Reason Radio interviews Jewamongyou

Though I hate listening to my own voice, I have no problems inflicting it upon others.  So, here it is:

http://reasonradionetwork.com/20110916/the-stark-truth-interview-with-reuben-hayat

Advertisements

About jewamongyou

I am a paleolibertarian Jew who is also a race-realist. My opinions are often out of the mainstream and often considered "odd" but are they incorrect? Feel free to set me right if you believe so!
This entry was posted in book/movie/video reviews and links. Bookmark the permalink.

41 Responses to Reason Radio interviews Jewamongyou

  1. Richard says:

    Your voice sounds better than that of the radio moderator :)
    beside that, nothing new for regular readers of your blog.

  2. portland1realist says:

    You sound just fine. I enjoyed it, I plan on finding a minute to call you. I listened while feeding my little terrors!

  3. Georgia Resident says:

    Ditto to what Richard says.

  4. Septen says:

    I listened to the entire interview, your voice is smooth and comes across fine.

    As someone already alluded to, the moderator’s voice did not. Worse, the interview was taking place on a bad internet connection, his voice creaked at several occassions.

    And that was just the technical aspect, here are some quick points on the interview itself:

    You come across as an interesting, intelligent man and and easy conversationalist. The host did not. I was more than annoyed when he refused to pick up threads of the conversation and went into his own private rants about the LA Jewish Community(thrice!).

    The forced busing was news to me, as well as the Israel issue(just up until a day or so ago on this blog). I would like to hear/read more on these issues but the host was hopeless. After he ranted about the LA Jewish Community he went onto globalist conspiracy theories and Alex Jones-territory(he also threw in George Soros for good measure).

    The problem, I suspect, was a fundamental mismatch in intelligence. The host has a responsbility to match the intelligence of the guest to the best of his ability; and that failed in a miserable fashion here.

    Often the host – when not doing his private, tiresome rants – would only barely touch a subject before moving on, or doing awkard pauses and saying bromies who are obvious or go into ridicolous depth of how he judges people and why, instead of talking of the important topic of anti-Semitism within the movement.

    I would also want more about what hostility, even if subtle, you’ve faced around Amren conferences and how this manifested itself.

    And, of course, the host completely skipped Israel which I thought at least would be a great conversation topic. What did you do there, how did you get there and general thoughts about the nation and it’s future.

    I was also piqued when you spoke of the effects of AIPAC in the ‘short-long term and the long-long term’ and how you viewed anti-Semitism as a glue to bind Jews together.

    Now, I make the host sound completely braindead. He wasn’t, of course, but it’s just that I thought his interview was way under even average potential of what it could’ve been. You did your best to infuse the conversation with meaningful discussion and you were at times forced to change the conversation when he went into one of his many rants who nobody cares about.

    I would be interested to interview you, if nothing because there were many questions that I have that were unanswered and you come across as a clearly intelligent, and intellectually honest debater.

    But alas, I suppose that wouldn’t be possible.

    • jewamongyou says:

      If you come to the next Amren conference (hopefully in the not-too-distant future) you can interview me there. A digital camera, and a small tripod, is all we need. But really there is no need for me to be treated as a celebrity; I’m just a guy with a blog.

    • countenance says:

      he went onto globalist conspiracy theories and Alex Jones-territory(he also threw in George Soros for good measure

      That was my favorite part from his end of the conversation!

      To me, AIPAC is overrated. Too many people make AIPAC out to be some massive K-Street munch monster, when it reality it only exists because of pro-Israel sentiment that already exists in the American population, for disparate reasons. I don’t think AIPAC is the kind of group that bribes politicians to change their minds.

  5. I like your first name. Can you guess what my favorite sandwich is? (And whenever I eat one, I cheat on my no-wheat save-whitey diet.)

  6. Haven’t heard the whole thing yet.

    Your voice has a nice timbre and you form your words intelligibly. Most importantly, your pace is right on, not too fast, not too slow

    On the other hand, I completely understand hating to listen to your own voice. I can’t stand mine either.

    Okay, Mr. Non-Anonymous, what’s your secret? HOW DO YOU KEEP YOUR JOB? (Can you hear a twinge of envy?)

  7. Stealth says:

    Interesting to finally hear the voice…..

  8. anonymous says:

    Along with your appearance, your name would lead me to believe you were Sephardic or Mizrahi rather than Ashkenazi. It’s rather more exotic than David Goldstein.

  9. IHTG says:

    You sound like Robin WIlliams.

  10. destructure says:

    You represented yourself well. First, you did a good job of balancing ethnic and racial interests. I think a more complementary and mutually supportive relationship would be in everyone’s interests. And, second, you were morally consistent in extending these principles to the Madagassi; which was good.

    I don’t want to be too critical of the host because he didn’t sound malicious. But he kept cutting you off and returning to some issues you had already addressed in your earlier comments. On the plus side, it gave you a chance to give your opinions and perspective which I thought was important. It’s going to come up anyway so it’s good you had the opportunity to spell it out.

  11. destructure says:

    You represented yourself well. First, you did a good job of balancing ethnic and racial interests. I think a more complementary and mutually supportive relationship would be in everyone’s interests. And, second, you were morally consistent in extending these principles to the Madagassi; which was good.

    I don’t want to be too critical of the host because he didn’t sound malicious. But he kept cutting you off and returning to some issues you had already addressed in your earlier comments. On the plus side, it gave you a chance to give your opinions and perspective which I thought was important. It’s going to come up anyway so it’s good you had the opportunity to spell it out.

  12. a random user name says:

    Nice interview, it was a shame the host did not let you keep speaking when you were on a roll.

    @Septen: I would be careful about comparing IQs based on a conversation. Jewish IQ is heavily weighted towards verbal. IME Jews think well and quickly on their feet, which is one of the reasons they do so well in law. (Simply following their own religion requires them to have a good understanding of an intricate system of laws, and those who can’t hack that leave the Jewish gene pool.)

    A Jew of the same average IQ is going to sound smarter than the same average IQ White Gentile and probably much smarter than the same average IQ East Asian. That is because the others will have visuospatial ability etc. that compensates for lack in the verbal region. So I would not rush to pass judgment on the host. I would expect JAY to sound better in this sort of situation.

    We can’t all have mellifluous radio voices. Most people with those voices are vigorously toeing the leftist party line in exchange for money (or because they are ideologically in support of it). I am glad that Stark is doing something productive, and this is productive.

    We are facing an undeclared war with genocidal intent. At the moment, few people realize this. Those who do have numerical, financial, and all manner of other disadvantage. Thus, helping to win the war of ideas and birthrates will do far more than anything else. Physically taking out members of the other side will be counterproductive, IMO. Stark is doing the right thing here.

    If you look at it from that perspective, the anger which Stark feels is not without basis (however productive or counterproductive it may be). My belief is that in order to diffuse that, a different approach to the heavy handed methods of the ADL should be taken. To outline how requires at least a whole post on the subject though.

    @JAY
    It was interesting to see that my hypothesis that reduced finances and hence forced interactions with the end result of PC (i.e. interactions with non-White races) was the force that radicalized you in the direction of racialism. When leftists used to deride “reactionaries”, it was a term not without warrant. Anyone who is going to come up against their policies is going to have a strong reaction. It is no accident that South Africa and the South in America are known for their race reality. They have close encounters with other races every day.

    And this is what will spell the end of the PC revolution. As there is nowhere to turn these days anywhere in a former European stronghold without running into large numbers of non-whites, as non-White immigration everywhere is an inviolable tenet of the left, and as periodic economic depressions are a natural phenomenon of growing populations and limited resources, inevitably PC contains within it the seeds of its own destruction.

    Also interesting to see the comments on arranged marriages (49 minutes). This is the sort of thing that I hope to be able to help out my children with too. This modern “throw them to the wolves” attitude is foolish and wrong, as is most of PC. When we go to throw out the PC bathwater, we will find that most of it is bathwater and very little of it is baby. Even most of the stuff we think of as baby is actually bathwater. For example, the policy that women should travel the world looking for their “soul mate” as opposed to “arranged marriages”.

  13. I really enjoyed listening to your interview, although it soon became obvious the interviewer 100% was on our side. But I am sure you would have no problem tackling a hostile marxist liberal interviewer if they ever had the courage to debate you, which we know they dont. What a wonderful world it would be If a jew could become a media celebrity and advocate for our cause. Well I’ll just have to continue dreaming I suppose..!

  14. seedofjapheth says:

    Robert Stark, the interviewer has a really good show. I have been a listener of his program ever since he first interviewed Robert Lindsay. I don’t always agree with him or his guests but Robert Stark has a good mind that is not constrained by ideological dogmatism. He is able to examine things from different perspectives. Robert LIndsay is a liberal race realist. If your not familiar with him his blog is robertlindsay.wordpress.com

  15. JAY – this maybe a bridge too far but have you ever thought about being the first non-Nazi to write something positive about Hitler?

    Hitler is always spoken of as the devil incarnate, an evil deranged creature with absolutely no redeeming qualities…but, just a minute….

    Unlike “Uncle” Stalin, with whom he is often compared, he was never a career criminal or a murderer – in fact he may have never killed or physically harmed anyone personally. He volunteered for the German Army in 1914 and fought and managed to survive 4 years in the trenches – he was both very lucky and very courageous, a war hero even.

    Hitler was a vegetarian, a non-smoker, a non-drinker, a nature lover, a promoter of regular exercise, and a very accomplished painter. He adored animals, was very kind to children, very courteous towards women, he could so easily have been a fornicator but he never was. Unlike say Hermann Goering he never sought posessions or wealth or soft living.

    To the best of my knowledge, and unlike virtually all other dictators of his type, (aside from the Hitler Youth) he didn’t promote a personality cult and never authorised any statues or monuments in his name.

    He promoted science – particularly rocketry and space travel, the first autobahns and the Volkswagen (not sure we should praise him for those), he also advocated cancer research, regular exercise, health, well-being, and quasi-military youth organisations (not much different from the boy scouts) which young people really need today.

    Given all this it is hard to believe he would not have supported Israel and especially the kibbutz concept. In fact without Hitlers unintentional help, Israel probably would never have come into being and if so what would have been the fate of the relatively small number of Jews in Palestine once the British handed over power to the Arab majority?

    Interestingly, given your recent visit there, didn’t the Nazis at one time propose exiling the jews to Madagascar? Imagine what a paradise that country could be today? I bet the lemurs and the (mostly destroyed) forests would be thankful to Hitler had that happened.

    If he had not “launched” the war and the holocaust he might well be lionised as a great leader and the founder of modern environmentalism

    I mean, given all the above, whats a liberal not to like about Hitler?

    Only one terrible event has blotted his record and, had it not been for the war (which he did not intend, except against the Soviets), the holocaust probably would not have happened (at least not the extermination camps) and historians might regard him as more like a latter-day Napoleon but with more positive attributes.

    Given the healing nature of time, historians will eventually review his record and say “Hitler may have been responsible for the deaths of millions but so was Genghis Khan who is a national hero to Mongolians. Therefore, lets put the record straight or at least into a less emotive perspective”.

    I doubt that day is coming any day soon….UNLESS its said by a jew..!

    Due to the legacy of Nazism tainting all right-leaning philosophy since the war, the left has held the moral high ground despite their various revolutions being responsible for many millions more deaths than Nazism. Only a re-assessment of history, particularly the history of WW2, can remove the left from their lofty self-righteous throne.

    A book written by a jew putting Hitler in a fresh persepective would surely be a best-seller and could help reverse white self-hatred and save our race from the self-destructive course it has embarked upon largely due to unjustified shame and guilt over “Hitlerian” racial philosophy which placed the white Nordic race proudly on top, where it doubtless ought to be.

    Jared Taylor couldn’t do it, David Irving couldn’t do it, but JAY could..!!!

    Or he could remain a marginalised right-wing blogger with a tiny audience.

    • jewamongyou says:

      While it’s true that Hitler had some good traits, we’ll probably have to wait another 50 years for any objective analysis of his personality and leadership. Katzenelson, in The Ashkenazi Revolution, says something similar to what you say (if not for Auschwitz, Hitler might have been considered “great” like Alexander or Napoleon). But, in my eyes, people who are responsible for the deaths of millions do not deserve the epithet “great”, whether it’s Genghis Khan, Napoleon or Hitler.

      • seedofjapheth says:

        JAY,

        We don’t have to wait another 50 years for objective analysis. Hitler was a moron and he should not be associated with white pride.

    • seedofjapheth says:

      Bantu,

      Writing something good about Hitler is a complete non-sense thing to do. Hitler has nothing to do with white racial consciousness and the fact you connect him to white racial consciousness really offends me. HItler killed millions of jews and other white people of various European nationalities. His government had many horrible policies. HItler was just a very stupid moron who screwed up the world. He has nothing to do with white pride. He killed tons of white people including Greeks, British, Jews, French, Russians, and on and on.

      • It cannot be nonsense to write “something good” about Hitler because clearly he had some good points and many good ideas that most of us here would embrace at least to some degree. Whenever the right makes the tiniest political gains (eg, the BNP winning 2 seats in the European parliament) the left raises the spectre of “racism” and a “new Nazism” on the rise in order to beat us back down again. And it works like a charm every time. It is rather akin to holding up a crucifix to Dracula.

        it is not my intention to totally re-habilitate Hitler, just to put things into a clearer and less emotive historical perspective. Whenever someone trys to convince me that something or someone is either 100% good (like Nelson Mandela) or 100% bad (like Hitler and apartheid) I am suspicious of their motives, and so should you be.

        Have you ever read a single positive article about apartheid in the mainstream press? I am sure you haven’t, and yet there is much good to say about it. More good than bad in fact. However to even hint at this truth is considered the same as endorsing Hitler and the Nazis.

        As I said, in some ways Jews should be thankful for Hitler as he is (albeit unintentionally) responsible for them recovering their promised land after 1900 years of exile. That would never have happened without the holocaust. I would imagine that many jews, if pressed, would reluctantly agree it was worth 6 million deaths. Also, since most jews are leftist liberals, the spectre of Nazism has given them a very potent weapon with which to keep the white right at bay. It is whites, not Jews, who have suffered and lost most due to Hitler and the Nazis.

        My larger point is that only a jew could get away with saying something positive about Hitler and only a black about apartheid. Until that day comes we are going to continually suffer and lose ground.

      • seedofjapheth says:

        Bantu it is not a good idea to discuss re-examining HItler in connection with white pride. An appropriate place to discuss re-examining Hitler would be a forum or some sort of group dedicated to WW2 studies. I do not want to be associated with Hitler simply for being white.

    • a random user name says:

      Bantu, if you aren’t trolling…

      I think you are asking far too much in asking Jews, especially the blog owner, to advocate for Hitler specifically. Irrespective of the root causes, his regime did wipe a large number of Jews out. It would be like asking Germans to see Stalin in a good light. Or asking a racially aware white person to write a book talking about the good points of Walter Benjamin. Be thankful that there is even someone we can ally with who genuinely wants change.

      OTOH, a better question to ask IMO is “Could there be some sort of National Socialist like movement or government that is not anti-Semitic, or philo-Semitic, or whatever-Semitic that Jews would like?” The answer to that IMO is “yes”. If you look at what happened to East Germany after the Russians got done raping and pillaging at the end of WWII, they just changed a few words in the books and it was much the same as it was before. Or at least, that is my impression.

      Also, you aren’t going to get a libertarian to advocate for any kind of socialism let alone National Socialism.

      A movement that is going to succeed today is going to suit the times of today. The situation is completely different now to the 1930s. I think for many, many Jews today, PC should be losing its luster. For the partial Jews, PC is perhaps even worse. A partial Jew’s grandchildren are going to be white, and perceive themselves as white. To the extent that PC is anti-white (and that’s what it was designed for), it is in the interest of partial Jews to overturn PC.

      Contrast today with the situation in the 1920s and 1930s. The 1920s must have been a very heady and hubristic time for Jews. Rothschild’s Balfour declaration gave them Israel, in exchange for screwing over Germany. Their Russian Revolution had just ousted the Tsars, and the Holodomor had settled old scores with the Ukrainians. Marxism looked to be spreading all over the European world. It SEEMED like it would work out really well for Jews. Why should they not support it?

      I think for that reason, any anti-Marxist and pro-German movement of the 1920s and 1930s would have had no choice but to have been anti-Semitic. (I would like to be proved wrong though, as I might learn something.)

      This is very much not the case today. Today’s logical alliance is of Jews, and Ashkenazi especially, with the race that has played host to them through the last 2000 years – Europeans. It is in both our interests. All that is needed is a spark. Perhaps this blog will provide it.

  16. Zimriel says:

    I have read the Alexander The Great analogy with Hitler in several books. But this isn’t in praise of Hitler.

    I am afraid that Hitler is never going to receive a positive press, for the simple reason that he was a villain. Even leaving aside the mass murders, his regime went on a looting rampage all over Europe.

    There’s a (slightly) better argument to be made for the pre-Beer Hall NSDAP, as a political expression of ultramontaine / Ghibelline Catholicism.

  17. jewamongyou says:

    Re: Bantu education,

    I really seriously doubt that any Jew would agree that the State of Israel was worth six million deaths. Many would say it was not even worth one death.

  18. Not even religious jews?

    • seedofjapheth says:

      This is real life, not a math problem. The loss of life is not an abstraction, it is a real thing. This line of reasoning your exploring is flawed in that it is disconnected from the experience of what is happening. WIth this reasoning your only thinking in terms of abstract concepts and the concepts are completely disconnected from “the reality on the ground” so to speak. I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you mean well but with some of the comments you are making in this thread you are saying things which are not very conscientious of peoples connections to historical situations.

  19. I dont understand what you mean by “the reality on the ground” and why you’re acting so “self-righteously” unless you have personal experience of those events. Even so, WW2 ended nearly 70 years ago and in a few years there will be nobody left alive with direct experience of the holocaust so as with all histories there will come a time when a re-asessment is considered.

    As for your not wishing to be associated with Hitler – nothing I write or think can change that because you will be. That, unfortunately, is the reality on the ground of which you speak. I am looking at this from the perspective of white South Africans (I am not one, merely a supporter) who on a daily basis are being vilified by the black Azanian govt – slighty more subtly perhaps than the pre-war Nazi propaganda, but no less worrisome. I am forever hearing people complaining that the jews (the Tutsis, etc) were left to their fate by the West, but the same thing is happening today in SA – and the results will be the same.

    Nobody is prepared to speak up for white SA’s because to do so is to be seen as a supporter of apartheid which has been placed on the same level of opprobrium as the holocaust by none other than the worshipped black “Saint” Nelson Mandela and most whites seem to have been conned into believing this gross absurdity. Even those that havent seem to believe it was a “vile system” comparable to Nazism and they are certainly not prepared to risk their reputations or careers by coming to the defence of 4 million whites who “deserve whats coming to them”. But what will happen in SA is just a fore-taste of what is going to happen elsewhere. Elana Mercer has recently written a book making this same prediction I believe.

    The browns, the blacks, and their Islamicist puppet masters – aided and abetted by useful idiot multi-culturalists – have seen how easily whites can be manipulated into conceding territory, gold, and all their great history and culture by stoking up our own self-hatred, the same self-hatred which makes you and many others cower at the mere thought of being associated with Hitler or being called a “racist”. Would it also bother you to be associated with Alexander the Great – didnt he also slaughter millions? Or Julius Caesar, who is said to have slaughtered maybe a third of all Gauls?

    Dont worry yourself about holocausts of the past – worry about the holocaust that is waiting to happen, of which 9/11 was just a tiny foretaste. Most of us are still “offended” by the idea of ethnically profiling blacks and muslims so we obviously did not learn any lessons. A much greater tragedy is therefore required – one that will reduce the Nazi holocaust to an insignificant place in the history books of the future.

    This, not the events of WW2, is the actual “reality on the ground”.

    • seedofjapheth says:

      Well look on my blog, I have posts in support of white South Africans. But just to warn you if you post any pro-Hitler comments on my blog I will ban you. But yes the plight of the white South Africans is something worth being concerned about.

      And you said you are not a South African. One word of advice: do not associate Hitler with white South Africans. It really would be a bad idea.

      Please just stop with the Hitler stuff. Being white has nothing to do with putting people in concentration camps.

  20. So in your mind Hitler was 100% evil, no redeeming qualities whatsoever?
    Blacks, aided and abetted by self-hating liberals, are making/have made exactly the same conclusions about apartheid, and colonialism. Have you ever heard Mandela, or any other black leader, say a single nice thing about whites? No, because they havent – ever..! It seems that whites in general have no redeeming qualities whatsoever. Do you get my drift?

    Thats a very narrow-minded view IMHO.

    • jewamongyou says:

      Everybody has some positive qualities, including Hitler. The question is: Do those qualities “redeem” him? I don’t think that is possible, nor do I see why it is necessary to redeem Hitler. From a purely academic point of view, you are right. But at this point in history, any attempts to redeem Hitler can only be counterproductive; they cannot help our cause.

      If we put together a list of Hitler’s positive qualities, and distributed it as a leaflet, would this help the white cause? Definitely not; it would be perceived as an attempt to revitalize Nazism (with all its attendant violence, real or imagined). Considering that we have limited resources, it would make much more sense to focus on today’s issues – and try to redeem WHITES, than to focus on a man who died almost 70 years ago (as you pointed out).

      Conversely, we all know that MLK was a reprehensible character (though even he had some good qualities). Would it help our cause to spend our time and energy besmirching MLK to the public? Probably not, though we can certainly discuss him honestly among ourselves. The fact is that both Hitler and MLK do not exist as real human beings anymore. The actual physical men are both dead – and all that exists is their legacy, which is a product of propaganda and history. When you speak well, or ill, of them, in the eyes of Joe Public, you are not referring to the man, but to the legacy. We should bear this in mind when reaching out to the public.

    • seedofjapheth says:

      Bantu,

      Hitler is just not relevant to what we are trying to do. We are fighting for the legitimacy of having a white ethnic identity. Associating a white ethnic identity with hitler would have the opposite effect, it would make having a white ethnic identity seem like a bad thing.

      In America it is viewed as legitimate for east asian-americans to have an asian ethnic identity. No one makes a fuss about that. The reason no one makes a big deal about that is because there is no hitleresque type figure that a segment of the asian population is admiring.

      Among people who are white ethnic advocates there are many who reject anti-semitism and who reject hitler adoration. However a significant portion of white ethnic advocates do admire hitler. And it is the speech of this portion, this portion who admires hitler, which is contributing to the perpetuation of the perspective that having a white ethnic identity is a bad thing.

      I understand you are interested in South Africa, if you associate the plight of white South Africans with Hitler the result of that is that you could influence people to not care about what happens to white South Africans.

      Words have consequences.

  21. Ryan says:

    Hey Reuben, nice interview! I know it is probably really weird for me to keep on giving information about me to you and your subscribers, but I just thought that you would find somethings that happened lately to be interesting. Well, I started college recently, and I decided to go to this type of Jewish Student Organization and meet some new people and I was pleasantly surprised because all of the students were nice and welcoming. Interestingly enough, almost all of them were like me and had significant European ancestry as well as Jewish ancestry. I found out that the actual statistics for just college students in America is that for each student that self-identifies as being of Jewish ancestry, they on average have at least two European gentile grandparents. So I just thought you would find that interesting and if you wanted to know anything else then just ask and I’ll be happy to respond!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s