A lot of discussion has come across my desk in the past few days in regards to Jews. Firstly, and most noticeably, my colleague over at Eponymous Flower has noticed how in recent days, post-Vatican II clerics and “experts” have been “venting their collectivist fury upon anyone they perceive as deviating from the acceptable, progressive orthodoxy on the topic of Judaism.” Secondly, another thing that I’ve been witness to lately is the timid Jordan Peterson statement on the Jewish Question, in which he refuses to take a fully critical and objective viewpoint on the Jewish subject. A lot of Peterson’s followers have been curious about his thoughts on this matter, so at least Peterson replied to his fans on a controversial topic. However, there was a resulting backlash from VD’s quarter against Peterson’s intellectual dishonesty, and I imagine Peterson has lost a few followers as a result. Finally, there is this recent E. Michael Jones interview, Catholics And The Jew Taboo, in which Jones explores the phenomenon of dynamic silence when it comes to Jews, rhetorically asking: “What do we mean by ‘The Jews’?”
The Jewish Question is an important one. Why are we not allowed to group these people together? It is important, after all. The Gospel of St. John mentions “Jews” 71 times. Ought we not know who these people are? To even use the word “Jew” in anything other than a glowing and positive context swiftly earns you a spot on the modern Sanhedrin’s blacklist. And more often than not, you are referred to as an anti-Semite from that point forward.
But a Semite is neither a religion nor even an ethnicity. In fact, the word “Semite” classifies people who speak the Semitic language. Critics of Jews are not typically against those who speak Arabic, Amharic, Tigrinya, Hebrew, Tigre, Aramaic, Assyrian, or Maltese. Much has been said on this issue by others with more knowledge than yours truly. Semites are not practitioners of Judaism. In fact, there is a difference between a Jew, a Zionist, and a Semite. “Anti-Semite,” like the word “racist,” is a loaded term utilized by Leftist enemies to shut down opposition.
As E. Michael Jones points out in his interview, former Democrat Vice President Joe Biden can attend a Jewish American Heritage Month reception, and he can praise Jewish leaders for transforming Amerca’s attitude towards gay marriage and other issues:
Think behind of all that, I bet you 85 percent of those changes, whether it’s in Hollywood or social media, are a consequence of Jewish leaders in the industry.
Or, in another example, consider how Amy Dean of Tikkun Magazine is able to proudly proclaim that Jews facilitated American gay marriage. Yet, if a Catholic or anyone else comes out and blames Jews for meddling in American culture in such a way, they are labeled as conspiracy theorists. If you favor Jews and talk about them in a positive light, you are allowed to talk about them. But if you blame them for something, you are demonized.
The author of Eponymous Flower is distressed that this double standard has affected even the post-Vatican II Catholic Church. But many are beginning to realize that these double standards exist, and people are becoming un-frozen. The paralysis is wearing off. For almost a century, this religio-political group has been immune from any criticism, and even attempts to name them have been fiercely shut down. Yet as time passes, more people recognize these dirty tricks, and they are becoming unafraid to discuss what has happened to our culture.
The modern Sanhedrin believe they can trap Catholics “between the anvil of [Vatican II’s] Nostra Aetate and the hammer of Jewish organizations” (see The End of Dialogue and the Beginning of Unity). While older generations of Catholics may fall for the trap of stigma fear, younger people simply do not care. The end result of this orchestration will be an enormous backlash of some kind. History has shown this to be the case every time.
Therefore, with all this in mind, my longtime forecast for the decades and century ahead is the following: Expect increasing discussions about Jews. Attempts to ostracize, exclude, or alienate inquisitive minds about the Jewish Question will fall short. There will be more resistance to censorship, and rhetorical Jewish tricks will become more well-known by the rest of normie society in coming years. I would prefer a more peaceful transition to the idea of Sicut Judaeis Non: that is, no one has the right to harm the Jew, but on the other hand the Jew does not have the right to harm your culture. Yet that’s probably both the most optimistic and unrealistic hope I could have for successive 21st century generations.
It will be interesting to see if the Holocaust (TM) card will lose its potency in discussions.
Culture Wars: Cardinal Bea, the Jews, and Nostra Aetate:
http://archive.is/y1w2j
The word “Jews” come from their Patriarch, Judah. Jews are an ethnicity. An ethnicity is defined by “from what Patriarch”. And the lineage of ethnicities/races can be traced thru language! Now, like all ancient religions, the religion of Judah, became the name of their particular type of religion. “Jewish”, “Jew” and “Judaism” all refer to either religion or ethnicity OR BOTH. There was nothing such as Greekism, the worship of Zeus and Athene. They had NO collective name for what they did other than “religion”. But when Christianity came in, it was all collectively called “Paganism”.
Jews as a people are a race. And the majority of them practice the Jewish Faith of Judaism.
The problem of the Jews is that the modern Catholic Church does not treat them as a race. The medieval Church did in that it told them to segregate themselves in ghettos. In Medieval Jerusalem there were 4 quarters, the Armenian quarter or Latin quarter, the Greek quarter, the Muslim quarter and the Jewish quarter. Usually, like in ancient times, religion followed from nationality. All nations had their particular war gods. But with Judaism, the War God, the Lord of Hosts, was the true God, God Almighty, creator of Heaven and Earth.