Noam Chomsky’s Radical Zionism and Jewish Supremacism
One personal benefit to me of the death of the Alt Right is that after spending the last five or so years reading right-wing stuff I have some space in my head for more reading of left-wing stuff. The “left” per-se is basically dead; it’s all Trump Derangement Syndrome and the only alternative is the hard left or the far left.
In my college days I did what everyone did and read a lot of Noam Chomsky, until I figured out his gimmick. He’s completely right that the media is simply the PR department for corporate power; they are powerful corporations. Chomsky’s also right that US foreign policy is realpolitik based on economic interests and that US imperialism is as brutal as anything the Soviets or historical empires have done.
But Chomsky is a Jewish Supremacist, full stop, and a Zionist disinformationist. His goal, which shines through every single word he’s written or spoken, is to distract from Jewish power in the American Empire. It’s never powerful Jews doing things in the interests of Jews, it’s always “white” men. Chomsky, laughably, wants us to believe that the Israel lobby has no power and even if they did it’s not run by Jews, it’s really Evangelical Christians – as if working class, high school educated Bible-thumpers have any effect on US foreign policy. Chomsky goes into absolute hysterics whenever Jewish power is noticed.
You can see Jewish power by its distortion of US imperial policy, when the US does something that is not in its own interests but instead in the interest of the Zionist entity. You can also disern what Jews are scared about by noticing when Chomsky goes off script. When the Israel Lobby book came out, Chomsky went into hysterical damage control. He goes into full attack mode, complete with bald faced lies and smears when 9/11 is questioned.
An unusual book of his, the Camelot Myth, also makes sense in light of the context. He wrote this in anticipation of the release of a large number of files being declassified about the JFK assassination. Many leftists and liberals believe that JFK was assassinated because of his supposed opposition to the Vietnam war. Chomsky quickly wrote a book attacking this idea and painting JFK as a war hawk. And, of course, Chomsky was terrified that the Jewish and Zionist connections to the JFK assassination might have come out, so he had to put the left off of JFK, going so far as saying “who cares, people get shot all the time.”
What is good in Chomsky isn’t unique to him – the good work on the media was actually from someone else – and what is unique to Chomsky is simply Jewish and Zionist disinformation. He’ll be dead soon and when the left and the mainstream media start their hagiographies immediately upon his death, it will be a good time to demonstrate just what a liar and disinformation artist he is.
Taking Kaczynski’s Name In Vain
So I was researching Ted Kaczynski and came across this group Deep Green Resistance. I’m wondering why in the world this supposedly radical environmental group spends most of their time discussing feminism. Derrick Jensen is a nutcase, a fruit-loop, with utterly wrong ideas and willful blindness to reality, but I have to admit he has a soothing voice and an engaging speaking style.
I posit that a lot of left-wing activism is driven by child abuse. Jensen says his father raped and beat him and his entire family and it’s obvious that he is very much influenced by therapy culture.
So when he says that at the root of “the war against nature” is the “patriarchal need to dominate” it’s clear he’s based his worldview on his father’s abusive nature. When Paglia pointed out that virtually all of the celebrity feminists had sexually and physically abusive fathers, it puts the whole thing in context.
Jordan Peterson points out that these people have likely never experienced good masculinity, good male authority, good male expressions of power. They cannot distinguish between positive masulinity and negative masculinity and they are not mature enough people to think outside of their own experience. He also notices that women with personality disorders are highly overrepresented in feminism.
Kaczynski had these people nailed in Industrial Society and it’s awful that these people claim inspiration from him when he opposed everything they say.
The “need to dominate” is not at the root of environmental destruction. It’s not an emotional thing. It is literally short term rational self-interest leading to long term disaster. These people claim to be Marxist yet Marx totally opposed this kind of thinking; he was a materialist.
I guess at the end of the day the left is just not serious. They are either liars or emotional cripples.
The emotional cripples don’t get it: it is the lack of patriarchy that caused their abuse. A stronger patriarchy would discipline these abusive men. Family values of the kind Christianity teaches helps women and children and moderates male violence.
These people would get thrown out of the left if they were pro-white, which is too bad, because we really need a pro-white leftist perspective, if the term “left” even means anything anymore, and I’m not sure it does.
The real valuable concept that Marx gave was the concept of class struggle. Class was defined by your relationship to the means of production and property. This is still an incredibly useful concept and it drives a lot.
But the left gained power and dropped Marx and instead followed Trotsky. Trotsky was simply a Jew. He was a Jewish supremacist – literally – a hater of Slavic people which he openly derided as racially inferior. He was exactly like Hitler on this. Trotsky simply wanted to destroy European society and White people and to establish a Jewish dictatorship. He wanted to recruit the non-white world to destroy the white world – he was very clear on this.
Trotsky was, essentially, a Zionist, just not particularly concerned about real estate as far as we know.
And these white leftists – and face it, there are no non-white leftists – these white leftists have internalized Jewish hatred of “gentiles” and loudly advocate Trotsky’s strategy of recruiting non-whites to genocide white people. They are driven by hate.
The Feminization of the Left
There is a sterotype that Ashkenazis have of themselves, and there is data to support it, that they tend to be high on neuroticism.
Individuals who score high on neuroticism are more likely than average to be moody and to experience such feelings as anxiety, worry, fear, anger, frustration, envy, jealousy, guilt, depressed mood, and loneliness.
Women tend to be more neurotic than men, and feminist women tend to be more neurotic than non-feminist women.
So you see where this is going. The contemporary left threw out the masculine blue-collar White men that populated the labor movement. This happened because Ashkenazis had taken over the ruling class of the United States and no longer had common interests with blue-collar white men and their entire culture is based around a hatred of those very men. So, enter “cultural Marxism.” No longer would class – and class struggle – be defined by one’s relationship to property and the means of production. Now it was “social classes.”
Ashkenazis – one of the richest, most educated, and most elite ethnicities in America – were now on the other side of class struggle in the Marxist sense. They were no longer a proletariat fighting against capitalists, they were the new rulers. They had no interest at all in sharing power with the masculine, blue collar white “gentiles” that they hated; they had won.
As Peterson points out, feminists cannot distinguish between “good” masculinity and “bad” masculinity. So, all masculinity is suspect. At the root of this is their trauma from their abusive upbringing. They cannot distinguish negative male “need to dominate” with the “positive” male need to master – as in mastery, competence.
Hence, this frankly stupid notion that environmental destruction is caused by the “patriarchal need to dominate.” What we see is the feminization of the left due to the absence of masculine thinking styles. A real man – like Ted Kaczynski – looked at environmental destruction like an engineer; he understood the materialist causes. He understood these things systematically.
Women don’t have that thinking style. So the abused women – and men like Jensen who, despite being a materials engineer, likely due to his physical and sexual abuse at the hands of his father – abandond Kaczynski’s systematic, materialist understanding of the War Against Nature and came up with an emotional cause.
It’s because bad men need to “dominate” nature. Bad White men – but not Jews, because Hitler.
You see this absurdity with Jensen’s special pleading for homosexuality. He lists four sexual paraphilias: homosexuality, pedophilia, beastiality, and BDSM, and says homosexuality doesn’t belong on the list because it’s not based on the “need to dominate.”
Oh, really, Jensen? Considering the central place of pederasty in homosexuality, both contemporary and ancient, are you sure about that?
Also, beastiality: is this really based on the “need to dominate” an animal? I don’t think so. There are long standing jokes about “sheep-shagging.” It was more common than one might think in pastoral times. I was told by a woman farmer that, supposedly, it is believed that a sheep’s vagina feels the closest to a human woman’s. There is no need to dominate the sheep, it’s literally the desire to feel wet friction on your penis. There is a hilarious and/or disturbing viral video showing a Chinese family at the zoo freaking out because a monkey is putting its penis in the mouth of a frog. Did the monkey have a “need to dominate” the frog? Or was the monkey desiring wet friction on his penis?
Jensen rails against “the myth of human supremacism” but he still believes that humans aren’t animals, apparently.
Next time: what these leftists are missing is called psycopathy and its relation to narcissisism. Not all narcissists are psycopaths, but all psycopaths are narcissists.
Jensen and Deep Green Resistance are radical feminists, thus oppose Queer Theory. Well guess what social subgroup scores off-the-charts on narcissism?
That’s your connection to Queer Theory, Jensen. It’s not the patriarchal “need to dominate” behind this. It’s off the charts narcissism.
Guess what other groups tend to score high on narcissism?
Radical feminists are right that there is a difference between sex and gender. They are wrong that gender roles are entirely “socially constructed” but are, in fact, “socially reinforced.” The fact that some girls are tomboys does not negate the clustering, nor does the fact that some boys are “artistic.”
Jensen and the rest of the Deep Green Resistance should try actually reading Kaczynski.
And they should get over their childhood trauma, distance themselves from “gentile” hating Jews, and actually do the work to understand – and halt – the material conditions that are driving environmental destruction.
If that is, in fact, their goal. Which it probably isn’t. Their “activism” serves their emotional need to hate.