In reply to a commenter, I’m going to characterize why some people, particularly ethnopolitical Europeans, are not on good terms with Ethnopolitical Jews and briefly explain the concerns that such people have.
The concerns listed, I believe, are reasonable concerns from the perspective of group interest. I can demonstrate this with a comparative analysis of the concerns that any group has with any other group. Whether or not a person who expresses them is rational, is a separate issue. Truth is correct facts put in perspective; rationality is logical reasons put in perspective. There are plenty of people that are quite intelligent, logical, and factually correct, and who express reasonable concerns — but who miss the boat because they are incapable of putting things in perspective. That noted:
I don’t get it, I mean why is there a problem with the Jews? I can’t remember in the past 61 years of my life where the Jews tried to dominate any other country or peoples, can anybody tell me where I am wrong?…If anyone can help me understand I would be grateful. Thank you.
The West had a Christian European identity. It was not Multicultural. Many Jews worked to dethnicize it. And many act as an integral part of the Diversity Lobby. They worked to make the West multicultural. It would be as if I went to Israel and lobbied for a Multicultural state identity.
Now, other whites have done the same within the West. We call them liberals. And, of course, there are some Jewish Liberals. Real Jewish liberals — Jews that want to multiculturalize themselves too. But there are many more doublethink Jewish liberals, Jews that push for a Multicultural West while instinctively pushing for a monocultural Israel. Jews who push to diversify others, but not themselves. Finally, there are some that are quite conscious of what they do. With regards to the latter two types, Saintly Socialists are one thing. Saintly Socialists that just want to socialize others are quite another, especially for right-thinking people.
This causes hostility from ethnically interested Europeans. And often ethnically interested Europeans see the later types, and assume all Liberal Jews are likewise. Of course, Jewish persons are not immune to stereotyping, nor is any group. Apparently, this is an easy, when not useful, mistake to make. One might be tempted to conclude that doing so is a mental disease, but given how pervasive the general tendency is, it makes more sense to say that this is a function of unconsidered group social cognition.
Sometimes this just comes about from a difference in perspective, for example, some people might look at US politics and say:
Among the more politically informed Jews, neo-conservatism gained a decent level of popularity, as evidenced by the ever-increasing Jewish donations to the GOP, while the percentage given to the Democrats decreased. So why can’t the Jews join the Paleos and White Nationalists? Because unlike the neocons, these people are viciously hostile to the Jews, with extremists calling for genocide and moderates calling for ethnic cleansing. Expecting anything other than rabid opposition from the Jews would be completely irrational. In fact, the whole right, even the philo-Semitic Republican party suffers because of the WNs extreme hostility to Jews.
Of course we know about those ‘politically informed Jews.’ And we know about the goal of converting “the Republican Party, and American conservatism in general, against their respective wills, into a new kind of conservative politics suitable to governing a modern democracy.” And we know about their vision for conservatism, that of:
1.”Reaching out beyond the traditional political and financial base”
2. Spreading the “affluence among all classes“
3. Not feeling “that kind of alarm or anxiety about the growth of the state in the past century, seeing it as natural, indeed inevitable”
4. Seeing the US as fundamentally a “nation of immigrants“
5. Feeling that it’s “necessary to defend Israel”
Some just see ethnopolitical motivation behind this. Were Jewish Neocons ‘politically informed’ in their support for a Multicultural America, because they anticipated it’s historic inevitability, or were they ethnically informed, which led them to help make the support for an open society a precondition of political success? Did their actions echo the sentiments of Earl Raab:
The Census Bureau has just reported that about half of the American population will soon be non-white or non-European. And they will all be American citizens. We have tipped beyond the point where a Nazi-Aryan party will be able to prevail in this country. We have been nourishing the American climate of opposition to bigotry for about half a century. That climate has not yet been perfected, but the heterogeneous nature of our population tends to make it irreversible ‘and makes our constitutional constraints against bigotry more practical than ever.
Is it irrational to suspect the later? We know that Jews broke left out of ethnic interest. And we know that this ethnic interest stood in relation to the Christian European identity of the country. As Norman PodHoretzm tells us in his WSJ Opt ed. “Why are Jews Liberal“:
The upshot is that in virtually every instance of a clash between Jewish law and contemporary liberalism, it is the liberal creed that prevails for most American Jews. Which is to say that for them, liberalism has become more than a political outlook. It has for all practical purposes superseded Judaism and become a religion in its own right. And to the dogmas and commandments of this religion they give the kind of steadfast devotion their forefathers gave to the religion of the Hebrew Bible. For many, moving to the right is invested with much the same horror their forefathers felt about conversion to Christianity.
Regardless if it’s rational or not, this is the problem some people have. According to this perspective, Jews are a market-dominant minority, who have had a history of confrontations with majorities. As such, they reflexively seek to mix things up. As they have an internalized sense of nationhood (and have a particular nation of their own), many see the homogeneity and nationalism of others as a threat and so seek that ensure that things are otherwise.
What’s not to understand?