Judaism IV: Zionism
This is the final article on Judaism.
Zionism is an increasingly divisive factor on the western right. Some people view Zionism as the ultimate enemy, that the tower of Sauron literally rests somewhere in the Negev desert, watching, plotting. It is this gangster headquarter of an international cabal spanning the entire Jewish ethnos. Others take a seemingly intentionally abrasive adoration of Zionism and the contemporary state of Israel, posting the “Gigachad Lion of Israel” every chance they get. I think it is important before getting into Zionism, to actually qualify Zionism. What is Zionism? What are the different goals of different forms of Zionism? What Zionism is practiced in contemporary times? Who were the first Zionists? What motivated the emergence of Zionism?
Well, I would say something that might surprise some people. Zionism arose, and was initially characterized by, an internal element of self-loathing and Jewish self-hatred. Which makes sense, if you think about what it meant to be a Jew in 19th century Europe. The identity of Jews was laced within their cosmopolitanism, their weakness, their lack of self-determination, and their need to survive through playing the game of their host nations. This is not an argument for or against Zionism in general. I am merely qualifying Zionism as it was before World War II.
The early Zionists largely began as assimilationists. Herzl did not want to be a Jew. He wanted to be a German Nationalist. He was a German Nationalist. In college Herzl was a member of the Nationalist and Pro-Unification German Fraternity Burschenschaft. He was a lover of Wagner, and he even wanted German — not Yiddish, but proper German, to be the official language of a Jewish state. But the process of finding himself confronted by antisemitism within Nationalist circles made him understand that he was not German. He had no German ancestry, in fact he had no ancestry. Jews were the nomads of the world, they were a people of obscured origins who bound to each other through zealotry and this parasitic shtetl life. This way of life that he viewed as degenerate and weakening, both on a cultural and genetic level. Herzl was a secularist. He did not want a religiously Jewish state, and did not get his children circumcised. His only son committed suicide because he hated being Jewish, and had been forced into being circumcised after his father’s death. Herzl was, as was typical for his time, a believer that Western civilization was the greatest civilization, and that Israel would be a buffer zone between Europe and Asia. Herzl famously said that Antisemites would be Israel’s greatest ally, and Antisemitic countries would be its greatest friends, because he saw Antisemites as having the same interests as Zionists. Again, it isn’t much of a stretch to call Herzl himself antisemitic. Or at least, ethnically very self-critical.
Still, I wouldn’t call Herzl some sort of radical. He was a liberal (in the 19th century sense), and wanted to create a moderate liberal society where Jews would live somewhat harmoniously with the local Arabs. But, little of him is reflected in what we see of Zionism today. Which I will get to.
Max Nordau was another very influential early Zionist whose name you may hear thrown around a lot. Like Herzl, he was a Germanophile, despite being a Hungarian Jew. He was not religious, he was agnostic and married a Danish Christian woman. He was mostly opposed to what he perceived as Jewish way of life, viewing it as inducing the frailness and neuroticism which Jews were so associated with. Like Herzl, he believed the settlement of Jews in a proper nation-state, like the Germans had, would revitalize them both culturally and genetically. Nordau was a strong proponent of Eugenics. Nordau also influenced a lot of later right-wing thinkers through his discourse on “Degenerate Art”, although his beliefs on what styles of art were degenerate were really quite different from what, say, Adolf Hitler viewed as forms of degenerate art. But I digress. Point is, Nordau and Herzl were both not particularly keen on their own people. They were, however, willing to accept that those were their people and so they had to make the best of it. They were also rather sympathetic towards European antisemites, as they viewed Zionism as a solution to the “Jewish Question” rather than as a rejection of a “Jewish Question”.
This trend continues to some degree with the likes of Joseph Trumpeldor, a national hero of Israel even today. Trumpeldor was an assimilated Jew and veteran of the Russo-Japanese war, whose arm was wounded by shrapnel in battle. Although his doctors advised him to stop fighting, he vouched to continue, saying that he still had one more arm to give up for the motherland. You can see, these early Zionists do not come from backgrounds deeply connected to their own ancestry.
This earliest generation of Zionists, Trumpeldor excepted, didn’t have very strong political convictions for what would go on within the state of Israel, but later Jews would, and especially after the Russian Civil War you see Zionism splinter. Although, I would say this splinter is somewhat deceitful. You see BAP talk about Jabotinsky and how great he is, but really upon doing more research I don’t think Jabotinsky is such a good guy. Was he a Fascist? Hmm, perhaps by some measures. Was he admired by Mussolini? Hmm, perhaps. But, please look into his comments on African Americans. I get that he probably never saw a Black person in his life, but… Come on man… Like, here you are dealing with Palestinians and realizing “not everyone in this world is like me”, but then you see Southern Anglos doing the same and assume they’re bad guys. This may be intertwined with his sentiment against the Anglosphere, as he was trying to revolt against British rule. He was not really a fascist in ways that mattered, and I don’t think he was even particularly racial in his attitudes. But he had a familiar sort of self-criticism where he considered the ideal Hebrew as essentially the opposite of what Jews were known to be by the West. So, make of this what you will. Perhaps tell the ADL that Zionism is actually antisemitism, not Anti-Zionism?
Anyways, the other side of this splinter would be the Labor Zionists, many of whom were Marxists and some of whom were less radical and just supported relatively left-wing politics. You see this in the gradual transformation of the Kibbutz, the Israeli collective farm, from a necessary way of life in the harshness of Palestine to a sort of utopian socialist hugfest. It’s extremely disgusting. Like, I’m warning you, don’t eat while reading this. It’s really longhoused stuff. Once women started coming to Israel it got bad. Children were raised collectively in nurseries, made sure not to have too much connection to their biological parents. This was also done so that women could have equal opportunity as men, not having to raise their children. Everything was owned communally. You couldn’t even be given gifts by the outside world without it being inspected by the Kibbutz, and they may very well rule that you had to now either get rid of this gift or share it collectively. Ugh. This is the end goal of the shartlibs. It is very longhouse, where there is no family or vertical order. Ugh. It really makes you not like them at all, doesn’t it? Yes, them. You know, them! It’s the worst dystopia I could imagine! I must… Conquer my enemies! HUAAAAH!
Buuuut, let’s not be too harsh on the Labor Zionists. After all, they did have the hypocrisy characteristic of their kind, which means they weren’t entirely divorced from reality. These were communities of ethnic Jews, not cosmopolitan. Still, it’s disturbing stuff. Gives me the heebie jeebies. Or I guess, the heebie sheenies. LOL. Some things that Ben Gurion did were quite reasonable, like the Haavara Agreement. And not siding with the Soviet Union. Yeah, a lot of these “MAGAComs” like to ignore that the USSR was one of the first countries to support Israel and that up until the Six-Day War it wasn’t entirely clear what side of the Cold War Israel was on. This is why Israel “played both sides” in Rhodesia and South Africa. They didn’t actually play both sides, it’s just that after the Six-Day War the Israelis realized there was no reconciling the Soviet support for decolonization (which included Arab irridentism in Palestine) with their own support for the Soviet Union. So Israel became ardently aligned with the other anti-decolonial countries still left. South Africa, Rhodesia, and Portugal. In fact, Israel probably is responsible for the Apartheid Regime developing Nuclear weapons, which they thankfully got rid of before Nelson Chandala came into office. But before the Six-Day War, many Israelis saw themselves as strong allies to the Turd World and fought with the Maoists in Africa and China. So DON’T be thinking I am saying Israelis are all le based. Or that the Maoists and Soviets were all anti-Israel. Cuz it was all out of circumstance. Ok?
Buuuut, I can’t just drone on about Israel’s Cold War shenanigans forever. Let’s discuss business. Specifically, let’s go back to that agreement I mentioned. The Haavara Agreement. The agreement between Nazi Germany and British Palestine to stimulate the mass emigration of German Jews into Israel. I’ll be getting some information from these two sources: Ruppin and Nazi-Zionist Relations (it is one chapter of this book. Not the whole book) and The Secret Contacts: Zionism and Nazism. They have some pretty obscure stuff in them, so I just wanted to clarify that that is where I have learned much of this stuff.
The relationship between Nazism and Zionism is the thing which really got me into all of this stuff about Zionism, because it foils the “exterminationist” model of the Holocaust. If the Nazis were aiming for the complete annihilation of the Jewish race from the start, they wouldn’t have so ardently promoted emigration to Palestine. You can talk about what Hitler said in Mein Kampf about Israel potentially being an excuse for Jews to develop a “center of operations”, but his actions show that by the 1930s he was not particularly concerned about this issue. While a Palestinian homeland may not be ideal, it was a for-the-time-being solution to the Jewish Question. Not only did Hitler continue to support the emigration of Jews to Palestine until the start of WWII (when it was complicated by British blockade and Palestinian riots), but the Nazi regime was generally tolerant of Zionism insofar as it was tolerant of Jews within the borders of Germany. Zionist organizations within Germany and the pro-Zionism newspaper Judische Rundschau welcomed the rise of Hitler, as it would encourage German Jews to flee Germany and settle in Israel. Something I was shocked about was the support from within the Schutzstaffel for Zionism. In 1935, Heydrich even condones the Zionists in the official SS Newspaper Das Schwarze Korps.
Hitler reaffirmed his devotion to the emigration of German Jews to Palestine as late as November 1938. Again, this was a practical solution. Several elements within the Nazi party were supportive of Zionism, and the promotion of emigration to Palestine placated foreign Jewish commerce. But in general it seems that, even if Hitler was suspicious of a Jewish state, he was not concerned with Zionism. Hitler only began engaging with anti-Zionists once the deportation of German Jews to Palestine became impossible, and once anti-British Arabs became a natural ally to Hitler in his campaigns
. In Hitler’s memoirs, he still supports moving Jews to some African colony, such as Madagascar. Hitler is still supporting this idea for the post-war future in his private life even in Spring 1942, when the official narrative suggests that the complete extermination of the Jewish people had already been enacted as a goal of Nazi policy by the German regime. I don’t want to get too far into my opinions on the nature of the Holocaust, as there is what I believe is an ADL agent with a sniper rifle pointed at my temple outside my window.
Arthur Ruppin is a strange figure, but was a significant Zionist politician and author in British Palestine. He was, like Nordau, a Eugenicist, but had an absolutely bizarre outlook on race. He was a race realist, and believed Israel should be a racial state with a ruling class of European Jews. He believed that Jews were originally an “Indo-Germanic” Race, as evidenced by their pastoral lifestyle in the hills as opposed to the more urban Canaanites. But as they expanded, they became diluted with Semitic blood. But he believed that Ashkenazi Jews were the most Aryan of the remaining Jews and had not been diluted as much, as evidenced by their use of Yiddish (I know, it’s bizarre). Because of this, he believed that Israel should essentially be organized like a caste system with the Ashkenazi at top, and through a process of selective breeding have Jews become more “Aryan” over time. He met and agreed with the Nazi ‘Race Pope’ Hans F.K. Guenther (worth looking into) that everyone was better off if the Jews were not in Europe. The late Ruppin was supportive of the Haavara Agreement, and regularly met with Nazi officials in solidifying the conditions of the agreement. Ruppin’s writings were even cited by Nazi Germany in a pamphlet defending the Nuremburg Laws. Ruppin was still, like his predecessors, quite critical of the Jewish race. This time, it was much more explicitly a racial criticism rather than just a cultural criticism.
There is another significant individual, David Ben Gurion, who supported the agreement. Ben Gurion, the first president of Israel and probably the most famous Israeli politician of all time, was heavily influenced by Ruppin. Ben Gurion himself was, behind closed doors at least, sharing in Ruppin’s sentiments that Ashkenazic Jews and Oriental Jews were worlds apart, and beyond this, that Jews and Arabs were worlds apart. Ben Gurion was also very much under the impression that the creation of a Jewish state was the end in itself, not a means to an end. Here is an extremely interesting Ben Gurion quote:
“If I knew that it was possible to save all the children of Germany by transporting them to England, and only half by transferring them to the Land of Israel, I would choose the latter, for before us lies not only the numbers of these children but the historical reckoning of the people of Israel.”
Wow… That sounds prophetic. Maybe a little bit too prophetic? Yes, in my travels I have heard many times this theory that the Nazis and the Zionists had more than just an unspoken mutual interest and an immigration agreement. Some have suggested, and this is very popular, that Ben Gurion was further implicated in the alleged “crimes against humanity” committed by the Nazi Regime. Particularly in The Other Side: The Secret Relationship Between Nazism and Zionism, whose author is now actually the president of Palestine. I’ve never read it, but many have told me that Eichmann’s trial was pre-coordinated. Mossad had already known where Eichmann was. They arrested him because they heard he was going to leak Ben Gurion et al.’s involvement with the Nazi Regime. The Eichmann Trial was also one of the first tastes not only to the world, but even to Israelis who hadn’t been involved in the Holocaust, of the Holocaust as it is understood today. It was still not entirely well known about during the 50s among those who weren’t directly involved in it. I mean, obviously the idea that a German foreign national following German law in Germany can be arrested for a crime from a country that did not exist when he committed it after being kidnapped by said country is already just meaningless gibberish window-dressing for a revenge execution. My knowledge on this subject though, is exhausted. So if any of you know more about this, leave it in the comments. If anyone even gets this far into the post…
Modern Zionism is, from what I see, a completely different animal than these forms of Zionism. The Right-Wing Zionists are all religious Zionists, who arose following the Six-Day War. The Left in Israel is something I never hear about. They’re probably losers, I assume. This new Zionism is revolved around a completely new interpretation of Zionism that is positive towards Jewry. It is deeply intertwined with the Holocaust (at least as portrayed at the Eichmann Trial) and with the Mosaic faith. People call Israel an apartheid state, but I don’t know about this. You can convert to Judaism. You can’t convert to being White. Like I talked about in my last post, there was a long period of Proselytization in Jewish history. Some Jews today still do it. Then there are groups like the Beta Israel who are obviously not the same race as, say, Karl Marx or Albert Einstein, and yet they’re considered Jews by Israel. This is frankly true as well for groups like Yemenite Jews. Don’t take this as me saying Ashkenazi Jews are white. I don’t consider them White. They’re in that peripheral area, but I have my reasons as to why I don’t consider Ashkenazi Jews white for genetic reasons. Which is not the subject here. But obviously there is a serious biological difference here. This is a peg above American civic nationalism and “muh assimilation”.
But still, Zionism is not the problem in my opinion. I think we should always be cautious of a Jewish state as we should of any foreign state. One of the reasons the Nazis were probably so willing to support Zionism was because they didn’t even imagine that Israel would so soon be granted full independence from Britain. Hell, maybe even Italy would have gotten it as war spoils. But the existence of a Zionist state does not facilitate the political attitudes of Jews outside this state. In fact, it probably moderates them.
The idea that Israel could be a “headquarters for Jewish meddling” is simply no longer relevant in this world. There doesn’t need to be a physical place for any institution to thrive. The existence of Israel gives White countries some leverage over Jewish interests, as the vast majority of people who support Palestine in the West are left-wingers and disproportionately non-White. You see the effects of this in Britain and France, where Jews are slightly more conservative than they are liberal (I wouldn’t call English conservatism very conservative, but whatever). In these countries, the sort of pathological bogeyman of Nazism and White Chauvinism which Jews have is made less powerful by the more imminent threat of Arabs actually hating you in the real world. This is a problem in, say, London or Tel Aviv, but not so much in Westchester or Pasadena.
If the state of Israel were to disappear, Jews may become more left-wing. A lot of Jews who do vote Republican do so primarily out of interest for Israel. Those who vote left are stopped from moving further left by the far left’s renunciation of Zionism. In the early 20th century, a large swathe of Jews were actual Marxists. One of the reasons Hitler felt the way he did about Jews was because around half of the leadership of the German Revolution was Jewish, despite Jews making up less than a percent of the population. Albeit, Jews back then were also much poorer and so had more of a reason to support Marxism, but a major reason Jews supported it in places like Germany and Russia where they were not particularly poor was because they felt threatened by the Nationalists and the Tsarists and felt the only solution to their alienation was to reject ethnic struggle and emphasize class warfare among the general population.
Many will respond to this with “oh, but Jews now don’t have to face the consequences of their actions”. This is a good point, don’t get me wrong. However, Jews are not comic book villains. Jewish Liberals are not playing a con. They are genuinely steadfast in their liberalism and simply don’t acknowledge the break between their beliefs on how Gentile society should be run and how Jewish society should be run. They view the existence of the Jewish people as necessary for the realization of their progressive worldview, not the other way around. This is sort of what I was talking about in my second post on Judaism wherein the Jews are chosen to “repair the world”.
Generally speaking, Israel has been fine. I mean, yeah, they have had some involvement with minor pro-migration groups, but they’re far less devoted to such things than, say, the Pope. Israelis support migration to the west if it means Israel will be getting less migrants, which is bad. But if both Israel and the West could get less migrants, they would probably support it as they know these immigrants will vote in pro-Palestine politicians in their allied countries. Once again, I bring up Israel’s loyalty to South Africa. This just goes to show that Israel is not so categorically opposed to our movements as Jews in the West are, so long as said movements support them.
Israel is still a mischievous country. Lavon Affair, U.S.S. Liberty, that sort of stuff. I mean, the US has done a lot of mischief as well, but it does go to show that we don’t have any reason to be funding or militarily supporting Israel. We should expel Israeli influence from our government and encourage the emigration of American Jews to Israel. No dual citizenship. One way ticket. The aid we give to Israel, is frankly a drop in the bucket. I don’t care about a few billion dollars to such and such country when we are spending an annual 600 Billion on Dark-Types. This won’t solve our problems at this point, as the Jewish elite of the late 20th century has largely outsourced to younger ethnic recruits from India, China, et al. Penn went from around a third Jewish to 16% Jewish. Harvard used to be 25% Jewish, and is now only 10%.
All in all, the major problem of right-wing Anti-Zionism is that all of its energy is funneled into left-wing Anti-Zionism. The powers that be will take this momentum and funnel it through the facade of a left-wing movement, because Anti-Zionism is a left wing movement. Listen to what these people have to say, whining about “Indigenous Rights” and “Settler Colonialism”. The vast majority of Anti-Zionists in America are not actually attacking Jews, they’re attacking White Evangelicals. They don’t like Israel because they associate it with White Conservative Boomers, and imagine Jews are just unfairly bound to it by circumstance. By co-opting these arguments you’re just legitimizing the insane worldview that people should just willingly give away their land because it was “taken” from some other group generations ago. Which includes we White Americans. If we are going to argue against Zionism, it should be on these terms:
Why should we risk our standing on the world stage supporting this random country which provides nothing to us, except for logistic support in the region which only is a hot point for us because we support them?
Why are we supporting Israel, a country built on the idea that it is bound to the people who settled there and not “values” or geography, if here at home these beliefs are so punished? Maybe we should be more like Israel.
That’s all I have to say about that. BTW the Holoc— *SPLAT!*
This is Mossad Agent Yitzhak Goldstein-Cohenpoop. I have just eliminated your evil Nazi leader “Sectionalism”. I am holding his assistant Liam Alexander hostage. Like and subscribe to Sectionalism’s Substack and I will let him go and use my Talmudic Necromancy to revive your dear leader, so I can do more datamining on gentilez…
