By RON UNZ

From my own perspective, I found these statistical results surprising, even shocking.

I had always been well aware of the very heavy Jewish presence at elite academic institutions. But the underwhelming percentage of Jewish students who today achieve high scores on academic aptitude tests was totally unexpected, and very different from the impressions I had formed during my own high school and college years a generation or so ago. An examination of other available statistics seems to support my recollections and provides evidence for a dramatic recent decline in the academic performance of American Jews

The U.S. Math Olympiad began in 1974, and all the names of the top scoring students are easily available on the Internet. During the 1970s, well over 40 percent of the total were Jewish, and during the 1980s and 1990s, the fraction averaged about one-third. However, during the thirteen years since 2000, just two names out of 78 or 2.5 percent appear to be Jewish. The Putnam Exam is the most difficult and prestigious mathematics competition for American college students, with five or six Putnam winners having been selected each year since 1938. Over 40 percent of the Putnam winners prior to 1950 were Jewish, and during every decade from the 1950s through the 1990s, between 22 percent and 31 percent of the winners seem to have come from that same ethnic background. But since 2000, the percentage has dropped to under 10 percent, without a single likely Jewish name in the last seven years.

This consistent picture of stark ethnic decline recurs when we examine the statistics for the Science Talent Search, which has been selecting 40 students as national finalists for America’s most prestigious high school science award since 1942, thus providing a huge statistical dataset of over 2800 top science students. During every decade from the 1950s through the 1980s, Jewish students were consistently 22–23 percent of the recipients, with the percentage then declining to 17 percent in the 1990s, 15 percent in the 2000s, and just 7 percent since 2010. Indeed, of the thirty top ranked students over the last three years, only a single one seems likely to have been Jewish. Similarly, Jews were over one-quarter of the top students in the Physics Olympiad from 1986 to 1997, but have fallen to just 5 percent over the last decade, a result which must surely send Richard Feynman spinning in his grave.

Other science competitions provide generally consistent recent results, though without the long track record allowing useful historical comparisons. Over the last dozen years, just 8 percent of the top students in the Biology Olympiad have been Jewish, with none in the last three years. Between 1992 and 2012, only 11 percent of the winners of the Computing Olympiad had Jewish names, as did just 8 percent of the Siemens AP Award winners. And although I have only managed to locate the last two years of Chemistry Olympiad winners, these lists of 40 top students contained not a single probable Jewish name.

Further evidence is supplied by Weyl, who estimated that over 8 percent of the 1987 NMS semifinalists were Jewish,[60] a figure 35 percent higher than found in today’s results. Moreover, in that period the math and verbal scores were weighted equally for qualification purposes, but after 1997 the verbal score was double-weighted,[61] which should have produced a large rise in the number of Jewish semifinalists, given the verbal-loading of Jewish ability. But instead, today’s Jewish numbers are far below those of the late 1980s.

Taken in combination, these trends all provide powerful evidence that over the last decade or more there has been a dramatic collapse in Jewish academic achievement, at least at the high end.

Several possible explanations for this empirical result seem reasonably plausible. Although the innate potential of a group is unlikely to drop so suddenly, achievement is a function of both ability and effort, and today’s overwhelmingly affluent Jewish students may be far less diligent in their work habits or driven in their studies than were their parents or grandparents, who lived much closer to the bracing challenges of the immigrant experience. In support of this hypothesis, roughly half of the Jewish Math Olympiad winners from the last two decades have had the sort of highly distinctive names which would tend to mark them as recent immigrants from the Soviet Union or elsewhere, and such names were also very common among the top Jewish science students of the same period, even though this group represents only about 10 percent of current American Jews. Indeed, it seems quite possible that this large sudden influx of very high performing immigrant Jews from the late 1980s onward served to partially mask the rapid concurrent decline of high academic achievement among native American Jews, which otherwise would have become much more clearly evident a decade or so earlier.

This pattern of third or fourth generation American students lacking the academic drive or intensity of their forefathers is hardly surprising, nor unique to Jews. Consider the case of Japanese-Americans, who mostly arrived in America during roughly the same era. America’s Japanese have always been a high-performing group, with a strong academic tradition, and Japan’s international PISA academic scores are today among the highest in the world. But when we examine the list of California’s NMS semifinalists, less than 1 percent of the names are Japanese, roughly in line with their share of the California population.[62] Meanwhile, Chinese, Koreans, and South Asians are 6 percent of California but contribute 50 percent of the top scoring students, an eight-fold better result, with a major likely difference being that they are overwhelmingly of recent immigrant origin. In fact, although ongoing Japanese immigration has been trivial in size, a significant fraction of the top Japanese students have the unassimilated Japanese first names that would tend to indicate they are probably drawn from that tiny group.

In his 1966 book The Creative Elite in America, Weyl used last name analysis to document a similarly remarkable collapse in achievement among America’s Puritan-descended population, which had once provided a hugely disproportionate fraction of our intellectual leadership, but for various reasons went into rapid decline from about 1900 onward. He also mentions the disappearance of the remarkable Scottish intellectual contribution to British life after about 1800. Although the evidence for both these historical parallels seems very strong, the causal factors are not entirely clear, though Weyl does provide some possible explanations.[63]

In some respects, perhaps it was the enormously outsize Jewish academic performance of the past which was highly anomalous, and the more recent partial convergence toward white European norms which is somewhat less surprising. Over the years, claims have been widely circulated that the mean Jewish IQ is a full standard deviation—15 points—above the white average of 100,[64] but this seems to have little basis in reality. Richard Lynn, one of the world’s foremost IQ experts, has performed an exhaustive literature review and located some 32 IQ samples of American Jews, taken from 1920 to 2008. For the first 14 studies conducted during the years 1920–1937, the Jewish IQ came out very close to the white American mean, and it was only in later decades that the average figure rose to the approximate range of 107–111.[65]

In a previous article “Race, IQ & Wealth,” I had suggested that the IQs of ethnic groups appear to be far more malleable than many people would acknowledge, and may be particularly influenced by factors of urbanization, education, and affluence.[66] Given that Jews have always been America’s most heavily urbanized population and became the most affluent during the decades in question, these factors may account for a substantial portion of their huge IQ rise during most of the twentieth century. But with modern electronic technology recently narrowing the gaps in social environment and educational opportunities between America’s rural and urban worlds, we might expect a portion of this difference to gradually dissipate. American Jews are certainly a high-ability population, but the innate advantage they have over other high-ability white populations is probably far smaller than is widely believed.

This conclusion is supported by the General Social Survey (GSS), an online dataset of tens of thousands of American survey responses from the last forty years which includes the Wordsum vocabulary test, a very useful IQ proxy correlating at 0.71. Converted into the corresponding IQ scores, the Wordsum-IQ of Jews is indeed quite high at 109. But Americans of English, Welsh, Scottish, Swedish, and Catholic Irish ancestry also have fairly high mean IQs of 104 or above, and their combined populations outnumber Jews by almost 15-to-1, implying that they would totally dominate the upper reaches of the white American ability distribution, even if we excluded the remaining two-thirds of all American whites, many of whose IQs are also fairly high. Furthermore, all these groups are far less highly urbanized or affluent than Jews,[67] probably indicating that their scores are still artificially depressed to some extent. We should also remember that Jewish intellectual performance tends to be quite skewed, being exceptionally strong in the verbal subcomponent, much lower in math, and completely mediocre in visuospatial ability; thus, a completely verbal-oriented test such as Wordsum would actually tend to exaggerate Jewish IQ.

Stratifying the white American population along religious lines produces similar conclusions. An analysis of the data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth found that Americans raised in the Episcopal Church actually exceeded Jews in mean IQ, while several other religious categories came quite close, leading to the result that the overwhelming majority of America’s high-ability white population had a non-Jewish background.[68]

Finally, in the case of Jews, these assimilation- or environment-related declines in relative academic performance may have been reinforced by powerful demographic trends. For the last generation or two, typical Jewish women from successful or even ordinary families have married very late and averaged little more than a single child, while the small fraction of Jewish women who are ultra-Orthodox often marry in their teens and then produce seven or eight children.[69] As a consequence, this extremely religious subpopulation has been doubling in size every twenty years, and now easily exceeds 10 percent of the total, including a far higher percentage of younger Jews. But ultra-Orthodox Jews have generally been academically mediocre, often with enormously high rates of poverty and government dependency.[70]
Therefore, the combination of these two radically different trends of Jewish reproduction has acted to stabilize the total number of Jewish youngsters, while probably producing a sharp drop in their average academic achievement.

ISRAEL SHAMIR

Our grandparents faced a quandary when they had to describe some body parts or physical activity. The ‘obscene words’ remained taboo at least until D.H. Lawrence broke the prohibition in Lady Chatterley’s Lover, and the four-letter words became printable only recently. However, now we have new banned words, or words one can use only at one’s own peril.

‘The Jews’ is such a word. Speaking about the Jews is fraught with consequences. Jews do not like to be referred to, unless in extremely flattering terms. You are likely to be banned in Facebook and other social networks for referring to ‘Jews’. You can be fired. Even a hundred years ago it was a troublesome step, likely to cause social ostracism.

Therefore, there is a permanent demand for euphemisms.

• “Semite” is an early and enduring euphemism of the 19th century which is still with us thanks to “anti-Semitism”.
• The Clergy prefer to write ‘Masons’ instead of ‘Jews’.
• ‘Khazar’ or ‘Khazarian’ is popular in the networks, thanks to Arthur Koestler, the author of The Thirteenth Tribe. He claimed modern Jews were the descendants of the Turkic Khazars who were Judaised in 12th century.
• The nickname ‘Ashkenazi’ originally referred to the Jews of Central Europe; the East European Jews of Lithuanian and Ukrainian origin gladly accepted it despite the German Jews’ objections. Nowadays it is just an euphemism for a Jew, with an extra bonus: not-very-prominent (outside trade and money) Oriental Jews will gladly join in Ashkenazi denunciation.
• ‘Zionist’ is a popular term of use and abuse, as in “Jews are fine, it is Zionists whom I dislike”.
• “Reptilian” or ‘Illuminati’ are the words used when all the rest fail.

There is one big problem with these words. They clearly show that you are afraid to write the J word. And they know how to deal with frightened persons. It is enough to murmur in response, “It’s an antisemitic slur”, and the guy will collapse in a paroxysm of denial. There is a second problem: it makes very little sense to call the Bolshevik Jews “Zionists.”

The Jews themselves have proposed a few euphemisms of their own: ‘Hebrews’ or ‘Israelites’ were the preferred ones, but they didn’t make much inroad in the English-speaking world. However, ‘Hebrews’ became the official designation of Jews in Russia, while the ‘Jews’ moniker had been outlawed, though it survived in Poland and the Ukraine.

Now the US has produced a new word: “globalists.” The Huffington Post called the tweet of Donald Trump about the dismissal of “globalist Gary Cohen” – anti-Semitic. It turns out that a “globalist” is just a Jew. For example, globalists like gefilte fish.

This neologism pleased Ann Coulter, and she amused her numerous readers with her tweets: “Paul Newman is only half globalist,” “How many globalists came under the distribution in the fight against male assault and harassment!”, “Israel is the last refuge of globalists.” These Tweets received thousands of likes and reposts, and caused an angry condemnation … of globalists.

Mahmud Abbas, the president of Palestine, created an euphemism accidentally. He called the US Ambassador to Israel a “son of a bitch”, and His Excellence Right Honourable Ambassador David Friedman said it is was an “antisemitic slur”.

A propos, the creation of euphemisms is a very Jewish way to deal with taboos. At first, the Jews banned the Name of God יהוה, and then they banned the substitute, and the substitute of the substitute, and the substitute of the substitute of the substitute. Nowadays, the religious Jews refer to ‘God’ in writing in an oblique way.

The whole of political correctness (PC) grew out of extrapolating this Jewish attitude to other groups. In the PC culture, the word ‘Negro’ was displaced by “Black”, and then by ‘black’ in low case, and then by “Afro-American”. Thus PC had created a new fence around the ban.

The idea of fences is another Jewish concept. A Jew is forbidden to pick fruit on the Sabbath. Fine! Then, the Jews created a fence around this prohibition forbidding the climbing of an apple tree on the Sabbath. The idea is: if you climb on an apple tree, you may be tempted to pick an apple. And then they built another fence, forbidding the climbing of any tree one the Sabbath. Otherwise, you’ll get used to climbing a pine on the Sabbath, and one day you’ll climb an apple tree.

PC is this additional fence. If today you refer to a black person, tomorrow you will be tempted to refer to Jews. And if you refer to Jews, perhaps you will do so in unflattering terms. The concept of micro-insults and micro-aggressions completes the fence.

And now we have a new fence: a reference to ‘bankers’, ‘moneylenders’ and even ‘globalists’ has become forbidden, as in the case of George Soros. The Hungarians referred to him as a “globalist banker” and the Jewish world rushed to his defence. Not that he is liked by his fellow Jews, he isn’t, but they have to fight the breach in the fence. You know the logic: today you call Soros ‘’a globalist’, and tomorrow you will call a Jew – a Jew.

President Putin did just that. In an interview with Megyn Kelly, he answered her question about the 13 Russians who were indicted by Mueller for alleged interference in the elections: “They do not represent the interests of the Russian state. Maybe they are not Russians, but Ukrainians, Tatars, Jews with Russian citizenship. Check it out.”

He was attacked ferociously. The leading Jewish organization ADL (Anti-Defamation League) referred to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (this is their standard response whenever a Jew is mentioned), and added, “Don’t you dare blame the Jews for interfering in American elections!”

This is especially piquant – if there is a foreign country that actively interferes in the US politics and elections, it is primarily the Jewish state and its supporters. American friends of Israel, Sheldon Adelson and Jeff Katzenberg are the largest donors; and in general Jews spent more money on presidential elections in the US than on helping needy Jews. Israeli diplomats are actively interfering in American elections at all levels, as the Jewish website Mondoweiss writes. But you can mention that only in marginal publications on the verge of a ban from Google and Twitter.

And in Israel, the energetic young MK Xenia Svetlova, (a Knesset Member for the Zionist Union), accused Putin of anti-Semitism and called upon Netanyahu to ‘protect the Jews’. It’s nothing personal – Xenia grew up in Moscow, worked for Russian TV channels, even loved Russia, but when she went into politics, she had to prove that she was not a Putin stooge. And she calls for Israeli intervention in Syria against Assad and Putin, and for the condemnation of Putin’s anti-Semitism.

The Tatars and Ukrainians did not resent Putin’s words. The Russian Jews in Russia dismissed it, too. For a good reason: the taboo on the word ‘Jew’ is not universal. It does not exist in Russia. Russia is the land of many native ethnicities, a hundred and fifty or so, from Yakut to Mordva, and people freely refer to all of them without fear. The Jews in Russia are just another ethnicity, or ethnos, or nation, one of many. ‘Russians’ in Russia connote members of Russian ethnicity, the most numerous nation of the Russian Federation, not the citizens of Russia, as you would expect.

This attitude may surprise an American, or a Frenchman. It is not totally unknown in Europe, where Walloons and Flemings populate Belgium, and Catalans and Basques live in Spain. Still, a Frenchman of Brittany or Provence is a Frenchman first, and a Breton or Provençal a distant second. In the US, ‘ethnicity’ is a domain of recent immigrants, Greeks or Poles; the Americans have race and religion as identity-forming factors.

In Russia the ethnic identity has been enforced since Stalin’s days: it was actually recorded on the ID. I explain this by Stalin’s personal perceptions: a native of Georgia, the country in Transcaucasia, he was brought up in the local tradition of ethnic awareness. For Russians proper, this ethnic identity is of little importance. They know of it, but do not consider it greatly important. That is why in modern Russia ‘ethnicity’ is not registered on the ID anymore.

Of course, Megyn Kelly, while referring to ‘Russians’ indicted by Mueller, had meant ‘citizens of Russia’, and not ‘ethnic Russians’. Me myself, like the majority of old émigrés, also refer to “Russians” meaning people in Russia or from Russia, or even people from the former Soviet Union. In Israel, every person whose origins are in the USSR is called ‘Russian’, to the chagrin of Russian Jews. They would like to be called ‘Jews’ in Israel, and ‘Russians’ in Russia, but alas, it is other way around, they are called ‘Jews’ in Russia and ‘Russians’ in Israel.

Russian ethnic nationalists of the kind embraced by my colleague Anatoly Karlin would like to keep the ethnonym ‘Russians’ just for themselves, but they are harmless, you can disregard their whines – they aren’t globalists for you.

Now, for the first time ever, the Russians are being trained to stick to American word usage. This is done by Facebook, a platform that millions of Russians use. Besides opening Russia for American business and stealing its data, Facebook is a powerful enforcer of PC in Russian minds. Whenever you refer to blacks, Jews, or even Ukrainians you risk being banned for a week or a month.

As unusual this attitude is for the Russians, they are susceptible for training, as we all are. These small punishments go a long way to bring Jewish hegemony to Russia. Beside protecting Jews, or Blacks from micro-insults, the banning of words has a powerful impact on the mind. Whoever tells you what you may or may not say, is a person of authority. This way of subduing people to your command is called Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP), and the CIA is on the forefront of using this black magic of words.

Israelis, and Jews in general do not accept these taboos. It is perfectly all right for Israelis and Jews to refer to ‘Jews’, or worse. The late Israeli MK Ze’evi, a popular right-winger minister, called Martin Indyk, the US Ambassador in Israel, a ‘Jewboy” (יהודון); Netanyahu’s aide called another US Ambassador a ‘Jewboy’, too. Israelis speak freely of blacks; they do not speak only, but deport them as well. They do not mind banning non-Jews from renting apartments quite openly, too. This disregard of taboo gives Jews an additional power in dealing with Gentiles, like a disregard of the Matrix gave supernatural powers to Neo.

The Palestinians disregard the taboo, too. They do not hesitate shouting “Jews are coming”, when Israeli soldiers on their jeeps roll into their villages. Americans of Palestinian origin are scrupulous with their observance, they never utter the forbidden J-word, (unless they want to say something nice about a Jewish friend), otherwise they speak of ‘Zionists’. That is why Palestinians in Palestine are free, and Palestinians in the US are not, like all Americans.

This taboo should be broken. Until it is done, the Jews will continue to dominate the discourse and the US society, the Palestinians will suffer, the bankers will grow fat and prosperous, legal and illegal immigration will continue unabated. Saying “Jew” will have a liberating effect, like mouthing the name of Rumpelstiltskin. And it is much shorter.

Israel Shamir can be reached at adam

This article was first published at The Unz Review.

SCOFIELD REFERENCE BIBLE —- FROM CHRIST KILLERS TO GODS CHOSEN PEOPLE

by Indian Gentile

Since it was first published in 1909, the Scofield Reference Bible has made uncompromising Zionists out of tens of millions of Americans. When John Hagee, the founder of Christians United for Israel (CUFI), said that “50 million evangelical bible-believing Christians unite with five million American Jews standing together on behalf of Israel,” it was the Scofield Bible that he was talking about.

Although the Scofield Reference Bible contains the text of the King James Authorized Version, it is not the traditional Protestant bible but Cyrus I. Scofield’s annotated commentary that is problematic. More than any other factor, it is Scofield’s notes that have induced generations of American evangelicals to believe that God demands their uncritical support for the modern State of Israel.

This annotated Bible contained several innovative features. It printed what amounted to a commentary on the biblical text alongside the Bible instead of in a separate volume. It introduced a chain cross–referencing system that tied together related verses of Scripture. It featured an attempt to date the events of the Bible chronologicaly. It was in the pages of the Scofield Reference Bible that many fundamentalist Christians encountered Archbishop James Ussher’s calculation fixing the date of Creation at 4004 BC, and it was largely due to Scofield’s Bible notes that creationism became a major issue among Christian fundamentalists.

Cyrus Scofield was born in Clinton Township, Lenawee County, Michigan, the seventh and last child of Elias and Abigail Goodrich Scofield. Elias Scofield’s ancestors were of English and Puritan descent, but the family was nominally Episcopalian.

In 1866, he married Leontine LeBeau Cerrè, a member of a prominent French Catholic family in St. Louis. Scofield apprenticed in the law office of his brother-in-law before moving to Atchison, Kansas in late 1869. In 1871, Scofield was elected to the Kansas House of Representatives.

In 1873 he was appointed U. S. District Attorney for Kansas—at 29, the youngest in the country. Nevertheless, that same year, Scofield was forced to resign “under a cloud of scandal” because of questionable financial transactions, that may have included accepting bribes from the railroads, stealing political contributions intended for Ingalls, and securing bank promissory notes by forging signatures. It is possible Scofield was jailed on forgery charges, although there is no extant evidence in the public records. Source

Scofield abandoned his wife and two daughters during this period. Leontine Cerrè Scofield divorced him on grounds of desertion in 1883, and the same year Scofield married Hettie Hall von Wartz, with whom he eventually had a son.

In 1879 Scofield the crooked lawyer became a“born again preacher”

However wo years after Scofield’s reported conversion to Christianity in 1879, the Atchison Patriot was less than impressed. Describing the former Atchison resident as the “late lawyer, politician and shyster generally,” the article went on to recount a few of Scofield’s “many malicious acts.” These included a series of forgeries in St. Louis, for which he was sentenced to six months in jail.

Being a “born again” preacher did not preclude Scofield from becoming a member of an exclusive New York men’s club in 1901, either. In his devastating biography, The Incredible Scofield and His Book, Joseph M. Canfield suggests, “The admission of Scofield to the Lotus Club, which could not have been sought by Scofield, strengthens the suspicion that has cropped up before, that someone was directing the career of C.I. Scofield.”

That someone was the Talmudic lawyer Samuel Untermeyer just one in the long line of “Presidential Advisors” who made and unmade American Presidents

Untermeyer is reputed to have blackmailed President Woodrow Wilson in 1912 into picking Louis Brandeis as a Supreme Court judge

When Hitler had been soundly established, Untermeyer, a New York Jewish lawyer, called for war on Germany. This call was made through radio station WABC on August 7, 1933. Heres a text of that speech

As Canfield intimates, Scofield’s theology was “most helpful in getting Fundamentalist Christians to back the international interest in one of Untermeyer’s pet projects—the Zionist Movement.”

Others have been even more explicit about the nature of Scofield’s service to the Zionist agenda. In “Unjust War Theory: Christian Zionism and the Road to Jerusalem,” Prof. David W. Lutz writes, “Untermeyer used Scofield, a Kansas City lawyer with no formal training in theology, to inject Zionist ideas into American Protestantism. Untermeyer and other wealthy and influential Zionists whom he introduced to Scofield promoted and funded the latter’s career, including travel in Europe.”

John Nelson Darby

On one of these European trips, Oxford University Press publisher Henry Frowde “expressed immediate interest” in Scofield’s project. According to a biography of Frowde, although the OUP publisher was “[n]ot demonstrative in his religious views, all his Christian life he was associated with brethren known as ‘Exclusive.’” The “Exclusive Brethren” refers to the group of Christian evangelicals that, in an 1848 split in the Plymouth Brethren, followed John Nelson Darby, the Anglo-Irish missionary generally considered to have been the most influential figure in the development of Christian Zionism, and a major influence on Scofield.

Central to Christian Zionist belief is Scofield’s commentary (italicized below) on Genesis 12:3: “‘I will bless them that bless thee.’ In fulfillment closely related to the next clause, ‘And curse him that curseth thee.’ Wonderfully fulfilled in the history of the dispersion. It has invariably fared ill with the people who have persecuted the Jew—well with those who have protected him.The future will still more remarkably prove this principle.”

Drawing on Scofield’s rather tendentious interpretation, John Hagee claims, “The man or nation that lifts a voice or hand against Israel invites the wrath of God.”

“The fourth judgment is the judgment of the nations. All the nations of the earth will be judged before God Almighty and His holy angels for the manner in which they treated the Jewish people. (See Matthew 25:31-46)”[28 July 2009, John Hagee, Charisma Magazine]

Zionist shyter Samuel Untermeyer ‘s small “investment” in a crooked ex lawyer changed the opinion of millions of American Chriatians towards Jews from Christ Killers to God’s Chosen People.

Bardon Kaldian says:

Although we do have media exploitation of shoah; Jewish ethnic animus toward Czarist regime, etc., the notion of the Jewish Bolshevism is wrong.

Jews had not been numerically over-represented in the CP USSR (and its earlier variants). They’ve comprised ca. 5% of all card-carrying Bolsheviks & close to 50% of the Politburo during Lenin’s times (never reached 50%+)*. They- Russian & Ukrainian Jews (except in the BUND)- never advocated separate Jewish interests, and, what is more important, they did not perceive themselves as Jews in a national sense- except in cases when they fiercely attacked Zionism as a “grave ideological error”. Many of them were actually Russian national loyalists, which was evident from their behavior in the Brest-Litovsk treaty crisis, when Lenin had had virtually all the Bolshevik party & Politburo against himself, this time based purely on “national pride” agenda (“we won’t give our land to Germans”.)

As for influence, to put it shortly: it was Lenin, an ethnic Russian with marginal Jewish ancestry (a converted mother’s father Moishko Blank, himself an anti-Semite) he wasn’t aware of until he was 35, and later didn’t care about, who has created & lead the successful global socio-political transformation called Communism. Lenin designed & built Bolshevik party as a highly militarized, disciplined & ideologically dogmatic sect, a universal machine for transformation of all resentments (social, national, religious, personal, ethnic, “racial”, cultural, economic,..) into a “laser beam” of focused, almost inevitably violent determination for possession of total power and creation of a new, Communist utopia.

Both ideas and actions in the crucial periods from 1903. to 1922. were his, frequently opposed by more cautious Russian & ethnically non-Russian Bolshevik leadership. The most prominent Bolshevik rulers during the revolution and civil war, of Jewish origin, had been: Zinoviev, Kamenev, Sverdlov and Trotsky. Sverdlov was perhaps the most influential among Bolshevik Jews in the earliest stage, but he died (or was killed) too soon. He himself never developed any idea, nor had been the central figure in any significant event- except the execution of Russian royal family. Trotsky, who had been a Menshevik but switched his loyalties to Lenin, played the pivotal role in organization of the Red Army, but his vanity & verbal excesses have alienated him from many other top Bolsheviks who feared his influence: so “Jewish” Zinoviev and Kamenev formed an alliance with the Georgian Stalin (and his lapdogs) to isolate & destroy Trotsky. They succeeded, but were later destroyed in the power struggles with other Stalin’s allies (this time ethnic Russian Bukharin and others). At the end, the entire “old guard”, except Stalin, had been killed, one way or another. So much for “Jewish solidarity”.

What Kevin Macdonald can’t (or won’t) see is that pure stats don’t mean much. One person, Lenin, totally dominated the party & the Revolution (the foundation of the Bolshevik ideology, the central strategy and tactics in post-February days, the planning and execution of the October coup d’etat, formation of the Cheka, the decision to switch to War Communism, the tactical withdrawal in the humiliating Brest-Litovsk treaty, crucial political/economic “retreat” embodied in the New Economic policy, …). On many occasions Bolsheviks of Jewish extraction had tried- unsuccessfully- to counter Lenin’s unique combination of radicalism & pragmatism, but inevitably failed: they’ve been frequently too radical, but not realistic enough; in other instances like the October coup, they were mostly too cautious and afraid to move (so was Stalin). In all critical moments Lenin virtually raped the party- and won.

Somewhere around 1920-1921, Stalin became the man of Lenin’s primary confidence. He was the only person who could see him without prior notice (Kamenev, Zinoviev, Trotsky, ..and other Jewish Bolsheviks couldn’t). After 1922. (Lenin died in 1924., completely incapacitated), Stalin was, effectively, the most influential Communist ruler & all other influential political figures, whether Jewish, ethnic Russian, Caucasian, Polish, Baltic, Ukrainian, …could not overthrow him, nor impose their ideas and practices. Eventually, Stalin got rid off all leaders of revolution and mercifully “spared” only figures of secondary importance whose chief characteristics had been blind loyalty to him.

To summarize: over-representation of Soviet Jews in the early stages of the Communist revolution (Sverdlov, Trotsky, Zinoviev, Uritsky, Ioffe ..or their enemies like Martov, Gershuny, Blumkin (he has later “converted”, but was executed as a Trotskyst during the Purges), Dora Kaplan …) or in Stalin’s Soviet Union (Kaganovich, Yagoda, Litvinov, Neftali Frenkel, ..) is an interesting phenomenon, but proves- nothing. The very formation of a new type of society was, essentially, the result of Lenin’s genius; consolidation of the new “theocratic” empire was in the hands of one man, Stalin. All Communist Jews, from top to bottom, were mostly executors and followers, not shapers of history along the ideas & practices they themselves had created. And I won’t address the issue of Soviet Jewish victims (Mandel’shtam, Mikhoels, Babel’, …). So, Kevin MacDonald is partially right, but his thesis about some imaginary Jewish survival strategy & brilliant success and “high life” in the Soviet Union they had- according to MacDonald – made for themselves is simply- wrong.

———————————-

* Of the 21 full members of the Central Committee of the Communist (Bolshevik) Party at the time of the October 1917 Revolution, six were of Jewish origin. That makes 29%. Or 7 out of 31, if you include the 10 candidate members.

The number dropped drastically after the purges

A Liberal Nationalist says:

“Indeed after superficial reading, that could well be the lazy and simplistic conclusion, that goes as follows:

Individual Jews may be either liberal or conservative. It is because they “naturally” gain access to politically and intelectually influential positions, due to high IQs and supposed genetic superiority, that it is normal to see them, as any other liberal or conservative influencer, do what influencers do. In other words, move along, nothing to see here.

But this view is challenged when you take a look at the facts. Therefore, after a bit of research one is likely to end up asking some of the following questions:

Why do 67% of American Jews – average Jews – support immigration reform – and being immigration reform an euphemism for amnesty and more chain migration mechanisms – for more mass immigration from third world and developing countries?

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/04/why-immigration-reform-is-a-jewish-issue/430806/

1) Why do Jewish leaders and influencers almost unanimously support and lobby for mass immigration knowing as they do most of it is coming mainly from developing and third world countries?

https://forward.com/news/179296/jews-unite-behind-push-for-immigration-reform/

http://www.worldjewishcongress.org/en/news/maram-stern-closing-europes-borders-is-not-the-solution-to-the-refugee-crisis-showing-solidarity-is-9-3-2015

http://www.worldjewishcongress.org/en/news/refugee-crisis-hungarian-jews-pledge-support-for-refugees-reject-any-comparison-with-holocaust-9-0-2015

https://www.adl.org/news/article/welcoming-the-stranger-adls-commitment-to-protecting-refugees

https://www.adl.org/education/educator-resources/lesson-plans/we-were-strangers-too-learning-about-refugees-through-art

http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-life-and-religion/243801/teaching-kids-about-refugees

http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-life-and-religion/216190/explain-refugee-crisis-to-kids

2) Why, and I quote, has the Jewish community made it clear that opening America’s doors to Syrian refugees is one of its defining priorities?

http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/218925/helping-anti-semites-immigrate

3) Is it a Jewish cultural and religious issue? historic perhaps?

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1898474/jewish/A-Torah-Perspective-on-National-Borders-and-Illegal-Immigration.htm

http://www.aish.com/ci/be/95296369.html?tab=y

https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/u-s-election-2016/1.754644

http://www.centralreformtemple.org/event/torah-study-strangers-in-a-strange-land-jewish-views-on-immigration/

https://reformjudaism.org/blog/2017/01/31/reform-jews-stand-our-immigrant-friends-and-allies

4) Why aren’t there more articles in tabletmag, Forward, World Jewish Congress and the ADL condemning the passivity of Israel towards the refugee crisis, and lobbying to get Israel opening his borders to all refugees?

5) Why of all influencers, do the ones publicly criticizing Islam and Western acceptance of mass immigration that is, such as Sam Harris, Gad Saad, Mark Steyn, Pamela Geller, Dave Rubin of the Rubin Report, Ezra Levant of the Rebel Media, the Gatestone Institute shills, Bill Maher, Douglas Murray and the rest of a long list, which by the way, is mostly composed of Jews, not acknowledge and condemn the Jewish organizations, leaders and influencers from Jewish owned MSM for their role in the lobbying of Western governments and manipulating public opinion to get them to accept more refugees?

Now, you can play dumb, dance around the issue, cry anti-semitism and play the victim so much you want, as you and your ilk (and I mean intellectually dishonest Jews, make no mistake) have done for so many centuries.

But the fact remains that the organized Jewish community, its leaders and influencers are almost unanimously lobbying for more third world mass immigration, and the ones opposing it fail to acknowledge the role played by said actors, perhaps because they are part of their tribe.

This lack of honesty and double standards on the one hand, and the lobbying for mass immigration on the other – so detrimental for the citizens of Europe and the US because it will convert, bit by bit, Western countries into developing ones like Brazil or Colombia, will no doubt be the source of future real and understandable anti-semitism, and of course by that time fools like yourself will again play victim and cry anti-semitism, and feel once more persecuted because of “envy”, as has been the narrative for centuries.”