Sign In
0 Items (
Search
Comments (37)
The current crisis over the Israeli-Gaza conflict is only the beginning; the culture wars have become hot. Hitler’s grandchildren have announced their arrival. On the streets they harass and persecute Jews, declare their allegiance to authoritarian and racist ideologies, plan and execute terrorist attacks, stage violent demonstrations, shut down city centres and vital infrastructure, attack a priest in his church, workers in bottle shops, prowl the streets bashing gays, publish private details about hundreds of Jewish people in the arts, and interdict and silence all opposition.
Ensconced at Sydney and Melbourne Universities, with the obvious connivance of their administrations and the federal education minister, they intimidate Jewish students, disrupt classes, ‘cancel’ visiting Israeli academics, occupy protest encampments, indoctrinate little children in antisemitic hate, teach them anti-Israeli and anti-Australian slogans, conduct them in pro-Hamas chants, cover the walls with hateful posters, violently harass any opposition and, as Chris Kenny put it in The Australian, “congratulate each other on social media, order pizzas and stir-fry through Uber Eats, [secure] in nylon tents with security guards watching over them.” And all the while they call for a global intifada against the Western world, demand the destruction of Israel and the eradication of the Jewish people.
Whether they are ‘Gen Y’, ‘Millennials’, ‘Gen Z’, or whatever, they are the direct descendants of the oedipally deranged extremist offspring of the Hitler Youth generation so chillingly portrayed by Jillian Becker in Hitler’s Children: the Story of the Baader-Meinhof Gang (1978). Eyes ablaze with fanaticism, their forebears had fervently embraced Nazism and rabid anti-Semitism, and eagerly filled the ranks of the German Student Union that executed an earlier nationwide campaign of anti-Semitism. Directed by the Nazi Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, they targeted the “gutter Jewish literati [and] intellectual filth”. Compounding anti-intellectualism with anti-Ssemitism, they destroyed tens of thousands of volumes, even entire libraries and bookshops, all the while declaring themselves the unquestioning devotees of Hitler and his promise of a Judenfrei Third Reich that would last a thousand years.
Today, the main difference across generations is that Hitler’s ‘Jew-free’ regime would be ruled by an Aryan super-race, whereas the Judenfrei regime that his ideological grandchildren lust after will be an ultra-repressive theocratic absolutism and kleptocracy in which every aspect of life will be regulated according to Sharia law, women will be whipped in the streets and LGBTIQ folk will face the death penalty.
How to explain the attraction of such a totalitarian and exterminationist ideology across generations? This question has exercised the minds of scholars for decades since such ground-breaking works as Lewis Feuer’s The Conflict of Generations: The Character and Significance of Student Movements (1969). Explanations vary, but it appears clear that there is a perennial need amongst a significant cohort of young people for totalizing explanations that seek to encompass and radically simplify the complexity of the world, reducing it to a few simple factors (e.g., American Imperialism, Zionism, the Jewish World Conspiracy, etc.) that serve to rationalize or justify political positions rooted in deeper psychological pathologies.
It is a feature of the current politico-cultural crisis in the West that this ideological syndrome is now championed as the concept of ‘intersectionality’, which purports to reduce all forms of alleged oppression, victimhood, and exploitation to a common source (e.g., those listed above, plus capitalism, colonialism, the patriarchy, white supremacism, etc.). It is for this reason that otherwise quite incongruous groups (e.g., feminists and LGBTIQ folk, and misogynistic and homophobic Islamists) feel ideologically comfortable joining together in the present anti-Israel/pro-Hamas coalition of hate. For example, a radical antisemitic, pro-Hamas academic has declared she feels comfortable attacking Israel and Jews because it is her duty “as somebody who fights all forms of oppression and violence [and] who opposes racism, misogyny, homophobia and all forms of oppressive harm.” This was when Hamas still held 130 Israeli hostages taken during the October 7 massacre and as various Muslim countries make homosexuality a capital crime.
Given the availability of this readily radicalized cohort, the task for the radical ringmasters is to mobilize it around the desired political objectives (i.e., anti-Western and antisemitic rage) and this requires leadership and direction. And this involves the same well-organized and trained militant cadre that has appeared, sometimes as if from nowhere, during such campaigns as Black Lives Matter, Antifa, the Voice, anti-Australia Day, Anti-Anzac, Extinction Rebellion, and in previous radical upsurges dating back to the 1960s. Usually associated with far-left groups like Socialist Alternative (The self-proclaimed “largest left-wing revolutionary group in Australia …with a national presence and an expanding membership.”), such militants follow the strategy of entryism and are embedded, along with their foot soldiers, supporters and enablers, within the ALP, the Greens, the universities and schools, the intelligentsia, arts and the media (especially the ABC), the unions (e.g., the NTEU), the public service and various government agencies (e.g., the AHRC, the ARC, the eSafety Commissioner), the social services, ministerial and electoral offices, the expansive NGO sector, and increasingly in corporate positions.
Meanwhile, many of the familiar faces amongst the foot soldiers at protests are happy to survive on government handouts via Centrelink, the NDIS, the Australia Council, etc. Ironically, this cadre is also happy to disclose its insurrectionist strategy, as we will see shortly, content in the knowledge that their activity, being of the left, faces little or no sanction from a complicit political elite and compliant police forces, all overseen by ALP governments.
Their arrogance, self-conceit, and sense of invulnerability are also encouraged by the manner in which our security services have been deliberately hamstrung by the present Federal Government, an administration dominated by career politicians who cut their teeth in university politics where they imbibed this far-left, anti-Western and antisemitic ideology. Its connivance in the explosion of antisemitism and Islamist extremism is exemplified by the exclusion of the Director-General of ASIO from the Australia’s National Security Committee of Federal Cabinet, and by the fact that the government, as Peter Jennings of Strategic Analysis Australia writes, “has no interest in strengthening the police or intelligence agencies in the counter-terrorism work because they worry it would counter their pandering to the Muslim vote in Sydney and Melbourne and lose progressive support to the Greens.” Indeed, the Federal Education Minister is completely beholden to the 60,000 Muslims in his electorate, and the ALP’s subservience to this ‘entitled’ constituency was reflected in the latter’s righteous indignation at the temerity of the Counter-Terrorism Taskforce in not consulting them prior to a series of pre-emptive raids and arrests of a large number of juveniles on very serious terror-related charges.
The convergence of militant Islamism with various neo-Marxist organizations began in the Sixties (c.1965 to 1974), an extremely important era of social, cultural and political turmoil whose importance in the genealogy of the current crisis is presently being assessed in several important works (e.g., Christopher Rufo, America’s Cultural Revolution: How the Radical Left Conquered Everything, 2023). Exploding at the height of the Cold War, it was characterized by the anti-war movement, the massive expansion of tertiary education, and the rise of the neo-Marxist New Left. For a time, a vast range of possibilities appeared to open up, but paradoxically a significant cohort exploited this period of unprecedented liberty to embrace extremist ideologies that promoted the radical overthrow of the very system that provided this liberty. Led by the New Left and the ‘Adversary Culture’ centred on the rapidly expanding university sector and fed by the very efficient agit-prop activity of the Soviet Union, Communist China, and their epigones and domestic agents, fellow travelers and useful idiots, the period entrenched an intense and militant self-hatred in liberal democratic societies, the fruit of which can be seen in our universities’ absurdly self-righteous refusal to accept many millions of dollars from the Ramsay Centre to establish courses on Western Civilisation, while, e.g., the ANU accepted $2million each from Dubai, Iran, and Turkey for a Centre for Arab and Islamic Studies.
At the broadest strategic level, this ‘unholy alliance’ of Islamism and neo-Marxism aims not at forcing concessions from liberal democratic society but seeks instead to undermine its core values and destroy its basic social and cultural fabric. Its ultimate aim is the extinction of liberal democracy, and to that end it regards its political enemies not as rivals for power within a shared and respected constitutional regime, but as representatives of an intrinsically evil and corrupt system that has no right to exist and must be ‘cancelled’ and eventually eradicated. It is the dark legacy of the ‘Sixties that the radical cohort described above embraces this worldview.
The unholy alliance occurred at a time when the Western revolutionary tradition had reached an impasse in its search for a viable Revolutionary Subject to lead the total social transformation it has always desired. Over the past two centuries this agent has variously been identified with the people; the nation; the industrial proletariat; the peasantry; the lumpenproletariat; the intelligentsia; the oppressed masses of the Third World; and, since the Sixties, various coalitions of students, artists, writers, blacks, women, the LGBTQI community, and various ‘victims’ groups, and now, as we are seeing, radical Islamist groups, represented by al Qaeda, ISIS, and Hamas. Despite their extremely reactionary nature, the contemporary left is attracted to these Islamist groups because they are perceived to be the latest incarnation of the revolutionary force that will transform their world.
It was, of course, the industrial proletariat that was to be in the vanguard of the revolution, and its failure to fulfil this role led the New Left to conceive of itself as embedded within a seamless system of total and malevolent power that totally encompassed Western society. It therefore looked to external agents of revolutionary change and came to support various campaigns of decolonization and anti-imperialism, and romanticized Third World revolutionary movements and figures, coming to believe that their theories of revolutionary action could be pursued within advanced industrial societies. This shift involved the adoption of a neo-Marxist model of political economy that sought to analyze the global economy in terms of the ‘exploitation’ of the Third World by the central capitalist powers of the West. Some version of the ‘external proletariat’ located in the Third World therefore became the new Revolutionary Subject, while the enemy and the principal agents of oppression were seen now as Western societies in their totality. These were viewed as inherently corrupt and therefore legitimate targets for radical political action, including mass systemic disruption and terrorism targeting ordinary people and civil society (cf. M. Bendle, “Existential Terrorism: Civil Society and its Enemies,” Australian Journal of Politics and History. 52(1), 2006).
Various statements of this radical ideology can readily be found on-line and in inner-city bookshops (e.g., Gleebooks in Sydney and Readings in Melbourne), but a succinct and revealing statement is provided by The Coming Insurrection, 2009) Attributed to ‘The Invisible Committee’, The Coming Insurrection appeared in French in 2007. Epitomizing the above worldview, it depicts every area of modern life as a site of desolation, oppression, and exploitation, while reducing the complexities of the modern world to simple slogans and ‘sound bites’. Nevertheless, a review of its English translation (2009) in the leftist New Statesman, declared it to be “without a doubt the most thought-provoking radical text to be published in the past ten years. It deserves to be read and discussed”, while the New York Times sympathetically portrayed its view of the West as a “diseased and dehumanizing civilization that cannot be reformed but must … be torn apart and replaced”. Consequently, it quickly became influential in various neo-Marxist, Trotskyist, anarcho-autonomist, anti-colonialist, anti-globalization, BLM, antisemitic, and related movements.
Like The Communist Manifesto, upon which it models itself, The Coming Insurrection is explicitly apocalyptic in its analysis of Western Civilisation, which it despises as “clinically dead [and only] kept alive by all sorts of life-support machines that spread a peculiar plague into the planet’s atmosphere”. Consequently, “what we’re facing is not the crisis of a society but the extinction of a civilization … its clinical death”, and what is required of radicals is “to decide for the death of civilization”, and to then commit themselves to its extinction by joining in direct revolutionary action against the entire system.
The new manifesto claims to speak for an alienated generation that “has known nothing but economic, financial, social and ecological crisis”, and it then itemizes the various components of what it sees as a quickly evolving revolutionary situation: the global financial crisis and associated crimes and scandals; environmental destruction and climate change; political incompetence and corruption; booming unemployment; urban degradation and riots; the failure of the educational system; irreversible demographic shifts; ethnic conflict and anti-migration sentiment; the war on terror; the alienation of youth; inter-generational conflict; the collapse of the welfare state; anti-globalization violence; and chaos in various parts of the world, most especially in the Middle-East.
This apocalyptic scenario is embraced as the final systemic crisis that will overwhelm liberal democracies and open the path for successful revolutionary action against what The Coming Insurrection depicts as a global system of domination exercised by a vast transnational ‘Empire’, a planetary apparatus of exploitation led by the United States and ‘the Jews’. Opposing this will be the ‘Insurrection’, as the alienated masses exploit “the truly revolutionary potentiality of the present”, and implement a new regime of liberation, conceived as “the matrix of a meticulous, audacious assault on domination”, led by the marginalized groups noted above and insurgent Islamist movements. In the face of this revolt, “the future has no future”.
As we are seeing, the front line in the coming insurrection will be the modern metropolis, “one of the most vulnerable human arrangements that has ever existed”, and a system particularly susceptible to a “brutal shutting down of borders … a sudden interruption of supply lines [and] organized blockades of the axes of communication”, so that “the whole façade crumbles [as it] can no longer mask the scenes of carnage haunting it from morning to night”. The manifesto stresses the central role that terrorist attacks on communications and other forms of infrastructure can play in the urban guerrilla warfare that will characterize the coming insurrection.
In doing so they would have been closely following the strategy of previous generations of European ultra-left urban guerrilla and terrorist groups, including the first of ‘Hitler’s Children’, i.e., the German Red Army Faction, which carried out a program of assassinations and bombings in the 1970s and worked closely with the PLO, the PFLP, the PFLP-GC, and Fatah, etc. Similar forerunners include the Italian Proletarian Action Group, whose founder, Giangiacomo Feltrinelli, was killed while trying to blow up high-voltage power lines near Milan in 1972; and the Italian Red Brigades, which launched a major campaign of assassination, violence, and destruction against Italy in the 1970s, nearly destroying democracy in that country.
The political and theoretical influence of such groups on The Coming Insurrection is obvious from its violent and hysterical language, radical arguments and concepts, anti-Western extremism, and its advocacy of direct action. It is also revealed in Introduction to Civil War, a manifesto published in Tiqqun, a neo-Marxist philosophy journal founded in 2005 by Julien Coupet, a failed doctoral candidate and probable principal author of The Coming Insurrection. Intended to supplement The Coming Insurrection, this new tract depicts liberal democratic society as already in a state of disintegration, and as held together only by the increasingly intrusive and oppressive activity of the capitalist state which acts as the local administrative arm of ‘Empire’. Out of this chaos will emerge a state of civil war, which radicals should embrace as an opportunity to establish a new form of libertarian communism.
These tracts showcase the tradition of radical French irrationalism shaped, e.g., by such influential theorists of postmodernism and deconstructionism as Michel Foucault, Giles Deleuze, Jacques Derrida, Félix Guattari, etc., but the references to ‘Empire’ also directs attention to the work of the far-left Italian philosophers, Giorgio Agamben and Antonio Negri, particularly the latter’s extremely influential radical diatribes against the West, (co-authored with Michael Hardt) Empire (2000), Multitude (2004), and ‘Empire: Twenty years On’ (2019) These works depict the global ‘Empire’ in terms of a pyramid of power that must be attacked. At the top, wielding ‘monarchical’ domination over the world, are ‘the Jews’, America, NATO, the G8, IMF, WTO and similar agents of global capitalism, which are to be targets of direct action, sabotage, terrorism, etc. Beneath them is the economic oligarchy of multinational corporations and subservient nation-states. Incredibly, it is claimed that ‘true’ democracy exists only in the political realm dominated by unrepresentative bodies like the United Nations and various international NGOs, such as Greenpeace, with parliamentary democracy rejected as a sham that merely perpetuates capitalism. This set of ideas is quite influential throughout the Australian left.
Negri’s role has been crucial in the development of this extremist tradition. He was the leading ideologue of the Red Brigades when the group carried out its most notorious terrorist action – the kidnapping of former Prime Minister, Aldo Moro, and the murder of his five bodyguards. Moro was held for weeks while the Red Brigades telephoned his family to taunt them, before finally murdering him and dumping his body. The telephone voice was linked to Negri, and he was subsequently convicted in connection with this and other terrorist murders. However, he escaped to France where he remained for 14 years, teaching at leading universities with the theorists noted above. Terrorism associated with the Red Brigades occurred in waves regularly after the 1970s and The Coming Insurrection signaled the appropriation of its underlying ideology by Hitler’s grandchildren as they indulge in their ultra-left, antisemitic onslaught on Western society.
Nowhere is this rhetorical hyperbole more obvious than in the tract’s indictment of the modern self, which it depicts as operating “in a permanent state of deterioration, in a chronic state of near-collapse”. The author laments desperately that “everything that attaches me to the world, all the links that constitute me, all the forces that compose me don’t form an identity”, but merely an existence within a system that wants only to control, regulate, and placate a population that has become “the paradise of anti-depressants, the Mecca of neurosis … sickness, fatigue [and] depression”, as “the hypothesis of the self is beginning to crack”. Mental life in such a world is characterized by “individualization of all conditions – life, work and misery. Diffuse schizophrenia. Rampart depression. Atomization into fine paranoiac particles. Hysterization of contact”.
Such references to mental disease, dissociation, depression, and the disintegration of identity recur throughout the book, and it is impossible to ignore the impression that it reflects the turmoil of very troubled minds. For all its revolutionary fervour the entire tract, along with the appalling claims once more being made on the streets and in the schools and universities about ‘the Jews’, may best be read as a gigantic exercise in projection, with their frenzied hatred betraying a deep inner conflict. Certainly they exhibit a pathological vision and for anyone to embrace this insurrectionary fantasy-world would be to step literally into insanity and mindless violence.
Tragically, as the murderous and destructive history of extremism over the past half-century shows, and as we now see in our streets and universities, this is no barrier for Hitler’s grandchildren.
Bron
I wonder how long it will take for Hitler’s illegitimate son to make a comment?
Bron,
Could I request you be more specific there? Hitler, amongst his admittedly far more objectionable features, was a right-wing ratbag. Whom of the numerous latter such, so abundant on this QO site, did you have in mind?
Hitler was a right wing ratbag?
Could you be more ignorant of Nazism – they were after all National Socialists. They differed from the Soviet communists. Who they fought for the spoils of Europe, only in leaving the ownership of capital in the hands of the industrialists (as long as they behaved) rather than state ownership.
They merely interpreted and applied Marx and Engels differently and mixed in some mystical environmentalism and rampant anti semitism for good measure. The Muslim Brotherhood was an early bedfellow of the Nazis.
Nazism was extreme left.
Nice try. National Socialism was nationalist, esteeming the German people, and socialist but it was world’s apart from Bolshevism which was atheistic statism. Nat Socs encouraged private home ownership for families with policies analogous to Orban’s in Hungary. Class boundaries were encouraged to be removed by fraternisation not by murder or gulags for the bourgeoisie. It had to compete with Bolshevism for the minds of the people and it won out until it was too successful and had to be crushed.
chuckp61:
“…they were after all National Socialists. … leaving the ownership of capital in the hands of the industrialists (as long as they behaved) rather than state ownership…. Nazism was extreme left.”
Only they had a funny way of showing it: invading Stalinist Russia, and murdering communists, socialists, social-democrats and liberals of all persuasions by the trainload. ‘National Socialism’ was a marketing label, no more: and Hitler tailored it to meet his political needs in the context of the Great Depression of the 1930s. That was when Germany was hit with its highest ever unemployment, and socialism was on the rise world-wide as a result of the clash of empire-building and imperialist ambition that had finished up as World War 1.
But if you are so easily hoodwinked by such labels, I would not be surprised to learn that you carefully check for parrot feathers any bottle of Rosella Tomato Sauce you may be considering purchasing. Though admittedly, the odd feather or two from a galah may have got into the bottle as well; even a couple from a white cockatoo. Understandable move if you do. You can’t be too careful these days.
In our overwhelming majority we are believers in the public ownership of what are called ‘public utilities:’ highways, by-ways, the air, solar radiation, etc. But even in the heyday of Thatcherite neoliberalism, I did not notice anyone out there campaigning for the privatisation of all of that. (Even Thatcher had her limits.) Still, private tollways were were a nice little earner in their time, for the aristocracy through whose lands they passed.
And Hitler was a right-wing ratbag.
National SOCIALIST Party is right wing. Well I never…
You suckered too, Roger? You surprise me.!
(Aside: Life is full of them, I suppose..)
If the German National Socialist Party was all about individual autonomy and freedoms how do you explain its collectivist appeal to co-opt all institutions and civil society into one central social ideal where all of societies effort was concentrated. That is text book socialism right there. That so many fell under its spell is a testament to the power of the useful idiot as exemplified in your comment.
Very drole post but by the original definition from the Estates-Generales the right wing stood for monarchical and aristocratic authority and the Catholic church. Whilst Hitler grew up in the Catholic church, enjoyed its rituals and made a compact with it he was not a supporter of the inherited aristocracy per se, introducing a much more fluid status hierarchy based on service to the nation. So he wasnt right wing. He had a levelling policy aimed at mixing the classes together, socially, not necessarily sexually. There was also significant state intervention in commerce and infrastructure development with subsidized holidays for workers “Kraft durch Freude”. However there were precious few actual handouts. Still overall I would say his was as advertised, a socialist system.
.
Individual freedom of action was encouraged in NS but this was always meant to be subordinated to duty. Each person was encouraged to think how he could best perform to benefit the nation or humanity more broadly (as long as not detrimental to Germany).
Thank you Mervyn for such a powerful summary of the forces gathering against us.
You pull the veil away from the puppet-masters who are choreographing the useful idiots wreaking such destruction on our society.
You also identify some of the incoherence of their rantings, and point out the profound weakness of their basis, which is their projection upon the world of a truly sick and paranoid mind.
Identifying and publicising these realities may swing some people to wake up to the horrors being planned for them. However with the bureaucracy, Government, academia, the media and the arts all completely corrupted, this will not stop the barbarians.
In our favor is the obvious fact that the majority of these useful idiots are fundamentally useless. They are too feeble and cowardly to be warriors. They are too deluded to be successful merchants. They are utterly unskilled so unable to sustain a trade. Their manifestos show that they are intellectual midgets with sick minds. They are people who are smart enough to have a gnawing feeling that they are failures. And they hate the world for that.
(Of course that is not universal. The likes of Soros and others are malignant and with the patience and wherewithal to execute their obsessions.)
All the useless idiots and their leaders have is the ability to appeal to similarly deformed personalities.
If we wish to defeat them, It is necessary to attack the alliances that these natural enemies have created. It can’t be that hard to turn religious extremists against efete academic who demand LGBTQI+
The future looks increasingly likely to be speckled with blood. It is up to decent people to prepare themselves to deal with the revolution when it comes to get them.
Sorry, Mervyn, but opposition to the war crimes of neofascist Zionist Israel has nothing to do with Hitler or neomarxism.
Rather, the reverse. Zionist Israel was founded with acts of terrorism and civil war in pursuit of Hertzl and Ben Gurion’s ideology of seizing the land of Palestine from Arab Palastinians, driving them out of Palestine (the Nakbah, remember?) and 75 years of wars against Zionist Israel’s Arab neighbours. The latest “war” against Hamas with total destruction of Gaza and killing of its people is only the latest manifestation of ethnic cleansing designed to create a Zionist autocracy. Zionist Israel is a racist, intolerant society, where Arab Palestinians who remain have been deprived of full citizanship by the Israeli Nationality Law of December 2018 and 26 other racist laws. It is not a democracy, but rather a one party state (Zionists with differant factions and various degrees of extremism). Its policies of dehumanising any opponents and violence against them was adopted from Mussolini’s fascists and Bolshevist revolutionarys in eastern Europe.
America has disgraced itself by supplying the money and armaments to prop up this tyranny, in the face of egregious war crimes, but you appear to hold Zionist Israel as th epitome of modern, tolerant humanist society.
Opposition to Zionist extremism has nothing to do with anti-semitism. In fact, most younger Jewish people reject this Zionism, as did 90% of postwar Jewish emigrants from Europe, who chose to go to North America or elsewher, rather than Zionist Israel.
Wow all that talk of ‘Zionist’ this and ‘Zionist’ that like a useful idiot parrot (sorry seagull) which only goes to underscore Meryn central thesis. Now perhaps you may wish to explain where in the world Judaism and the Hebrew language arose and when?
Because there is nothing more evil to the brain-dead Neo-marxist zeitgeist than an ancient religious and cultural group seeking a homeland in the place from where they arose.!
‘Zionist Israel is a racist, intolerant society’ (Funny then how Muslim Arabs are members of the Knesset)- because we all know that Hamas run Gaza and the wider Islamic middle East is a model of Liberal democratic freedoms and not at all a collection medieval theocracies. How you rage with eyes wide shut! How could anyone take you seriously.
An eminently rational comment, seagull.
To quote…(especially);
“Opposition to Zionist extremism has nothing to do with anti-semitism. In fact, most younger Jewish people reject this Zionism, as did 90% of postwar Jewish emigrants from Europe, who chose to go to North America or elsewhere, rather than Zionist Israel”
BTW
Acknowledging the underpinning of Judeo-Christian broad-brush ethics of our current civilisation, I would like to see more prominence accorded to the Humanism part of the equation.
Erasmus and Spinoza spring to mind.
‘Opposition to Zionist extremism has nothing to do with anti-semitism. In fact, most younger Jewish people reject this Zionism, as did 90% of postwar Jewish emigrants from Europe, who chose to go to North America or elsewhere, rather than Zionist Israel”
And your evidence for ‘most younger Jewish people reject Zionism [i.e. the state of Israel)’ is?
Just another baseless antisemitic claim.
Reference for 90% of postwar Jewish emigrants from Europe choosing to go to North America is ?
Notwithstanding of course that modern Israel did not come into existence until a full 3 years after the end of World War II.
You can’t be taken seriously either – just someone else itching to express their antisemitic racism.
I posted this comment once before and was sneered at and dismissed by one of your readers. But I will post it again. Some parents approached Nazi officials in the 30’s and said, “We have concerns about many of your policies. ” The Nazis replied, “Do you think we care what you think? We have your children.”
Now, another observation.
I have thought for some years now that Australia is, (after Britain and Europe) heading for violent social disorder. In short, civil war. Why? Because violence is the response when a situation has become unreasonable and intolerable.
Last time you used this it was in a discussion about trannie children and medical cowardice and @rosross suggested we should keep the Nazis out of it. You’ll admit they do get a fair run here at QoL, Allowing that this anecdote is true and I’m not denying it could be although the phrasing seems odd, one suspects it could be the response of many an educator today which I presume was your point. Pehaps the difference is that the NatSocs were quite upfront about their anti-degeneracy Germany for the Germans policy, whereas we have to infer that the current supranational demoralisation policy of forcing belief that up is down, is aimed at destroying us; and if we do make the inference we’ll be told we’re paranoid racist loons.
Oh! Am I posting a hate comment and encouraging violence? Not at all. I deplore violence. War no more. War never again. But in a time when Judeo/Christian civilisation is being attacked, the children of God are ours to protect in a brutal and irrational world. And if we have to fight, we fight.
And so the truly insane rankings have begun
Rantings
The comment in the above article – “Such references to mental disease, dissociation, depression, and the disintegration of identity recur throughout the book, and it is impossible to ignore the impression that it reflects the turmoil of very troubled minds.” is pertinent to what is happening in our society as people such as those of the verdant persuasion and the neo-Marxists have as part of their political program the legalisation of mind-altering prohibited drugs as one tactic to undermine the West. But like Hitler, many take the stuff themselves, and it shows.
It appears to me that the left’s main complaint is that someone else has something they want and should be entitled to. The politics of envy scream long and loud from those who would destroy the very society that allows everyone to make their own choices and improve their lot in life. Selfish, self indulgent children frankly.
Mervyn, thank you for your honest insight. These young adults need daily work, real work. This young generation is the most unappreciative, and likely to be the least productive, in the history of mankind. I see it every day. Many don’t rear families, manufacture products or farm. Their self-esteem is being destroyed by the very ideologies that are brainwashed with. Walking into a room for a blood test, I greet the young phlebotomist, introduce myself and mention I’m here to have my blood taken. Absolute silence from this young girl, followed by ‘sit in the chair or bed’. What is wrong with them? Why have they lost the ability for polite interaction? They seem to lack basic civility nowadays. You are absolutely correct Mervyn regarding the damage those aforementioned institutions/agencies are wreaking on our society.
The radical left and their troubled young followers are never short of hypocrisy. They protest colonialism, globalisation, oppression, exploitation, yet are happy to have their cholesterol laden fast-food delivered to their front door in a sack on the back of a third-world immigrant riding a push bike in 40deg heat. There is a reason for the saying ‘Children should be seen and not heard’, We cannot take advice from deeply troubled minds who lack life experience and common sense.
A perfect encapsulation of the deathgrip which nihilism has on so many of us. The young are learning obedience to state power in the guise of planet-saving ideology, nation-wrecking social justice and utter contempt for older generations which ‘left them with this mess.’ They are insecure, a rational response to the atomisation of liberal individualism and to constant gloom and doom, .but simultaneously exhorted to ‘change the world’, especially young women. Once the flowers of the next generation were judged on their beauty, certainly, but also on their grace and especially in the case of the less beautiful, kindness to those around them. Unfortunately allowing unchecked narcissism, putting women into competition with men whilst trying to convince them that the playing field is hatefully tilted against them by that pack of rapists has not improved anyone’s life. All I can think of, what I’m sure many here already do, is to behave around them as you would wish them to behave and pray that the light will one day soon switch on for these damaged people.
.
This is happening because the Left has, broadly, replaced Class War with Race War as its current means of destruction of the West – by “Race War,” I mean a War by the “Global South” based on anti-white racism. Israel represents the cutting edge of this conflict, because it fights back. There has also been a “reversal of antisemitism,” with Israel being overwhelmingly supported by the West’s conservative politicians, commentator, journalists, etc., and opposed with venomous hatred by the Left. This hatred by the Left is also a component of the absurd championing here of the Aborigines, whose 65,000 years of murderous and barbaric primitive savagery is now being depicted as “civilisation,” censoring out all of its horrors, such as almost automatic infanticide, cannibalism, the endemic mistreatment of women, and the Aboriginal failure to generate an Agricultural Revolution, as much of the world experienced thousands of years ago, while at the same condemning the British settlers. The current hatred of Israel in the West is also, obviously, fanned by the vast rise in Muslim numbers here – Muslims would appear to be a major share of the pro-Palestinian demonstrators everywhere – who, no doubt, will not stop with the Jews and Israel.
It’s time to take Poland’s lead and restrict Muslim immigration.
The Cronulla Rioters warned us two decades ago. End racism now. Sorry I meant end diversity as soon as practicable. The Muslim invasion is bad but instead of cutting back on them coming in, the plan seems to be to swamp them (and us) with multitudes from India or anywhere else. All while White women who should be the mothers of the country are told to do STEM and keep their Malthusian belts on.
On top of all this, we have a federal government that, complicit with the AHRC, is going to bring in federal human rights legislation that is not aimed at protecting individual human rights at all, but certain “groups”. So our national law will inevitably privilege certain groups based on race, rather than need. This legislation will be Albo’s last hurrah to punish the Australian public for rejecting a flawed and legally invalid ‘voice’ referendum. It will be “the voice redivivus” or ‘the voice by stealth’ even though the vast majority of Australians, including indigenous people, rejected the whole idea. And they rejected it because it was a lie and a con job.
Reading Mervyn Bendle’s articles and the numerous replies to it, I get the impression that we are renewing the Crusades, but this time the Crusaders are not trying to win the Holy Land for Christendom while at the same time giving the boot to the Christ-killing Jews, no, this time the “Christians” have abandoned Jesus Christ (aka the Jewish Prophet Rabbi Yeshua who was murdered by the Jews for exposing hypocrisy within Judaism, advocating pacifism, forgiveness and universal equality for all humans) and are now supplying arms to the Jews for the establishment of the ancient nation of the Hebrews, with its boundaries to be those set out in the Torah!
.
While it will no doubt be automatically dismissed as an “anti-semitic conspiracy theory” by some, the facts would appear, as observed for more than one hundred years, that Jews (those identifying as belonging to the ancient and eternal Nation of Israel) have established themselves disproportionally in positions of influence within “Christendom” (aka The West), and have used those positions to advance the re-establishment of the ancient theocratic kingdom of Eretz Israel on the former Land of Canaan which eventually became the province of Palestine, under rule of various empires, as it has been for the last 2,000 plus years.
.
Winston S. Churchill was greatly influenced by the Rothchilds, who were the political patrons of the Churchill father and son’s careers. Churchill (the younger) was alarmed by the attraction of Ashkenazi Jews to the doctrines of Marxism, and in particular to the expansion of “Bolshevism”, and so he sought to promote Zionism as a better alternative for the political interests and actions of Jews. Churchill set out his concerns and solutions in an article published in the February 8, 1920 edition of the “Illustrated Sunday Herald”, titled: “Zionism versus Socialism – A Struggle for the Soul of the Jewish People”. It is a very interesting and instructive article, and I encourage Quadrant readers to give it some consideration. It is easily read and/or downloaded via the Inter-web thingy.
Made a mistake above, Churchill’s article was not titled “Zionism versus Socialism” by actually it was “Zionism versus Bolshevism”. Sorry, like “old sleepy Joe”, my mind sometimes wanders off!
Also, I typed in my last reply the word “by” when I should have said “but”. No more coffee for me!
I’m making such errors more and more frequently but I’ve not had coffee for 30+ years.
Ian MacDougall
I take your point. Several candidates are active on this site. The most persistent is David Isaac. I wonder if he has visited Auschwitz?
What a great mix of ideas
Long live Quadrant
3 May 2024
Yes, once again, Quadrant is to be congratulated for allowing free speech–even when that speech is, to many of us (including, I strongly suspect, the editor), abominable. I sincerely hope that David Isaac and cbattle 1 continue to be permitted on this site, just like the rest of us.
Sorry, can’t agree with you on “David Isaac”, Rebecca. It is, however, entirely a matter for the editors, who are under no obligation to publish any particular post or viewpoint. Personally I would not be at all sorry for time to be called at Quadrant at least on his posts about Jews – those people he describes as “peculiar and unassimilable”, who were complicit in 9/11, who are mainly responsible for multiculturalism and moral degeneracy – the list goes on. Ditto his risible burblings about Hitler and the third reich. There is no real value in having those views aired here, and there are lots of crackpot websites where he can post, as he is entitled to do.
*Rebekah, sorry