Why have I not been posting?

It’s a question some of y’all have probably been asking. The answer is that I HAVE been posting, but not to this blog.

I’ve decided that I should do for the rest of my past travels what I did for Ethiopia. So, if anybody’s interested in reading more about my travels, viewing the photos and videos, just click here. It’s a work in progress; I still have a few more places to write about. Some of the posts have already been published here.

Like this blog, what you’ll see at the top is what was most recently published. You can use the drop-down menu to the right to navigate to various places. Maybe I should put a widget like that on this blog too…

Don’t worry; I’ll still post here. I’ve just been so wrapped up in the travel blog that I’ve been doing little else in my spare time.

The travel blog is meant to be non-controversial, though I do sometimes touch on politics. Bear this in mind if you comment.

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

Feminism and Freedom by Prof. Michael Levin

A while back, Diversity Chronicle sent me “Feminism and Freedom” by Michael Levin. I just finished reading it, and thought I’d share some thoughts about it with my readers.

Firstly, here’s an accurate summery of the book from Amazon:

Combining philosophical rigor with detailed knowledge of a wide range of subjects, Michael Levin presents a thorough examination of feminism as both a theory and as a generator of social policy. His book provides a much-needed counterweight to uncritical feminist scholarship prevalent in so much social science writing.

Levin argues that feminists deny that innate sex differences have anything to do with the basic structure of society. He shows how this denial leads feminists to interpret observable differences between male and female roles as the result of discrimination and restrictive social conditioning rather than as the free expression of basic preferences. Levin concludes that feminist proposals for remedying this imaginary oppression systematically thwart individual liberty.

The first chapters of Feminism and Freedom show the conflict between feminist ideology and recent developments in anthropology, neurology, child psychology and behavioral genetics, as well as basic principles of scientific method. The author then moves to a wide-ranging discussion of affirmative action, comparable worth, and the impact of feminism on education, military manpower policy, language, family life and sports—showing in each case how feminist policies run counter to classical liberalism. Written in a lively, challenging, and accessible style, as controversial as it is timely, Feminism and Freedom is must reading for anyone interested in understanding society and preserving liberty.

There’s no doubt that Prof. Levin is an exceptional author; his book “Why Race Matters” opened my eyes to the reality of race. Similarly, this book opened my eyes to the true nature of feminism. However, due to Levin’s broad (and academic) vocabulary, many readers will find themselves reaching for their dictionaries.

The book also has more typographical errors than one would expect from such an illustrious author.

What I gleaned from the book is that there is no such thing as “moderate feminism.” All feminism is radical – because, by definition, feminism is at war with nature. In any other age, feminism would never have gained traction, but because its advocates piggybacked the movement onto liberalism in general – and “civil rights” in particular – they were able to hijack government and education on all levels. The results have been catastrophic and tragic. Countless billions of dollars, of taxpayer money, have been wasted, and countless lives ruined due to the feminist agenda.

The book was published in 1987, so the statistics cited therein are dated, but still very relevant. This book was written ten years prior to “Why Race Matters,” and one can already see hints of the latter work in the former – though the author annoyingly gives sympathetic words to the black civil rights movement. Ostensibly to highlight the contrast between the struggle for blacks (which, he says, has merit) with the struggle for women (which, he says, does not have merit). He may have simply been trying to stay out of trouble in this way.

If he were to write the book today, he might have included a chapter on the role of Islam vis-a-vis feminism. But he didn’t, so I’ll claim the insight for myself:

Feminism paved the way for the advance of Islam in Europe. By pressuring women to be like men, and forcing men to be like women, feminist societies left many women feeling unhappy and unfulfilled. Many women simply do not WANT to be just like men; they want to be WOMEN. But Western society made this difficult, and sometimes even impossible.

Along comes Islam, with clearly defined roles for the sexes. In Islam, many Western women found a way to be women again – even with the blessings of the liberal establishment!

As for the unhappy men, some of them also convert to Islam – or commit suicide. Or both.

Posted in book/movie/video reviews and links, feminism and men's issues | Tagged | 17 Comments

Kalman Katzenelson’s encounters with Sephardic Jews

Thanks to a commentor, who calls himself IHTG, for providing the link to a Ha’Aretz article, which includes something of an epilogue to “The Ashkenazi Revolution.”  I’ve taken the time to translate it, and I’m sure some of y’all will enjoy it, especially those of y’all who have already read the book itself. My translation is probably not perfect; there are some things I wasn’t sure of, and where I had to take my best guess. So I’m including the original Hebrew at the bottom; hopefully, other Hebrew speakers can point out my mistakes and make suggestions. WordPress isn’t designed for a right-to-left format, so the Hebrew has some punctuation anomalies.

Here you go:

The first time I met Sephardim face to face was when I was doing temp work for the “Daily Press” of Jerusalem, which was edited by Revisionists, in 1930. My patron, A.B.A. Ahimeir, warned me, “Sephardim work here, the Sephardic-Ashkenazic issue isn’t settled with them. Be careful how you behave; if they suspect even a hint of disrespect, they’ll consider it Ashkenazic supremacy over Sephardim, and they’ll be very offended.” The test ended successfully. One day a man burst into the network who was permeated with severity, entirely agitated and enraged. “This place has also been lost to us,” he shouted in a mourners voice. The man, as one of the Sephardim in our network explained to me, was Mr. Gaon, secretary of the Sephardic congregation of Jerusalem. Gaon had submitted an announcement for a meeting in his organization, as had been customary for a long time. Due to incompetence, the piece had not been published, but Mr. Gaon suspected that the omission was a political decision by the new Revisionist editorial staff, which had locked the gate that had been wide open under the previous editor, Itamar ben Avi. In Jerusalem there was a process whereby Sephardic institutions were weakening, while Ashkenazic ones were gaining strength, and to the omission of this announcement, Gaon responded, crying bitterly, “This place has also been lost to us!”

One of the Sephardim on the editorial board was David Siton, who translated from Arabic, and was an expert on subjects involving Arabs and the Middle East. He would always have bundles of Arabic newspapers under his arm. He was an open-minded man, thirsty for liaisons. My acquaintance with him caused a dramatic turn for the duration of my life. We continued to encounter each other, in passing, at Revisionist meetings. At the end of 1930, David Siton moved, with his Ashkenazic wife, Bilha, from Jerusalem to Tel Aviv, and became a close friend of mine. There were family meetings. In our apartment, in Neve Shaanan, we met with Avraham Stern (Yair), the founder of Lehi. David Siton joined Lehi. Stern’s family returned to Jerusalem, and the contacts ended. Between April 1944 and March 1947, I endured three incarcerations. Among the incarcerations were house arrests. Our contacts resumed during the mid 1950s, when I worked temporarily for the Hebrew Encyclopedia in Jerusalem. Again there were soulful conversations and family visits. In 1957 I published my first book, “Israel After the Sinai Campaign.” David Siton praised the book, and of the 10 copies I gave him for publicity, he sold about half, in installments. “We’ve been left without any status,” he told me as Revisionists establish themselves in the Knesset and government agencies. He appeared perplexed and as if he were standing at a crossroads. At our next encounter, I found him encouraged. The depression about “lacking any status” had passed. Something in his life had changed for the better. He told me some news, of his many travels. He was in the Balkans and in Turkey. He was sent by the Office of Foreign Affairs or one of the clandestine entities, I thought to myself. I didn’t ask for details. With such subjects, silence is better than speech. After a while, he excitedly revealed to me that he had acquired a high management position in the Israeli branch of the World Sephardic Federation. His words descended on me like snow in July. Over the course of 25 years of close familiarity, and heart-to-heart conversations, he never mentioned a word, or even half a word, on the subject of Sephardic ethnicity. Now all of a sudden he’s director general in the very heart of militant Sephardism. After the shock, I summed it up for myself: David’s revolution is part of the revolutions that the State had brought. People who had hidden within the hiding places of the Underground have turned into members of the Knesset, thirsty for publicity. People who gave up on livelihoods and family are in a frenzy for monetary profit. David joined the process.

In a meeting, at a small cafe’ on Yaffo Street in Jerusalem, David Siton brought up the problem with which he had been struggling, the problem of the ethnic gap. “You cannot imagine the awfulness of  the degradation, and the depth of the gap. Now, thank God, there is a state, and there is somebody to turn to. We are the choppers of wood, and the drawers of water; the Gibeonites (a servile caste in ancient times – translator).” Afterwards, I read every line of Sephardic announcements. I didn’t find the awful word “Gibeonites.” I only heard it from his mouth. He requested that I help him. Something in the field of my specialty. To warn about the severity of the problem of the gap. It was concluded that I would write an article for “Tribe and People,” a periodical that he edited, published by the Israeli management of the Sephardic Federation. I left with a suitcase overflowing with Sephardic publications, prior editions of “Tribe and People” and thin folders, in order to facilitate the writing of my article, which was published in “Tribe and People,” folio 3 of Kislev, 5719 (November/December 1959). The material I received was entirely complaints about the gap, and anger at the failure to reduce it, the fault of the Ashkenazic government. In my article, I called for Sephardic activists to moderate their criticism, and to know and appreciate the greatness of accomplishments that Ashkenazic hands had done in this field. Historic experience bears witness that the closing of a gap of the magnitude that exists in Israel has gone on for three generations, and has brought about a huge exodus of Ashkenazim to the United States. I concluded by emphasizing that the closing of the gap can be accomplished only “through a general effort,” not through various forms of separatism. Since “we’re one nation,” the solution will be reached through the qualitative democratic channels of a modern state.

Folio 4 of the journal responded strongly regarding my article. David Siton, on the foremost pragmatic problem: “The honorable writer’s approach bears testimony to a feeling of Ashkenazic superiority, which borders on revolting racism.” The process of three generations is shoved aside with anger. “They’re not willing to wait 150 years!” The scent of the Spanish Inquisition wafts from the words, machinery for the uprooting of opinions that are considered defective, and the erasing of inconvenient facts

At the following meeting, a different David Siton arrived. He didn’t speak of the woes of Sephardic Jewry, but of its rising power as waves of Sephardo-Mizrahi immigrants flooded the state. The Sephardo-Mizrahim are rising to majority status, while the Ashkenazim are descending to minority status. “The days are over when token Sephardim are registered, at the end of the list, for Knesset and municipal seats. From now on Sephardi and Ashkenazi are side by side. The Sephardim are ready to rule the state, they’re establishing dozens of settlements. Why not!” In the throes of his excitement he proclaimed “All the vegetable production in the country is now in Sephardic settlements!” I tried to calm him down: “The settlements are built with the guidance of Ashkenazim, within the framework of Ashkenazic civilization;” but to no avail.  The words “Ashkenazic civilization” angered him. He responded mockingly. His ears were blocked, and his eyes refused to see the reality.

The warmth in our relationship died. In its place a cold tenseness took hold. The state that had built a new world had destroyed, and uprooted, old worlds. It shredded the fabric of friendship between myself and the Jerusalemite Revisionist David Siton, who marched briskly with bundles of Arabic newspapers under his arm. The British left, the Arabs were expelled, and the Jews remained and proceeded to balance old scores.

With the words “Ashkenazic civilization” I lost, with him, all credit for being a good Ashkenazi, and I turned into a bad Ashkenazi. At our last meeting, and I didn’t know it would be our last, we traded impressions about the latest political news. When I told him, as an aside, that I had become close to Yiddish authors, and that I would strive to rejuvenate Yiddish, he exploded at me with angry words. I fled. Over the next week, I was in a state of shock and almost sick. When I recovered, I decided I would not be silent, but respond. “The Ashkenazi Revolution” appeared in 1964, after 5 years.

In folio 4 of “Tribe and People,” in a long pragmatic article, David Siton laid out the tactics of his group. The central pillar, “Securing places of leadership according to ethnic indexing.” Leadership in its broader meaning, which includes not only bodies where elected officials serve, such as the government, the Knesset and municipalities, but even high positions that require an intellectual population. To the extent that they do not exist, don’t worry! “Funds to encourage the higher education of members of the Eastern ethnicities” will solve the problem. In short, what they call “Affirmative Action.” Also when the plan comes to fruition, also when thousands of officials, worthy and not worthy, reach seniority within the workings of government, will this suffice to elevate the education and political skills of close to two million people? Isn’t there a risk that this group of bureaucrats will not fulfill the hope of razing the Ashkenazic civilization, but will rather assimilate within it for its own personal advancement? To this question, Sephardism provides an ideological answer that contains its main thrust: “The Israeli Ashkenazic culture won’t last long. It’s temporary and transitional from its very nature, (such as) the founding of incidental kibbutzim, whose fate will resemble somewhat the fate of the Crusaders. It’s not religious. On the contrary, it’s hostile to religion. Therefore, it will not last long, because Jewish culture is rooted solely in religion.” The Israeli Ashkenazic culture is destined to break up, and in doing so, the leadership of the country will pass to Sephardic flanks, which will achieve a process of affirmative action. The future culture of the State of Israel will be Sephardic, a continuation of the golden age in the land of Spain, rooted in the poetry of Spain.

Sephardism is correct in its prophesy of the breaking up of Israeli Ashkenazic culture, but it errs a tragic error in its assessment of the strength of Sephardic culture to inherit its place. (Sephardic culture’s) weakness is not the result of Ashkenazic persecution; we have an alibi. The weakness was born in the land of Spain, a result of the influence of the rationalism of Greek philosophy, which led to outbreaks of forced conversions the likes of which Jewish history had never known. Sabbateanism. The lack of ability to build a popular flourishing continuation, despite the wonderful Sephardic inspiration of the 16th century. In the 300 years between the Spanish Expulsion and the French Revolution, the Sephardic elite had a wonderful opportunity to establish itself ahead of the Ashkenazim, to establish itself and to lead, but it preferred to estrange itself and to subjugate. In contrast to this lack of ability, Ashkenazic achievement stands out in assuring popular continuity in the land of Europe under cruel conditions for a thousand years. Sephardism is correct in its burning prophesy for Israeli Ashkenazic culture, but it makes a tragic mistake in its faith that it will turn Israel into another chapter of the Golden Age of Spain. In its burning prophesy for Israeli Ashkenazic culture, Sephardism shares the assessment of the Ultra-Orthodox.

Over the 5 years after I wrote “The Ashkenazi Revolution,” a collection of material from over 4 years, and about half a year of writing, I sought opportunities to chat with Sephardim. I chatted with close to fifteen. One of them was Avraham Rikanati, of blessed memory, a precious and accomplished man, wonderful in his complete Jewishness, which didn’t need any foreign addition. Sephardic Jewry was his entire world, and he never recovered from its disgrace. He lived on Yehudah haLevi Street, and could it be otherwise? Usually I would meet him near the post office at Allenby, or on Binyamin Street. Folder in hand, on his way to the Florentine neighborhood with insurance policies for the Salonika (Jews). One day at Allenby, by the post office, he told me, as he gestured an annoying hand toward the shops: “In business we are descending and descending; there are no positions for young people. Thank God for Discount (Bank?), with 400 positions.” Binyamin Arditi, a Bulgarian from Yaffo, emotional and stormy, a wholesaler who might have been a member of the Knesset, and was a partner with David Siton in editing “Tribe and People” (folio) 3, in which my article was printed. He met me at Allenby, near the beach, and shouted at me: “It’s because of you that the Sephardim are just thieves and prostitutes! You have no idea how great our contribution is!” With a vegetable vendor on Dissengoff, who I think was from Iran, understanding and cultured, and very friendly with his customers. He was very much aware of political issues. Regarding the issue of ethnicity, he told me “There is a lot of bitterness, a lack of peace-making. In the future, something will happen…”. I gave him one of my books and I fell into a trap. He rejected my claims that the Jewish People has always had a leading tribe, currently the Ashkenazim. In his rage, he screamed at me “Hitler!” and he blocked way to the door. I was left imprisoned until the partner, less “passionate” about political issues, came to my rescue and allowed me to exit. Afterwards, I never entered that store. I chatted with a group of Yemenites a few times at clubs. I was surprised at the sight of an abundance of expensive electronic gear that they had received from a government agency, most likely the Office of Religions. They listened to me politely and attentively, but they rejected my claims.

The most dramatic meeting for me was around 1980, 15 years after the publication of “The Ashkenazi Revolution.” On Allenby Street, a stranger confronted me and asked: “Katzenelson?” Yes. “Why do you hate Sephardim?” He shook my hand so forcefully that it was a miracle he didn’t cause it to break. As we stood, he listened to my claims: We’re a group of tribes, and among us is a leading tribe. In the past, it was Sephardim, and Ashkenazim were trampled beneath them. Now the wheel has turned, not through our fault, but through the fault of history. I desire what’s good for the Sephardim. Tall, thin with the stride of a soldier. From time to time he would hunt me out at Allenby, and we’d have the same conversation. He would strive to digest the concepts. His stride was the stride of a professional military man. An undercover police officer? A private detective? He doesn’t sit at the table, at a cafe’ like realty agents, he constantly stands and confronts from the space between the houses. On one of the meetings, he invited me to a table at a cafe’ and he told me his story: (He was) a member of “Hagana” during the days of slander (to the British) between members of Etzel and Lehi. He was present during a meeting where they called the leaders of “Hagana” to slander the members of Etzel and Lehi, and he refused to cooperate. A soldier of the Israeli Defense Force, a decorated war hero, and after all this he remained… a Sephardi. There is no doubt that the thought that he had to teach me a lesson was eating away at him. Perhaps he belonged to a group that busied itself with such programs, and took photos. How did he recognize the features of my face 15 years after the publication of “The Ashkenazi Revolution?” Had he not done anything, it would have been because he’s a man of protocol, and he saw himself as obligated to heed the call of protocol. As the years passed, the cruel profile of his handshake diminished, and when his handshake became a normal one, I became convinced that he had forgiven, and that we were even at the threshold of friendship. Then he disappeared, and from the 90s I was no longer afraid that somebody would confront me from between the houses on the paths of Allenby.

“פגישות עם ספרדים” מאת קלמן כצנלסון

בפעם הראשונה נפגשתי עם ספרדים פנים אל פנים בעבודתי הזמנית ב”דואר היום” הירושלמי בעריכת רביזיוניסטים, ב-1930. הפאטרון שלי אב”א אחימאיר הזהיר אותי “כאן עובדים ספרדים, הנושא ספרדים־אשכנזים אינו מרפה מהם, תקפיד על התנהגותך, אם יחשדו בשמץ זלזול יעריכו אותו כהתנשאות של אשכנזי מול ספרדי וייפגעו מאד”. המבחן עבר בהצלחה. יום אחד התפרץ למערכת אדם לבוש בקפידה, כולו רותח ונסער. “גם המקום הזה אבד לנו”, זעק בקול אבלים. האיש, כך הסביר לי אחד הספרדים במערכת, הוא מר גאון מזכיר העדה הספרדית בירושלים. גאון מסר לפרסום ידיעה על פגישה בארגונו, כנהוג מימים ימימה. הקטע לא פורסם בגלל רשלנות, אך מר גאון חשד כי ההשמטה היא פרי מדיניות המערכת החדשה, הרביזיוניסטית, הנועלת את השער הפתוח לרווחה, בימי העורך הקודם, איתמר בן אב”י. בירושלים פעל תהליך של החלשת עמדות חברתיות ספרדיות והתחזקות אשכנזיות, ועל אי־פרסום הידיעה הגיב גאון בזעקה מרה “גם המקום הזה אבד לנו!”

אחד הספרדים במערכת היה דוד סיטון, מתרגם מערבית ומומחה לנושאי ערב והמזרח התיכון, חבילת עיתונות ערבית תמיד תחת בית שחיו. אדם פתוח וצמא למגעים. הקשר איתו גרם למפנה דראמטי לכל אורך חיי. המשכנו להיפגש פגישות חטופות בועידות רביזיוניסטיות. בסוף ה-1930 עקר דוד סיטון עם אשתו בלהה, אשכנזיה, מירושלים לתל אביב והפך לקרוב בידידי. היו פגישות משפחתיות. בדירתו בנוה שאנן נפגשנו עם אברהם שטרן (יאיר), מייסד לח”י. דוד סיטון הצטרף ללח”י. משפחת סיטון חזרה לירושלים והמגעים נפסקו. בין אפריל 1944 ומארס 1947 עברתי שלושה פרקי מאסר. בין המאסרים מאסרי בית. הקשר התחדש בשנות ה-1950 האמצעיות כאשר עבדתי זמנית באנציקלופדיה העברית בירושלים. שוב שיחות נפש ואירוח בבית המשפחה. ב-1957 פירסמתי את ספרי הראשון “ישראל אחרי מבצע סיני”. ד.ס. שיבח את הספר מ-10 העותקים שנתתי לו להפצה מכר כמחצית, בתשלומים לשעורים. “נשארנו חסרי כל עמדה”, אמר לי כאשר רביזיוניסטים מתבססים בכנסת ובמוסדות הממשלה. נראה מתלבט ועומד בפרשת דרכים. בפגישה הבאה מצאתיו מתאושש. הדכדוך על “חסרי כל עמדה” חלף. בחייו השתנה משהו לטובה. סיפר לי על חידוש, הירבה בנסיעות, היה בבאלקן ובטורקיה. בשליחות משרד החוץ או אחד הגופים החשאיים, אמרתי בליבי. לא שאלתי לפרטים. בנושאים אלה שתיקה עדיפה על דיבור. לימים גילה לי בהתרגשות שקיבל תפקיד גבוה בהנהלת הסניף הישראלי של הפדרציה הספרדית העולמית. דבריו ירדו עלי כשלג בתמוז. במשך 25 שנות היכרות הדוקה ושיחות נפש לא הזכיר במילה וחצי מילה את הנושא הספרדו־עדתי. עתה מנכ”ל בלב ליבו של ספרדיזם מיליטאנטי. אחרי התדהמה סיכמתי לעצמי: המהפך של דוד הוא חלק מהמהפכים שהביאה המדינה. אנשים שהתחבאו במחבואי מחתרת הפכו לחברי כנסת צמאי פרסום. אנשים שהפקירו פרנסה ומשפחות מסתערים על ריווחי כסף. דוד הצטרף לתהליך.

בפגישה בבית קפה קטן ברחוב יפו בירושלים גולל ד.ס. את הבעיה שנגש להתמודד איתה, בעית הפער העדתי. “אינך מתאר לעצמך כמה נורא השפל ועמוק הפער. עכשיו תודה לאל יש מדינה ויש אל מי לפנות. אנחנו חוטבי עצים ושואבי מים וגבעונים”. בעתיד קראתי כל שורה בפרסומים ספרדיים. את המלה הנוראה “גבעונים” לא מצאתי. שמעתי אותה רק מפיו. ביקש ממני לעזור לו. משהו בשטח הסברתי. להתריע על חומרת בעית הפער. סוכם שאכתוב מאמר ל”שבט ועם”, בטאון בעריכתו, הוצאת ההנהלה הישראלית של הפדרציה הספרדית. נפרדתי עם תיק גדוש פרסומים ספרדיים, גיליונות קודמים של “שבט ועם” וחוברות דקות, להסתייע בכתיבת מאמרי שפורסם ב”שבט ועם” גיליון ג’ כסליו תשי”ט. החומר שקיבלתי היה כולו זעקה על הפער וזעם על המחדל לחסלו, אשמת גורמי שלטון אשכנזיים. במאמרי קראתי לאקטיוויסטים הספרדיים לא להגזים בביקורת ולדעת להעריך את גודל המעשים שידיים אשכנזיות עשו בנושא. הנסיון ההיסטורי מעיד שסתימת פער בסדר גודל הקיים בישראל נמשכת שלושה דורות, וכך קרה להגירת הענק האשכנזית לארה”ב. סיכמתי בהדגשה שסתימת הפער תושג רק “על ידי מאמץ כללי”, לא על ידי בדלנות מסוג זה או אחר. כיוון ש”אנו אומה אחת” והפתרון יושג במסלולים איכותיים־דמוקראטיים של מדינה מודרנית.

גיליון ד’ של כתב העת הגיב בחריפות על מאמרי. דוד סיטון במאמר פרוגראמתי ראשי: “גישתו של הכותב הנכבד מעידה על קיום רגש של התנשאות אשכנזית הגובלת עם גזענות נפסדת”. התהליך של שלושה דורות נדחה בזעם. “לא מוכנים לחכות 150 שנה!” מהדברים נדף ריח של אינקוויזיציה ספרדית, מנגנון לעקירת דעות הנחשבות פסולות ומחיקת עובדות לא רצויות.

לפגישה הבאה הגיע ד.ס. אחר. לא דיבר על צרות ספרד אלא על כחה העולה כאשר גלי עליה ספרדו־מזרחית מציפים את המדינה, הספרדו־מזרחיים עולים לרוב ואשכנזים יורדים למיעוט. “עברו הזמנים כאשר לרשימות נבחרים לכנסת ולמועצות עירוניות דחקו ספרדי לסגולה בסוף הרשימה. מעתה ספרדי ואשכנזי זה בצד זה. הספרדים בשלים לשלטון במדינה, מקימים עשרות מושבים, מדוע לא!” בלהט התלהבותו הכריז “כל ייצור הירקות במדינה הוא עתה במושבים ספרדיים!” נסיתי לצנן אותו “המושבים נבנים בהדרכת אשכנזים, במסגרת ציביליזציה אשכנזית”; לשוא. המילים “ציביליזציה אשכנזית” הרגיזו אותו, הגיב בלגלוג, אזנו היתה אטומה ועיניו סרבו לראות את המציאות.

החמימות ביחסינו גוועה. במקומה השתלטה מתיחות שופעת קרירות. המדינה הבונה עולם חדש הרסה ועקרה עולמות ישנים, קרעה לגזרים את ריקמת הידידות ביני לבין דוד סיטון הרוויזיוניסט הירושלמי הצועד בתנופות רגל גדולות כשתחת בית שחיו צרור קבע של עתונות ערבית. האנגלים נטשו, הערבים גורשו, היהודים נשארו ונגשו לאזן חשבונות ישנים.

באמירה “ציביליזציה אשכנזית” איבדתי אצלו כל קרדיט של אשכנזי טוב והפכתי לאשכנזי רע. בפגישה האחרונה, לא ידעתי שתהיה אחרונה, החלפנו רשמים על המתרחש בסביבה הפוליטית. כאשר סיפרתי לו בדרך אגב שהתקרבתי לסופרי יידיש ואשתדל לפעול להחיותה התפרץ כלפי באמירת זעם. ברחתי. במשך שבוע הייתי נתון בזעזוע, כמעט חולה. כשהתאוששתי החלטתי לא לשתוק, להגיב. “המהפכה האשכנזית” הופיע ב-1964, אחרי 5 שנים.

בגיליון ד’ של “שבט ועם”, במאמר פרוגרמאתי ארוך, פירט דוד סיטון את הטקטיקה של קבוצתו. עמוד התווך, “שיריון מקומות בהנהגה לפי מפתח עדתי”. הנהגה במובן רחב הכולל לא רק גופים בהם מכהנים נבחרים, ממשלה כנסת שלטון עירוני, אלא גם במשרות של פקידות גבוהה הדורשות ציבור של משכילים. במידה שאינם, אל דאגה! “קרנות לעידוד חנוך גבוה של בני עדות המזרח” יפתרו את הבעיה. בקיצור מה שקרוי “העדפה מתקנת”. גם כאשר התכנית מוגשמת, גם כאשר אלפי פקידים, מתאימים ושאינם מתאימים, מבורגים במערכת השלטון, האם זה מספיק להעלות את ההשכלה והכושר הפוליטי של קרוב לשני מיליון? האין חשש שקבוצה זו של ביורוקראטים לא תקיים את התקוה לערער את הציוויליזציה האשכנזית, אלא תתבולל בתוכה לקידום אינטרס פרטי? לשאלה זו משיב הספרדיזם תשובה אידיאולוגית שבה עיקר כחו: “התרבות האשכנזית הישראלית לא תאריך ימים. היא ארעית ובת חלוף מעצם טבעה, יצירת קבוצות מקריות, שגורלן ידמה במשהו לגורל הצלבנים. היא אינה דתית. להפך, עויינת לדת. לכן לא תאריך ימים, מפני שתרבות יהודית שרשית היא אך ורק דתית”. התרבות האשכנזית הישראלית צפויה להיכנס להיתפרקות, ותוך כדי כך תעבור השליטה במדינה לעמדות ספרדיות שישיג תהליך ההעדפה המתקנת. התרבות העתידה של מדינת ישראל תהיה ספרדית, המשך לתור הזהב על אדמת ספרד, מושתתת על שירת ספרד.

הספרדיזם צודק בנבואת ההתפרקות לתרבות האשכנזית הישראלית, אולם טועה טעות טראגית בהערכת כחה של התרבות הספרדית לרשת את מקומה. חולשתה אינה פרי קיפוח אשכנזי, יש לנו אליבי. החולשה נולדה על אדמת ספרד, פרי השפעת הראציונליזם של הפילוסופיה היוונית שגרמה להתפרצות שמד במימדים שההיסטוריה של היהודים אינה יודעת כמותם. שבתאות. חוסר היכולת לבנות המשך המוני משגשג למרות צפת הספרדית הנפלאה במאה ה-16. ב-300 השנים שבין גירוש ספרד והמהפכה הצרפתית ניתנה לאליטה הספרדית הזדמנות נפלאה להתייצב בראש האשכנזים, להתייצב ולהוביל, אך היא העדיפה להתנכר ולחבל. לעומת אי־יכולת זו בולט ההישג האשכנזי להבטיח המשך המוני רצוף על אדמת אירופה בתנאים אכזריים במשך אלף שנים. הספרדיזם צודק בנבואתו הקודרת לתרבות האשכנזית הישראלית, אך טועה טעות טראגית באמונתו להפוך את מדינת ישראל לחוליית המשך לתור הזהב הספרדי. בנבואתו הקודרת לתרבות האשכנזית הישראלית שותף הספרדיזם להערכה של החרדים.

ב-5 השנים בהם כתבתי את “המהפכה האשכנזית”, איסוף חומר למעלה מ-4 שנים וכתיבה כחצי שנה, חיפשתי הזדמנויות לשוחח עם ספרדים. שוחחתי עם קרוב למניין וחצי. אחד מהם אברהם רקנאטי ז”ל, אדם יקר ודגול, נפלא ביהודיותו השלמה שאינה זקוקה לשום תוספת זרה. ספרד היא כל עולמו, עלבונה אינו מרפה ממנו. גר ברחוב יהודה הלוי, וכי ייתכן אחרת? בדרך כלל פגשתיו בסביבת דואר אלנבי או ברחוב נחלת בנימין. תיק ביד, בדרכו לשכונת פלורנטין עם פוליסות ביטוח לסאלוניקאים.יום אחד באלנבי ליד הדואר אמר לי בהניפו יד עצובה לעבר החנויות: “במסחר אנחנו יורדים, יורדים, אין משרות לצעירים, תודה לאל דיסקונט, 400 משרות”. בנימין ארדיטי בולגארי יפואי רגשן וסוער, נמוך קונה, ייתכן היה חבר כנסת, שותף לדוד סיטון בעריכת “שבט ועם” ג’ בו נדפס מאמרי, פגש אותי באלנבי סמוך לים והסתער: “בשבילכם ספרדים זה רק גנבים וזונות! אין לך מושג על גודל התרומה שלנו!” עם סוחר ירקות בדיזנגוף דומני מפרס, נבון מנומס ידידותי מאד ללקוחות, עירני מאד לנושאים פוליטיים. בנושא העדתי אמר לי “יש הרבה מרירות, לא משלימים, בעתיד יקרה משהו…”. נתתי לו אחד מספרי ועליתי על מוקש. דחה את טענותי שבעם היהודי היה תמיד שבט מוביל, עכשיו האשכנזים. בריתחתו צעק לעברי “היטלר!” ונעל את הדרך לדלת. נשארתי כלוא עד שנחלץ לעזרתי השותף, פחות “שרוף” בנושאים פוליטיים ואיפשר לי לצאת. מאז לא נכנסתי לחנות. שוחחתי עם קבוצת תימנים מספר פעמים במועדונם. השתאיתי למראה שפע הציוד האלקטרוני היקר שקיבלו ממוסד ממשלתי, ייתכן ממשרד הדתות. שמעו אותי בנימוס ועירנות, אך דחו את טענותי.

הפגישה הדרמטית ביותר היתה לי סמוך ל-1980 15 שנה אחרי פירסום “המהפכה האשכנזית”. ברחוב אלנבי הגיח אלי אלמוני ושאל: “כצנלסון?” כן. “מדוע אתה שונא ספרדים?” לחץ את ידי בכח שבנס לא גרם לה להתפרק. תוך כדי עמידה הקשיב לטענותי: אנחנו קבוצת שבטים ובתוכם שבט מוביל. בעבר הובילו ספרדים ואשכנזים התרפסו בפניהם. עתה נהפך הגלגל, לא באשמתנו, באשמת ההיסטוריה. אני רוצה את טובת הספרדים. גבוה, רזה הליכות של חייל. מפעם בפעם צד אותי באלנבי, שוב אותה שיחה. משתדל לעכל את המושגים. הליכותיו הליכות של איש צבא מקצועי. שוטר סמוי, חוקר פרטי? אינו יושב ליד שולחן בית קפה כמנהג מתווכי נדל”ן, תמיד עומד ומגיח מפרצה בין בתים. באחת הפגישות הזמין לשולחן בית קפה וסיפר את סיפורו: איש “ההגנה” בימי המלשינות על חברי אצ”ל ולח”י, נוכח באסיפה בה קראו ראשי “ההגנה” להלשין על חברי אצ”ל ולח”י סרב לתת יד. חייל צה”ל, הצטיין במלחמות ואחרי הכל ולמרות הכל נשאר… ספרדי. אין ספק שהמחשבה שצריך ללמדני לקח אכלה בו. אולי השתייך לקבוצה שעסקה בתכנית כזו וביצעה צילומים. כיצד ידע את תוי פני 15 שנה אחרי פרסום “המהפכה האשכנזית”? אם לא עשה מעשה הרי אך ורק מפני שהורגל להיות איש מסגרת וראה את עצמו מחוייב למשמעת של מסגרת. במרוצת השנים ירד פרופיל האכזריות בלחיצת ידו וכשהלחיצה ירדה לנורמלית השתכנעתי שסלח והיינו על סף ידידות. אז נעלם ומשנות ה-90 חדלתי לחשוש שבלכתי במדרכות אלנבי יגיח אלי מתוך הפרצות בין הבתים.

Posted in Jewish stuff and Israel | 6 Comments

Serena Williams: Victim of sexism and racism?

According to Marc Bain, of Quartz.com, tennis player Serena Williams is underpaid, and underendorsed – because of sexism, racism or both. He writes:

The US Open begins today (Aug. 31), and Serena Williams has a chance to make tennis history. A win would put her at 22 career Grand Slam titles, tying Steffi Graf for second most, behind only Margaret Court. Her skill prompts arguments that she is the sport’s greatest female player of all-time, and currently the most dominant US athlete, of any sex or sport. Katrina Adams, the president of the US Tennis Association, recently opined that Williams is the greatest athlete ever—period.

Not everyone will agree on each of those points, particularly that last one, but there’s no disputing that Williams has been among the top handful of athletes on the planet for years now. Yet, on Forbes’ list of the highest-paid athletes, Williams ranks 47th. Of the seven tennis players on the list, she ranks last in endorsement dollars, with $13 million.

The top-earning male player, Roger Federer, will bring in an estimated $58 million in endorsements this year. The number-four ranked men’s player, Kei Nishikori, also brings in more than Williams, as does Maria Sharapova, who will rake in $10 million more yet hasn’t been a genuine rival to Williams for years. This gap has no logical explanation, except for long-held prejudices about female sports stars and how people feel they should look.

It seems to me that Bain is ignoring a basic supply-and-demand element of professional tennis. A while back, Human Stupidity wrote an excellent article detailing how female tennis players are overpaid, and over-promoted:

Women tennis players get  the same pay for less work (fewer shorter sets), lower performance (women are chanceless against any male top 500 player), less productivity (they have fewer spectators that pay less). In other words, women’s equal prize money gets subsidized  by the performance of the males.  Equal prize money actually leads to Wimbledon top 10 women getting higher pay then men. Women play shorter games, thus they have time to make extra money in more games, like doubles. Women also tend to get more sponsor money.  ESPN

Feminists manage to interfere in free market pricing of wages and prizes and enforce excessive pay for women.. Free market admission prices are lower for a spectator’s seat in women’s finals.

Venus Williams, the defending champion and three-time winner, said the women simply want to be treated equally.

“This is not just about women’s tennis but about women all over the world,” she told BBC Radio before Wimbledon’s announcement. “At Wimbledon we would like to have equal prize money to prove that we are equal on all fronts.” 2

The same Venus Williams that was annihilated by #203 in the men’s ranking!  Such demagoguery . If women are “equal on all fronts”, why do women need separate categories? Let them play against men, and whoever wins gets the prize.

Precisely! Professional sports is a product. Fans, and endorsing companies, are its customers. In the case of men’s tennis, the product is (for the most part) raw athletic performance. This is the entertainment that people are willing to pay money for. But female tennis players are selling two products: The beauty of their bodies (as evidenced by their skimpy outfits and the huge amount of attention their male fan base gives to the appearance of those players) and their actual performance. As Human Stupidity points out, female tennis players are inferior to male tennis players – so they capitalize on their sexy appearance to help make up the difference – and to have a viable product. It’s all about supply and demand.

But the Williams sisters are not as sexually attractive as their white female counterparts, and they don’t play tennis as well as their male counterparts. So it should come as no shock that they don’t get paid as much, and are not endorsed as much, as those who offer a better product.

To claim that Serena Williams is a victim of sexism is the same as claiming that ugly strippers are victims of sexism because they don’t make as much in tips as more attractive strippers. To claim she’s a victim of racism is akin to claiming that Asian basketball players are victims of racism because they’re grossly underrepresented in the NBA. In reality, ugly strippers and Asian basketball players are victims of nature – if they’re to be considered “victims” at all.

Posted in Africa and blacks, feminism and men's issues, human sexuality and morality | Tagged | 12 Comments

Donald Trump

Unlike so many of my fellow Americans, I don’t follow politics much. I don’t care what the president, or congressmen, say – because they only say what they say for political gain. After they’re elected, they do whatever moneyed interests want them to do.

But Trump intrigues me. Why? Because he dares to speak the truth about immigration, because he’s not beholden to political correctness, and because the media hate him. For these reasons alone, I’ll vote for him if given the chance.

But I just looked over the Council of Conservative Citizens website, and it seems to me that a lot of pro-whites are putting way too much stock in Trump. You’d think he’s the Second Coming. We should vote for him – as a protest vote. But I really don’t think he’s a bona fide pro-white, or that he’ll dismantle the Cathedral. Even if he wanted to, there’s only so much a president can do. Take Obama for example. The fact that there are still white people alive in the US is proof enough that his power is limited.

Posted in politics and attitudes of the pro-white movements | Tagged | 9 Comments

Our rigid concept of time

I just finished reading E=MC2 by David Bodanis. It’s a fascinating book, and for the first time, I feel as if I can grasp some of the importance of this formula and its history.

One subject the book touches upon, though only in passing, is the relativity of time and its status as a dimension. This reminded me of how I used to struggle with the concept of “eternity” as a child. I wish I could have all that wasted time back, for it turns out that it’s one of those things that do not actually exist, but for which words were invented anyway. It’s cruel when that happens.

Many years ago, I studied at a Lubavitcher yeshiva (a Jewish religious school). The rabbi was teaching a class on the main esoteric book of the Lubavitcher Hassidic sect, the “Tanya.” At one point, while trying to emphasize a difficult concept (one that seemingly made no sense), he kept repeating, “It’s THERE, but it’s NOT THERE!” as he gestured dramatically. I thought to myself, “Wow. This is really deep.” Later I realized that the deepest concepts are the ones that are false. The reason we can’t understand them is that they really don’t make any sense. Sometimes, our most primal, instinctive gut reactions are the correct ones.

Sometimes science, though well-meaning, takes us on wild intellectual rides – that end up exactly where we started. For many generations, it was Greek philosophy that was considered cutting-edge science. This was the case in ancient Greek and Roman times, when Hebrew (representing a more primitive mode of thought) clashed with Hellenistic thought. Though traditional Jews were successful in holding back imperial Hellenistic forces, during the wars of the Maccabees (celebrated through the holiday of Hannukah), Judaism and Hebrew were transformed through their contact with Greek and Greek thought.

Hebrew took on many loan-words from Greek. The Talmud, with its overly analytical methodology, was clearly influenced by Greek philosophy.

As for the Hebrew language, it was fundamentally changed. Before Greek influence, there was no clear-cut concept of tenses. I’ll quote ulpan.net:

there was no such thing in Hebrew as “Past Tense” or “Future Tense”. These are modern Israeli Hebrew terms. Originally it rather was “Perfect” and “Imperfect” aspects. It is the Perfect which gradually developed itself to be used as “Past Tense”, and that’s Imperfect which we treat today as “Future”.

This is well-known to scholars. Classical Arabic is the same way, and I’m told the same is true of classical Mandarin Chinese. It’s possible that ancient Semites didn’t perceive time the same way most of us perceive it today. Something that was to take place in the future was simply something that IS meant to be. “Yiqtol” now means “he WILL kill”, but in ancient times it meant “he is one who kills” or something to that effect. His status is the same today as it will be when he actually does the killing. As to the concept of eternity, Hebrew has no such word. The word that serves as a proxy, in classical Hebrew, is “le’Olam,” which literally means “for the world,” or “for a world.” In other words, for as long as it matters for those in the world.

The human mind is easily molded, and once we get used to thinking about things a certain way, it becomes extremely difficult to think outside of these terms.

Perhaps, through Einstein’s revolutionary grasp of time, as being relative, we have come full circle. The ancients (and even not-so-ancients) viewed time as simply an extended “present,” with the past and future holding no special status in everyday life. The Greeks, and modern Europeans (and those under their influence) enhanced the past and present into a rigid time hierarchy. This was useful for them, and helped facilitate modern society. Those who embrace this hierarchy most fully are those who can be more successful in modern life. The future is more real to them; they have less time-preference. Those who exist in an extended present are held back.

So, for all practical purposes, there is a rigid past-present-future procession. But, as a purely academic question, we can still ask: In the wider reality, outside of ourselves, does it really exist? If we do acknowledge its existence, does this not force us to confront impossible concepts – such as eternity?

Perhaps we can view the rigid procession of time as a human invention. One that is useful to us. As soon as we disappear, so does time. In that case, “eternity” exists only as long as humans exist. As soon as we’re gone, time disappears, and so does “eternity.”

Posted in Jewish stuff and Israel, language | Tagged | 16 Comments

Which do YOU prefer: Babes in bikinis or Idris Elba?

One of the pleasures of summer is the sight of hot babes in bikinis. But some women, who shouldn’t wear bikinis, insist on doing so anyway. I’d like to propose a product for them. It would come in a spray can, and it would cover up the parts most of us don’t want to see. It would be called: Spare-us-all spray (or “spareusol”). I’ll admit that some out-of-shape men expose too much as well. In either case, we can comment: “She/he needs a can of spare-us-all!”

Speaking of babes in bikinis, Maxim Magazine (famous for featuring scantily clad gorgeous women) has decided to break with its tradition and feature a man in its September issue:

If so (and it most likely is so), get ready to change your perception: The cover star of Maxim’s September 2015 issue is not only wearing a full-coverage top, but it’s … a man!

Idris Elba — full-time actor, part-time rapper, and future James Bond  —is officially the first-ever dude to cover Maxim U.S. without the presence of a woman. Who knew that (in this case, anyway) the fastest way to feminism was actually the absence of a female, altogether?

Yes, you read right. They’re making sure that the first featured man, on the cover of Maxim Magazine, is a BLACK man. Of course, no mention of this is made in the article. Few of the comments even point this out. Apparently, we are to believe that “racial equality” has progressed to such a degree that the race of the man on Maxim’s cover is not even an issue.

But of course it IS an issue. We see this over and over again. In the eyes of the hostile elites, black men represent the ultimate male figure, while white men (and Asian men) are failures. Sure, they’ll put up with us if we’re rich or famous, but all else being equal, our race works against us.

I hope this decision costs them enough subscriptions to put them out of business. I’m pretty sure that I speak for many when I say that, though I don’t hate black men, I’m sick and tired of having them shoved in my face at every opportunity.

I hope to send Maxim a can of spare-us-all, so they can use it on their magazine cover.

Posted in Africa and blacks, examples of propaganda | Tagged | 3 Comments