Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old December 27th, 2009 #1
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,352
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default Jew Paul Gottfried

He's a Liberty denier, among other things.

http://www.originaldissent.com/forum...ead.php?t=6106
 
Old January 15th, 2010 #2
Mike Parker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,311
Mike Parker
Default

[More blame the victim: nothing about the Jewish power structure that enables the neocons but of which they're just one part. Gottfried is also less concerned about the neocons' warmongering and nation-wrecking than that they cost him a job.]

Insider Politics

Picking Apart Washington’s Scum

by Paul Gottfried on January 12, 2010

As everyone and his cousin know, the neocons are my least favorite “Washington insiders” and they divide generally into two categories, the ill-mannered, touchy Jews and their groveling or adulatory Christian assistants. David Frum, the Kagan boys, Norman and John Podhoretz, and Michael Ledeen are the house-owners; while Bill Bennett, Fred Barnes, Michael Novak, Cal Thomas, Linda Chavez, and Rich Lowry all live in the servants’ quarters.

Although I’ve suffered more at the hands of the Podhoretz-types than from the machinations of their servants, I’ve always felt a grudging admiration for my most vicious enemies. The Jewish neocons leave their finger-marks on whatever they do to bring down their critics on the right; and they don’t seem to care that others notice. Most of their hits on members of the Old Right, such as getting Sam Francis removed from an editorial post at the Washington Times and Joe Sobran from one at National Review, have been done in a strikingly open fashion.

It’s as if the neocons wish to be caught in flagrante delicto, perhaps to demonstrate what they can get away with. At Catholic University in 1987, the neocon capifamiglia first got their underlings to call the appropriate deans in order to keep me out of a graduate professorship. But then Norman made a direct call to the university administration, so that he could personally warn the administrators against my allegedly anti-Zionist views. (As far as I can recall, I never held such views.) Neocons enjoy inflicting PAIN on those “anti-Semites” who dare to defy them. And they show a kind of Stalinist exuberance when they pounce on those they want to crush. Even when they’ve unloaded on me and my friends, I can appreciate their hate-filled energies and the thoroughness with which they destroy reputations. At least the Jewish neocons are nasty but not sneaky; and they feel entitled to crush those whom they don’t fancy.

Here I have to differ from my friend Taki, who seems excessively hard on the Jewish neocons. He accuses them of being hypocrites who avoid fighting in the wars they foment. He also charges them with smearing their opponents (almost always on the right) by denouncing them as Jew-haters and Nazi-sympathizers. But Taki may be overlooking the more endearing or at least more interesting side of his adversaries. They act with an emotional intensity that we should be able to admire on the aesthetic level. This of course would not keep me from doing to these sleazebags what they’ve done to me over the last twenty-five years. But I can appreciate their straightforward approach to ruining others. In a nutshell they are truly worthy absolute foes. Here I’m inclined to cite the German legal theorist Carl Schmitt who observed that one should respect people who deal with powerful, determined enemies.

It is the neocons’ servants who turn my stomach. These include not only those who bow and scrape before their masters but also those who help eliminate neocon targets. At the lower level these helpers engage in character assassination from behind the scenes, and some of them have done so at the expense of such badly battered victims as Sam Francis, M.E. Bradford, and Joe Sobran. For me those who take the orders are more contemptible than those who give them. They combine servility with dishonesty—and a willingness to defame in order to curry favor. The worst such case of kissing-up by a neocon houseboy involved the head of a “conservative think-tank,” who went to President Reagan in order to trash the Southern scholar Mel Bradford. This enabler undertook his task as a favor to “Irving and Bea,” who were then greasing the skids for their protégé, that dumpy mediocrity and gambler extraordinaire Bill Bennett. Bradford, who had the inside track, had to be eliminated for the dark horse candidate Bennett, so that the neocons could get their fill of NEH grants.

And I’ve also no use for those fetch-and-takers who spend all their time trying to anticipate and express the latest neocon concern. When these types are not cheering on the Red team against the Blue, calling for wars to spread democracy, rediscovering the “Christian conservative” Martin Luther King, and howling against Islamo-fascism, they turn to even viler things. For example, they work around the clock to keep the agitprop publications and organizations they “manage” free of politically undesirable influence. On those very few occasions when I got to place my comments in neocon-run publications, I did so after I had spoken to the Jewish master class, and bypassed their Christian subordinates. Having dealt with this nomenklatura for years, I’ve become convinced that the servant class submits the name of every would-be contributor to some censoring office, located in Midtown Manhattan. Without the necessary stamp of approval the gentile editor is not allowed to accept any article or commentary.

The slave class has also featured certain charges that have been given heavy-duty use against those who are marked out for marginalization. One member of this class has besmirched me as an “intellectual who wants to return to the eighteenth century” and as someone who has “no understanding of today’s politics.” Equally familiar is the charge raised by some of the house servants that we have not moved with the times. But since the neocons and neoliberals help shape these times and determine what we’re allowed to say, it all comes down to the same: We’re bad for not saying what they want us to say. One aging neocon client, who has grown rich in the service of his masters, turned his back on me at an Aspen Institute Conference where both of us were invited to speak five years ago. More recently, the same person has wondered aloud “why paleos are so bitter.” The answer is simple: His friends have smashed our heads into the wall often enough to remove the grins from our faces.

Unlike the master class, which glories in destructive acts, the slave class pretends that such acts have never taken place. The opponents of the neocons are simply “bitter” and this may be ascribed to our sour dispositions. Otherwise we would sit down with the rest of the “movement’ and iron out our differences. But no invitation to parley has been extended to our side or to anyone whom the neocons have decided they don’t want around.

That is the way the neocons have organized the soft or kept opposition to the center-left. One can take one’s pick in this case about which are worse, the deciders of agendas or their servants. I’ve already chosen.

http://www.takimag.com/blogs/article...hingtons_scum/
 
Old June 22nd, 2010 #3
Mike Parker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,311
Mike Parker
Default

[Jew Gottfried attacks MacDonald for being hard on Jews, but detests WASPs for being soft on Jews.]

High Society

The Death of the WASP

by Paul Gottfried on June 20, 2010

A remark by Richard Brookhiser in April in a syndicated column in the New York Post about “how we’re all WASPs now” made me realize that Brookhiser’s statement taken in context does not prove what he thinks he’s saying. A journeyman author, long associated with NR, Brookhiser, to all appearances, is an upper-class WASP endowed with all the proper manners and tics. Nonetheless, for decades he’s been in the employ of the neocons, people who would hardly qualify as bon gratin.

A scene involving one of their leaders, John Podhoretz, sticks vividly in my mind. While in the employ of the Washington Times, where Arnaud de Borchgrave entertained him lavishly as a favor to his parents, the present editor of Commentary was known for his crude table manners and general loutishness. I recall seeing him in Borchgrave’s office slouched over his chair and (dare I be so frank) picking his nose while in conversation with the apparent boss. (Actually it was Norm and Midge who called the shots at the WT then.) But people like John Podhoretz are precisely the ones whom Brookhiser and other WASPs, and particularly those at The New Criterion, have been kissing up to for years.

This subordinate position certainly does not demonstrate the assertion that “we’re all WASP patricians now.” The fact is members of our onetime dominant ethnicity and its onetime social elite are down on their luck. They’ve been reduced to menials serving at the beck and call of other groups, and in the journalistic and media world, this means working for Jewish liberals and Jewish neocons.

Such a situation should distress the new class of menials (perhaps it does!), but as I’ve indicated in more scholarly venues, their fate is entirely deserved. Elites that melt into spasms of guilt or niceness and which fail to continue to produce figures of the caliber of George Kennan, the Tafts, Robert E. Lee, Henry Adams, etc are not going to continue to be around as social, political, and cultural leaders. In doing research for my book on multiculturalism, I encountered statistical information that showed the decline of WASPdom since the middle of the last century in just about every area of human endeavor. The exception here (and it’s nothing to be proud of) is the disproportionate white Protestant representation at the public trough, and particularly in the ranks of the GOP. The last significant WASP patrician in public service was our recent, unmissed president, George W. Bush, someone whose ancestry is almost as noteworthy as the evidence of his verbal ineptitude. Needless to say, W took orders, whether or not he understood them, from neocon control-persons.

Clearly we’re not all WASPs now; and in my book Encounters I described in detail how differently the WASP gentry behaved when I was at Yale in the 1960s as compared to the Jews and even Irish Catholics. The WASP gentry were noticeable for their lack of élan and for their overpowering desire to be non-controversial. The Jews, by contrast, were conspicuously nasty. They had chips on their shoulders, and profoundly loathed the group they were destined to replace. Once they took over academic and journalistic posts these parvenus left no doubt who was in charge. They behaved with an ideological and sociological intolerance that was truly breath-taking.

“If there’s anything WASPs should feel inexpressibly guilty about, it is this Jacobin fervor that causes them to unleash wars on other societies in order to bring them the gift of American democracy.”

Even that over-the-top critic of Jewish power, Kevin MacDonald, has hardly scratched the surface in delineating the nastiness with which the children and grandchildren of Eastern European Jewish immigrants clawed their way to the top of the academic-media industry, on the backs of those they often despised. And all the while they appealed with brilliant success to a guilty WASP conscience.

This tactic worked like a charm because of the ruthlessness and hypocrisy of those doing the climbing and because of the mentality of those they supplanted. Apparently WASPs suffer from an onerous sense of guilt toward others whom their ancestors excluded or were alleged to have discriminated against. Other groups, particularly Jews, blacks, Irish Catholics, and Latinos, consider themselves to have been the victims of discrimination, and they therefore happily associate with the Democratic Party, as an in gathering of victimized ethnicities.

One may attribute the WASP’s far deeper sense of social guilt to any number of causes, but his ancestors were hardly worse than those of the groups whom he now worships as designated victims. Did African blacks treat their slaves better than did American slave-owners? What about the Muslims who dragged captured blacks eastward, to Arab countries, well into the twentieth century, when they weren’t enslaving European Christians, whom they captured in naval raids? When one of my students, who himself is predictably WASP, noted in class that his ethnic group lost influence in the US “because they practiced discrimination against other people,” I asked somewhat impatiently: “How the hell did everyone else get into the country?”

Certainly many other groups have been more oppressive than American WASPs. Human history is full of them. But no other group, except for their pathological German cousins, seems to enjoy quite as much as WASPs the ecstasy of wallowing in guilt. And no other group seems quite as easily swayed to engage in moral crusades, perhaps to atone for their past sins as racists, sexists, or whatever. Unfortunately these crusades show our WASP population at their worst, trying to save the rest of the world with confected “human rights” after laying waste to their countries. If there’s anything WASPs should feel inexpressibly guilty about, it is this Jacobin fervor that causes them to unleash wars on other societies in order to bring them the gift of American democracy. But for some reason my Republican WASP neighbors think such devastation is alright and may be redemptive for its victims. After all, blowing up non-democrats is not reprehensible in the same way as refusing to let other ethnicities into WASP country clubs or being against affirmative action for Australoid transvestites.

Although I’ve loads of respect for their Protestant antecedents, I can’t say that I like or respect this present generation of WASPs. And least of all can I understand why their elites, by the time I was in my teens and early twenties, began to feel guilt toward those who hated their guts. As a great Italian thinker Pareto pointed out about a hundred years ago, ruling classes fall not so much because of opposition from below as they do from disintegration from above. Or as the Russians put it, the fish rots from the head on down.

http://www.takimag.com/article/the_decrepit_new_wasps/
 
Old June 22nd, 2010 #4
Igor Alexander
Senior Member
 
Igor Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,591
Igor Alexander
Default

Quote:
The fact is members of our onetime dominant ethnicity and its onetime social elite are down on their luck. They’ve been reduced to menials serving at the beck and call of other groups, and in the journalistic and media world, this means working for Jewish liberals and Jewish neocons.
Serves them right.
__________________
The jewish tribe is the cancer of human history.
http://igoralexander.wordpress.com/
 
Old June 22nd, 2010 #5
Igor Alexander
Senior Member
 
Igor Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,591
Igor Alexander
Default

Quote:
Even that over-the-top critic of Jewish power, Kevin MacDonald...
"Over-the-top"? MacDonald is on the mild side.
__________________
The jewish tribe is the cancer of human history.
http://igoralexander.wordpress.com/
 
Old June 22nd, 2010 #6
Igor Alexander
Senior Member
 
Igor Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,591
Igor Alexander
Default

Quote:
Other groups, particularly Jews, blacks, Irish Catholics, and Latinos...
Irish Catholics are every bit as susceptible to white guilt as WASPs, as are other "aggrieved" white minorities, like the Quebeckers. Maybe even more so, since WASPs, for all their semitically correct talk, are less likely to actually breed with the muds who are supposed to be their equals. I guess that's a point in favor of WASP hypocrisy.
__________________
The jewish tribe is the cancer of human history.
http://igoralexander.wordpress.com/
 
Old June 22nd, 2010 #7
Igor Alexander
Senior Member
 
Igor Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,591
Igor Alexander
Default

Quote:
When one of my students, who himself is predictably WASP, noted in class that his ethnic group lost influence in the US “because they practiced discrimination against other people,” I asked somewhat impatiently: “How the hell did everyone else get into the country?”
Don't get mad at your student, Gottfried -- after all, he's only repeating the lies your fellow tribesmen have been pumping into his mind since birth.
__________________
The jewish tribe is the cancer of human history.
http://igoralexander.wordpress.com/
 
Old June 22nd, 2010 #8
Igor Alexander
Senior Member
 
Igor Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,591
Igor Alexander
Default

Quote:
Certainly many other groups have been more oppressive than American WASPs.
Not the least of which are jews.
__________________
The jewish tribe is the cancer of human history.
http://igoralexander.wordpress.com/
 
Old June 22nd, 2010 #9
Igor Alexander
Senior Member
 
Igor Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,591
Igor Alexander
Default

Quote:
But no other group, except for their pathological German cousins, seems to enjoy quite as much as WASPs the ecstasy of wallowing in guilt.
You don't suppose that might have something to do with having Hitler and the holohoax shoved in their faces at every turn from the time they're in diapers, do you? The Germans even have a term for the guilt they're supposed to feel for the holocaust: "die Schande" (the shame). No other language that I know of has a word to remind the speaker of how wicked his ancestors were.

Yet the jew Gottfried makes it sound as though Germans are willingly inflicting this punishment on themselves because that's how they get their masochistic kicks. (Portraying Germans as sado-masochists is a favorite of the jew-run entertainment industry, as can be seen in everything from Ilsa-type movies to South Park episodes in which Germany is associated with "scheissen films").

What an asshole this guy is.
__________________
The jewish tribe is the cancer of human history.
http://igoralexander.wordpress.com/

Last edited by Igor Alexander; June 23rd, 2010 at 11:30 AM.
 
Old June 23rd, 2010 #10
Mike Parker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,311
Mike Parker
Default

Although they squabble, Gottfried and Auster are basically the same animal. Each opens the door to criticism of jews, and then slams it shut on any critic other than himself. It’s like a controlled burn.
 
Old June 26th, 2010 #11
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,352
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Parker View Post
Although they squabble, Gottfried and Auster are basically the same animal. Each opens the door to criticism of jews, and then slams it shut on any critic other than himself. It’s like a controlled burn.
It's perversely amusing that "our" Ph.D.'s can't make the simplest distinction - between friend and enemy.
 
Old August 3rd, 2010 #12
Mike Parker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,311
Mike Parker
Default

To vengeful jew Gottfried, vengeful jew Freud who destroyed the entire basis of Western morality was just a good middle class Austrian patriot.

Subversives and Shills

Paul Gottfried

Quote:
Furthermore, when they did become citizens or full subjects of Western governments in the 18th or 19th century, most of them worked hard to fit in. Helmut Rumpler in his (more or less) definitive study of the Danubian monarchy underlines that the majority of Austrian and Hungarian Jews in the 19th and early 20th centuries were ardent Habsburg monarchists. Although there were Jewish socialists and republicans at the time, those radicals were distinctly in the minority.

Most of Franz Josef’s Jewish subjects, including the agnostic pioneer in psychology, Sigmund Freud fervently supported the Austro-Hungarian monarchy -- and came to incarnate bourgeois social institutions.
 
Old August 3rd, 2010 #13
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,352
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

I'm going to trust Hitler's view over kike Gottfried's.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:28 AM.
Page generated in 0.13452 seconds.