theme of their mythology, the unique holiness of the Jews. That they will not abandon. Nominal Christians want no further impairment of a religion they believe socially necessary. Believing Christians, retaining the faith that was developed during the Middle Ages, now hold to what is really a mysticism, and if they read their Holy Writ, they do so in the light of preconceptions so strong that they, like Ophelia’s friends, botch the words up to fit their own thoughts. The facts of history, if not denied with feminine outcries, are stored in a drawer that is tightly closed before the drawer of faith is opened. And the two groups include many of the most amiable, honest, and estimable Aryans to be found in this hapless nation.

In 1955, the only feasible thing to do, for a man who was determined to be a critic, not a propagandist, was “to concentrate on the “Liberals” and Bolsheviks, and, at most, to drop an occasional hint that might set an alert reader to thinking about antecedents and causes.

(to be continued)

parts 1234567891011

* * *

Source: America’s Decline

Previous post

Race Above All

Next post

The Changing of the Names

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedback
View all comments